Joni eccentricproductions.com.au

The early studio executives all had stories of rags to riches. Many of the studio executives came from Jewish immigrant families and in time they become among the most influential creators of American popular culture.

Nowadays moviemakers deal explicitly with strong Jewish themes. Spielberg re-embraced his Judaism by making the critically acclaimed film “Shindlers List”. The film dealt with Shindler a “Righteous Gentile” who saved the lives of many Jews in the Second World War. Spielberg was criticised by some for misrepresenting Shindler as hero when he was reputably more of an opportunist. However, as a young Jewish Teen at the time I felt the popular Hollywood film sparked a personal interest to study the holocaust in greater detail and it appeared to educate many who previously new nothing about the Holocaust. It appears that the making of the film also had a profound affect on Spielberg. After the completion of the film Spielberg established the “Shoa foundation”, which is now run by his previously estranged father. The Foundation visually documents the stories of survivors.

Woody Allen is another well-known Jewish performer who openly embraces his Jewish identity. Aaron Spelling, Deborah Messing, Adam Sandler, Gwyneth Paltrow, Kirk Douglas e.t.c are all well-known Jewish figures in the Hollywood industry. Consequently, it is no wonder that so many films and television shows not only embrace Jewish characters and actors they also integrate Yiddish words as part of their vernacular.

How the role of the Jew is portrayed in films is another interesting question to ponder. Coming from a religious household it is apparent to me that most Jews portrayed in Hollywood would be associated with Reform Judaism. Reform Judaism does not prescribe to the belief that the “Torah” (religious writings) where handed to Moses at mount Sinai verbatim. Reform Judaism is more associated with customs and traditions than religious observance.

In the film “Keeping the Faith”, actor Ben Stiller plays a Rabbi who falls in love with a non-Jewish gorgeous blond women played by Jenna Elfman. For a Rabbi to marry non-Jewish women the Jewish people would consider it a great loss. This film appears to underplay the importance of religion and faith and ascribe to a happy Hollywood ending where the man and women end up together.

The surge of the Kabbah is yet another example of how Judaism affects Hollywood. The Kabbalah is Jewish Mysticism. It is only supposed to be studied after the age of 40,when a person is married and with great care. However, Hollywood seems to have embraced the idea of Kabbalah , or its cult version of the Kabbalah. Sadly, one of the greatest Jewish teachings appears to have become a form of a cult headed by such famous artists as Madonna (Ester)Demi Moor, Ashton Kutcher and Britney Spears.

Adam Sandler is another well-known Jewish actor, writer and producer. In an attempt to give young Jewish kids their own holiday songs for Chanukah (similar to songs published every year for Christmas) , he produced a popular Chanukah album. In some of Sandler’s songs he lists the many actors associated with Judaism and how they are associated. In Australia the cult band “Yidcore”, are Jewish punk rockers that write and perform strongly Jewish songs.

As a young star Kirk Douglas dissociated himself with Judaism but after two near death experiences the actor has become a devote Jew. Douglas also encourages others to embrace Judaism.

“Studying the Torah is very demanding. I say to screenwriters, you want to write? Study the Torah. There is every story, every plot that you can think of in there, and it is very dramatic.'’ (Kirk Douglas)

I have started to explore the aforementioned issues in relation to my own projects. It is apparent that Judaism is affecting the film industry both in front and behind the camera.

Extra:
The lyrics from Adam Sandlers Chanuka Song

Who and What Am I:
Unlike any other tangible form, the Internet raises the question “Who or what disseminated the information I am reading?” When one reads an article on the Internet, interacts with a web site, receives a pop up icon or responds to a chat session invariably we do not know who, what or how many people we are interacting with. Consequently, when the law tries to govern the Internet it must first recognize the new forms of “information givers” that exist in such unchartered legal territory. Are we responding to a random Internet generated message, or are we chatting with many people typing from one station using the same name chat name or are we simply chatting to a 12 year old girl in California?

A further, and greater, issue that arises is jurisdiction. “Traditional law is based on the notion that activity occurs in a particular jurisdiction-a nation, a state/territory, a municipality- and can be dealt through reference to the rules (and authorities) of that physical location” (Ref). The problem that the Internet raises is that it is difficult to define whose jurisdiction an issue may arise in because people interacting over the Internet, or information being disseminated, may come from different countries. Consequently, even if a ruling were made by a court it would not have to be upheld in another country. Laws and rulings cannot be made to cross international borders, and sometimes they cannot even cross-national territories.

