dvd review: toys are us
you know what i want to do? i want to be able to show each and every naysayer (friends and aquantainces) i have had met in the past, who've give me the WTF?-look whenever i try to explain to them what are "designer vinyl toys"? - i wanna show them the TOYS ARE US DVD - then they might understand (if not "approve") LOL
i enjoyed the effort in showing and explaining the crossover influences with other pop culture genres, with a heavy slant towards an arts angle, without being overtly preachy and at the same time, provide both a voice for both creators and collectors, leaving you to "judge" and decide for yourself, IMHO :)
with the main docu clocking in @ 25minutes, with an addition helping of Special Features including individual creator-interviews and even a music-segment, i reckon the TOYS ARE US toy-documentary dvd should be archived in public libraries (if not genre-specific), IMHO.
in essence, TOYS ARE US does not alienate, it educates, as well as entertain; giving vinylheads a good oogle and aw, while giving vinyl-newbies (including myself) further insights to the genesis and origins, as well as the spirit and mindset of the designer urban vinyl-movement (yes, it is a movement, becoz it sure as heck ain't a fad, yo! IMHO, 'natch)
WHERE TO GET TOYS ARE US DVD:
rather than go on a lengthy schpell about the DVD here, i decided to have a long blog-convo with filmmaker Brian Stillman about the making of TOYS ARE US (where i schpell more there instead LOL) - which may also interest some of my film-students, who've happened to discover my blog recently (*heh*) /// CLICK HERE TO READ INTERVIEW
TOYSREVIL: what format did you shoot on? i totally appreciated the production value with crisp clear images. and kudos to the audio integrity = a broadcast quality product that should be seen by more peeps, IMHO - has that been considered?
BRIAN STILLMAN: Actually, I shot the film in SDDV -- standard definition digital video -- using a Panasonic DVX100A camera. (For the tech geeks out there...Represent!) I did all my shooting in 24p instead of 30i, because I like the vaguely film-like look when video's shot in 24 frames/second.
And just to round out the techie questions... I edited the film on a Mac using Final Cut Pro 5. The fancier graphic effects -- subject IDs and opening title sequence -- were done using Adobe After Effects.
I never really considered having the film put on TV for broadcast -- my intention while shooting was always to release it as a DVD, and then see what other opportunities might come along. To that end, I did my best to keep the quality of the production as high as I could within my budget.
As far as the audio is concerned: Before I got into documentary, and even before I became a journalist, I did a lot of work in my own home recording studio, writing and producing music for my industrial band, Atomic Box. So I had a lot of opportunities over the years to figure out how to get a half-way decent mix using computer-based audio systems. Ultimately, though, it's about properly miking a subject and just watching the levels while shooting. Practice makes perfect, as they say.
TRE: the importance of audio somehow seems lost in some productions (altho not necessarily 'intentional') - becoz what's the use of having fabulous images and a kick-ass story but no one can here clearly what is being said? LOL - tell us who did what and how they did?
BRIAN: Well... I produced, shot, edited, and wrote the film, and did a few of the graphic effects. A broadcast designer named Mary Hawkins did the opening title sequence and all the ID graphics (the sections that introduce each character), which was great because it really gave the film a finished look. She's done work for MTV, A&E, E! Entertainment, and various other production outlets, a true professional. Of course, I didn't have a very large budget for the documentary, so I agreed to pay her with dinners. I think I owe her something like 14,000 burritos from our favorite local burrito joint.
Did I mention she's also my girlfriend? That helped convince her to do the work for free...
My Associate Producer was a friend of mine named Karl Tate. Besides helping me during the research stage of production, and then at the Comic Con '06 shoot, he also shot a lot of the still photography that ended up being used in the opening credit graphics and the closing titles. He also designed all the DVD box art. He was a huge help throughout production.
I got a lot of advice along the way from some of the artists themselves -- Frank Kozik, Mark Nagata, Brian Flynn, and Erick Scarecrow were all helpful in getting me in touch with other people or suggesting ways to distribute the film post production. I also would like to thank some other filmmakers and journalists -- Megan Thompson, Stuart Harmon, Jeff Solomon, Crystal Fisher, John DeNatali, and Marcia Rock, in particular -- a lot of credit for their input, suggestions, etc. Making a film is DEFINITELY not a solo effort.
TRE: Amen to that! how long did the entire docu took to finish? from conception, to shoot, to post etc - many people do not realize nor appreciate the effort and timeline dedicated to projects like these, IMHO. when i "was" plying my trade in the local media production-line, loads of folks would mention things like: "just grab a camera and go out and shoot only, what's the big deal?" LOL scheduling interviews alone would've been a daunting-task already, i could only imagine :p
BRIAN: The whole process took about a year and a half, from conception to finished product. It started as a graduate school thesis. I'd been a journalist for about a decade when I decided to go back to grad school at New York University for broadcast journalism and documentary making. To graduate, we had to produce a documentary, which we'd shoot over the summer between our second and our third (final) semester. Then, in theory, we'd edit in a workshop environment for the last few months of school before participating in a public screening in February following graduation. (It was a three semester program -- a year and a half -- so we finished in December.)
But after the screening, I took another few months to shoot and add more footage and then recut and fix various sections for the DVD release. Ultimately, I wrapped everything up and send the final master off to the DVD plant at the end of June 2007. JUST before Comic Con, which was definitely cutting it too close for comfort!
There were a lot of overnight editing sessions, where I found myself crashing for an hour in the editing bay. Probably not the best way to make a film... certainly a stressful way to do it!
The logistics were definitely a little tricky. I live in New York City, and many of the shoots happened in San Diego (Comic Con) and San Francisco (Patrick Ma, Mark Nagata, Frank Kozik, Mars-1, Brian Flynn, Glenn Pogue). I needed to schedule the SF ones as close together as possible -- flying out to San Francisco, staying in a hotel, travelling around, it all ends up getting expensive. So I couldn't afford to drag it out for too long, and I definitely couldn't fly back out to SF again if I missed anything.
