Same Script = Different Film?
Why would a filmmaker want to buy a book of screenplays that other filmmakers can use? Isn’t the whole point of making a film to have an original thought?
Yes, but each director has his or her own unique style and approach to the material. No two films are going to be the same, even if they have the same script. Two examples of this artistic experimentation leap to mind – Hal Hartley’s Flirt (which consists of three wildly different short films made with the same script), and Gus van Sant’s Psycho (which does nothing except demonstrate why people should study Alfred Hitchcock).
A director focus on tone and pacing, not necessarily creating a performance or visual experience, but instead shaping and guiding it. To do this, a director needs to interact with the material on a fundamental level. Because we are all fundamentally different - our passions, strengths, and weaknesses differ wildly – the art we create will be different, even if we have the same building blocks.
This goes back to the 26 Screenplays book. If a class of twenty film students took a single script from the book and made twenty films, they would all be different. We enjoy watching different actors play the same roles in Shakespeare. Compare Lawrence Olivier’s Hamlet to Mel Gibson’s Hamlet; no one gets upset because someone has already interpreted a performance of Hamlet. Instead we approach the new interpretation with a curiosity. Let’s see what this person can do with this material. It should be the same with directors and film making.
In terms of web video and short films, a mastery of cinematic language seems to be more important than telling a coherent story. The following two internet videos demonstrate how the cinematic language of spy/action films can be co-opted for different uses. In the first example, the action film cinematic language hooks the viewer into thinking about art and design. In the second example, the same cinematic language raises awareness of a product. Same cinematic language, wildly different interpretations.