|
By Joe Cellini |
||
The three hats worn by writer/director/producer Roger Avary while filming his new movie, The Rules of Attraction, made him highly accountable, creatively and fiscally to himself.Enter Final Cut Pro and Cinema Tools, applications that smoothed the delivery of a movie that matched Writer/Director Avarys vision while meeting Producer Avarys form-fitting budget. The QuickTime-based architecture of Final Cut and Cinema Tools allowed Avary and editor Sharon Rutter to shuttle freely between film and DV while shooting and editing to achieve complex effects, including rewinds and split-screen, required by a uniquely non-linear script. These capabilities, according to Avary, worked like lightning and saved hours a day. And with a full editing suite in his home, on a Power Mac G4, Avary could edit any time, while pulling on another hat to watch his kids. If I have an idea at 3:00 a.m, I can edit it a 3:03 a.m., says Avary. Leaving plenty of time to take a meeting with, say, his writer, director or producer. The Critics Think Twice Once was not enough for notable and notably decisive film critic Roger Ebert. After leaving a screening of Roger Avarys just-released The Rules of Attraction, unhappy with the films subject, he had second thoughts, which provoked a second look and a revised opinion. Ebert still disliked the subject matter but confessed that these feelings may have steamed his glasses to the point that he missed the films skillful and appropriate technique.
The image of Eberts notorious thumb diving south, twitching, then coming closer to level says much for Eberts integrity as a critic and even more about Avarys effectiveness as a filmmaker, a visceral approach that finds its way into the heads and hearts of viewers, through the gut.Although Avary dislikes negative reviews as much as any director, he knows that with Rules he has at least achieved one of his creative goals. You cant really hate something that doesnt affect you. And what bothered some people about this movie is that it works so well. And what theyre arguing with is not the movie itself, but what they felt. The movie is social criticism, a condemnation of the luxurious debauchery of the ruling class. Its designed to upset people. For the record, Avary makes the thematic case for the film that some audiences, expecting a typical teen movie, missed. I designed this movie to be a culture bomb, to land in culture and to have repercussions, an explosion that will ripple outward. What people sometimes miss is that although the script was extremely tough and violent and dark, the movie is actually very funny, very light and highly moral. Its not an amoral experience. Its not even nihilistic, although it has nihilism in it. At the end of the day, its all made to push an extremely moral point of view. Continued: Avarys work on Killing Zoe and Pulp Fiction established his reputation |
|