Popcorn.

Went to the movies today. I got a free ticket which included a free "children´s combo" meaning a children´s size soda and popcorn measured for childrens usage. There was 1,5 liters of popcorn and 0.4 liters of lemonade.

I was with my girlfriend, so we ate it together. Movie was something over 2 hours, and when the movie ended, there was one or two popcorns left and some leftovers.

So, I´m just saying, that there was enough for us. in the children´s popcorn combo. for 2 hours for 2 adults. So, of course it is good that there are more choices in the menu, but the "normal" size is way too much for one guy, who in any case, is there ( or should be there ) to watch a film. Not to eat a whole meal. What would be a good thing, I think, to get them change the names of the "combos". It would please me if they were something like: regular, big and huge. Not: for children, normal and large.

here are the information available in finnkino website:

-----------

POPCORN
Lasten	2,70 €
Normaali	4,10 €
Iso	5,60 €

MIKSI POPCORN ON NIIN HYVÄÄ?

Koska sen valmistamisesta on monen tuhannen vuoden kokemus. Maissin alkuperä on arvoitus, se tunnetaan ainoastaan viljeltynä. Intiaanit kasvattivat maissia jo 7 000 vuotta sitten ja Kolumbus toi sen mukanaan Eurooppaan.

Maississa, kuten muissakin viljalajikkeissa on runsaasti hyödyllistä energiaa, hitaasti imeytyviä hiilihydraatteja, tärkeitä ravintokuituja, hyviä valkuaisaineita ja korkealaatuisia kasvirasvoja. 100 grammaa Finnkinon popcornia sisältää peräti 10 grammaa ravintokuituja! Popcorn on turvallinen kivennäis- ja hivenainepommi. Popcorn on siis paljon yleistä käsitystä terveellisempi snack-tuote. Finnkino käyttää Popcornin paistamiseen kookosöljyä. Popcorn ei sisällä gluteenia, joten popcorn sopii myös keliakiaa sairastaville henkilöille.

------

Findie: March of The Mediocre

I can not understand why Findie-scene, which has been quite well on the media lately, aims to be, at best, mediocre.

Usually things like computer graphics are quite impressive, length something close to respectable 90 minutes. But the script is nothing. Acting is unbearable and the image-storytelling is something too inferior to describe. And why is the humor so bad?

Being able to show your skills in technical pragmatics is one thing, but I think is not enough. That is not the function of making and indie film. No one is ( or maybe i should write: I am not) interested how well someone can frame a picture or light it with no money. That is a thing that one can learn, to some point atleast. To tell a story in the language of cinema, is the thing that is lacking from the indie (and mainstream) makers of today. And this is not only my personal opinion. Of course, this "to be original" might be something of a cliché, but there is some truth to it. "There is no need for intellect in maintaining a culture, but a genious, a true human is needed to create it." -....

Maybe (F)Indie is facing some sort of crisis now, when films made with big money deals whit splatter/horror/teen- sort of themes, which are commonly the subjects of indie-films. Or so it seems, cause I haven´t seen an indie film with any originality in years. If I have, it has been an american film with big distributors, and that doesn´t count.

For me, the most important things are; the idea of the story and the way of telling a story and characters, of course These things are almost every time set aside when making an indie film. Or so it seems. The way I see it it is more important to show how well one handles storytelling, apart from for example imagequality.. Of course findie is a large phenomenon and there are lots of different makers, but still, often it seems that some take pride in being "Findie-makers" and there fore it is a good thing to do something which does not even aim to be anything different. Apart from being somehow grotesque, containing bad humor or using in it self, the mark of indie, for to justify bad storytelling in some urban lovestory.

Santa Claus: The Final Tabu

Today is the premiere of the biggest Finnish Christmas movie Christmas-story ( Joulutarina ), I had the pleasure of getting invited to the special-guest screening on Wednesday.

I won´t argue ( too much anyway ) about the success of the movie it self, but what surprised me is how people reacted to the fact that it tried to present Santa Claus as a normal human being, a lonely and traumatized boy. In fact, the lead character wasn´t even santa claus, it was a boy/man called Nikolas.