Actually, I didn't know I definitely had my interview with Frank Kozik until about five hours earlier, when I was in a cab on the way to another interview, and I got an email on my Sidekick. "Sounds cool. How about 4p.m.? I'm at..." I'd just bought the Sidekick, by the way -- if I didn't have it, I wouldn't have known about the interview, and that'd have been that... I don't like to think about those things.
Obviously, the interviews and shoots in New York were a lot easier to arrange and get to.
I once got some great advice from a documentary maker. He told me, "Always try to make documentaries whose subjects can be reached via public transportation."
Most of my budget was eaten up just by travel, with airfare, hotels, rental cars... It adds up really fast. If everyone in the film had lived in Brooklyn, I'd have been able to make the documentary for about $10!
TRE: sound advice indeed LOL - any particular reason you chose TOYS as your subject? do you yourself collect?
BRIAN: The reason I chose this subject in the first place is that I'm a toy collector myself -- mostly vintage tin space toys (robots and stuff) from the 50s and 60s, as well as vintage ray guns from the 30s-50s. At the time, I was getting interested in some of the vinyl pieces -- had some friends who were into them, knew a couple artists -- and I decided that I wanted to learn more about the scene. I quickly realized that it'd make a good documentary. (Since then, my vinyl collection's grown... needless to say.)
TRE: from vintage toys to designer-vinyls, so how has the lure of vinyl been thus far?
BRIAN: Well, like I said, my main toy collections are actually vintage space toys. However, since getting into vinyl -- It's hard to do a documentary like this, to see all these great toys, and not want to own them! As far as western vinyl is concerned, I'm attracted to pieces that have some meaning behind them -- Kaws, Ron English, and Jermaine Rogers in particular. I also really like Nathan J. and Mars-1 a LOT. Their aesthetic really appeals to me. I'm a fan of Mark Nagata's toys (Max Toy Co.), as well. I never really collected the old Ultraman-style character toys, but his Captain Max figure is pretty neat.
I'm a big fan of Super 7's toys, particularly the new Ghostland figs and the company's collaborations with Secret Base -- especially the Ghost Fighters, which just kill me. Speaking of Secret Base, I also have a small collection of Japanese vinyl -- mostly SB, plus a little Gargamel and Chronic.
And, of course, I like all the work done by the artists in the film -- Rocket World, Kozik, Erick Scarecrow, Kano, Tara McPherson... Why else would I want to interview them?
But the truth is, I'm pretty picky about the toys I add to my collection.So my vinyl shelves are thinner than you'd expect.
TRE: a more discerning collecting trait/habit/approach would also lead to a longer collecting life-span, IMHO (without breaking the bank nor be saddled with toys you may not like at all further down the road LOL) ... the main docu, i felt, had a decent mix of entertainment and educational aspects, IMHO - and i appreciated that you've not being too overtly preachy, while at the same time had also provided a voice for collectors, as well as creators, into/of the phenom that which is designer-vinyl. was there anything conscious you had to leave out (but wanted to put in?) due to any particular circumstances?
BRIAN: I definitely entered into the film with the idea that it had to be ENTERTAINING. I didn't want it to feel like a lecture on vinyl toys. Of course, it's a documentary, so I couldn't just write some jokes or funny scenes -- I had to work with the material. So it came down to pacing, and making sure I included enough interesting real-life moments. Also, editing was important. I never CHANGED a scene using editing, but I would edit the scene in such a way as to create comic "beats." For instance, the scene with Voltaire and the girl at Comic Con. It was pretty funny to begin with, but it was also about 20 minutes long. So I cut it up, set it to music, and got a pretty entertaining little moment out of it. But as a journalist, I think it's very important that what audience sees really
happened.
Another scene that people keep telling me they enjoyed was the intercutting between the two collectors -- Drew Lippman and Glenn Pogue -- and Tara McPherson. Again, editing plays a huge role in making the scene work, but I never changed or manipulated what the people were saying -- I made certain not to put words in their mouths, and to keep it obvious to the viewer that each person was speaking independently. I never tried to make it look like they were all in the same room or anything like that.
It's the difference between documentary work and reality TV, which manufactures its dramatic, humorous, or emotional moments as opposed to letting the characters themselves just say what they want to say, or do what they want to do.
On the other hand, I knew the film had to be "educational" for people who didn't know anything about vinyl toys. I realized going into it that there'd be stuff that collectors already knew. But when making a film like this, you have to consider your entire audience, and I knew that some people watching it would either not collect toys at all (many people have told me that when their friends or parents or spouses wonder what's up with all the toys, they sit them down and show them the film), or would be new to the toy scene.
As for cutting out footage... The only reason I cut footage was because it failed to move the narrative of the film forward, or because of time or pacing, or because it was tangential or whatever. Nothing got cut to "protect people," or to save face, or anything like that. I knew from the beginning that the film would be a positive depiction of the vinyl toy scene. BUT, if "Artist X" had said, "Screw art -- I'm only in this to make money!" I'd have definitely included it in the film. He or she said it, it's definitely an important detail, so there's no way I'd cut it out.
It's important -- VITAL -- that documentary makers show and tell the TRUTH. That comes first. But, on the other hand, a documentary maker can still have an agenda. You can decide that the film will be positive about a subject, or an attack on the subject, or whatever, but still be TRUTHFUL and HONEST and FAIR about the information in the film. It's a tough balancing act sometimes.
However, in the end, I lucked out -- no one did or said anything negative, so there's nothing in the film that makes anyone look bad.
TRE: personally, it might have been interesting to hear naysayers' points-of-view, in regards to designer-vinyls (cost being a major issue for most, IMHO) - hell, i would've loved to hear their "partners" (wives, girlfriends, husbands etc) or friends giving them shitte for collecting toys! (hell, i've had my fair share of encounters LOL)
BRIAN: You know, I agree. It was something I thought about. But there ended up being two reasons I didn't do it.