The first amendment of the United States constitution is “freedom of speech”. This amendment has also been one of the main issues causing delay in the judicial process. The amendment provides all Americans with the right to freedom of speech, and it is an amendment, which is strongly upheld and adhered to. Nonetheless, Australia does not adhere to the same constitutional privilege and therefore ultimately has more scope to combat Internet abusers.

A further site of interest may be New Forms Of CommunicatorsNew Forms Of Communicators

What is a documentary?

One of the prominent questions my Masters of Media Production class has been continually discussing is “what constitutes a documentary?”

When I was younger the very thought of watching a documentary would make me ill. I believed a documentary was long and boring. I believed that a documentary was “the truth!” It was a factual account of a person or event that had come to pass.

It seems that over the last few years what constitutes a documentary is changing, and with it is my desire to view a documentary.

Wikipedia defines a documentary as

“A documentary is a work in a visual or auditory medium presenting political, scientific, social, or historical subjects in a factual and informative manner.”

The AFC’s definition of documentary follows that used by the Australian Broadcasting Authority: specifically ‘a program that is a creative treatment of actuality other than news, current affairs, sports coverage, magazine infotainment or light entertainment program, and corporate and/or training programs.’ The AFC data covers documentaries intended for cinema or TV release. Non-broadcast documentaries are not included, nor are online documentaries. (AFC)

Another definition of a documentary, and my favorite is the following “In audiovisual records: (1) A non-fiction motion picture film having a theme or viewpoint but drawing its material from actual events and using editing and sound to enhance the theme. (2) Still photographs having a theme or viewpoint but showing actual situations realistically”.(Ref)

The reason the aforementioned is my favourite definition of a documentary is because it acknowledges that the editing and sound are used to enhance the theme. Thus, suggesting that a documentary is more than just a factual account of a situation or a person.

The more my class delved into the concept of a documentary, the broader our view became. I would not attempt to write my own definition of a documentary, but if I were to I would highlight such words as “enhance” and “directors view”. Unlike my childish belief that a documentary was the truth, I now believe that a documentary is the account of a factual event or person told through the often-bias view of the storyteller (producer or director).

Michael Moor is a notoriously famous documentary filmmaker. Many believe that the rise of the documentary is due to Michael Moor. Prior to Moors films “Bowling for Columbine” and “Fahrenheit 9/11”, documentaries did not receive the same marketing and exposure as fictional films. Moor’s elaborate, embellished and blatant lack of subjectivity has made his documentaries not only profitable but re-ignited documentary filmmakers.

Michael Moor has opened the door to documentary filmmakers. A great deal of footage in his films appears to be filmed on a simple camcorder and edited in a home suite. But, Moor is more than a documentary maker, he is a true storyteller. Although, I enjoy Moor’s documentaries and they have inspired my filmmaking ambitions I am not unaware of his methods. Moor has been condemned for his uses of heavy editing, sentences are assembled in the speaker’s voice, but edited to create new sentences.

Thus, we re-visit the question “What is a documentary”, how can we distinguish a documentary from a fictional film. If Moor’s films are considered documentaries then it would seem that such movies, as “The Crucible”, “Gladiator” and “Schindler’s List” should also be considered documentaries.

The line between fiction and non-fiction is becoming more difficult to distinguish. I believe in time there will start to be stricter rules determine what constitutes a documentary.

In follow up to my entry “what makes a great short film” I thought it would be important to also ascertain what makes a great documentary.

Making a great documentary is as difficult as making a short film, however what is more difficult is financing and selling a great documentary. The nature of documentary making is expensive. You have to buy all the appropriate insurance and also ensure all the visuals; music and graphics are properly licensed. Furthermore, the prospective broadcasters will require you to certify that you attained full legal permission to use every frame of video and every measure of music. Clearly, it is a costly business.

The following are the top ten tips to making a great documentary by Janis Cole, I have added annotated comments.

