Tag:

blogging

Back to the Future: Observations on Villeneuve’s “Blade Runner 2049”

by Dan Perez October 8, 2017

I’m rarely the kind of guy that would go see a film on its opening weekend but I made an exception for Denis Villeneuve “Blade Runner 2049“, which I went to see this past Friday in all its thunderous IMAX glory. Having seen Ridley Scott’s original “Blade Runner” as a teenager (it has become one of my Top 5 favorite films) and finding myself unusually giddy about the sequel, I feared someone might post a spoiler on social media or perhaps I might accidentally overhear someone talking about the film’s ending while satisfying a late-night blueberry pancakes craving at my local IHOP. Then I might have had to kill that person. And go to jail. I wanted to avoid that.

Having seen Villeneuve’s gritty “Sicario” and being a long-time fan of cinematographer Roger Deakins, I felt really, really good about the sequel being up to par with Scott’s original 1982 masterpiece. It was. And it wasn’t. I mean, it was an excellent film in it’s own right – a brooding, methodical film that slowly sucks you into its shadowy world; a film that surely requires (like the original) multiple views to truly appreciate. But unlike what some movie critics have stated, it does not surpass the original.

It’s actually quite unfair to compare one to the other in the first place. Two different films made by two different directors in two different times. There are many similarities, however. Villeneuve’s film, much like Scott’s, is more film noir than sci-fi and both films raise questions about reality, individuality and freedom. And they both look gorgeous. Perhaps, BR2049 will stand the test of time like Scott’s original has. We shall see. That said, here are a few SPOILER FREE observations from my viewing of “Blade Runner 2049”:

Denis Villeneuve is a Force to be Reckoned With

I’ve only seen “Sicario” (which I absolutely loved) and BR2049, but in both films, I was reminded about what Roger Ebert wrote in his review of 1967’s classic French film noir “Le Samourai” (starring Alain Delon and directed by Jean-Pierre Melville). “The movie teaches us how action is the enemy of suspense – how action releases tension, instead of building it”, Ebert wrote. “Better to wait for a whole movie for something to happen (assuming we really care whether it happens) than to sit through a film where things we don’t care about are happening constantly.”

Villeneuve understands this concept unreservedly.

After the first 20 minutes of BR2049, I was like, “When is this thing gonna kick into gear?” After about an hour, I was like a guy who had been thumbing through his Instagram stream while unknowingly standing in a giant pond of wet cement. Before I knew it, I was waist deep in it – and the cement had hardened. Make no mistake about it, this film is a slow burn. And the action, when it comes, hits you like a splash of ice water to the face.

In sharp contrast, directors like Zach Snyder, who totally butchered “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice” (yeah, I’m still mad about that!) after Christopher Nolan carefully built the Batman movie brand, can learn a lot from Villeneuve (“action is the enemy of suspense”). Villeneuve, like Fincher and Scorsese, is also a director who seems comfortable in the dark, shadowy alleys of a film; he’s not afraid to get his hands dirty – I like that. This director is one to watch.

Ryan Gosling and the Failure of Harvey Keitel

Did you know that Harvey Keitel was originally cast as Captain Willard in Francis Ford Coppola’s “Apocalypse Now“? Filming actually began in the Philippines with Keitel in the lead before he was fired by Coppola after a week of shooting. Copolla stated that Keitel didn’t have the “gravitas” to carry the role. That’s a little bit how I felt about Ryan Gosling in this film. I know most critics have raved about his stoic performance and I thought he did an adequate job but it felt as if he was sleep-walking through much of the first half of the film.

Moreover, he didn’t make me forget about Ford’s portrayal in the original, and that shouldn’t have been too hard as I’ve felt that Ford himself was a little out of his element in Scott’s film (that’s right, I said it). The jury will continue to deliberate on Gosling’s performance until a future viewing but in other news, newcomer Cuban actress Ana de Armas is a revelation as Gosling’s real/not real love interest. She’s an actress to watch…

Old School Visual Effects Can Still Be as Awesome as CGI

Allow me to tip my hat once again to director Villeneuve as he eschewed the common practice of “blockbuster” films over-depending on CGI effects in favor of practical camerawork and effects. “I hate green screens. It sucks out all my energy. I get depressed,” Villeneuve said in an interview for Variety. “For Blade Runner, we tried our best to do as much as possible in-camera, building everything.” I mean, there was no CGI in 1982, the year the original “Blade Runner” came out, so it would have been somewhat of a cheat to go all CGI for the sequel, right? Right. Is Zach Snyder still listening?