1. It was tough finding people with anything "negative" to say. Everyone I encountered thought the toys and artists making the toys were cool. Even spouses and significant others. I suppose that's why they're married to/dating the toy collectors/artists in the first place.
2. The other reason I didn't go in that direction -- and the more important one -- is that many of the potential audience members might already feel that way. Anyone seeing the film who isn't a toy collector or artist is probably already thinking to themselves, "What do you mean that toys are art? That's a load of crap!" So, in theory, the audience already represents the "negative" point of view, if that makes any sense.
On a sort of related subject... There was a Q&A session during that first public screening, and someone asked me, "You explain why the toys are art, but why didn't you explain why they're still toys?" I thought it was an interesting question, and I responded by asking him, "If I held up a Dunny or something, you'd immediately think, 'That's a toy.' It's a toy because IT'S A TOY -- that part's obvious."
TRE: the power of "visual-recognition" is something we most times under-estimate. i've told my film-students that there is no longer any total ORIGINAL thought nor creation existent in this world at this day and age, and everything we create henceforth will be based on what we've seen, heard, tasted, experienced before, in some shape or form, whether directly or subconsiously, IMHO...
BRIAN: I think the point is, sometimes as a filmmaker, you can use your audiences preconceived notions to your advantage -- the audience, in a sense, can become a useful tool in conveying the information. Because they already thought of these things as toys, I didn't have to explain to them that they're toys. And because they already had doubts about toys being art, I didn't have to find someone to be that devil's advocate on screen.
Anyway, that was my thinking at the time.
TRE: but for the wonderful platform that is "media", and for 'filmmaking' in that regard :) - i appreciated you showed a female-collector's POV of collecting as well (Nathan J. fan) rather than this just being a man's vinyl-obssession (this is just a thinly-veiled question of an excuse for me to say Tara McPherson is thoroughly HAWT - yes i am shallow :p) - was it hard to find female collectors to profile?
BRIAN: I originally put out a call on some message boards looking for collectors, and only one person responded (Kano, who turned out to be one of the film's featured artists, as he was just finishing up his Money Grip toy). So finding collectors willing to speak on camera was surprisingly tough -- I have no idea why. In the end, a friend of mine suggested I call up Drew Lippman (whose amazing photos I'd seen online -- I used some of them in the beginning of the film). Then, when I was in San Francisco, Brian Flynn gave me Glenn Pogue's contact information. Both were nice enough to invite me over to shoot.
Finding Wendy, the woman at the Nathan J. signing, was just luck. I filmed Nathan signing her Bunniguru toy, and heard her say to Nathan that it was her second piece of vinyl ever. I realized that it'd be worth speaking to her. So I cornered her in Toy Tokyo, stuck a camera in front of her, and asked her some questions. Unfortunately -- and this gets back to the discussion about scheduling and logistics -- I couldn't ever make a full-on, formal interview at her home happen. My schedule at that point was crazy as I tried to edit the film and I just didn't have any time. It bothers me, actually, because she's an interesting person with an amazing collection, and I think an interview with her would have brought something good to the film.
TRE: a pity tho, for 'logistics' be the bane of any filmmaker (as opposed to 'creative' being totally subjective, IMHO) ... clocking in at 25 minutes is a decent time (but of coz i wanted more!!!!) - is there a 3-hours director's cut somewhere out there begging to be released? LOL
BRIAN: That's a looong story. Ultimately, though, I decided that the film would be only as long as it needed to be. That is, I didn't want to stretch it out just to make it fit a particular length if the material didn't allow for it. A normal, half hour TV show (here in the States, anyway) is actually 22 minutes, not counting commercials. Toys Are Us is a bit longer, and I decided that it worked well at that length. And this way, if I'm able to market the film further -- to cable TV, for instance -- it's at a length they can use.
But I DID have some extra interview footage that I wanted to use, and I was able to work it in as part of the DVD extras.
There were also issues concerning how much information could fit on a DVD. It's actually lot less than you'd imagine -- major movie studios can afford double-layer DVD production and stuff, but for the rest of us, there are definite limits. Between the film, the extra interviews, and the additional music tracks, I tapped out the disc's capacity.
As for those music segments -- they were included as a way for me to get the music for free. I spoke to a number of musicians and they were wonderful enough to let me have some of their songs in exchange for a bit of promotion. I agreed to put unedited tracks in the extras section, along with whatever promotional materials the provided. They agreed to let me use the music at no cost.
When making films, NEVER underestimate the barter system. It's an independed producer's best friend.
TRE: a double-Amen to that! LOL (something which i've been trying to incalculate into my students' mindset too LOL) what i personally loved most about the DVD were the individual Creator-Interviews section (i have a new-found respect for Frank Kozik - dude knows his shitte and he made me feel wholely inadequate; vinyl-wise LOL). how was the experience interviewing them and to have them invite you into their toy-lives?
BRIAN: The interviews, of course, were the most fun part of the whole process. I love going out to meet new people, it's one of the reasons I'm a journalist. And all the artists were fun, nice, interesting people. They were talking about a subject that I personally enjoy. And they were showing off their toys... What's not to love about all that?
All the interviews were surprisingly easy -- everyone seemed happy to talk on camera, and everyone had something interesting to say. Getting the interviews to happen was also pretty simple... some of the scheduling was a little tricky, but there wasn't any difficulty in getting people to agree to being in the film. Which was a relief...