It is an interesting pheonemon when movie doers now-a-days try to make films about superheroes. They quickly come to the conclusion that only when a man is somehow mentally damaged, can he do the things that most superheroes do. Think about Batman. A rich guy who beats bad guys wearing black rubber clothes. Well Santa Claus is not a super hero, but there are lots of similarities to the story and I think the approach has been similar in this case.

A man comes out once a year to deliver presents to children, what kind of man would he be like in reality? I think that the starting point in the story is at least logically true. A lonely ant traumatic child, who misses his parents and sister, who feels obliged to compensate being a burden to the small town whose people are taking care of him, being an orphan. First he gives presents to people who have helped him, later on to all children.

The fact that Nikolas stays in that state, that his madness grows even bigger during the years, is in no way funny or nice, but if we want that he keeps bringing the presents to the children, he must not find happiness in any other way. And trough suffering one becomes a saint, like St. Nicholas. (this is not in the movie, apart from small references and a very odd and symbolic ending of the film).

My point is, that it seems that Santa Claus has more power than we, or at least I think. Everyone hates the Coca-Cola santa, but everyone seems to reject the look of what could be the real santa. The story looks to me like being a basis for the myth that now-a-days surrounds the santa claus thing. This is how stories and myths are born; from some messed up guy, usually a loner who does something out of ordinary.
If the movie had been a tale about a jolly old man with elfs and singing, everyone would have hated it. But now the same people reject this story.

Is Santa Claus really that sacred? That it cannot be viewed from any other point of view? not to me. I think I´ve never had any relationship to santa. I hear that I was afraid of him when I was younger. But it is really funny that in our freedom of speech, liberal and politically-incorrect, nothing-is-sacred-kind of time, santa claus still holds his position of an icon, not to be changed.

The movie has many problems, I think it deals with the subject too lightly, superficially, even for a children movie. Children movies can be more scary than grownups seem to think. That kind of scary and dark stories are what affected me most when I was a kid. The movie is too fast, there is no space to breath and get in to the emotion.. Things like this. Acting is poor from time to time, even tough the lead man was good all the time. music was good but it increased the feel of the movie being "ahead of emotion" so the viewer was forced to feel, which is bad. But if there was something good, I think it was exactly this point, this what someone calls a Finnish way of looking life; melancholic and lonely life, of santa.

Tänne ei voi jäädä - arvostelu / We Can Not Stay Here - review

So, this is in Finnish only,

Minun Elokuvani 2007 - tapahtumassa annettu arvostelu

TÄNNE EI VOI JÄÄDÄ
Jussi Rautaniemi

TÄNNE EI VOI JÄÄDÄ on raikas elokuvakokemus. Päämäärättömästi harhailevan, työtä vieroksuvan ja muutenkin juurettoman nuorison keskuuteen sijoittuva tarina ei ole aivan tavallinen viime vuosien suomalaisessa elokuvassa. Tai ehkä on sittenkin: ajatelkaamme vaikkapa Perttu Lepän tai Dome Karukosken elokuvia. Tarkoitankin tässä sitä, minkälaisella tyylillä tarina on kerrottu. TÄNNE EI VOI JÄÄDÄ on kuin virkistävä tuulahdus niiltä ajoilta, jolloin erityisesti eurooppalainen elokuva käsitteli vakavia aiheita ja teemoja ilmavan kepeästi, totutuista kaavoista ja säännöistä piittaamatta. (Älköön kukaan nyt ymmärtäkö sanomaani siten, että jotenkin väheksyn Lepän tai Karukosken elokuvia. Päinvastoin, “Helmiä ja sikoja” ja “Tyttö sinä olet tähti” ovat ihastuttavia elokuvaelämyksiä. Haluan vain sanoa, että kerrontatavaltaan ne ovat klassisempia kuin Jussi Rautaniemen elokuva.)

Päiväkirjaa kokemuksistaan kirjoittava Eero saa Helsingissä tarpeekseen sikailevasta kämppiksestä, heittää tämän ulos kämpästä mutta lähtee samalla itsekin. Kohti entistä kotikaupunkia Karhulaa ja vanhaa ystävää Olavia, joka puolestaan on saanut häädön asunnostaan. Yhdessä kaverukset varastavat auton, hankkivat kasimillisen kameran ja lähtevät baanalle – lähirannalle bileisiin.

