being clear (more on relationships)
Cormac dropped into rehearsal yesterday (Tuesday). He’d been watching the footage of Gladys Eastwood. He noted the distance between the ‘eye’ of the camera and Gladys’ gaze (towards me – the interviewer). It is unusual this separation but it makes for a really spacious relationship between the subject, the camera and the off-screen interviewer.
We also talked about the space in Gladys’ responses, her graciousness.
Later, as we were talking, Bagryana suggested that, rather than leave the various relationships uncertain or ambiguous, we make the relationships very clear (and very soon) and then we are left with the option in post-production of roughening the edges of these relationships, or leaving them tight, or even altering them with additional dialogue/audio.
I like this idea - it will give the decision making momentum at this stage, and point the project without us necessarily having to be hitched to the stated relationships.
The critical relationships (I think) are between Liz’s character and my role, and between Bagryana (off-screen) and Liz.
As on offer, and staying very closely to the ‘setup’ of the Gladys interview, how about:
Liz is Bagryana’s grandmother (is this plausible given Liz’s relative youth?)
I am Liz’s unborn child. I never existed. Did I die at birth or am I imagined? What happened?
Bagryana would therefore be my niece (if I were alive/or existed).
Can this work?
postedbysimon