Roger Deakins is Actually Getting Better

After 13(!) Academy Award nominations without a win, I think it might be safe to say that the white-haired cinematographer Roger Deakins is actually getting better. I haven’t seen all his films but I’ve seen enough. Deakins reminds me in many ways of Burt Lancaster – never the best of his era but he never disappointed. I loved “Fargo” and his work with the Coen Brothers but after watching 2007’s “No Country for Old Men”, I was like, “THIS is his best work!“. Then came 2012’s “Skyfall”, “No, THIS is his best work!“. Then came 2015’s “Sicario”, “Seriously, THIS is his best work!“. And now, “Blade Runner 2049”, his best work yet. He isn’t Emmanuel Lubezki nor Janusz Kamiński but he doesn’t need to be. That said, as good as his work was in BR2049 (and it was brilliant), it still fell short of the look of the original, which brings me to my next point…

Jordan Cronenweth Absolutely Nailed it in the Original

I mean, the look of Scott’s original film would be the envy of most cinematographers if it came out today. As great as Deakins was in the sequel, the late Jordan Cronenweth‘s cinematography in the original (which won awards from the British Society of Cinematographers, the Los Angeles Film Critics Association, and BAFTA) still trumps it by a hair. Cronenweth explains, “[Director] Ridley Scott felt that the style of the photography in Citizen Kane most closely approached the look he wanted for Blade Runner. This included, among other things, high contrast, unusual camera angles, and the use of shafts of light.” The final sequence between Roy Batty and Deckard in Scott’s original film is still one of the most visually stunning sequences you’ll ever see.

PS – His gritty NYC cinematography in Phil Joanou’s 1990 film “State of Grace” which stars Sean Penn and the best actor of his generation, Gary Oldman, is also some of his best work (and no, I’ve never seen “Peggy Sue Got Married”). That said, here’s my next point…

Douglas Trumbull is a Friggin’ Genius

If you’re not familiar with the name, Douglas Trumbull is the man behind the visual effects of some of the greatest sci-fi films of all time: “2001: A Space Odyssey”, “Close Encounters of the Third Kind”, “Star Trek: The Motion Picture” and oh, yeah, the original “Blade Runner”. Trumbull, as well as Richard Yuricich and David Dryer were nominated for an Academy Award in 1982 for the visual effects for “Blade Runner”, losing out to “E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial”, a film whose effects have not aged all that well. On the flipside, the look of Scott’s “Blade Runner” still holds up today. I mean, it not only holds up, it would wipe the floor with most of the CGI-drunk summer “blockbusters” of the past 10 years. As good as BR2049 looked, that you can still compare it to a film made 35 years ago, is a credit to Scott, Trumbull and the visual effects team as well as cinematographer Cronenweth (and surely a whole lot of other people).

Harrison Ford is the Greatest Actor of ALL TIME!!!

OK, not really but how many actors have remained around long enough to resume their roles in sequels to three ground-breaking films they starred in 35+ years ago? He starred as Han Solo in 1977’s “Star Wars” and again 38(!) years later in “Star Wars: The Force Awakens”. He played Indiana Jones in 1981’s “Raiders of the Lost Ark” (and say what you want about how good an actor Ford is, his Indiana Jones character has been often imitated, NEVER duplicated) and again 27 years later (and there’s still an untitled Indiana Jones project slated for 2020!!!) and he played Rick Deckard in 1982’s “Blade Runner” and again 35 years later. He’s also the highest grossing actor of all time with a total box office gross of almost $5 billion. Number 2 on that list? Samuel L. Jackson. However, Jackson has been in 66 more films than Ford. Yes, Ford’s career has been pretty damn amazing.

Where Have You Gone, Roy Batty?