Hienosti kuvattu materiaali on vapautuneen hengittävästi leikattu, eikä ihme: Jussi Rautaniemi on erittäin taitava leikkaaja (tässä elokuvassa myös ohjaaja, käsikirjoittaja ja kuvaaja, tuottajakin). Kuvassa viipyillään harkitusti vain silloin kun se on tarpeen. Aivan riemastuttava on kohtaus, jossa auto varastetaan. Eeron ja Olavin jurona näyttäytynyt kaveri puhkeaa pälpättämään paskaa (kahvinjuonnin suhteesta sotien syttymiseen!) pysäköidyn auton omistajalle sillä välin kun Olavi piiloutuu auton takapenkille. Samalla jumalaisen kaunis Kevät esittäytyy Eerolle, ja hetikohta Olavi ajaa paikalle autolla. Merkille pantavaa on, että Olavin jonkinasteista väkivallan tekoa auton omistajaa kohtaan ei näytetä. Tässä kokonaisuudessa se olisi täysin tarpeetonta.

TÄNNE EI VOI JÄÄDÄ on elokuva valinnoista elämässä. Rantabileet määrittelevät Eeron lopulliset valinnat: ei enää sitoutumista. Kevät jää rannalle, kokemukset lentävät tienposkeen (josta elokuvan Markku Lahtelan aforistiikalla aloittanut hippi ne löytää). Kevät on enää läsnä vain kasimillisen haikeissa kuvissa.
Miksi tällaisia elokuvia ei voi nähdä missään? Tässäkin kuljetaan kaikilta osin aivan professionaalilla tasolla. Toivon sydämestäni, että Rautaniemi-tuotanto tekisi kaupat jonkin televisioyhtiön kanssa TÄNNE EI VOI JÄÄDÄ-elokuvan esityksestä.

Matti Kuortti

Horror, like no other

During the weekend, at some point I got this weird idea to do this "youtube-comedy" thing. I though I should combine the Sony Bravia -LCD TV commercial to a classic horror film, the Shining, which is also known of its genius use of color, and includes a scene similar to the Sony Bravia commercial.
So here it is:



Here is the original, if someone hasn´t seen it:



ps.
I´ve been writing to this blog now for a year! WUu! Some the writings in the beginning were definitely better, but I hope I can write about something interesting again someday..

Movies and real life

- Addings made 29.5 2007 12.44

(Sorry, I think that my english is on its limits in this text. Some thoughts might be a bit short or badly written)
When people are watching a movie, what do they think about the characters, I mean, why are the characters there, what is the motive for their actions...? Does anyone think this? Yes or no, either way things aren´t that simple.
Cause I´ve confronted some very scary people, and a lot of them, who seem to watch movies in a way which is totally odd to me. If a character is in a movie, Someone has written the part, and an actor has acted him/her in a way which supports the characters role in the movie. So, am I wrong by thinking that a character represents a certain thought, feel or "way of looking" or a "view point" to the subject of the film, or has a function in it to get the plot and message where it is going? This is ofcourse a bit shallow interpretation. A character must rise out of the text to be recognized as a human, not only work as a mathematical factor. But that is a big part of character. Think about the Aristothelic way of telling a story. There is the hero, the protagonist and the antagonist and many others, all have their specific part in the story to keep moving..
Now follows an example full of cliché ->
If we see a film made in the 50´s where the lead character is a man and an anti-hero who gets in situations where he must rise above his own powers compared to his life before, and the reason for this is a woman, who has a smaller part and is more shallowly presented, a troubled woman, who likes lilies but has no boyfriend and is in some kind of danger, possibly because his father is some evil nazi officer.
So, does this story present us an image of all men whit the expection for them to overcome their obstacles and stand up as men? and do you think that this storyline gives us the impression that women in general like lilies and need to be rescued?
My answer is absolutely no!
( yes, this arrangement is really stereotypical, but there is also the "era"-issue. Which is a totally different issue, but important also, interpretation must recognize the time and place where the piece was made, eventhough this isn´t an escape route or justification for anything).
Its more like a tale about overcoming obstacles in general and finding love and exitement in life or something..but not about what men and women are like!
Of course there is that interpretation, and it is true also, but it is very very dangerous to think that it could be the only way on interpretating it! Movies are art and if someone thinks that he can give a full and thorough analysis of a movie he or she should stop watching films and go out and live.
People can choose what they see. That is relevant in watching films too.

