Archive for July, 2013
Many, many, years ago I was diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder. This was during my teenage years, and for the most part it seemed we had things under control, I was very confident in myself, brash at times… but during that time I never lost sight of doing what I wanted to do, which was to make film. After High School, in the Summer, I went to the New York Film Academy and truly shined, with many people thinking I made some of the best cinema of the class that Summer year. That was the final flash of hope I could recall in what would become a battle that would last a decade, (and truly for the rest of my life), with Bipolar I/Schizoaffective.
During this decade I can only utter little words as insights, it felt as if my memories became little bubbles of information during this time, nothing whole or linear:
A drive down to see a doctor in oxnard, sometimes daily and surly weekly. Dreams which I didn’t want to wake up from, nor could I either, sleeping away my life. Cutting open my face with a comb, finally entering a mental hospital. Feeling anxious that I was going to lose everyone. Entering the mental hospital again…
… and then, by some miracle, it seemed I snapped into some sort of mentality where I thought I had to work harder to stay healthy. So I opened up to my doctors more, they found a medication that works for me. I created structure for myself, and for my doctors to look carefully into to keep me on the right track. I quit smoking, meanwhile lost 40 pounds in the process due to picking up exercise, I even got of my diabetic insulin as a result. From now on I wanted to win, but the battle I fought had a reality to it…
…This last month I went into a mania, there is no need to describe all the gory details that resulted from it, but something interesting occurred during the exiting of it all…
…When I quit smoking, lost weight, and got off insulin, I noticed my confidence didn’t return to me, even though I thought I had Bipolar I/Schizoaffective beat at the time as well. Sadly, that last issue is not going away, but unlike before, when I had this most recent trouble, I never lost sense of myself. I instead knew something was wrong and did something about it. So I called my doctor everyday if I had to, and beat this issue into the ground on the home front, not even having to go to the hospital again. Suddenly, in realizing this, and with a bit more medication adjustments, the person who I thought I lost a long time ago had returned… Full Force!
Now that I’m back, I have a lot of catching up to do, and part of that is not just making film theories/experiments/ideas I “HOPE” to film one day. No, now I actually can make my hopes and dreams a reality. I used to be so afraid of falling on my ass or failing that I didn’t even try at times, mainly because I felt then, that film was my only hope. It was the only thing I could cling on to during my “Blurred Decade”, that if I tried then and failed, I wouldn’t even like to see the result of what might partake after. I couldn’t handle the film or myself as a result. But now that I’m on more stable ground, I feel I have the liberty to fail and the liberty to try again. Because ultimately what I am after IS “Film Science/Film Experimentation”, and I will fail, many times, but with the confidence in who I am now, I am actually able to pick myself up.
…I, for the first time in many years, see a future… and it’s a future worth fighting for!
A sequence using dialectical montage operates as such:
Sequence = Thesis + Anti-Thesis = Synthesis/New Thesis
But what if we play with this sequence, remove the Anti-Thesis from the equation and create some mystery to the sequence so that sequence equates to this:
Sequence = Thesis + “X” =Synthesis/New Thesis
So take this in terms of a written scenario:
“A man is walking down the street, when someone from a passing alley mugs and murders this individual, this man falls to his death and the culprit runs away.”
(Note the written format: 1,2,1). Now take out (2):
“A man is walking down the street, this man falls to his death (someone either criminal? or spectator?) runs away.”
By taking out actions in film and having reactions being the point of all action, it leads to the beginnings of the audience having multiple interpretations of a single film… but this is only “part” of a bigger equation to solve. To truly create the “Multi-Film” one must push the use of intercutting to the extreme. So:
Sequence 1 = Interpretation on Sequence, which leads to a possible Sequence 2 & 3.
Interpretations on 2 & 3, intercutted, lead to possible Sequence 4 & 5 & 6 & 7.
Interpretations on 4 & 5 & 6 & 7, intercutted, lead to possible Sequence 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 & 12 & 13 & 14 & 15…
…and continue on this process as long as it can sustain itself.
I believe this is a possible way to achieve this type of film. Though I’ll have to experiment with it…