Tuesday, August 23, 2016

Zen Film Movies in the Moment By Scott Shaw


By Scott Shaw

            As I often detail, life is lived in the moment. Our life is made up of days, weeks, years, decades, but it is the precise occurrences that take place within specific moments of our life that we live to the utmost and truly remember.
            From a filmmaking perspective, when a movie is moving being filmed, we shoot all kinds of footage to bring together and create a feature film. For those of us who are cinematographers we try to capture images in the best and most artistic manner possible. For those of us who have edited movies, there is no doubt, we have seen specific moments within the entirety of the filmed footage that are truly interesting; presenting a visually stimulating image and possibly even giving birth to cinematic satori. As the editor of the film, perhaps that image is beautiful or thought-provoking but as it contributes nothing to the greater whole of the film being constructed, that scene is left behind and probably lost forever. 
            Zen Filmmaking is ultimately about forging a pathway to cinematic enlightenment. It is about taking the art form of filmmaking and creating something artistic, interesting, and mentally stimulating, while removing as many preconceived notions and obstacles as possible.
            Zen filmmaking is not a stagnate entity. It is forever evolving.
            More recently, the evolution of Zen Filmmaking involved the Non-Narrative Zen Film. Now, the next evolution of Zen Filmmaking is, “Movies in the Moment.”  What is a Zen Film: Movie in the Moment?  It is capturing a moving image, whether intentionally or not, and allowing it to find its own perfection on the screen. Whether this moving image exists in its own perfection for a few seconds or a couple of minutes it is allowed to be whole and complete onto itself; seeking no definition other than letting it be what it is.
            In traditional filmmaking you conceive, stage, light, and then film your subject. This is not the case with a Zen Film: Movie in the Moment. For a Movie in the Moment exists in its own perfection. It is simply you, as the witness, seeing the art and capturing it.
            In today’s world, capturing moving images has become as immediate as those transient images themselves. As such, a Zen Film: Movie in the Moment is the perfect art form for today.  It is free, it is easy, it holds no rules, no definitions, and it is perfect onto itself. It it simply the artistic vision of the individual who notices, realizes, and then films what is taking place.  
            Let your creative mind wander and when you a witness a moment that should be captured, do it. Create art.
            At the Zen Film Movies in the Moment Playlist on the Scott Shaw Zen Filmmaking page on YouTube you can see some of the images I have grabbed and cast to eternity.
            No rules. No definition. No Judgment. Just art.

Copyright © 2016 – All Rights Reserved
 

Thursday, August 11, 2016

Making Something Out of Nothing By Scott Shaw



By Scott Shaw

            The world of filmmaking is something that is entered into by very few people. Yes, most everyone watches films and many have their opinions about the films that they have seen but few people have the creativity, desire, focus, and the fortitude to actually make a film. It is not easy.
            I often speak about how filmmaking was much harder and way more expensive a decade or two ago. Back then, before the digital revolution, everything was shot on film. And, when shooting on film you could never see what you had actually captured until that film was developed and put into a format where it could be viewed. Then, you had to sync the sound and edit the footage. All, very expensive. 
            The formula was, you could calculate approximately $1,000.00 a minute to shoot a 16mm film. As a feature length film is eighty-two minutes plus, you would basically calculate a $90,000.00 budget to complete an independent feature film. When we created Roller Blade Seven in 16mm for $30,000.00 it was quite an accomplishment and almost unheard of.  
            Then came the video revolution and next the digital revolution. People have now shot entire feature films, that have been shown on the silver screen, on their iPhone. Not only has filmmaking become exponentially cheaper, it is vastly more easily done, as well.
            All this being said, though filmmaking has become much easier and cheaper, still very few people step up to the filmmaking plate and actually create a feature length film. Yes, people talk and talk about the films other people have created. Some say, “They could do it better.” Some even state that, “Someday,” they will make their own. But, that someday never comes. All they do is talk.
            At the heart of filmmaking is creating something out of nothing. You have an idea for a film and then you find a way to get that film made both financially and technically. Then, you put together the cast and the crew and you actually create the vision that is your mind. Can you do that? Few people have.
            Here lies the essence of the arts. This is the factor that defines the true artist from those who all they have is their words.  An artist envisions their art, then they find a way to create their art. It is not easy. It takes a lot of work. It takes a lot of focused creative energy. But, once it is done, it is done, and art has been created. Loved or hated is not the sourcepoint of art. The creating of the art is the sourcepoint of the art and very few can actually do that. So, all we are left with is those who talk about the art others have created.
            Who are you? How do you live your life? Is your life defined by talking about the creations of others or is your life defined by creating your own art? Are you someone who can actually make something out of nothing?