1. Secure creative backup funds (it is always important to have extra money)
2. Pick crews who make you laugh (its important to pick people you have a good time with, because documentary film making often requires shooting difficult subjects in difficult conditions)
3. Learn to embrace CHANGE (I believe its important when creating a documentary to sometimes let the work guide you, rather than being too restrictive with your filmmaking approach.)
4. Leave all drugs at the hotel when you go off to shoot (Yes, the entertainment industry is notorious for its use of drugs, but I hope that when people are at work they can leave their addictions at home)
5. Don’t even consider dealing drugs to finance your film (I think this is a ridiculous comment to include)
6. Choose your wardrobe to indicate that you’re the filmmaker (professionalism is important in any shoot. Furthermore, it’s important to dress appropriately. For example if shooting a film in the Middle East it is important for both men and women to dress conservatively and appropriately so as not to offend anyone or cause trouble)
7. Keep your idea under wraps (it is always important not to disclose too much about a film prior to its completion, as ideas are easily stolen)
8. Document your production experiences (the making of films are currently very important for marketing)
9. DON’T QUIT YOUR DAY JOB – YET (only a few people will succeed in the entertainment industry.)
10. Steal Michael Moore’s doc method Pick a topic (any will do), determine a narrow viewpoint (arguable for 90 minutes), put yourself in front of the camera (don’t worry about how you look), tell your audience what you think (which is how you want them to think) and be sure to make anyone else’s viewpoint looks foolish (easily achieved in the cutting room, even when your main character isn’t George W. Bush).

My top five documentaries are:
1) Farenheit 9/11
2) Super Size Me
3) The Making of Moulin rouge
4) The documentaries 7 and Up.
5) Spellbound.

The first documentaries that I was truly fascinated by where the “Seven Up” series. I was captivated by how the storyteller captured the personalities of the subjects. “The basic premise was to examine the Jesuit theory: “Give me the child until he is 7, and I will show you the man”. Michael Apted wanted to document whether the theory was true or false. Is a person’s fate sealed at birth? He filmed the same children every seventh year from the time they were seven. It has also become the longest running real life documentary ever made. I am not so sure I would have been so fascinated if I was only able to see one of the documentaries, what made it so interesting was to be able to watch the progression over time.

There is currenlty a rise of documentary filmamking, and rise in innovative documentary filmmaking such as the ABC documentary “Homeless” . The probelm with Homeless is that it lacks depth. The documentary does not make us care about the people represented.

Although, I applaud the rise of the “documentary” film and the innovative new forms of media being explored I am afraid that along the way many new film-makers will loose site of the most important part of the documentary process “The Story!”.

I recently became a “podster”. A podster is an individual who owns an iPOD of any color or size. I assume the size and color one chooses does infer something about a person’s personality but that can be researched at another time.

iPods’s are at the heart of the most recent high tech revolution “IPOD Revolution. iPOD”. iPOD sales have even surprised Apple. In 2004 ten million people bought iPods, and became apart of the podster revolution. The iPod is renowned for its elegant appearance, large storage capacity, fabulous colors, free tunes software and its small compact design. The iPod is advertised as a music device. Its compact size and lightweight allows a person to easily take it with them anywhere. It is also capable of being connected to different devices through which one can listen to music e.g., car stereos, speaker’s etc.

The iPod is not only popular with the younger music savvy generation. Many capabilities are attracting older podsters. Although many buy the iPod simply to disseminate their music, the iPod is capable of so much more. A renowned university in the USA, Duke, gave each of their new students iPOD’s loaded with handy information on starting at the school. Thus it is apparent the iPod can be used to carry music and homework. The iPod can also function as an excellent hard drive. One can also download popular books and the daily newspaper onto the Pod. The pod is a revolution unto itself.

With the wide spread dissemination of the iPod, the demand has exceeded the supply (reference
) although one might believe the Music industry would embrace the rise of the iPod, the opposite is occurring. Music Companies and Producers claim the iPod is partly responsible for the amount of music, which is now being illegally downloaded via the Internet.

In the twenties, the music industry pursued an Act of Congress to stop radio broadcasters from playing their music because they felt if people listened over the radio they would have no need to buy their music. The next step they took was to try and tax blank cassettes because these might be used to record music. Naturally they had the same issue with blank DVD’s. Shawn Fanning’s invention of file sharing, entitled Napster, was another issue of great concern to the RIAA. What RIAA is not aware of is that they are constantly declaring war on their greatest customers, on those that want their music the most (Reference).