TRE: on one hand, you'd want to "educate" the general public about the designer vinyl-scene, to build up understanding and (even) tolerance, but on the other, this seeming underground toy-culture may take off among the masses, and the next thing you know, your general toyshops (TRUs et al) is going to be hawking the next "hawt designer vinyl" and the scene dilutes for the sake of mass consumption and mainstream popularity (which can be seen currently with varied creators and their creations, IMHO) ... but then again, wasn't that the case since toys were ever "created" (for production and sales)? - as opposed to products meant to "entertain" (and mayhap "educate") children? the urban vinyl spirit / scene is moreso catered to adults, who no doubt has the purchasing power (least of all financially-strapped sad-buggers like me LOL)
BRIAN: I think this is a valid question. But I also think it assumes a lot about both the mainstream and underground cultures. There is a chance that the release of a film on the subject of designer vinyl toys could spark an interest in these toys among the mainstream. But that seems unlikely.
1. It assumes that the mainstream will see the film in such vast numbers as to create a demand beyond only the people who are interested in weird, subversive, EXPENSIVE toys.
2. It assumes that the toy manufacturers like Hasbro and Mattel will see profit in this. That means that they think they can make about 500,000 pieces of a toy, and have them all sell out. That gets back to assumption #1.
I don't see either of these things happening any time soon. The numbers don't play out correctly at this stage of the game. Remember, there's a reason it's UNDERGROUND toy culture -- these toys have themes, aesthetics, prices, etc. that aren't going to appeal to the mass market, which, by definition, tends to run on the conservative side of things like art and design.
On the other hand, films like mine and some of the others coming out in the next year or so MIGHT help to increase the size of the underground market as people who do like these types of things discover the toys as another form of artistic expression. I can only see this as a good thing -- it means more money for the artists, who in turn have the freedom to create more toys. They'll have the freedom to experiment with different, more daring designs because there's a bigger market for their more "normal" pieces of vinyl. But at the same time, I think the whole thing will still remain more or less underground, and the integrity will remain.
As long as the artists' hearts are in the right place, I think the toys will remain compelling, no matter who's buying them.
TRE: too true ... altho a smaller corner of my mindworries thinks about mainstream-toys slowly (but an eventuality, IMHO) adopting the forms (if not 'spirit') of designer vinyl, ironically to want to cater to the adult-crowd (and purchasing-powr) as well LOL - again the power of mass-media-subconsciousness is so subtle, you'd only realize it when the credit-card-bills come a knocking at the end of the month LOL ... (surprisingly) i lurved the music segment of the dvd = i had them on a loop even while the docu finished, while blogging about toys! LOL - how did you choose the bands? was there ever consider having music videos (ie: moving visuals) along with the songs?
BRIAN: Well, I touched on this before. The music segment was my way of paying the bands, but also my way of SUPPORTING bands whose music I like.
I spent a lot of time trying to find songs that I thought worked well in the film... I knew the music needed to be high energy and loud. I'm a huge fan of punk rock, but also industrial, metal, old school synthpop... so I had a lot of options and different ways I could have approached things. In the end, though, I decided that punk was best. It just fit nicely with the subject.
I also had to consider my budget. My original, rough cut, used music that I swiped from whatever CDs were lying around. At one point the soundtrack had stuff by the Misfits, NOFX, Rancid, Sick of It All... It was a damn fine soundtrack! Of course, it would have cost me $10,000 to use all that music, so it wasn't going to happen.
But I didn't mind. I think I'd much rather support really indie bands who're on their way up, who are doing things on their own to create their art. It's really in keeping with the spirit of the film, as well as my own DIY approach to making the film.
Eventually, I discovered Longway and Brian McCarty and Stick Shift by sifting through a web site for indie music called CD Baby. I knew the man behind I, Synthesist already, so it was easy to approach him and ask for a track. The only group that I thought might be tough was Mindless Self Indulgence. They're actually a pretty big band with a great underground following. They used to be on a major label, then broke away and decided to do everything themselves. A complete DIY success stories, and one of my favorite bands. But because they're successful, I didn't know if they're be able -- or even want -- to contribute a song without financial compensation.
I'm friendly with their manager, though, and I've interviewed the band a few times for various music magazines, so it turns out that they were immediately into the idea. I got really lucky -- they said I could pick any song I wanted and use it in any way that I wanted. I ended up chopping it up a bit to make it work in the film, and they didn't have any problem with it at all.
As for making videos to accompany the music... I just didn't have the time or money for something like that. I offered to include video footage if the artists sent it to me, but no one had any at the time.
TRE: at the end of the day, how has the experience of making this docu affected you? burnt or blossomed? (LOL) ... what have you gained from the experience?
BRIAN: I feel like I've grown spiritually. I've turned my life around, I've quit drinking and drugging. I don't dig up graves anymore for cheap and easy sex.
Ha ha.
Actually, in all seriousness, it was a learning experience. I've done some broadcast work already, and, like I said, I've been a print journalist for a decade. But the scope of the documentary was so much greater than any other project I'd worked on up to that point that every experience was a new experience -- even the stuff I already knew how to do. Shoots were tougher, editing was a LOT tougher. But I learned a lot, and I think I'm a better filmmaker for having done it all.
And, as experiences go, running all over the country to talk to people about toys isn't the worst way to spend a summer...!
TRE: very cool that tho, the opportunity for constantly different work environments is always cool (at least for me LOL) ... so what's next for X-Ray Films?
BRIAN: Top secret. But we're ramping up for another documentary -- and this time it'll be a much bigger production. Multiple cameras, a year long shoot... if it all works out the way I hope, it'll be great. We're looking at a 2009 tentative release date, if all goes well. It's not about toys, I'm afraid, but I think that toy fans'll definitely dig it. And that's all I can say on the subject for now.
TRE: dude, you had me at "multiple cameras" LOL - until the next docu debuts, where can we find TOYS ARE US DVDs?
BRIAN STILLMAN: They're in vinyl toy stores now, though I'm not sure which ones. If your local shop doesn't have them, they can contact DKE Distribution to order copies.
OR... Anyone interested can go to www.xrayfilms.net. Click on the giant For Sale banner, which will take you to an independent online retailer called Film baby. You can order from them -- they take credit cards, handle shipping, all that fun stuff. They'll get your DVD right out to you with no fuss or delay.
