Corfizz: From Poverty to Africa: Retrospection Part 2

Thomas Dubois, played by Matthew Tisot

Thomas is quite clearly supposed to be the main character: it is his poverty that the title references, and he is the one who starts the story for the first time at the beginning of the film. Yet Thomas is consistently overshadowed by the other characters, including Questa, who almost certainly has more lines than him. This is partly because the other characters are just generally more comic, but also because of inconsistency in his character. He is supposed to have grown up in the inner-city slums, to have had numerous addictions and to have been involved in petty crime, yet if it weren't for the fact that this was specifically revealed to us at the start, we probably wouldn't notice. Though specific mention is made of his lack of formal education, he speaks very eloquently and comes up with very logical and intelligent arguments. All of this is ostensibly due to the civilising effect of Questa and her elocution lessons, but this certainly sounds like a contrivance. In the hotel room, Thomas talks about a few of the events from his past; after that, he essentially becomes furniture until the very end, making only a brief come-back to fend off an inflatable crocodile.

The inconsistent character is not helped by Matthew's inconsistent acting. While some of it is good, other bits are dull. Sometimes he displays genuine character, such as when he relates the tale of the chicken in the fast food shop, yet he never acts like this at any other point in the film and loses this character immediately afterwards when talking about his pancreas transplant. Compare also his delivery of "That's the second time this week - unbelievable!" at the start with the line immediately afterwards, "So, anyway, why don't you tell Señora Gaitán our story?" It seems as though we just didn't know what Thomas is supposed to be like. Another part of the problem, of course, is that he doesn't have much of interest to say; Questa and Jeanne steal all of the interesting lines, especially towards the end, where Thomas' only purpose is to be confused and ask the right question so that the exposition can move forward. Matthew spent a long time trying to get the "Wow, and speaking of the world..." line right, and the result is generally quite good, if a little slowly delivered (while he tries to remember how the next bit goes).

Memorable line: "The extent of your manipulations is unbelievable!"

Worst line: "Anyway, back to the piece of paper."

Questa Dubois, played by Charlotte Kay

Two somewhat contradictory questions about Questa come to mind: firstly, is she perfect? Secondly, is she stupid? She understands Thomas' problems, and accepts him as a person despite his criminal past; she puts a firm stop to his addictions and stops him from taking up drinking. She is absolved of any blame for Jeanne's situation and suggests that she would have helped her if she could have. Partly for these reasons, Questa seems to have no character flaws, although she does display some impatience, such as on the London Underground. At the same time, she fails to fight back against her mother's tyranny, just accepting whatever she says almost unquestioningly. She may be afraid of her mother, but she doesn't even seem to show any sign of resentment, or even unhappiness. She just seems to want to make the best of the situation. We may suspect Questa of being an idiot for a number of reasons: she fails to recognise her cousin Jeanne; she wonders why the English people all look "strangely similar" without considering that they might be the same person; she stupidly remarks to her mother on the phone, "I can't tell you if she's here or not; she's told me not to say anything", despite having a gun in her face; and, of course, she married Thomas. There were further examples of Questa saying stupid things which were cut in the final version. Despite all this, Questa shows signs of being intelligent: she has an impeccable grasp of French military history; she isn't satisfied with Thomas' shrugging-off of the camel's glowing; she was supposed to have taught Thomas what he knows; and she makes generally very cogent and analytical remarks about most things, particularly in her voice-overs.

Questa's character is more consistent than Thomas', but still seems to be lacking something. This was going to be addressed further in the new scenes that we had planned: Questa was afraid of being disinherited, for example, which was going to explain why she didn't dare anger her mother too much. As it is, we have to be thankful for Charlotte's acting, which consistently made the best of the inconsistency. She injected emotion precisely where needed, and, unlike Matthew, she continued to act even when she didn't have any lines, which certainly saved the wedding reception scene from being even duller than it already was.

Memorable line: "Everyone's life is important!"

Worst line: "In fact you could say that this is the story of their products."

Jeanne Lefèvre, played by Amber Prosser

From her first major appearance on the train, Jeanne/Amber immediately provides the film with some much-needed colour. In fact, Jeanne's success in the train scene is entirely down to Amber, whose impromptu newspaper-peering antics were not detailed in the script, yet were perfectly consistent with the deranged but nefariously cunning antagonist that she plays. Her acting was, however, somewhat variable - her performance in scenes 15 (on the cliffs), 18 (in the tent) and 39 (in the inn) being somewhat flatter than her outlandish enthusiasm in scenes 40 (outside the inn), 20 (at the shop in 'London') and 47 and 49 (on the common). Generally, the scenes that were filmed later are better, presumably because she had had more time to grow into the role and to learn the fiendishly difficult lines. Given the tight schedule and the sheer length of her lines, Amber's patience and overall performance is laudable.