One of the things missing from BR2049, and one of the main reasons Scott’s film was so good, was a great movie villain. Rutger Hauer’s Roy Batty character was one for the ages. Despite his murderous ways, his motivation was clear (“I want more life”) and in his desire to live, to be free, he sparked something hidden inside us all. When he spares Deckard’s life at the end of the film, he shows more humanity in his last act before “expiring” than Deckard had in probably his whole adult life. In BR2049, Jared Leto looks and sounds creepy but he’s no real villain. Instead, lovely Dutch actress Sylvia Hoeks handles the role of “villain” quite well; however her motivations as the film progresses become a bit cloudy. Not a deal breaker but if we’re gonna compare one film to the other, here’s another one for the original.

Blade Runner 2049 is an Excellent Film. Period.

That’s the bottom line here. That it doesn’t quite eclipse the greatness of Scott’s original film makes it no less of a great film. I mean, after 35 years, this is as close to the look and feel of the original Blade Runner as any film has ever been. That’s quite the accomplishment. Will it attract large audiences and set box office records? Don’t think so. It’s too long and like the original, too deliberate and too gloomy for mass appreciation; people don’t like to think too much when they go see a movie (that’s why there are directors like Zach Snyder around). Furthermore, the word is out that you need to see the original to understand Villeneuve’s sequel (you really do) and that will probably set it back even further. In time, I believe it will take its place among the greatest sci-fi films (and neo noirs) ever made.

Epilogue

In the Old Testament of the bible, during the Israelites’ wanderings in the wilderness, there was an inner room called the Holy of Holies in the Tabernacle, a portable earthly dwelling place of God amongst the people of Israel. Whoever entered into the Holy of Holies through the thick curtain which shielded holy God from sinful man, was entering the very presence of God. In fact, anyone except the high priest who entered the Holy of Holies would die. Moreover, the high priest himself could be struck dead if he did something he was commanded not to do or if he was commanded to do something and didn’t do it.

Now, as far as sci-fi films are concerned, Scott’s “Blade Runner” is the Holy of Holies and if you pull back that thick curtain to enter that sacred room, you’d better have your heart in the right place. Villeneuve’s heart was true. And that’s something all fans of “Blade Runner” can appreciate. Go see it. Nuff said.

October 8, 2017

Blog It Is Written

Choosing the Right Music for a Documentary Film

by Dan Perez March 16, 2016

written by Dan Perez

Recently, I was contacted by Danny Groner, the manager of blogger partnerships and outreach for Shutterstock, the home of millions of royalty-free stock photos, illustrations, and vectors. Back in 2014, they launched Shutterstock Music, a collection of tracks that customers can license for a simple per-song fee. Their music collection can be browsed by genre, mood or tempo.

As a corporate video producer and DIY (award-winning) documentary filmmaker, the use of music is vital in setting the tone and mood of any of my productions. I sometimes go through 5-7 different music tracks before choosing the one I think works the best for a particular video or segment of a film.

I discussed my process at length in a phone interview I had last month with Mr. Groner for a blog post titled The Art of Choosing Documentary Music – give it a read and share your own thoughts on the subject…

Oh, and if you’re looking for the right music for your video or film, check out Shutterstock. They not only have a great collection of music to fit any mood or tempo but standard licenses starting at only $49 per track. Pretty sweet.

Image by 135pixels via Shutterstock

March 16, 2016

Blog It Is Written The Written Word

Clint Eastwood’s “American Sniper” | For What it’s Worth

by Dan Perez February 15, 2015

written by Dan Perez

So I finally got around to seeing Clint Eastwood’s American Sniper yesterday with Mrs. Perez and I’ll admit right off the bat that I was somewhat disappointed. Not that it wasn’t a good movie – I mean if you were expecting a movie about a guy who really, really loved his country and was really, really good at killing people in Iraq with a high-powered rifle who were perceived to be the enemy of said country, then you got exactly that. Nothing more.

And therein lies the source of my disappointment. I was expecting a turkey leg and I got only a small chicken wing.

Let’s start with director Eastwood, shall we? In Chris Kyle, we have a man who specialized in a “profession” that I couldn’t even begin to understand – a sniper. Here is a man with a highly specialized skill who can kill people from great distances with a rifle. In the course of doing his “job”, he’s witness to bodies being ripped in two, brains and innards splattering against concrete and puddles of blood. So how does one sleep at night after a good day’s work much less four tours of duty in Iraq?