Copyright © 2016 – All Rights Reserved
 

Wednesday, August 10, 2016

Film Reviewers: Fact or Fiction By Scott Shaw

By Scott Shaw

            Ever since I first got into the filmmaking game I quickly began to realize that a lot of the magazines and even the authors of books put out fiction and claimed it to be fact. This has really intensified at the point when everybody got a voice on the internet. You don’t have to have any credentials anymore, so all kinds of people began saying all kinds of things – many of which had absolutely no basis in fact.
            When magazines and books began to discuss my films, back in the early 1990s, I quickly realized that many of them did not check their facts at all! They were stating a lot of things about my films, their development, who did what, and why, and all the etcetera… But, they were totally wrong!
      I think most people do not realize this. They read what they read and instantly believe it. It’s in a magazine, it’s in a book, or even, it’s on a website – it must be true; right? No, many times it is not.
      And then, reviewers have gone on to misquote me and my associates; taking our words out of context, and then writing a whole piece about what we or I said in order to get their own point of view across and somehow gain validity for it by jumbling the words of their source. That is just hatchet journalism. And, I can say that with some authority as I have had well over a thousand articles published and none of my editors would ever have let me do that.
            I have long thought to write a piece titled, “Reviewing the Reviewers.” I am sure I will get around to that a some point.
      Perhaps the biggest fault of those who write on the subject of film is that they base what they write upon their own appraisal of a project. They are not so much presenting the reality of the film or of a filmmaker’s process but, instead, they write what they think about the project and then disguise it as a literally discussion.
            A few of the funny things that come to mind that authors and reviewers have gotten totally wrong about my films are: one author totally got the title of The Roller Blade Seven wrong in his book, “Blade of the Roller Seven.” One magazine article, said that the frog masks we used in Max Hell Frog Warrior were poor imitations of the ones uses in Hell Comes to Frogtown. In fact, they were the exact same masks! One author claimed that the Asia scenes in Undercover X were actually filmed in L.A.’s Chinatown. I guess he didn’t take the time to read the writing on the signs or view the license plates on the cars. That was Tokyo and Seoul! One of the funniest, at least to me, was one author in his book detailed that one of the lead characters in Killer: Dead or Alive was my wife. I’m sure the actress that played that part was surprised to find out that we were married.
      Those are just a few examples… It goes on all over the place.
      And, on the internet, oh my god! The totally wrong things that they write and say…
      Personally, I find all of this amusing. Some of my filmmaking friends are not so jovial as I am and get really upset.
      But, this is the reality of life. People say or write what they write from their own perspective. And now, in the digital age, Andy Warhol’s prediction has come to pass, “Everybody gets fifteen minutes of fame.” Some people just choose to gain theirs by reviewing and discussing the works of others. And, in many cases, they base what they say upon fiction, not fact.