Every time someone shows us an image of a person or something, it is presenting somekind of characteristics that the presentator finds important or likable.
Every image is a statement!
But in order to make stories and movies, one must use images and characters and their characteristics and sometimes characters evolve in a direction which is not the must likable or not the most thorough presentation of the group that that specific character is a part of. Should every movie have in them a complete range of every characteristic a human could have to make them acceptable?

If the audience can not understand the connection between the different statements or images, what is the synthesis that they produce together, because that is what film is about, either the storytelling of a film is bad, or the audience doesn´t want to recieve the point, or is not ready to understand it.

Of course he/she who makes these images must be aware what kind of vision of world he/she is representing. And if the images are somehow questionable, one should maybe take the story and message under closer look.

I am not saying that portraying stereotypical images is OK or could always be justified. No. But if someone does decide to create some characters who are somehow stereotypical or something, there could be a reason for it? Maybe, maybe not.

My point in short is, that movies are small tales about life, they tell us things by presenting them through selected sort of characters and events, which are not to be taken literally in any situation. Movies are not telling us how we should live or how we should observe life.

movies affect our life, but I guess that real people have much greater impact on us than movies

Psychoanalysis is especially dangerous way of interpretating films. Being my self a big "fan" of Freud and Jung, It is the way of looking things, not the specific symbols or connections that those guys, especially Freud made. For example, ever though about the precious world-wide-famous award winning trilogy of The Lord of the Rings, in a point of view of traditional psychoanalysis.. some really funny stuff can be seen.
Or look at the same films keeping in mind the man-woman matter. Not so funny anymore.
You could say "Those films are fantasy films". But it might be just me, but films are films. In my eyes they are all fantasies. And how far of everyday life a film is, more exact it can be in telling us about our life. I dont make such direct segregation between films, just by in what genre they happen to be.

Connecting the same interpretations for symbols and characteristics from one artwork to another is not so right thing to do as one might think. I mean, that one must learn the system in whit a specific artwork works in, in order to analyse it and make connections from it to the real world:
"On a traffic light red means stop, yellow means slow down, and green means go. But on a banana it's the opposite. Green means hold on, yellow means go ahead and red means "Where the fuck did you get that banana at?""
-Mitch Hedberg

So, Im just warning everyone to think again. Was the interpretation you just made, out of the film or out of your own way of seeing and thinking life, and your own wants and desires was just unjustily placed on the shoulders of an innocent movie?

no sense.

Hi,
I just did this stupid test, while waiting a wedding video to render..how exiting! I found this from the really active blog of Niklas Piiparinen. I was anoyed about the result, not sure if its true..these test are so interesting. I´ll propably delete this post later..

I got this weird job doing a dvd for these young athletes. A lot to do, and not very nice work, but...easy money! (well not so easy, but alot of it ;) ) also, in a few weeks we are making a music video for Omnium gatherum. Kaihoro-video is ready soon! And the artpiece for Patterson is on its way! So, stuff coming.

6 days, filming the real life Beat

I just returned from Tampere. I was an assistant director, production manager, lightcrew, grip and catering-man in this documentary, or ethno-fiction. We shot two guys who lived in Tamepere, the film is called "Hulttiot" translated maby "Scoundrels". Director was Jaakko Ruuska, and the guys we shot were Jaakkos friends Joona and Ilmari. The thing was that these guys acted themselves. So it was kind of fiction, but a documentary, cause we never took a second take and the guys acted this kind of enhanced reality. It is not about improvisation, cause they are not actors and are not ment to act.

These shootings really affected me. First, my thoughs about Tampere as an interesting, quite small but a big city, got confirmed and enhansed by visiting all these interesting places we shot in. And the guys, Joona and Ilmari were something straight out of some Jack Kerouacs book. Really interesting personalities and characters with interesting lifestyles, thougts and tales. The way the guys talked and behaved affected me aswell. This strange, slow and thoughtfull way of talking and moving. The fact that this film has a lot of similarities with my own "We can not stay here" shortfilm (which wasn´t accepted to Tampere film fest by the way), but it happened for real, where as my own film was based on my own life but the style and events and all that was totally fiction. But these guys lived it.

