‘Act Naturally’ Plays Chicago United Fest, Plus More Behind the Scenes

In Act Naturally / Camera Talk / Production Notes / Screenings / Tech Talk

While 99% of the movie was shot with that rig, there are a few shots of Super 8mm and 16mm in the final cut. From our first meetings, JP wanted to mix media in numerous places, but due to budgetary concerns, we limited how much film we rolled. JP and I both share an intense love for celluloid and if we could, we would’ve shot the entire movie on Super 16mm. The most logical scene for the nostalgic look of Super 8mm is where Kristi (Susan May Pratt) tells Charlie (Liz Lytle) the orgins of her burns and why she runs Bear Lake Resort.

Even though I had no control over the exposure, I was happy to let the camera do all of the work so it would authentically replicate home movies of the early 70’s (and yes, there are zooms). For clarity’s sake, only the first two shots of this series of flashbacks are film.

Speaking of that flashback, I ran into funny man, Dan Foster, at a party recently and he asked me if any of his jokes made it into the film. We laughed about the fact that everybody knew going into it that there wouldn’t be any dialogue. Nevertheless, we had some very talented people performing improv including Blake Silver, KC Gleason, and Susan May Pratt. We had always planned to shoot flashbacks to spice up the static scene between two women sitting on a patio talking, but I didn’t have the footage when I began cutting the scene. I had a polished edit by the time the weekend of July 18th-19th rolled around and we spent two days at Jaime Stocker’s apartment shooting Leah’s sorority hazing scene, Charlie’s numerous yearbook photos, and Kristi’s collegiate stories.

Aside from the great footage that made it into the film, there are two lines that crack me up every time. I hope you enjoy this video that I put together soon after the shoot (for those of you who don’t know my voice, I’m the one answering the question, “uhhhh, no” and then leads the follow up laughter). This was a great scene to cut. Liz gave us a ton of excellent footage to work with and I had a lot of trouble deciding what to include in the film. My first edit had too much footage of her phases and it became clear that less was actually funnier.

We contemplated leaving the identity of our editor a mystery, but the cat is long out of the bag (thanks to whomever put our names on the IMDb page). Phillip Loren Patrick is derived from the middle names of our three editors. We bastardized Katie L. Hall’s because I insisted that it would be weird for a man (with my middle name as a first name) to have Lauren as his middle name. I borrowed the name of a male classmate of mine from high school and made it Loren. The “P” in JP’s name is Patrick, which is conveniently a cool last name.

I generally don’t like taking too many credits on a film or having too many of the same people filling up all the key title cards. On a project like this, however, it was somewhat inevitable. What we lacked in equity, we made up for in passion and dedication. Katie had never used Final Cut before she decided to pick up some of the slack and quickly proved her value in getting some quality rough cuts together. Editorial was a little tricky given the workflow of having 3 editors in different parts of this sprawling metropolis, but we were quite efficient. Using Google Docs, we kept a log, divided the film into 6 reels, and assigned scenes to each editor. We kept each other up to date by sharing small quicktimes of our rough cuts and continually uploading project files to the Letterblue FTP. We made a ton of progress before I had to step away for a few weeks to shoot my third feature in June. After I wrapped, I resumed my editorial duties.

I’ve always enjoyed editing, but I found this experience to be particularly educational. Perhaps because I had logged so many hours behind the camera without seeing the footage all the way through post. When I first started shooting, many of the projects were also pieces that I directed and therefore cut myself. As I worked more steadily as a cinematographer, I was spending less time with my footage in post. I would obviously see rough cuts, but there is something magical about taking raw footage and piecing it together into the narrative. You quickly see that getting an extra take can be invaluable for a multitude of reasons, you are reminded that dirty coverage can lead to headaches with continuity, and that actors may deliver their best take off camera so having a mic on them is a life saver.

While I believe that the initial shot list is the responsibility of the director, the cinematographer also has an obligation to production to deliver angles that will cut together well in editorial. I’ve worked with many first-time directors and I’ll always implement their vision, but when the coverage is lacking or I can foresee an issue down the line, then I voice concern. Every director needs to spend ample time in editorial to truly understand their craft. Why shouldn’t the same apply to cinematographers?

It took great personal sacrifice to get this film made. Amidst the rubble of blood, sweat, tears, and credit card debt, is the cracked plastic and shattered glass of my beloved Persol sunglasses. I don’t have the exact date, but my shades went missing and I asked around the crew for any information leading to their return. A day or so later, Christine discovered the remains of my glasses. Apparantly they had fallen off of my camera cart and were run over by a vehicle. I’ll admit that there’s something comical about the flattened case, but I was sad to see them destroyed. Perhaps it was karmic payback, because during one of the first nights at the Ranch, I accidentally sat on and broke Kate Ducey’s eye glasses at the hot tub.

Post Views: 11,224

11.2K Views

Author

Dustin Pearlman Dustin Pearlman is a plant-based Cinematographer. Aside from film, he's passionate about the environment, music, and cycling. He's a member of IATSE Local 600 and lives in Los Angeles with his mini-schnauzer Iris.