Copyright © 2009 – All Rights Reserved

Friday, May 20, 2016

Everybody Talks About the Films but Nobody Studies the Films By Scott Shaw




By Scott Shaw

            I forever find it curious that whenever I hear or read about what people are saying about the Zen Films of Scott Shaw they are virtually always completely wrong. Some have gone to extended lengths to describe and discuss the films I have made but they are completely missing the point. Some love them, some hate them, and, all that is fine with me — that is their opinion. But, no one ever studies the films.
            From a personal perspective, I can tell you that from the time I was young I would watch films very carefully. I would notice things about them that I would later realize were completely missed by others. There are mistakes in continuity, changes in lighting between the various takes, wardrobe differences, actors looking at the camera, and the list goes on. But, I never saw those as filmmaking flaws, I simply saw them as part and parcel of the filmmaking process. By observing a film in this manner, it truly makes the watching of that movie very intriguing to me.
            Again, from a personal perspective, I can categorically state that I have never attempted to make a traditional film. From my experience, a traditional film, that will play well to a traditional film going audience, costs a lot of money as you have to play to their preconceived notions about what a film is supposed to be. As I have never had a high budget in my filmmaking endeavors, I have never attempted to walk down that road — though some of the people I have worked with have attempted to guide me in a more traditional direction in my filmmaking practices. But, that is just not who I am. And, when you make the kind of films that I make, criticism can be expected as people project their own likes, expectations, and preconceived notions onto their viewing experience. I accept that.
            All this being stated, what I can say is that within the spontaneity, freedom, and magic of Zen Filmmaking every film that I have ever created has been done so with a very clear focus of message, (based upon budgetary constrains, of course). You may love what I do. You may hate what I do. You may issue praise or cast criticism. That’s all fine with me. But, what most people never seems to do is to actually study the films I make. They never look for the subtleties. They simply look to the obvious. And, by viewing my Zen Films in this manner, they are really missing the whole point.
            …I mean, come on! These are Zen Films, what do you expect to see when you sit down to watch them?
            As the filmmaker, I could point to each element of what one should be looking for in each scene of my films. But, what would be the fun of that? This is Zen Filmmaking and that is all part of the process; finding the hidden meaning, revealing to yourself what is hiding beneath the surface and what it means to you. It is essential to know, however, that every scene in every one of my Zen Films has a Some Thing that is there for a reason which guides the overall vision of the film and projects an ideology to the audience whether they consciously notice it or not. This is why they are each titled a, “Zen Film.”
            So, I want to call out all you, (oh so knowledgeable), film reviewers. I want to tell you, “You missed the point.” Simply by looking to the storyline, the sets, the acting, and the character development for guidance in your reviews you have completely overlooked what is actually going on.
            As a Film Watcher and as a Film Maker I can say that to truly understand any film you have to look beyond the obvious. This is especially the case with Zen Films. So, the next time you want to find something to cast your judgment upon at least have the foresight to see what you are missing by studying the subtitles instead of simply sitting there with your mind already made up and casting judgment.

Copyright © 2016 – All Rights Reserved
 

Friday, February 26, 2016

Max Hell Frog Warrior: The Facts and the Fiction



Friday, December 18, 2015

Catching Up With Scott Shaw


Here is the translation for the January 2015 interview with Scott Shaw for a magazine published in Romania.

What are you currently working on?
Scott Shaw:
Everything.

I know you are involved in a lot of things can you give me any specifics?
SS:
For the last couple of years I’ve been focusing a lot of my time on creating music and capturing photographic images.

What kind of music and what kind of photographs?
SS:
In terms of music I have been doing a lot of very ethereal guitar based stuff and working with vintage synthesizers. As far as photography, I’ve continued on my path of capturing, what I consider, interesting and abstract urban images.

Can we expect a new album in the near future?
SS:
Several. 

What type of guitar equipment are you using to create music?
SS:
Well, I have a lot of guitars so I work with several of them but recently I am predominately recording with a Fender Stratocaster with a scalloped fingerboard and using tons of pedals to create the textural sound I’m looking for.

Which pedals?
SS:
Wow, there's a lot. Off the top of my head I’ve been using The Electro-Harmonix Ring Thing, Holy Grail, Electric Mistress, and Ravish Sitar, The Digitech The Weapon, The Whammy, and The Hardwire DL8, The Behringer Ultra Shifter/Harmonist, The Boss DD20 and The Boss Fender 68 Deluxe Reverb Amp Pedal, a Morley Classic Wah, a Fender Blender, The DanElectro Dan Echo and Fab Tone, a vintage Echoplex, a vintage Roland Space Echo, and a bunch boutique pedals I'm sure no one has ever heard of.