We left from Helsinki at around 07.30 a.m. on Thursday morning. We drove to Tampere with 2 cars, one big wan with all the lights and one smaller car. Jaakko changed the timetables cause the weather wasn´t good enough for the scene we planned to do first. We drove to TTVO to pickup some lights and light crew members. One of these were this guy, Anton who had promised to give us a place to stay during these shootings. He was a nice guy! We went to Joonas place, which was in the nice neighborhood of Pispala, this old wooden house, painted with this hippie-style paintings from the inside. Joona wasn´t home, so we had to wait for a while, we started to put the lights on and did some hazardous light set ups. Jaakko wanted to be alone with Joona, so me and Anton left and Jussi Rantala (who was recording the sound for the first 3 days) stayed there, sitting behind the door, recording sound.
We went to Antons place. It was an old building, fromerly the flat had been somekind of kindergarten, the nameplates were still on the door "Lastenseimi". Six people lived in this flat. We stayed in Antons room, which was a mess, he apologized about it. When Jaakko called few hours later we went to pack the lighst and equipments and went to eat. The place we ate in had some problems getting us the receipt, propably they usually never give one to the customer.
In the evening Jaakko went to sleep at Joonas place, and Jussi went to some gig somewhere, so I stayed at Antons. Which upset me a bit, cause I was tired and felt that I didn´t have the strength to communicate and get to now some new guys (there were some Antons friend also).

Well anyway, On the next day, Friday a girl named Jenni arrived from Turku. She came to do some camera-assistant job. We had a strange day coming. The shootings took place in a public sauna. We had few hours to put all the lights up and the camera had to be in the sauna, warming up 2 hours before shooting, otherwise it wouldn´t work properly. We had only one hour to shoot all the shots in the sauna. Ilmari arrived late and we had to start without him. The sauna was full of local sauan-men, who were all happy about the fact that the sauna was free ´couse of us shooting there. The guys didn´t mind us shooting, and I think we got some nice shots there. One of the guys said to Ilmari "Listen, Just cut your hair, go to army and then come here with us to sauna and you´ll be a man.." something like this. Ilmari is a slim young guy with curled long hair, he looked funny between these big sauna-men. After shootings we went to some place called Jalla Jalla to eat.
In the evening we went to see a play directed by Ilmari and Joona acted in it. It was held in this culturehouse in Pispala. The house was full of culture-people, some sat on the floor, drank whisky, some just hanged around. The play was lit whit an old 8mm projector. and all the characters looked like characters from the silent movie era. The play was really scary and at times really intensive. It had no dialogue, someone just played violin to do the sound. The story was something that I couldn´t grasp or put in to words right now, but it didn´t seem confusing. Something about having a child, being a false mother, about image and responsibility I guess. It had a lot of blood in it. After this stunning experience me and Jenni went to town and to cafe Europa to drink some beer. I saw Eci there too.
We had some troubles getting in to Antons apartment, cause he wasn´t home and none of the people who lived there knew that we stayed there. But we got in.

On Saturday we shot at Anttila and on the street near it. A new guy, Patse, came to help us out. I arraged a parking place for us in front of the Anttila. First we shot some scenes at the street where Ilmari and Joona walked on the street and Ilmari suddenly starts to shoot Joona with a funny looking toy gun. Then the guys run inside Anttila and steal some money from a whisingfountain. I think these scens worked out really well. Ilmari and Joona seemed happy about this day also, Ilmari was a bit resistant during the first two days. This old lady came to talk to us. She asked what we were doing and then suddenly started to tell with a fragile voice that she went to work at age of 12 and never got treated as a child, doing a mans job. A nice old lady. On saturday evening we went to at at RAX buffet and had some nice moments there. Joona put some espresso to his coke-cup and then filled it with icecream..things like this. We all ate too much and felt bad afterwards. On the evening Jenni and Jussi left and Svante joined us. He came to record the sound.

ADDED later: I had a dream one night that someone was filming me and when we looked the material I was Ilmari..! Scary.