Jeanne is one of the better-developed characters in the story and it is perhaps a shame that we don't really get too close to her; she is, for the most part, presented as the 'other' - the mysterious stalker, the shady villain, the one who's silently pulling all the strings, right up until her plan backfires, the aliens dispose of her and she's never heard of again. Jeanne is hence not the overarching antagonist, since it quickly becomes clear that the threat posed by the aliens is orders of magnitude more serious than any damage Jeanne could have done with her hypermarket. It would not be at all controversial to say that the villains and the interactions between them are far more interesting than the protagonists. Betrayal and back-stabbing are the order of the day: Jeanne gets the ninjas to betray Claire by setting the Ultimate Gaullist Weapon on her; Jeanne then disposes of the ninjas when they refuse to join her; Claire almost looks as though she has a strange-hold over Jeanne, before Jeanne asserts her cunning once again; and finally the aliens betray her.

Memorable line: Too many to choose from! How about, "Don't come any closer! I like my personal space."

Worst line: "Brilliant, brilliant, but I mean, as I say..."

Claire Montpellier-dit-Michel, played by Rosemary Reeves

When I first read the original version of the script, I found scene 9 (the wedding reception scene) extremely funny and also somewhat innovative for being a stereotypical 'villain's exposition' that actually appears at the start of the film instead of the end. Unfortunately, this scene turned out to be rather dull, which was at least partly because Rosemary had not been able to learn her lines (and was consequently reading from a script for the whole scene! Bet you didn't notice!) and because she delivered them very slowly. In other places, her acting was memorably good - "Silence! Or I'll kill you!" - and her non-verbal acting was usually appropriate for the unhinged, power-hungry, wicked interfering mother-in-law that she was playing.

Claire is a reasonably interesting and entertaining character overall. Unlike in early versions of the script, she re-appears near the end of the film, which helps for the cohesion of the film in general but does drag out the already over-long scene 52 (the long exposition on the common). Claire's final fate isn't mentioned - she fizzles out along with Questa's mobile phone battery - and this could leave the hypothetical audience wondering how Thomas and Questa managed to escape her grasp and do what they wanted, i.e. remain married and set up their project in the Congo. The scrapped new scenes would have explained that Claire died of a haemorrhage after getting into a fight with a union woman who was trying to get better working conditions at the Montpellier-dit-Michel lumber mills; Questa then inherited the fortune and used it to finance the eco-village in the Congo.

Memorable line: "Tell me now or I'll rip off both your arms and beat you... with their soggy ends."

Worst line: "What's this? It says it's a family tree..."

Claudia García Gaitán, played by Maddy Lawrence-Jones

Most of the film is a story that Thomas and Questa are recounting to Gaitán, and this would suggest that Gaitán is a significant character. However, her role is solely to listen: we needed to introduce the idea of the story being narrated (for reasons I mentioned in part one), and that means we needed someone to be narrated to. Gaitán is from some "organisation in Venezuela" whose purpose is never explained. Her appearance is official and perhaps even intimidating, but she appears to have a sense of fun and isn't afraid to fall fast asleep when the story gets boring. We recorded a number of shots of Gaitán in various stages of boredom and sleep, and Maddy's non-verbal acting here was quite superb. The idea of inserting these clips, however, is of somewhat questionable purpose; we were effectively saying, "Yes, we know this bit is boring". According to Gaitán, the story is "very... detailed", which is, of course, a polite way of saying that it's exceptionally dull. After all, there is no reason why Thomas and Questa would have to go into the excruciating detail that they did, and I also see no reason why Gaitán felt it necessary to put up with it. The overall impression I get from this is that Thomas and Questa are just exceedingly sad people.

Some people have said that Gaitán was hard to understand, which I imagine is more because of the Spanish accent than the volume. Those familiar with Spanish will find it quite authentic.

The scrapped new scenes were going to develop Gaitán into a major character. She was to be a reformed drug dealer who was responsible for the death of the fiancée of the scrapped character Darryl Dycho.

Memorable line: "Have you heard this estory of theirs? It's very... detailed..."

Worst line: "You are the product of the couple in Cévennes National Park."

Monique, played by Milly Paine

Monique is perhaps the most colourful character in the film: an ex-security guard who is now completely obsessed with yams and only speaks in rhyme. Who could fail to be enchanted by such a ridiculous personality? In fact, I would almost be tempted to say that there is more character and interest packed into Monique's relatively brief role than there is in Thomas and Questa put together. In this way, I think Monique is one of the film's great assets. Her history as a security guard neatly allowed us to remind the hypothetical audience of Thomas' past, and if there were more time, it would have been an interesting relationship to explore.

Milly plays the character very well, though I would suggest that she delivers the rhymes a little too quickly. This was probably due to the fact that she and Maddy were practically incapable of keeping a straight face and so she needed to get through the lines as quickly as possible before she burst out laughing.

Memorable line: "Wham! Have another yam!"

Worst line: "Thank you for your introduction Thomas; unfortunately I have some very serious news to offer" (not a bad line, really).

