My wonderful wife, She Who Must Be Obeyed, as left me. She has taken my son and made the trek to Zion to visit family for the next three weeks (read about her adventures here), while I get to do really exciting lawyer stuff at work. (OK, it actually isn’t that exciting.) In the evenings, I have been having various do-it-yourself home improvement adventures. To fight off loneliness and boredom while I paint, I have rented movies. Lots of them. Since my local Hollywood Video seems to have a fairly complete set of the recent offerings from the LDS film world, I have been going through the productions of Mollywood.
Suffice it to say, that many of these movies are…um…special. (I thought Saints and Soldiers was very good though.) Still, I have been having a lot of fun, and I have kindled a burning ambition to be a film maker. My favorite parts of most of these movies are the special features sections on the DVDs, particularly the “making of” bits where the directors and producers talk about making a movie on a shoestring and the commentary where the director says, “Now this set is actually my aunt Edna’s garage in Heber.”
I envy the film makers for two reasons. First, what they are doing looks like so much fun. (I am in a reviewing-insurance-documents phase at work; so everything is looking fun to me.) Second, it must be wonderful to have something at the end of your labors. At its best, my job consists of a series of complicated arguments. It can be fun and intellectually demanding, but at the end of the case you are usually left with a mountain of paper that no one in their right mind will ever read again. The struggle can be exciting, but there is no product. It would be great to stand back, point at something, and say, “I made that.”
I think that it is pretty clear that God is a first and foremost a lawyer. One has only to read the Old Testament to see that God spends a lot of time making laws, and the New Testament is largely a set of clever legal arguments. The Sermon on the Mount is a masterpiece of Legal Process reasoning, and Paul’s Epistle to the Hebrews is tremendously imaginative and powerful reinterpretation of old precedents. Still, God seems to take time off from the law to create things every now and then, and I suppose that he is probably into low budge movies as well.
I usually overlook your typos, Nate. But “she as left me” was great. Excuse me while I read the remainder of your post in a cockney brittish accent.
Shawn, I think your comments are great, too. But in a comment where you comment about Nate’s frequent (and endearing) typos and misspellings, did you really intend to spell British as brittish?
Those who want carefully proof read documents from me can contact Sidley Austin Brown & Wood LLP. Our hourly rates are very reasonable…
Mark: yes, I thought spelling “british” as “brittish” would be funny. Too subtle for you?
Nate: I offered my services, but …
Nate, where can I find one of these low budge movies? I’m dying to see the kinds of films the Almighty watches in his spare time!
In the spirit of responding to something other than the substance of Nate’s post (home improvement? Mollywood? God as lawyer first and creator only second? Your big firm malaise?): I noticed that you (Nate) are using Hollywood Video instead of mail-in service like Netflix. Now I’m not about to sing that service’s praises without reservation. I have twice cancelled my account only to return, hat in hand, for more scratched-up but unlimited monthly rentals. The fact that they ship from Gaithersburg, about a mile from my home, adds to the appeal for me—the turnaround is occassionally lightening fast.
Anyway, I have been dismayed by the spotty selection of Mollywood from Netflix, where I have been unable to obtain Brigham City and The Best Two Years. Rather alarmingly, however, other less watchable titles (“special” ones in Nate’s post) they have. My point: I hereby invite the bloggernacle to join me in applying some pressure on Netflix to fill the gaps in its Mollywood collection. Getting these out there and widely available may not yet be a net gain for the church’s image. But it is atleast good for mormon film makers. Certainly we don’t want them giving up, taking the LSAT, and attempting to join the ranks of creativity-stiffled document reviewers.
And, btw, “proof read” (comment # 3) should actually be “proofread”, I think . . .
Obviously, I have more time on my hands this morning than you.
Have you ever seen them making a movie? What looks like fun at the finish looks like drudgery during the making. After several hours getting the lighting right, the shot set up, the make-up and costume on the prima donna stars, you shoot the scene. Then you shoot it again, and again. Sometime before dawn you finally get it right, and you start thinking about tomorrow’s shooting while looking at rushes from today’s work. Then you get in a fight with the teamsters about delivering stuff, or about non-teamsters doing some kind of work on the set, and then the star gets a cold or a big zit that even the make-up people can’t cover and you throw all the work in the trash and do it again.