(And if any independent filmmakers are reading this, and you plan on releasing your films on DVD, I HIGHLY suggest checking out Film Baby. They're great.)
TOYSREVIL: cheers for the time and trouble for this blog-convo, Brian and i'd like to congratulate you on the DVD as well as wish you a smooth production for your future projects, and be sure to keep us updated yeh? LOL
i enjoyed the effort in showing and explaining the crossover influences with other pop culture genres, with a heavy slant towards an arts angle, without being overtly preachy and at the same time, provide both a voice for both creators and collectors, leaving you to "judge" and decide for yourself, IMHO :)with the main docu clocking in @ 25minutes, with an addition helping of Special Features including individual creator-interviews and even a music-segment, i reckon the TOYS ARE US toy-documentary dvd should be archived in public libraries (if not genre-specific), IMHO.
in essence, TOYS ARE US does not alienate, it educates, as well as entertain; giving vinylheads a good oogle and aw, while giving vinyl-newbies (including myself) further insights to the genesis and origins, as well as the spirit and mindset of the designer urban vinyl-movement (yes, it is a movement, becoz it sure as heck ain't a fad, yo! IMHO, 'natch)
WHERE TO GET TOYS ARE US DVD:
- your local vinyl-stores
- contact DKE DIstribution
- log unto www.xrayfilms.net and click on the FOR SALE banner - which will take you to an independent online retailer called Film baby
- read more about the DVD-contents HERE and HERE :)
rather than go on a lengthy schpell about the DVD here, i decided to have a long blog-convo with filmmaker Brian Stillman about the making of TOYS ARE US (where i schpell more there instead LOL) - which may also interest some of my film-students, who've happened to discover my blog recently (*heh*) /// CLICK HERE TO READ INTERVIEWTOYSREVIL: what format did you shoot on? i totally appreciated the production value with crisp clear images. and kudos to the audio integrity = a broadcast quality product that should be seen by more peeps, IMHO - has that been considered?
BRIAN STILLMAN: Actually, I shot the film in SDDV -- standard definition digital video -- using a Panasonic DVX100A camera. (For the tech geeks out there...Represent!) I did all my shooting in 24p instead of 30i, because I like the vaguely film-like look when video's shot in 24 frames/second.
And just to round out the techie questions... I edited the film on a Mac using Final Cut Pro 5. The fancier graphic effects -- subject IDs and opening title sequence -- were done using Adobe After Effects.
I never really considered having the film put on TV for broadcast -- my intention while shooting was always to release it as a DVD, and then see what other opportunities might come along. To that end, I did my best to keep the quality of the production as high as I could within my budget.
As far as the audio is concerned: Before I got into documentary, and even before I became a journalist, I did a lot of work in my own home recording studio, writing and producing music for my industrial band, Atomic Box. So I had a lot of opportunities over the years to figure out how to get a half-way decent mix using computer-based audio systems. Ultimately, though, it's about properly miking a subject and just watching the levels while shooting. Practice makes perfect, as they say.
TRE: the importance of audio somehow seems lost in some productions (altho not necessarily 'intentional') - becoz what's the use of having fabulous images and a kick-ass story but no one can here clearly what is being said? LOL - tell us who did what and how they did?
BRIAN: Well... I produced, shot, edited, and wrote the film, and did a few of the graphic effects. A broadcast designer named Mary Hawkins did the opening title sequence and all the ID graphics (the sections that introduce each character), which was great because it really gave the film a finished look. She's done work for MTV, A&E, E! Entertainment, and various other production outlets, a true professional. Of course, I didn't have a very large budget for the documentary, so I agreed to pay her with dinners. I think I owe her something like 14,000 burritos from our favorite local burrito joint.Did I mention she's also my girlfriend? That helped convince her to do the work for free...
My Associate Producer was a friend of mine named Karl Tate. Besides helping me during the research stage of production, and then at the Comic Con '06 shoot, he also shot a lot of the still photography that ended up being used in the opening credit graphics and the closing titles. He also designed all the DVD box art. He was a huge help throughout production.
I got a lot of advice along the way from some of the artists themselves -- Frank Kozik, Mark Nagata, Brian Flynn, and Erick Scarecrow were all helpful in getting me in touch with other people or suggesting ways to distribute the film post production. I also would like to thank some other filmmakers and journalists -- Megan Thompson, Stuart Harmon, Jeff Solomon, Crystal Fisher, John DeNatali, and Marcia Rock, in particular -- a lot of credit for their input, suggestions, etc. Making a film is DEFINITELY not a solo effort.
TRE: Amen to that! how long did the entire docu took to finish? from conception, to shoot, to post etc - many people do not realize nor appreciate the effort and timeline dedicated to projects like these, IMHO. when i "was" plying my trade in the local media production-line, loads of folks would mention things like: "just grab a camera and go out and shoot only, what's the big deal?" LOL scheduling interviews alone would've been a daunting-task already, i could only imagine :p
BRIAN: The whole process took about a year and a half, from conception to finished product. It started as a graduate school thesis. I'd been a journalist for about a decade when I decided to go back to grad school at New York University for broadcast journalism and documentary making. To graduate, we had to produce a documentary, which we'd shoot over the summer between our second and our third (final) semester. Then, in theory, we'd edit in a workshop environment for the last few months of school before participating in a public screening in February following graduation. (It was a three semester program -- a year and a half -- so we finished in December.)
But after the screening, I took another few months to shoot and add more footage and then recut and fix various sections for the DVD release. Ultimately, I wrapped everything up and send the final master off to the DVD plant at the end of June 2007. JUST before Comic Con, which was definitely cutting it too close for comfort!
There were a lot of overnight editing sessions, where I found myself crashing for an hour in the editing bay. Probably not the best way to make a film... certainly a stressful way to do it!