The Ninjas, played by James Strachan and Luke Warner

Is it justifiable for me to treat the ninjas as though they are one character? Well, I don't care. They don't even have individual names (though the scrapped new scenes were going to christen them Vivantpierre and Battantpierre). The ninjas, like Monique, add some much-needed originality and spice to the film. As soon as the camera pans down on them in scene 26, we can tell that this is going to be good. Incompetent, gluttonous, Gaullist ninjas. Have you ever heard such a ridiculous concept? James and Luke's acting (and particularly James') add barrels of extra pizzaz - although the 'raised finger' gesture was originally meant to be much more prominent. One unfortunate problem with the ninjas is that their masks make their voice quality worse. Luke's acting was quite flat and hesitant in places.

Memorable line: "In the name of de Gaulle!"

Worst line: "Ninja huddle!"

Emma Scott, played by Starbuck Friend

Emma is the Scottish woman who talks to T&Q on Loch Ness. Her lines are amusing, but unfortunately spoilt by the traffic noise. It would have helped if the microphone were closer to her. This was the real reason why I added subtitles in the final cut, but the fact that her lines are in Scots provides a convenient excuse for making them obligatory. Emma's only purpose from the plot's point of view is to distract T&Q while Jeanne steals the camel. Starbuck's acting was very good, including vibrant gesticulations.

Memorable line: "Tay bad it ate him next."

Worst line: ?

The Ventriloquist, played by John Tisot

Now, a bit of background (which I explained in part one). You know that tripod that's standing behind Charlotte on the cliffs in scene 15? It wasn't meant to be there. I'm not sure why they didn't notice, but they didn't, and there's nothing you can do about it short of re-filming the scene, which was not really practical or desirable. So naturally we decided to make tripods (or rather, tripodula!) a major element of the plot. As such, Matthew introduced the ventriloquist scene in order to prepare the hypothetical audience for the fact that a tripod will shortly be on the shot. This scene is funny, in my opinion, and Mr. Tisot (Matthew's father) delivered the lines very well.

The Alien, played by Justin Morgan

The alien's lines in the stop motion sequences are not, in my opinion, particularly funny, nor are they particularly understandable (though that wasn't the point). They serve their purpose, though. The processing that I applied to my voice is quite effective, I think: I didn't want it to be too extreme in case it made it inaudible, but I did make it go deeper or weirder at appropriate points (e.g. "the time for killing is upon us"). My voice acting is generally OK.

Memorable line: "You humans go on about such drivel" (another self-referential dig at how boring the script is)

Worst line: "People start acting like headless llamas"

The Panicked Passengers, played by Ben Pennington and Starbuck Friend

Classic. That is all.

The Parents, played by James Sidwell, Sarah Kilmister, Dan Omnes and Aphra Hurford

These don't have any lines - they appear at the beginning of the film as flashbacks of Thomas' and Questa's parents. I can't really think of any criticisms. James' acting was extremely good; Sarah's was also fantastic; excellent non-verbal communication in both cases. Dan and Aphra didn't have to do much, but they did it well enough.

James and Sarah also provided the voice-overs for the comedy on the television:

"I AM your father! And thanks to gender re-assignment surgery... etc."

Great stuff.

Speaking of gender, consider the proposition that From Poverty to Africa is a feminist film. Consider - it is Mrs. Dubois, not Mr. Dubois, who is wheeling the wheelbarrow and doing the heavy work; similarly, the young Claire is the one who wields the axe; the major antagonists, Claire and Jeanne, are strong, cunning and ruthless women; Gaitán is a senior official in her organisation; Monique is a former security guard; Questa exerts a good deal of authority over her husband and teaches him elocution and logic; and the male ninjas are highly incompetent. Now, we must certainly not fall into the trap of calling a film 'feminist' just because it happens to portray a lot of powerful women and stupid men; and indeed, there was no conscious intention behind these facts. The roles of Gaitán and Monique were specifically written as 'unisex' roles and Matthew just accepted whoever said yes first, regardless of gender. Though Thomas is still supposedly the main character, his fairly uninteresting role allows the large number of female characters to come to the fore and take over the helm - witness, for example, the back-seat that Thomas takes in scene 40, outside the inn, where Questa and Jeanne argue about the military history of the UK and France. But this, in my opinion, is not really noticeable unless someone points it out, and that's probably because it was unconscious. There is no feminist statement to be found here, and so the phenomenon is of no consequence, and certainly not a problematic one.

Advice

Character-related advice for other amateur film-makers:

Allow your actors a certain leeway in adapting the lines to suit their style: forcing them to stick rigidly to the script is likely to make it unnatural for them.
Similarly, provide scope for the actors to bring in their own particular flair, mannerisms or ideas - chances are, it'll turn out better than you imagined it.
NEVER compromise on line-learning. The advice above notwithstanding, if the actors struggle to do the scene without referring to a script, then they're not ready.
Accordingly, don't try to get filming done in an ambitiously short period of time. Give the actors plenty of time to learn the script and understand their role, and help them with this process as necessary.
Actors need to continue acting even when they don't have any lines.

If your actors aren't roughly as enthusiastic about each scene as you are, chances are you've got a boring script.

Always have a clear idea of what your characters' purpose, goals, opinions, history and general personality traits are while writing the script.

Think about how your characters are changed by their experiences throughout the film.

Next, we'll look at visual elements.

Sunday, 18 July 2010

From Poverty to Africa: Retrospection Part 2 - Characters