Z
MCN Blogs
Ray Pride

By Ray Pride Pride@moviecitynews.com

Once, more

Hansard, Irglova, Carney


Two fresh comments from David Carr‘s Carpetbagger blog regarding the Oscar fortunes of “Falling Slowly” (all punctuation, etc., in the original): “I was lucky enough to have been peripherally engaged with the shooting experience of the Irish film ‘once’. The song contested, ‘falling slowly’ was written for the film, albeit a number of years before the film began actually shooting, but without going into long winded specifics I can assure all concerned that I was witness to the truth in this ridiculous matter. The song was written for the film. I have read alan’s material that his link provides. His presupposition that doubt should be cast upon the authenticity of the songs authors is bizzare to say the least. Certainly the fabric of his article has no argument to support his doubt. It is quite obvious that the true element of concern to the Academy in this issue is the fact that Glen Hansard had the gall to preform his composition before the motion pictures eventual release. Discussions that strive to debate the genesis of the song’s authorship are facile and to this observers mind without any merit or reason. I truly hope this great event for contemporary independent cinema is given the chance to gain a small degree of the recognition it truly deserves on the hallowed stage of the Academy, free from the impotent claims of falsehood of the aforementioned journalist and his ilk… — Posted by Paula R.” And: “The song Falling Slowly had been banging around Frames gigs for a couple of years in different guises and Glen said at these gigs that the song had been written for a film that his Friend John had written that at the time had been called Buskers and the name was then changed to Once. Glen has always stated that that particular song had been written for the film project his friend was working on, and this was back in 2002, about the same time that Glen and Mar started writing music together.
— Posted by Toni”

Leave a Reply

Movie City Indie

Quote Unquotesee all »

“The core fear is what can happen to you, personally. Your body. That’s what horror films deal with, precisely. We are a very thin skin wrapped around a pumping heart and guts. At any given moment it can come down to that, be it diseases, or somebody’s assault, or war, or a car wreck. You could be reduced to the simple laws of physics and your body’s vulnerability. The edged weapon is the penultimate weapon to disclose that reality to you.”
~ Wes Craven, 1996, promoting Scream

MAMET
Well, that, to me, is always the trick of dramaturgy; theoretically, perfectly, what one wants to do is put the protagonist and the audience in exactly the same position. The main question in drama, the way I was taught, is always what does the protagonist want. That’s what drama is. It comes down to that. It’s not about theme, it’s not about ideas, it’s not about setting, but what the protagonist wants. What gives rise to the drama, what is the precipitating event, and how, at the end of the play, do we see that event culminated? Do we see the protagonist’s wishes fulfilled or absolutely frustrated? That’s the structure of drama. You break it down into three acts.

INTERVIEWER
Does this explain why your plays have so little exposition?

MAMET
Yes. People only speak to get something. If I say, Let me tell you a few things about myself, already your defenses go up; you go, Look, I wonder what he wants from me, because no one ever speaks except to obtain an objective. That’s the only reason anyone ever opens their mouth, onstage or offstage. They may use a language that seems revealing, but if so, it’s just coincidence, because what they’re trying to do is accomplish an objective… The question is where does the dramatist have to lead you? Answer: the place where he or she thinks the audience needs to be led. But what does the character think? Does the character need to convey that information? If the answer is no, then you’d better cut it out, because you aren’t putting the audience in the same position with the protagonist. You’re saying, in effect, Let’s stop the play. That’s what the narration is doing—stopping the play… It’s action, as Aristotle said. That’s all that it is—exactly what the person does. It’s not what they “think,” because we don’t know what they think. It’s not what they say. It’s what they do, what they’re physically trying to accomplish on the stage. Which is exactly the same way we understand a person’s character in life—not by what they say, but by what they do. Say someone came up to you and said, I’m glad to be your neighbor because I’m a very honest man. That’s my character. I’m honest, I like to do things, I’m forthright, I like to be clear about everything, I like to be concise. Well, you really don’t know anything about that guy’s character. Or the person is onstage, and the playwright has him or her make those same claims in several subtle or not-so-subtle ways, the audience will say, Oh yes, I understand their character now; now I understand that they are a character. But in fact you don’t understand anything. You just understand that they’re jabbering to try to convince you of something.
~ David Mamet

Z Z