About that time, you wish you were back in a quiet office doing due diligence.
“I suppose that [God] is probably into low budge movies as well.”
He is, but only as a fan. He and Joseph Smith went in together on a little theater where, late at night, they run pirated copies of films like Legacy and make wisecracks. Sydney Rigdon operates the projector and sweeps up the aisles afterwards. I heard that God laughed so hard during The Book of Mormon Movie Diet Coke shot out of his nose. And Nephi was just sitting there kind of moodily with his legs crossed. Joseph threw popcorn at him and told him to relax, it was just a movie, whereupon Sydney muttered something from the back about not really needing another mess, thank you, but his and Joseph’s relationship is now akin to that of Biff Tannen and George McFly at the end of Back to the Future, so …
Diet Coke? I thought the only sodas God drank were 7-Up and Canada Dry Ginger Ale.
He switched once they started adding lime.
Nate,
A lot of this post rings true for me. I frequently tell my wife that I want to make a movie, and it’s usually after a long day at work followed by a short, fun time watching the extras on a DVD and learning cool facts. (The big bloody scene in Carrie was shot over a few weeks, and the lights kept drying out the blood, so Sissy Spacek kept constantly having to be re-bloodied. Darren Aronofsky never got a permit to shoot Pi, so he had a lookout watching for the cops when they were shooting outdoors.)
Plus, there are a reasonable number of low-budget films that worked out very well. (Pi was financed by Aronofsky bugging family and friends and getting a bunch of $1000 contributions. Open Water was shot on weekends, over two years, on a digital).
So perhaps some day I’ll join you in film school.
Nate,
Why film school? What ever gave you the idea that mollywood film making required any kind of training?
My next post: “I Want to be a Landed Gentleman of Leisure.”
Lol, Adam.
Well if there’s one thing I’ve learned from Project Greenlight, it’s that movies have too many fingers in the pie. Too many chefs in the kitchen. Too many chiefs and probably too many Indians, too.
I mean it’d really bother me to make a movie and not have control over everything. But maybe I’m just a control freak.
Susan M.,
Frank Capra was a control freak too. His motto was: “One man one movie”. IMO, he created a respectable canon of films because of that approach.
A caution: in the 70’s, to poke fun at BYU’s early films, my roommates and I set up a projector in our apartment’s parking lot, invited ward and other friends to join us, and screened what we called the Spencer W. Kimball Film Festival, featuring films in which Pres. Kimball appeared. The low production values entertained us with the first film, we started listening with the second, and by the third, the message pushed aside our mockery of the production’s deficiencies. So much for trifling with sacred things for sport. To be enjoyed, sniping has to be aimed away from the core stuff!
A radio commercial here in SoCal quotes a well-known movie producer defining teamwork as, “a bunch of people running around doing what I tell them.”
Adam:
Word up. I would so be the perfect amateur scholar, lazy estate manager, small time politico, earnest yet witty correspondent, middle-brow gourmand, big-hearted landlord (but not too big) and all-around dabbler.
The only thing is that I’m not real fond of playing whist or gin.
If it’s any consolation to you, Nate, I –with 15 years in the broadcasting industry– want to go to law school. ;-)
Interestingly enough, we never get posts like “I want to be a document-reviewing attorney” or “I want to be swashbuckling corporate lawyer.” How come we never get posts about people who love their jobs – Nate, please tell me that I won’t start posting dreams about other careers once I’m done with my clerkship!
“The only thing is that I’m not real fond of playing whist or gin.”
That could be your de rigeur eccentricity.
Stew: If you don’t have at least some regret about not pursuing other careers, you are simply not properly aware of how many cools things there are to do in the world. Living life is about having regrets. The practice of law can be a lot of fun at times. (I finished up document review before lunch, and I have spent my afternoon reading and thinking about argument and strategy in a pending cert petition. Lots and lots of fun! It is the sort of thing that Steven Spielberg sees and thinks, “I wish I had gone to law school.”)
You should check out the “at home parent” option. Pretty close to being independently wealthy in my book. Blogging and bon bons all the way!
I know I must be very un-hip for asking this, but what exactly does “mollywood” mean? Is it just mormon movies? I thought Naomi Frandsen at M* used that term referring to some films out of India? Does it just mean everything that’s squeaky clean?
