Recently, the most discussed variety show in the fan circle is "Director Please Advise".
This variety show can be roughly divided into three links: one is the "reality show", we can see the director's preparation before filming, how to select actors, be selected by actors, and a series of operations in the shooting; the second is the "premiere", that is, the work is presented in front of the audience; the third is "post-screening communication", which is the discussion and feedback of the work, the PK between the director, and the mutual choice between the director and the producer. In this way, the program builds and restores the complete small ecology of the film industry, with a real inner drive, the wheels roll and push forward.
Overall, watching "Director Please Advise" is like peeking into a mirror in a mirror. The audience's voice comes from a series of short films that accompanied the birth of the show on the one hand, and from the pointing out of the appearance of the whole show on the other hand. Therefore, the appearance of the program determines that its presentation process must be full of multi-dimensional interactive collisions. In my opinion, the clamor and controversy are expected.
Some people question whether it is necessary to show the director and all aspects of the film in the show - as Qian Zhongshu said, the eggs are delicious, is it necessary to know the hen that lays the eggs? As a practitioner of the film industry, I think the show's attempt is still very meaningful.
First of all, film is the art of performance, but also the art of directing.
The famous actress Meryl Streep was always troubled by her performance in a movie, but she was always thankful that the director was the one responsible for the whole movie anyway. It is true that the director usually intervenes in the whole process of the birth of a film. If the performance is not good, it is the director's mistake in casting and tuning the actors; the bad play is the director's grasp of the direction of the plot is unfavorable; the sound effect is not good, the director's work is not meticulous enough; the photography is not good, it is the communication between the director and the photographer... Truffaut, the representative of the French New Wave, has long promoted the director to the status of "film author".
Most of the 16 competitors in "Director's Advice" are just directors who have just started their careers. Compared with their relatively unfamiliar faces, there are many familiar actors in the guest seat. As the camera swept by, the actors' faces were full of anticipation. At this point, you can understand what Hao Lei said in the producer's seat, "There are many directors, but good directors are very lacking" - even successful actors come to the newcomer's field, because they know how core the director is. The opportunities and possibilities that are conceived are exactly what the actors strive for.
Furthermore, the program also fully demonstrates what the director's job is and why the film is the director's art.
In the first link, from casting to shooting, you can see the director's embarrassment when choosing and being selected, as well as the misplaced and uncertain selection of candidates. Few newcomer directors have works that convince actors, and actors lack reference to how to choose. At this point, it is a test of the director's persuasiveness and personality charm. The show shows and emphasizes that this ability must be the standard for directors.
The preparation time is short, and the real shooting period is only two or three days. Various situations are frequent, and it is also a situation that the director must solve. In the show, Xiang Guoqiang's crew and Zeng Gift crew were facing the situation of rain on the shooting scene, Wang Zhao mentioned that the two actors had a short time in the same frame and difficulty in coordinating the schedule, and Degna had to properly coordinate the shooting time of the lead actor and soothe the actor's emotions...
A young director on the stage explained the situation that occurred on the shooting scene, so that the helplessness caused and the unsatisfactory part of the film, the producer on the stage immediately interrupted: This is a competitive program, everyone faces fair conditions, refuses to complain and excuse. Some people have questioned such a setting, believing that such hasty conditions are not necessarily the soil for the birth of good movies. But rationally speaking, it is indeed an indisputable fact that the film is limited to the commercial operating environment and subject to various harsh conditions such as personnel, materials, and natural environment. Even Kurosawa, who "waits for the clouds to arrive", is also strictly constrained by capital.
The conditions that filmmakers deal with are never idealized. And the director is always the dancer in the shackles. It is their mission to pursue perfection in imperfection and to cast shortcomings as part of art. Orson Wells, the great director who shot the classic "Citizen Kane", said: "The director is the person who deals with all kinds of accidents. "The director must have strong coordination ability, the ability to adapt to changes, be able to handle various personnel relations, and protect his ideas in the face of unexpected accidents and conditions, and rely on strong willpower to achieve them." In "Director's Advice", the various creative restrictions faced by directors, in general, I don't think it is more exaggerated than the actual situation.
In the end, good works are the hard currency of this show.