The logistics were definitely a little tricky. I live in New York City, and many of the shoots happened in San Diego (Comic Con) and San Francisco (Patrick Ma, Mark Nagata, Frank Kozik, Mars-1, Brian Flynn, Glenn Pogue). I needed to schedule the SF ones as close together as possible -- flying out to San Francisco, staying in a hotel, travelling around, it all ends up getting expensive. So I couldn't afford to drag it out for too long, and I definitely couldn't fly back out to SF again if I missed anything.
Actually, I didn't know I definitely had my interview with Frank Kozik until about five hours earlier, when I was in a cab on the way to another interview, and I got an email on my Sidekick. "Sounds cool. How about 4p.m.? I'm at..." I'd just bought the Sidekick, by the way -- if I didn't have it, I wouldn't have known about the interview, and that'd have been that... I don't like to think about those things.
Obviously, the interviews and shoots in New York were a lot easier to arrange and get to.
I once got some great advice from a documentary maker. He told me, "Always try to make documentaries whose subjects can be reached via public transportation."
Most of my budget was eaten up just by travel, with airfare, hotels, rental cars... It adds up really fast. If everyone in the film had lived in Brooklyn, I'd have been able to make the documentary for about $10!
TRE: sound advice indeed LOL - any particular reason you chose TOYS as your subject? do you yourself collect?
BRIAN: The reason I chose this subject in the first place is that I'm a toy collector myself -- mostly vintage tin space toys (robots and stuff) from the 50s and 60s, as well as vintage ray guns from the 30s-50s. At the time, I was getting interested in some of the vinyl pieces -- had some friends who were into them, knew a couple artists -- and I decided that I wanted to learn more about the scene. I quickly realized that it'd make a good documentary. (Since then, my vinyl collection's grown... needless to say.)
TRE: from vintage toys to designer-vinyls, so how has the lure of vinyl been thus far?
BRIAN: Well, like I said, my main toy collections are actually vintage space toys. However, since getting into vinyl -- It's hard to do a documentary like this, to see all these great toys, and not want to own them! As far as western vinyl is concerned, I'm attracted to pieces that have some meaning behind them -- Kaws, Ron English, and Jermaine Rogers in particular. I also really like Nathan J. and Mars-1 a LOT. Their aesthetic really appeals to me. I'm a fan of Mark Nagata's toys (Max Toy Co.), as well. I never really collected the old Ultraman-style character toys, but his Captain Max figure is pretty neat.
I'm a big fan of Super 7's toys, particularly the new Ghostland figs and the company's collaborations with Secret Base -- especially the Ghost Fighters, which just kill me. Speaking of Secret Base, I also have a small collection of Japanese vinyl -- mostly SB, plus a little Gargamel and Chronic.
And, of course, I like all the work done by the artists in the film -- Rocket World, Kozik, Erick Scarecrow, Kano, Tara McPherson... Why else would I want to interview them?
But the truth is, I'm pretty picky about the toys I add to my collection.So my vinyl shelves are thinner than you'd expect.
TRE: a more discerning collecting trait/habit/approach would also lead to a longer collecting life-span, IMHO (without breaking the bank nor be saddled with toys you may not like at all further down the road LOL) ... the main docu, i felt, had a decent mix of entertainment and educational aspects, IMHO - and i appreciated that you've not being too overtly preachy, while at the same time had also provided a voice for collectors, as well as creators, into/of the phenom that which is designer-vinyl. was there anything conscious you had to leave out (but wanted to put in?) due to any particular circumstances?
BRIAN: I definitely entered into the film with the idea that it had to be ENTERTAINING. I didn't want it to feel like a lecture on vinyl toys. Of course, it's a documentary, so I couldn't just write some jokes or funny scenes -- I had to work with the material. So it came down to pacing, and making sure I included enough interesting real-life moments. Also, editing was important. I never CHANGED a scene using editing, but I would edit the scene in such a way as to create comic "beats." For instance, the scene with Voltaire and the girl at Comic Con. It was pretty funny to begin with, but it was also about 20 minutes long. So I cut it up, set it to music, and got a pretty entertaining little moment out of it. But as a journalist, I think it's very important that what audience sees really
happened.
Another scene that people keep telling me they enjoyed was the intercutting between the two collectors -- Drew Lippman and Glenn Pogue -- and Tara McPherson. Again, editing plays a huge role in making the scene work, but I never changed or manipulated what the people were saying -- I made certain not to put words in their mouths, and to keep it obvious to the viewer that each person was speaking independently. I never tried to make it look like they were all in the same room or anything like that.
It's the difference between documentary work and reality TV, which manufactures its dramatic, humorous, or emotional moments as opposed to letting the characters themselves just say what they want to say, or do what they want to do.
On the other hand, I knew the film had to be "educational" for people who didn't know anything about vinyl toys. I realized going into it that there'd be stuff that collectors already knew. But when making a film like this, you have to consider your entire audience, and I knew that some people watching it would either not collect toys at all (many people have told me that when their friends or parents or spouses wonder what's up with all the toys, they sit them down and show them the film), or would be new to the toy scene.
As for cutting out footage... The only reason I cut footage was because it failed to move the narrative of the film forward, or because of time or pacing, or because it was tangential or whatever. Nothing got cut to "protect people," or to save face, or anything like that. I knew from the beginning that the film would be a positive depiction of the vinyl toy scene. BUT, if "Artist X" had said, "Screw art -- I'm only in this to make money!" I'd have definitely included it in the film. He or she said it, it's definitely an important detail, so there's no way I'd cut it out.
It's important -- VITAL -- that documentary makers show and tell the TRUTH. That comes first. But, on the other hand, a documentary maker can still have an agenda. You can decide that the film will be positive about a subject, or an attack on the subject, or whatever, but still be TRUTHFUL and HONEST and FAIR about the information in the film. It's a tough balancing act sometimes.
However, in the end, I lucked out -- no one did or said anything negative, so there's nothing in the film that makes anyone look bad.