Eastwood never fully bothers to uncover the effects of such work on Kyle’s psyche; never takes us inside his head the way Coppola took us inside the tortured head of Capt. Willard in Apocalypse Now. As terrific as Bradley Cooper is in this film (and he does a lot with a little), he’s not much more than a one-dimensional character (“I just want to get the bad guys but if I can’t see them, I can’t shoot them”).

Eastwood also fumbles the ball on the effects Kyle’s service to his country has on his family. With the exception of a few clichéd examples (“You’re my husband, you’re the father of my children. Even when you’re here, you’re not here”), Eastwood and screenwriter Jason Hall seem unwilling to spend much time with Kyle at home, preferring to illustrate his badassery behind the scope of a rifle in the warm sunlight of Iraq. This leave Sienna Miller, who plays Kyle’s wife admirably, with a thankless and grossly underdeveloped role in the film.

Heck, I learned more about the effects of war on one of its most highly trained soldiers watching Stallone’s barely decipherable ramble at the end of First Blood (“There I flew helicopters, drove tanks, had equipment worth millions – Here I can’t even work parking cars!”) than I did from Eastwood’s kid gloves treatment of Kyle.

Then I started reading a bit about Kyle, something I hadn’t done before watching the film because I didn’t want to know too much about him – I wanted the film to surprise me. It didn’t. But what did surprise me was one notable scene in the film which did not occur in Kyle’s autobiography [SPOILER ALERT]. Let’s start with his first kill in the film, a young boy who is handed a Russian anti-tank hand grenade by his mother and sent off as a human sacrifice to toss it at an approaching Marine convoy in Fallujah. Kyle guns him down and does the same to the boy’s mother after she picks up the grenade lying beside her fallen son and also attempts to hurl it at US troops.

In Kyle’s book, this never happened. Kyle’s first confirmed kill in Fallujah was a woman who was attempting to toss a Chinese grenade (not a Russian RKG) at invading US forces. Why Eastwood felt compelled to alter the story to have the woman first pass on the grenade to a young child is a puzzling one. But then again, maybe not. Perhaps his intention was to dehumanize the Iraqi people in such a way that Kyle’s (and the US’s) subsequent actions in Iraq seem justified. I mean, when you invade another country, bomb their cities, kick in their doors in the middle of the night and deprive them of drinking water and electricity, you gotta expect you’re gonna piss off a few people, right?

Now as hard as it is for us to see ourselves as the bad guys, to many Iraqi civilians, the US was like the evil aliens taking over the world in Independence Day. So why the need to turn one of these “rebels” (and we all love rebels, right?) into a nefarious Iraqi bitch mother sending off her young son on a suicide mission to kill American soldiers just doing their job?

I guess it’s just better that way, yes? An easier pill for American film-goers to swallow especially with all we now know about the war in Iraq and its devastating effects on our soldiers as well as the Iraqi people. What it ultimately boils down to is chickenshit filmmaking. Period.

That said, Eastwood does make a few feeble attempts to illustrate the effects of the war in Iraq on our troops, on Kyle. But he seems far less willing to crack open that can of worms than he is to quickly relocate Kyle (and the audience) back to Iraq where things are far more black and white; an easier story to tell I suppose.

The Department of Veterans Affairs estimates that PTSD affects about 20 percent of veterans who served in Iraq. That Kyle found some solace in his life helping other veterans cope with PTSD and was ultimately gunned down by a soldier he befriended who was also suffering from PTSD made this a topic the film should have spent more time on (and less on a silly cat and mouse game between Kyle and an Iraqi sniper named Mustafa).

And, again, with all we now know about the war in Iraq; the intent, the casualties, the devastation, the aftermath – Eastwood fails to express where he stands on the issue. It’s as if Eastwood never really knows what he (the film) wants to say other than that Chris Kyle was a real badass soldier who loved his country. In that he succeeded.

The film, however, is never as tense as it should have been and unlike similar cinematic observations on the effects of war (The Hurt Locker, Born on the Fourth of July, Full Metal Jacket, The Deer Hunter), left me with little to chew on upon exiting the theater. With such a complex and controversial figure as Kyle (not to mention the war in Iraq), I expected more.

