05/20/2002 Entry:
"Tape - Richard Linklater (2001)"

This film is kind of like Richard Linklater's companion piece to Waking Life. Tape was shot using digital video on a set which is a perfect match for a choosy motel room. In it three characters come together to hash out an event that happened between them many years ago. The movie was interesting, but not horribly so. All the cast members seem to have been quite taken by the script, something I don't really understand. Technically, however, the film is really interesting to me.

Tape was shot using what Linklater describes as "consumer-level PAL Sony camcorders." I am guessing he used the PAL VX1000 or VX2000, perhaps the PD150. The film was shot using two cameras, handheld by Linklater and his DP Maryse Alberti. It is edited using lots of short cuts back and forth. The editing style fits really well with the back and forth banter of the characters, with the exeception of two extended segments which are using whip pans. I felt this was a really poor choice for two reasons. First, because it is so different from the rest of the film, it really stands out to no narrative purpose that I could glean. Second, it just becomes too much after a while. You can only take so much of it.

In the commentary for the film, Linklater says that he sees a lot of people using digital video as nothing but a less expensive form of filmmaking. They light and cut and shoot as if they were using film, they're just trying to save money. He states that these people are doing themselves a disservice. If they aren't taking advantage of the inherent benefits of digital video (lightweight, unintrusive, produces a different look) then they would be better served just trying to raise more money and shooting on film. It is a very good point, and one that I don't hear brought up too often. For instance, there is no reason something like Chuck And Buck (also I shot on the same cameras as Tape if I'm not mistaken) couldn't have been shot on film. It was made very traditionally. However something like Promises really used the digital video to its advantage. First, the small size of the cameras was way less intimidating to the subjects than even a small 16mm camera would be. It also allowed them to shoot in public without attracting attention. Second, the small crew allowed them to shoot in the cramped spaces of tiny apartments and cars. Third, by being able to shoot an hour at a time per tape (rather than 11 minutes per reel of film) you can conduct interviews with more flow and less interruption. With high points like that, its no shock at all that DV has become the medium of choice for many documentary filmmakers.

Tape however, as a narrative film, uses DV to its advantage in different ways. First, it allows Linklater to shoot in the cramped space of a "hotel room" with minimal interference (the hotel room is actually a set they constructed for the purpose, mainly for easier lighting through a removable ceiling.) The camera never goes anywhere a person couldn't, which gives the whole endeavor a more realistic feel. In a related point, he was able to shoot with two cameras in that space with minimal interference between them since it was easier for them to keep out of each others' way.

Additionally, because of its reduced contrast range, DV has to be lit far flatter than normal film - otherwise bright spots will be way too bright, and dark spots way too dark. Because the film is shot in a drab, brown hotel room in the middle of nowhere (sorry Lansing-ites) Linklater can use this to his advantage. The movie is actually lit very nicely, it is easily the best looking consumer-level DV film I have seen. It lacked that "news video" quality which so much DV work seems to have. I would have loved to see it projected, it would have given me more of an idea of how it felt.

The editing style totally matches the shooting style - lightweight and always moving. And these both flow from the narrative which is constanly on the move back and forth, there is very little silence. In terms of the use of low budget DV for in the feature fim setting, Tape is a remarkable acheivement. It actually made me rethink a DV project I have in the works, which really would be better served stylistically by film (although as a documentary, DV brings me all the advantages described above.) One thing that seemed a little weird initially was the choice of wide angle lenses, especially in the later portion of the film. I like it in some places, especially when its used to really get one person up front and center. But in the later portion I thought maybe you would take the wide angle off and shoot straight, trying to increase that closed-in feeling. Of course, I'm sure the use of the wide angle had as much to do with utility as anything, its hard enough shooting in such cramped quarters. Many times I'm sure the wide angle was the only way to get in a two-shot.

The DVD contains commentary by Ethan Hawke and Linklater which is pretty interesting. As always, I wish Linklater had gone into more technical detail about his choices in the filmmaking, but he does provide some pretty good tidbits.