The first competitive stage of "Director Please Advise" is an adaptation of the classic IP. Adaptation, in fact, is a kind of re-creation. Taking the second program as an example, the good film has obviously received more courtesy, and it has also increased the network popularity of the entire program.
The short film "Love", which was donated to the director, has been particularly hotly discussed. The adapted short film and the original "Journey to the West" echo in the scenes, movie clips, and lines. For example, in the original work, "collect clothes in the rain", and in the adaptation of the short film, it became "I will collect clothes", such a play makes people laugh. Between the mirror images of the film, there are also many flattering borrowings and echoes. For example, the close-up shot of Zixia's tears has become a powerful stroke of young people's soul attraction in the movie, which makes the male protagonist convincing for a moment of female initiative. A greater emotional echo may come more from what the director once said, the regretful compensation for the end of the original film, the choice about "going" or "staying".
"Love" is a very clever IP adaptation, the story is relatively complete, and the lens language is relatively mature. Zhang Xueying and Zhang Wanyi, the two actors, got a good play under the camera. And the short film carries the keen touch of female directors, with the sentimentality of lost love and the power of healing. So it has gained both a good reputation and a good attendance rate in the show.
In contrast, Degna's Back to the Burlegen River is more literary and controversial in the show. In my opinion, this short film is still very good. Although some producers on the scene said that the way it was handled was not novel enough, I think it used three generations represented by three women in a short space to convey tangled emotions and rich meanings in very ordinary scenes and simple daily dialogues. Among them, there are different feelings and memories of the city and hometown, and there are also themes such as root-seeking, death, and faith. Degna's adaptation of the IP is Xie Fei's "Black Horse", she cut the original film two clips at the beginning and end of the short film, which is also a controversy in the program. In my opinion, this visual collision is not contradictory. Degna's approach to ethnic themes has first emerged in short films, and I personally believe that her works are fully capable of entering the short film section of international mainstream film festivals (and then expanding into long films). I am looking forward to her follow-up works.
In the show, there are also 23-year-old Ning Yuanyuan's distinct personality when filming "Five Elements Academy", and Wu Zhenyu's ghost horse like his acting skills when filming "Ji", and so on.
In a reality TV competitive show that shows the style of a director, there is a core question that is worth discussing: in the end, what kind of director is a good director?
Director Jiang Wen once had a description of "four kinds of directors": the first kind of director who has something to say, and also talks about Delisuo, who is a very good director; the second, there is something to say, very sincere, but it is a good director; the third, there is nothing to talk about, but it is a bit deceitful, but at least it can please the audience; the fourth, there is no talk, but also talk about unfavorable so, this kind of no one to play with.
Carefully discerning director Jiang Wen's words, what he emphasizes is that a director must first have a strong self, have what the heart really wants to express, and then be skilled in techniques and skills. Just like when discussing Degna's work, Wu Zhenyu, who was on the same stage with her, said a sentence that impressed me. He said: "Young directors focus on life, is there anything wrong? A lot of people don't pay attention to life, only focus on the audience. "Those who focus only on catering to the audience can only create second-rate works." A good director carries his own personal style and desire to express, even if someone else's book comes into his own hands, he can dye the work with his own color.
The various topics in the program create a public opinion field full of the spirit of the fans. This is also the reason why it deserves the attention of film practitioners.
Therefore, aside from the slightly noisy and impetuous discussion on the Internet, as a film-related practitioner, I think "Director Please Advise" is still a very meaningful program. Especially for the film industry, in the industrial ecology that is now deeply affected by the epidemic and slightly difficult, I think that in addition to the real ecology of the film industry presented by the producer through the cloak of variety shows, its deep meaning is to foster creation, cultivate new talents, and improve the industrial chain. The goal of "Director Please Advise" is not just a variety show to be commented on, it points to the unlimited potential of the future of contemporary young directors and mainstream streaming media platforms.
In this sense, "Director Please Advise" is a big chess game with more birds than one stone in the next game. I hope that the heat of today's online discussion can finally be exchanged for a solid and abundant work. It is for this reason that we continue to pay attention and anticipation with longing.
Author: Sha Dan (Senior Film Critic, Film Festival Curator)
Editor: Zhou Minxian