TRE: personally, it might have been interesting to hear naysayers' points-of-view, in regards to designer-vinyls (cost being a major issue for most, IMHO) - hell, i would've loved to hear their "partners" (wives, girlfriends, husbands etc) or friends giving them shitte for collecting toys! (hell, i've had my fair share of encounters LOL)
BRIAN: You know, I agree. It was something I thought about. But there ended up being two reasons I didn't do it.
1. It was tough finding people with anything "negative" to say. Everyone I encountered thought the toys and artists making the toys were cool. Even spouses and significant others. I suppose that's why they're married to/dating the toy collectors/artists in the first place.
2. The other reason I didn't go in that direction -- and the more important one -- is that many of the potential audience members might already feel that way. Anyone seeing the film who isn't a toy collector or artist is probably already thinking to themselves, "What do you mean that toys are art? That's a load of crap!" So, in theory, the audience already represents the "negative" point of view, if that makes any sense.
On a sort of related subject... There was a Q&A session during that first public screening, and someone asked me, "You explain why the toys are art, but why didn't you explain why they're still toys?" I thought it was an interesting question, and I responded by asking him, "If I held up a Dunny or something, you'd immediately think, 'That's a toy.' It's a toy because IT'S A TOY -- that part's obvious."
TRE: the power of "visual-recognition" is something we most times under-estimate. i've told my film-students that there is no longer any total ORIGINAL thought nor creation existent in this world at this day and age, and everything we create henceforth will be based on what we've seen, heard, tasted, experienced before, in some shape or form, whether directly or subconsiously, IMHO...
BRIAN: I think the point is, sometimes as a filmmaker, you can use your audiences preconceived notions to your advantage -- the audience, in a sense, can become a useful tool in conveying the information. Because they already thought of these things as toys, I didn't have to explain to them that they're toys. And because they already had doubts about toys being art, I didn't have to find someone to be that devil's advocate on screen.
Anyway, that was my thinking at the time.
TRE: but for the wonderful platform that is "media", and for 'filmmaking' in that regard :) - i appreciated you showed a female-collector's POV of collecting as well (Nathan J. fan) rather than this just being a man's vinyl-obssession (this is just a thinly-veiled question of an excuse for me to say Tara McPherson is thoroughly HAWT - yes i am shallow :p) - was it hard to find female collectors to profile?
BRIAN: I originally put out a call on some message boards looking for collectors, and only one person responded (Kano, who turned out to be one of the film's featured artists, as he was just finishing up his Money Grip toy). So finding collectors willing to speak on camera was surprisingly tough -- I have no idea why. In the end, a friend of mine suggested I call up Drew Lippman (whose amazing photos I'd seen online -- I used some of them in the beginning of the film). Then, when I was in San Francisco, Brian Flynn gave me Glenn Pogue's contact information. Both were nice enough to invite me over to shoot.
Finding Wendy, the woman at the Nathan J. signing, was just luck. I filmed Nathan signing her Bunniguru toy, and heard her say to Nathan that it was her second piece of vinyl ever. I realized that it'd be worth speaking to her. So I cornered her in Toy Tokyo, stuck a camera in front of her, and asked her some questions. Unfortunately -- and this gets back to the discussion about scheduling and logistics -- I couldn't ever make a full-on, formal interview at her home happen. My schedule at that point was crazy as I tried to edit the film and I just didn't have any time. It bothers me, actually, because she's an interesting person with an amazing collection, and I think an interview with her would have brought something good to the film.
TRE: a pity tho, for 'logistics' be the bane of any filmmaker (as opposed to 'creative' being totally subjective, IMHO) ... clocking in at 25 minutes is a decent time (but of coz i wanted more!!!!) - is there a 3-hours director's cut somewhere out there begging to be released? LOL
BRIAN: That's a looong story. Ultimately, though, I decided that the film would be only as long as it needed to be. That is, I didn't want to stretch it out just to make it fit a particular length if the material didn't allow for it. A normal, half hour TV show (here in the States, anyway) is actually 22 minutes, not counting commercials. Toys Are Us is a bit longer, and I decided that it worked well at that length. And this way, if I'm able to market the film further -- to cable TV, for instance -- it's at a length they can use.
But I DID have some extra interview footage that I wanted to use, and I was able to work it in as part of the DVD extras.
There were also issues concerning how much information could fit on a DVD. It's actually lot less than you'd imagine -- major movie studios can afford double-layer DVD production and stuff, but for the rest of us, there are definite limits. Between the film, the extra interviews, and the additional music tracks, I tapped out the disc's capacity.
As for those music segments -- they were included as a way for me to get the music for free. I spoke to a number of musicians and they were wonderful enough to let me have some of their songs in exchange for a bit of promotion. I agreed to put unedited tracks in the extras section, along with whatever promotional materials the provided. They agreed to let me use the music at no cost.
When making films, NEVER underestimate the barter system. It's an independed producer's best friend.
TRE: a double-Amen to that! LOL (something which i've been trying to incalculate into my students' mindset too LOL) what i personally loved most about the DVD were the individual Creator-Interviews section (i have a new-found respect for Frank Kozik - dude knows his shitte and he made me feel wholely inadequate; vinyl-wise LOL). how was the experience interviewing them and to have them invite you into their toy-lives?
BRIAN: The interviews, of course, were the most fun part of the whole process. I love going out to meet new people, it's one of the reasons I'm a journalist. And all the artists were fun, nice, interesting people. They were talking about a subject that I personally enjoy. And they were showing off their toys... What's not to love about all that?
All the interviews were surprisingly easy -- everyone seemed happy to talk on camera, and everyone had something interesting to say. Getting the interviews to happen was also pretty simple... some of the scheduling was a little tricky, but there wasn't any difficulty in getting people to agree to being in the film. Which was a relief...