Amps?
SS:
Mostly, with today’s technology, I record direct into the system but for recording live sound I use a Mesa Boogie and some modeling amps like the Line 6. I also have an early Behringer modeling amp that really produces a great live sound and, of course, I use my ’57 Fender Deluxe when I want to record that gritty old school sound.

In terms of photography what type of equipment do you use?
SS:
Everything from my iPhone to a small Nikon I carry around with me all the time onto my high-end Nikon DSLRs.

Do you have a preference?
SS:
They all do what they do with the advantages and disadvantages they each individually possess. So, they each serve their purpose. 

What about painting?
SS:
Yeah, I’m still doing that.

Poetry?
SS:
Of Course.

How about Zen Filmmaking. What have you been up to lately?
SS:
I capture moving images all the time. Whenever I see something interesting I film it. When I get enough footage, I put it together.

What type of equipment are you using?
SS:
Well, just like with still photography I use everything from my iPhone, my small carry-around Nikon, onto my Nikon DSLRs. In terms of actual video cameras I am currently using the new Sony HDR CX900. It’s portable, full broadcast quality, and really captures a great image.

Are you working on any specific films we can look forward to?
SS:
Like I said, I’m always filming but I have really moved away from making, for lack of a better term, traditional story-driven films. 

Why?
SS:
I just have not felt like dealing with the desires, expectations, and egos of the actors and the crew and being the only one who is putting the whole production together and dealing with the all and the everything.

What does that mean for your filmmaking style?
SS:
Like I’ve talked about for a few years now, I’ve been focused on making non-narrative Zen Films. Meaning, I just get an inspiration and tie a bunch of relevant moving images together, forming them into a piece of cohesive cinema.

It that a cinematic revolution?
SS:
Revolution is a big word. I’m just doing what I do. 

How about the martial arts?
SS:
As always, the martial arts are one of the key elements of my life. I, of course, workout all the time and I train very-advanced practitioners.

For 2015 what do you have in mind?
SS:
Live and create.

Copyright © 2015 — All Rights Reserved
 

Saturday, August 22, 2015

Scott Shaw: The High Priest of Zen Filmmaking



This is an interview conduced with Scott Shaw in 2006 and originally published in a European film magazine. It can also be found in Scott Shaw's book, Zen Filmmaking.

By Kelty O’Bannon

            Scott Shaw, the creator of Zen Filmmaking, has continued to change the way filmmakers view their process of creation. He has been writing about this style of filmmaking for the better part of twenty years and has taken-in many converts to his realms of understanding.
            Shaw is much more than a filmmaker with a unique set of ideals about filmmaking, however. In fact, he came to the art form of filmmaking rather late in life — at the age of thirty-two. Prior to his emersion into the craft, he was a well-known martial artist and a well-published author on the subject of eastern religion. Each of these factors helped Shaw to create a unique and new understanding of the art and craft of filmmaking.
            Though Scott Shaw was not the first film director to employ improvisational acting as a tool in the creation of a film, he was the first to formalize a method where each filmmaker can embrace the most natural elements of improv and Zen Buddhism and then integrate them into a method where they can utilize these foundational assets and create a truly unique piece of filmmaking. He has created this new style of filmmaking with such precision that many noted filmmakers have borrowed from his ideology and integrated this method into their own.
            For this article, I speak to Scott Shaw in a restaurant in Beverly Hills, California. Beverly Hills is a city that flanks Hollywood. We sit at a table surrounded by many of the Hollywood A-list players, who are having lunch. Due to our surrounding, I cannot help but be motivated to ask Scott Shaw my first question.

What do you think of Hollywood?
I think it’s all bullshit.

What do you mean?
If you are referring to the generic term, “Hollywood,” where all the films are made and all the people get famous, and everyone thinks this is the place to be, then it’s all bullshit. Most people who come here to be famous leave very disappointed. Hollywood has nothing to do with art. And, fame has nothing to do with talent.