Andrea: “Bollywood” is the term for the Indian film industry, and “Mollywood” (referring to Molly Mormons) is sometimes used for the Mormon film industry (such as it is).
Nothing warms my heart quite like hearing a lawyer say he wants to go to film school, and somehow it’s all the more heart-warming when that lawyer is Nate Oman.
But don’t let those DVD commentaries fool you, Nate.
It’s true that there’s great satisfaction in being able to point at the fruit of your labors and say I did that, or I helped do that, but take it from me, someone who did go to film school, it doesn’t always make up for having money, health benefits, job security, and the respect of people around you. Ironically, after years of struggling to get a toe-hold in the entertainment industry I came close to hitting rock bottom, and nearly decided to go to law school. I caught a few breaks in the nick of time, and it’s a good thing because I probably would have been miserable.
Lucky for you, though, unlike medicine and the law you don’t have to go to film school to practice filmmaking. In fact, film schools ruin a lot of good filmmakers. So my advice is if you’re serious get yourself a camera and knock yourself out.
I don’t think I want to make movies. But I’d like to do some video editing — I’d be really good at it! I’ve been editing some old footage of shows, and I really like it. I purchased the new Final Cut Studio from Apple — now that’s some complex software!
Nate,
I totally recognize that there are a zillion cool things to do out there in the world. I’ve just been dismayed lately that I really haven’t ever seen posts (on this blog, and others) where people talk about how much fun they are having in the current job. That’s all.
Also, an interesting topic that I’ve been mulling on lately – how many young associates (or analysts, in the business world) have bosses, partners, judges, etc, who they view as exceptionally devoted to their families? I’m intrigued by this topic and wonder if there are just a few anecdotes out there, or if there are people who are actually able to be great parents and great contributors in the law, business, medicine, etc. Maybe this post might not be the place to discuss this, however, so I apologize for bringing it up if it isn’t the right forum.
Good luck on the cert. petition.
Not to be argumentative (since I always sound that way even when I’m not trying to be), but just to clarify for those who are interested, Bollywood films are not Indian films in general, but a particular genre of Indian films which has garnered that appelation from, among other things, the sweeping romantic narratives, lush cinematography, high production values, and musical interludes that characterized golden-age Hollywood films.
Precisely, Travis—thanks for the clarification!
Travis, being Indian, I do watch my fair share of Bollywood movies. Us injuns, however, refer to all movies made by the Indian film industry, even if the serious, artsy movies, Bollywood movies. However, having seen a fir number of both high-art movies and the kitschy dance-around-the-trees, musical-theaterish movies, I’d say that the production values, generally are pretty bad. Compared to American made movies, whether they be lavish Hollywood productions, or seat of the pants type of movies like Napolean Dynamite.
Funny, I had a good friend who was a director who went to law school.
Again, only for the sake of those who are both detail-driven and interested in the topic (and not to be argumentative), I’ll be more specific. While the word Bollywood is no doubt used and misused by the public at large in any number of ways, like most other words and with negligible consequence to the great scheme of things, within the film industry and the film studies discipline it primarily refers to the genre I described above–as a cursory search indicated by yielding the following Google weight-listed definition, from http://www.filmsiteorg/filmterms: “Bollywood refers to the burgeoning film industry of India, the world’s biggest film industry, centered in Bombay (now Mumbai); the etymology of the word: from Bo(mbay) + (Ho)llywood; unlike Hollywood, however, Bollywood is a non-existent place. Example: Mira Nair’s Monsoon Wedding (2001), a modern Indian film set in current-day New Delhi, echoes the Bollywood spirit with typical traits including music and dance, romance, and comedy.”
Secondary, the term also refers to films resulting from the cinematic transmutations and stages through with the genre (like any genre) has passed–e.g., Mumbai parodies of classical Bollywood films.
And, of course, it is frequently used in more casual contexts with reference to contemporary Indian films in general (as Rosalynde used it above, though I’m sure she knows at least as much about the topic as I do, given her admirable trait of never commenting on something about which she isn’t well-qualified to converse, as her subsequent comments always reveal). But you’ll seldom find industry people or academics using it that way for the same reasons they wouldn’t typically refer to all American films (or even to all films made in Hollywood) as “Hollywood” films.
Again, only someone who is a detail-obsessed film teacher, student, and/or afficionado like me would care about all of this. But for their sake, there you have it.