TRE: on one hand, you'd want to "educate" the general public about the designer vinyl-scene, to build up understanding and (even) tolerance, but on the other, this seeming underground toy-culture may take off among the masses, and the next thing you know, your general toyshops (TRUs et al) is going to be hawking the next "hawt designer vinyl" and the scene dilutes for the sake of mass consumption and mainstream popularity (which can be seen currently with varied creators and their creations, IMHO) ... but then again, wasn't that the case since toys were ever "created" (for production and sales)? - as opposed to products meant to "entertain" (and mayhap "educate") children? the urban vinyl spirit / scene is moreso catered to adults, who no doubt has the purchasing power (least of all financially-strapped sad-buggers like me LOL)
BRIAN: I think this is a valid question. But I also think it assumes a lot about both the mainstream and underground cultures. There is a chance that the release of a film on the subject of designer vinyl toys could spark an interest in these toys among the mainstream. But that seems unlikely.
1. It assumes that the mainstream will see the film in such vast numbers as to create a demand beyond only the people who are interested in weird, subversive, EXPENSIVE toys.
2. It assumes that the toy manufacturers like Hasbro and Mattel will see profit in this. That means that they think they can make about 500,000 pieces of a toy, and have them all sell out. That gets back to assumption #1.
I don't see either of these things happening any time soon. The numbers don't play out correctly at this stage of the game. Remember, there's a reason it's UNDERGROUND toy culture -- these toys have themes, aesthetics, prices, etc. that aren't going to appeal to the mass market, which, by definition, tends to run on the conservative side of things like art and design.
On the other hand, films like mine and some of the others coming out in the next year or so MIGHT help to increase the size of the underground market as people who do like these types of things discover the toys as another form of artistic expression. I can only see this as a good thing -- it means more money for the artists, who in turn have the freedom to create more toys. They'll have the freedom to experiment with different, more daring designs because there's a bigger market for their more "normal" pieces of vinyl. But at the same time, I think the whole thing will still remain more or less underground, and the integrity will remain.
As long as the artists' hearts are in the right place, I think the toys will remain compelling, no matter who's buying them.
TRE: too true ... altho a smaller corner of my mind
BRIAN: Well, I touched on this before. The music segment was my way of paying the bands, but also my way of SUPPORTING bands whose music I like.
I spent a lot of time trying to find songs that I thought worked well in the film... I knew the music needed to be high energy and loud. I'm a huge fan of punk rock, but also industrial, metal, old school synthpop... so I had a lot of options and different ways I could have approached things. In the end, though, I decided that punk was best. It just fit nicely with the subject.
I also had to consider my budget. My original, rough cut, used music that I swiped from whatever CDs were lying around. At one point the soundtrack had stuff by the Misfits, NOFX, Rancid, Sick of It All... It was a damn fine soundtrack! Of course, it would have cost me $10,000 to use all that music, so it wasn't going to happen.
But I didn't mind. I think I'd much rather support really indie bands who're on their way up, who are doing things on their own to create their art. It's really in keeping with the spirit of the film, as well as my own DIY approach to making the film.
Eventually, I discovered Longway and Brian McCarty and Stick Shift by sifting through a web site for indie music called CD Baby. I knew the man behind I, Synthesist already, so it was easy to approach him and ask for a track. The only group that I thought might be tough was Mindless Self Indulgence. They're actually a pretty big band with a great underground following. They used to be on a major label, then broke away and decided to do everything themselves. A complete DIY success stories, and one of my favorite bands. But because they're successful, I didn't know if they're be able -- or even want -- to contribute a song without financial compensation.
I'm friendly with their manager, though, and I've interviewed the band a few times for various music magazines, so it turns out that they were immediately into the idea. I got really lucky -- they said I could pick any song I wanted and use it in any way that I wanted. I ended up chopping it up a bit to make it work in the film, and they didn't have any problem with it at all.
As for making videos to accompany the music... I just didn't have the time or money for something like that. I offered to include video footage if the artists sent it to me, but no one had any at the time.
TRE: at the end of the day, how has the experience of making this docu affected you? burnt or blossomed? (LOL) ... what have you gained from the experience?
BRIAN: I feel like I've grown spiritually. I've turned my life around, I've quit drinking and drugging. I don't dig up graves anymore for cheap and easy sex.
Ha ha.
Actually, in all seriousness, it was a learning experience. I've done some broadcast work already, and, like I said, I've been a print journalist for a decade. But the scope of the documentary was so much greater than any other project I'd worked on up to that point that every experience was a new experience -- even the stuff I already knew how to do. Shoots were tougher, editing was a LOT tougher. But I learned a lot, and I think I'm a better filmmaker for having done it all.
And, as experiences go, running all over the country to talk to people about toys isn't the worst way to spend a summer...!
TRE: very cool that tho, the opportunity for constantly different work environments is always cool (at least for me LOL) ... so what's next for X-Ray Films?
BRIAN: Top secret. But we're ramping up for another documentary -- and this time it'll be a much bigger production. Multiple cameras, a year long shoot... if it all works out the way I hope, it'll be great. We're looking at a 2009 tentative release date, if all goes well. It's not about toys, I'm afraid, but I think that toy fans'll definitely dig it. And that's all I can say on the subject for now.
TRE: dude, you had me at "multiple cameras" LOL - until the next docu debuts, where can we find TOYS ARE US DVDs?
BRIAN STILLMAN: They're in vinyl toy stores now, though I'm not sure which ones. If your local shop doesn't have them, they can contact DKE Distribution to order copies.
OR... Anyone interested can go to www.xrayfilms.net. Click on the giant For Sale banner, which will take you to an independent online retailer called Film baby. You can order from them -- they take credit cards, handle shipping, all that fun stuff. They'll get your DVD right out to you with no fuss or delay.
(And if any independent filmmakers are reading this, and you plan on releasing your films on DVD, I HIGHLY suggest checking out Film Baby. They're great.)
TOYSREVIL: cheers for the time and trouble for this blog-convo, Brian and i'd like to congratulate you on the DVD as well as wish you a smooth production for your future projects, and be sure to keep us updated yeh? LOL