What does it have to do with?
Luck and who you know.

Why then did you get involved in the filmmaking profession?
Like I always say, I hope to be a beacon of light in a sea of darkness.

What do you mean by that?
Well, first of all, I didn’t come from a family based in the Hollywood industry. I didn’t grow up rich. And, I didn’t have friends who could walk me though the door and get me inside the industry. So, I had no easy way in. Plus, I wasn’t a pretty girl or a man willing to fulfill the desire of other men to get whatever I wanted. And, believe me, that is the ticket that many successful actors, actresses, and filmmakers have used to become successful in the industry.

So, what did you do?
I simply embraced my art.

What do you mean?
When I first stated out, I had the same aspirations as most of the people who come to Hollywood to get into the industry. The only difference with me was, I was born here. Just like everybody, I hoped to be a star overnight. Which caused me to turn down a lot of roles that probably could have actually helped my career. But, I was also lucky. I got my SAG card really quickly. Actually, I was cast for a role in a union film on like my second audition and I began to move my way through the industry.

What happened next?
I quickly saw that most of the industry, particularly the independent sector of the industry, where new actors get their feet wet, was full of a lot of wanta-bes who waste everybody’s time making promises about films they will never complete.

What happened to you next?
Well, I met Donald G. Jackson and I created Zen Filmmaking.

Wow, what a jump.
Yeah, I guess it was. But, you have to understand, all of life, not just being in the film industry, is based upon foundations. By the time I met Don, I had been a serious photographer for almost twenty years. I had been very involved in eastern mysticism virtually my whole life, and martial arts since I was six years old. I had my photographs shown in galleries around the world and used in tons of publications. In addition, I had made several documentaries in Asia. So, when Don and I started working together, I was ready.

I have to ask you because I have seen it written in several places. Is it true that you were a monk?
Yes, it is. I was first a Bramacharaya and then a Sanyass (a Swami) for several years.

How did that affect your life?
It is pretty simple and straightforward — though I no longer wear the orange robes, the essence of who that person was has never left me. I simply am more interactive with modern society.

Your early filmmaking is closely linked to Donald G. Jackson. How did you two work together? Was it a democracy?
No. A democracy indicates that there are two or more points of view. This was not the case with the films Don and I created. We worked together as a single-minded team. Sometimes he would have the idea. Sometimes I would have it. But, we never doubted each other’s end results.

Some people refer to Donald G. Jackson as your mentor. Is this true?
Creatively, we were an equal team. But, when I first met Don, he certainly had much more experience in the independent film industry than I did. So, in that regard, yes, it is true. In fact, when he was living the last few months of his life in the hospital, before he died, he would introduce me to all of his doctors and nurses as his son. So, I guess he viewed me as a son. But, in reality, I was the computer guy. So, when the digital age hit, it was me who was guiding the ship. But also, if you look at my life prior to meeting Don, what I had accomplished stands clearly on its own merits. Plus, the minute Don and I finished the first two films we made together: The Roller Blade Seven and Return of the Roller Blade Seven, I immediately went off to make my own films. So, I see the early time of our collaboration as Don was the technical end and I was the creative and spiritual side — as he always would turn to me for spiritual advice. Later in his life he would always say about me, “The student has become the master.” So, make of that what you will.

There have been many critics of Donald G. Jackson. Was there a downside to working with him?
Yeah, there were many. To put it kindly, Don was a complicated guy. But, he always treated me with the utmost respect. And, we made some great films together. So, even though there was always a price to pay, that was attached to working with him, what we created would not have been created had we not teamed up.

Where did he get inspiration for films?
In regards to filmmaking, he had an interesting characteristic. Some may call it undesirable. In that he was a lot like Quentin Tarantino. He could view previously created projects — whether they be comic books, movies, or whatever, and then reinterpret them to suit his own ends. Don was notorious for confiscation, or at least attempting to confiscate, other people’s ideas. He tried to do that with me a few times.

What happened?
No comment.