I am opposed to music being downloaded illegally. I do believe that artists should receive compensation for their work. Furthermore, we must acknowledge that it is more than just the artist who is suffering from illegally downloaded material. Managers, record labels, art directors, music engineers and many more also receive money from the sale of music. The RIAA needs to re-think how to disseminate music for profit. The RIAA needs to accept that technology is here to stay and find a way to work with new technology and not against it.

Until recently I was not aware of what an effect blogging was making on the world. It seems that Blogging has become another form of media expression for artists. Many filmmakers, including myself, are now using Blogs to record and disseminate information about their upcoming films.

Movie Blogs and on-line journals for how movies are created will further demystify the film making process. However, they will also give aspiring filmmakers the opportunity to have a voyeuristic understanding of the filmmaking process.

An interesting experiment would be to have a producer, director, actor and editor each write a Blog on the same project. It would be interesting to see the production of a film from many different perspectives. The aforementioned exercise would also help those, already in the industry, to understand what each person encounters in the film making process. In turn this might lead to interesting changes, which might be beneficial financially and intellectually.

Singer, songwriter Ben Lee has a blog attached to his web site. It is interesting to see what he writes and to whom he responds. The director, Bobby Roth, who recently made the independent film “ Berkley”, has also attached a blog to his movie’s website. In it he comments on the films progress, and his personal thoughts and feelings. It is also accompanied by photo blogging.

With the rise of Tivo, and the imminent loss of advertising potential on television, TV and film studios will have to look for new avenues to advertise. In an effort to keep up with changing times web-based portals such as Friendster have been used to market such programs as The Apprentice and Movies like “The Anchorman”. Consequently, it seems only natural that blogs will soon be used, publicly, to market people’s careers and progress. I believe it is not in the distant future before we see such actors as Tom Cruise and Russell Crow writing their own blog’s (of course with much help from their publicists) so that they are able to “have their own say”.

Web-blogs are already having a major impact on the corporate world. Due to the easy to use nature of web-blogs and wikis they are fast becoming one of the fastest growing forms of media dissemination with-in corporate environments. High profile companies such as Microsoft are already using blogs as a seemingly informal marketing tool. Robert Scoble one of Microsoft top marketing spokesmen uses his blog to humanise the company’s image, by using conversational style. General Motors vice Chairman Bob Lutz, writes his weblog in the voice of a knowledgable car-dealer.

Blogs are also part of a low cost software network that has streamlined the way information is published. Blogs allow all levels of an organisation to have an equal say. Furthermore, the seemingly natural style of blogging and lack of face to face contact allows people to feel less inhibited with their thoughts and feelings. In large corporations where CEO’s often do not have the time to interact with many employees blogging has created an environment to allow for more free flowing communication.

In an attempt to stay abreast of current innovative changes in the industry I created a blog “australianshortfilm.blogsome”, purely for the purpose of promoting my upcoming short film. I have started to record information in my blog so that everyone involved and everyone who wants to be involved are able to easily find out what is occurring, how and why.

Flew T, New Media: An Introduction (2nd Ed)

The illegal downloading of songs from the Internet is, in my belief, only a small illustration of what is yet to occur in the film and television industry. If current recording labels wish to maintain both their power and wealth they will have to re-think their existing roles. …….. foresight in creating the IPOD is the sort of forward thinking that everyone in the entertainment industry will need to make. I believe that unless power houses such as Paramount, Fox, Warner etc actively change the way in which they distribute their products there will be a re-distribution of both wealth and power. This is the perfect platform for forward thinking innovative individuals to make their mark on the “Entertainment” industry.

As a student interested in “Producing”, possibly one of the positions most likely to feel the current climate changes, it is impetrative that I acknowledge the changes set to take place and explore the changes to set to occur in that job profile. One of the primary issues of concern, with the ever-increasing emergence of the internet, is the lack of “necessity” for distribution houses and other such vestibules. In some instances the role of the producer, if not tied to another position such as a director, may become unnecessary. In the current film industry Producers are the most power players. Thus question posed is what can they do to maintain their power?