On sunday we first shot some nice scenes on this warehouseplace, the kind of which are always located near trainstations, you know what I mean. We got some nice shots there. It was really cold and my toes were frozen, and jaakko made me run back and forth to the van. After this we went to eat some overprized chinese meals. I was stressed cause I was responsible for the money.
After this we went to Ilmaris place, to shoot a scene with Ilmari and his stepfater. I thought that It wouldn´t work out, that it would be too fictional, you know. But what amazed us all was the thing that it worked out really well. The Stepfather was supposet to talk to ilmari about life values and getting job and this basic stuff you tell a young guy who doesn´t work or study. And I think that the style of Ilmari and the step father were so completely different, and eventough they were clearly in these roles, it worked out nicely, cause Ilmari replied in his own weird kind of way, and they clearly had gone trough these conversations many times, so it wasn´t a problem to do them again in front of the camera. "I want to turn in to a bird" replied Ilmari, when is stepfater asked him what he is going to do with his life.

Monday was a easy day, Jaakko shot alone with Ilmari some scenes and we went to help in few shots. There was a lot to arrange and to do, so a day with a little less shooting was welcome.
On Tuesday, the final day, we shot one shot where Ilmari left his apartment, for real, and moved to Helsinki. We had to pack his things to our equipment van. Then we went to shoot some scenes to a place where people went to swin in the winter to a hole in the ice. It was a complex shot, we had to wait for a train to go on a bridge nearby, cause jaakko wanted Ilmari, Joona, a swimmer and a train to same shot. The swimmer Jaakko had called didn´t show up so I had to talk to some people there who agreed to swim when we asked.
After these shots we shot under a bridge, some nice improvised drumming. Then we ran out of film. But I thing we got all shots needed.
We left tamepere and returned all the equipment and went to exodus to talk in the evening, but I was so tired that I left aroun 00.15 a.m.

Now I must do some reports and calculate all the receipts.

But a really nice shootings, really gave me things to think about and some perspective to things. It was also fun to do things with a small crew, this was nothing like the previous shootings I´ve written about here.

I hope that things go well for Ilmari and Joona, Joona is going to India in few months and Ilmari moved to helsinki to do some theater things. The shootings continue during the spring, we´ll see if I am taking part in them again.

5.1. 2007 The premiere! an oustanding success!

It is over! My god people! Amazing. I must say, this year started great! This week was really intensive, I was really nervous all the time, I couldn´t sleep, I couldn´t eat much.. On tuesday morning I was in Helsinki, in the evening I was in Kouvola, producing a musicvideo for Kaihoro with Harri Pikka. On wednesday morning a newspaper article was done about my movie and me. The interview went well. In the afternoon I went to Kouvola to shoot the musicvideo. Some weird and nice and really rock´n roll attitude stuff came from there, much to do in the edit...And the dvd´s arrived from estonia!! great! BUT on thursday the article was on the days local paper. It was a good piece, but it mentioned kaurismäki for 6 times!! why!? Well, I´ll put it on my pages soon..

Then the radio-guy from the kymenlaakson radio called and wanted me to come to a live interview on friday morning. On thursday it was explained to me that at Kyminsuu, the place where the premiere was supposed to be, you couldn´t serve alcohol. So I had to make some phonecalls and arrange some securityguys to come there. I was so stressed that I couldn´t sleep well.

On friday I went to the interview, which went well I guess. I planned my opening speech for the premiere on friday day. At 5.00 p.m. we started organizing the premiere. My grandmother did some saltysnacks and Laitila sponsored us with some lemonade. We had 30 liters of wine.

Then, suddenly, there was 300 people at Kyminsuu. there is 299 seats in that theater. There was so much people there, I went into a shock. "Who are these people!" I thought. "Why are they here!!" Everyone was there. Everyone!

The securityguys told me that they had to close the door and some people who came a bit late had to be turned away, there simply wasn´t enough room. Amazing... People were standing at the doorway. It was a bit chaotic.
I was so amazed that my opening speech didn´t go as planned but it was later told to me that it went well and I seemed nervous but sweet.
I coudn´t watch the movie.
It took about a half an hour for the people to get out from the theater, cause the lobby just wasn´t big enough. Unofficial information is that there were 340 people there. The actors seemed happy and maybe a bit suprised about the film. But we had a really nice time, altough I didn´t have enough time to talk to everyone.
I sold about 60 dvds I guess. Im a bit tired right now. I don´t know if the people liked the movie or not. It doesn´t matter anyway, I guess.
Here are some pics: Thanks to everyone! Everyone. Thank you so much! This was something amazing.
There is nothing else to say, exept I have a post about the shortfilm which I haven´t posted yet..I´ll post it later.
thank you.