How do the films you made with Donald G. Jackson differ from the films you have made without him?
Don was a comic book orientated guy. Much of his inspiration came from that genre. Me, I am an urban kid. I was born and raised in some of the worst parts of L.A. So, that’s my inspiration. I love the abstract beauty of the inner city and the stories the city has to tell.

What is the symbolism of the Happy Face emblem that is seen in the films you made with Donald G. Jackson?
That was basically Don’s creation. You have to look back to the 1970s to see the inception of this. In the 1970s the Happy Face was everywhere. So, Don took this and made it a commentary on society and a signature in his films. It was one of those things that each of us, as we get older, hold on to in order to remember a specific era that meant something to us. And, that was Don’s.

In virtually all of your films, there is at least one image of the Buddha. How does that tie into your overall filmmaking message?
Don had the Happy Face, mine is the Buddha. It is just my way of subtly suggesting that the audience stay conscious and embrace the mystical.

You have filmed several of your movies in Asia and virtually all of your films, at least partially, in Hollywood. What can you tell us about that?
That is my yin and yang. I was born in Hollywood and grew up in South-central L.A. and Hollywood. Hollywood is the center of the universe for filmmaking. But, Asia is where my heart is. Asia’s abstract mystical nature, its beauty – that is who I am. So, I film there whenever I have the chance and then come back to Hollywood to add the structure to the story. The other side of it is, I am from Hollywood, and so I know it inside and out. But, the rest of the world does not. They see Hollywood as this grand illusion — the place to be. In my films I try to show the more gritty side of Hollywood, to illustrate the true nature of this city.

There are certain people, other than Donald G. Jackson, that have worked in a production capacity with you on several of your films, most noticeably Hae Won Shin, Kenneth H. Kim and Kevin Thompson. What can you tell us about that?
Well, Hae Won has worked with me since I first got into the industry. She has helped me in many ways — in virtually every capacity. She has a degree in photography, so she has been my cinematographer; she has helped me in production and has been an actress in my films when I need to fill in the storylines. Ken, I met early in my emersion into the industry. In fact, I met him when we were actors on one of the first films I was cast in. After that, he helped me put some of my early projects together and we did another film together a couple of years ago. I was introduced to Kevin when I was about to begin production on Undercover X. We needed one final lead-actor and Richard Magram, who was producing the L.A. portion of the film with me, suggested Kevin. And, he was perfect. Kevin is one of those people who just, “Gets it.” He completely understands my style of filmmaking. I call him up and tell him I am putting a new project together. He doesn’t even ask what his character will be. He just asks, “When and where.” He is a great guy and a great actor to work with.

Do you think it is important to work with people like that?
Absolutely. I think every filmmaker; whether they are in the low or the high budget side of the industry finds cast and crewmembers that they work with over-and-over again. By working with someone you know, you understand what to expect and this just makes every project easier and better.

It seems that your early films were martial art orientated. That has seemed to change. Can you tell the readers about that?
You have to understand, I have been a martial artist since I was six years old and watching people beat each other up on film has just gotten boring. But, more than that, most martial artists who are actors have really bad attitudes. I just don’t want to deal with them anymore.

Another thing I have noticed about the evolution of your films is that you have begun to use much smaller casts.
Yes, that’s true.

Can you tell us about that?
Again, it has just been an evolution for me. I used to like to add a lot of character-driven texture to my films. That meant there were a lot of people in my films. Some had large parts and some roles were much smaller. Now, I see my films much more as intense character studies. So, I keep the number of cast members way down.

What is next on the horizon for Zen Filmmaking?
Zen Filmmaking will forever evolve. It is not a static entity that cannot move forward or be reinterpreted. Each filmmaker who uses Zen Filmmaking, as a basis for their filmmaking, will find and evolve their own method of using it as a foundational factor for a freer style of filmmaking.

What advice do you have for filmmakers?
Drink a bottle of Italian red wine every night. Go out and a have a latte or cappuccino at least once a day at a coffee house. Workout in a gym several times a week. And. Live. Because this is where all the inspiration for filmmaking comes from —  living!

Copyright © 2006 – All Rights Reserved