Luckily I have “First Blood” on bluray.

Here’s an interesting read on the film written by Ross Caputi, a former Marine who participated in the 2nd Siege of Fallujah > American Sniper?

Here’s a History vs Hollywood post about the film.

Here’s an interesting article I came across in The Guardian American Sniper: anti-Muslim threats skyrocket in wake of film’s release

February 15, 2015

Blog It Is Written The Written Word

If Today Was Their Last Day: A True Story

by Dan Perez December 8, 2013

written by Dan Perez

***I published this post three years ago during the holiday season. I look back on it every now and then and it still resonates with me; still serves to remind me that even though tomorrow is highly likely, it still isn’t guaranteed – for you or someone close to you. With the holidays and the new year upon us, I decided to share it again.***

IF TODAY WAS THEIR LAST DAY

You often hear the saying, “Live each day as if it’s your last“. It sounds like quite an exciting way to live one’s life, yes? I’m a believer, however, that living each and every day in such a manner would surely burn you out by around day 46. Why the need for such urgency? I mean, less than 1% of the world’s population dies each day so the percentages that you’ll live to see tomorrow are heavily in your favor. You never know, though, do you? Now, imagine if it wasn’t your last day but *their* last day? Another person in your life; a friend, family member, spouse, loved one. What if someone you cared for wasn’t going to wake up tomorrow morning and neither one of you knew it?

Oh, and they were spending their last night with you?

THE LAST DAY

Victor was a fellow videographer who I met at a local professional videographers association meeting. We hit it off well from the beginning and over time had become good friends. I hired him for several of my own video productions, even bringing him with me up to Orlando one time for an overnight video shoot. You can learn a lot from a person when you spend over 6 hours with them in a car. What I liked best about him was his professionalism and easy-going style. He was the kind of guy you liked within a few minutes, he radiated health and positive energy and was always smiling. You don’t meet too many people like that.

Several months had gone by without us speaking (for no particular reason) until one day I found myself videotaping an afternoon wedding with a photographer who I knew was also friends with Victor. Near the end of the shoot, I asked him if he had seen or spoken with Victor lately. He paused and looked at me quizzically for a second before he said,
“You haven’t heard?”
Heard what?
“Victor had a heart attack.”
A heart attack?!
“Yeah.”
Did he die?
“No, he’s doing OK. He’s staying with his sister in Miami.”
Oh.

I called Victor as soon as I got to my car. He told me he had survived what doctors call a “Widow Maker” heart attack. He said he had felt a sudden pain in his chest and checked himself into the nearest hospital. That’s when the heart attack occurred. “My doctor told me I’m lucky to be alive” he said. “Most people don’t survive those kinds of heart attacks.” He went on to say that he was feeling good and was staying at his sister’s house in downtown Miami while he recovered.

The next month, I arranged with Victor to stop by his sister’s house and visit him as my wife and I were driving back home from a holiday party we were attending in Miami. We arrived at his sister’s house a little after 9pm. Victor was glad to see me and it was good to see him. He looked amazingly well – you’d never know that he had survived a lethal heart attack just a few months earlier. He introduced my wife and I to his sister and her teenage son and daughter – they all made us feel very welcome. To our surprise, the sister had prepared a meal for us so we all sat down to eat together.

Over the next two hours, we ate, drank wine, talked and laughed – a lot. It was as if we were all old friends. It was a shame to have to leave but we promised our daughter’s sitter that we’d be home no later than midnight. Before leaving, we shared a couple more laughs and then it was time for farewell hugs. As we got into our car and pulled away, we saw Victor and his sister waving to us from the front of the house. Victor had a huge grin on his face.

It was the last time I would see him alive.

THE DAY AFTER THE LAST DAY

Late the next morning, I called Victor’s cell phone to thank him and his sister for their hospitality. It wasn’t his voice I heard when the phone was answered but rather the voice of his nephew. I asked if Victor was around. There was an unusually long pause on the other end of the line before I heard, “Well, I don’t know how to tell you this but…Victor died in his sleep last night.” My blood suddenly ran cold. Surely this was some sort of joke. “When we went to his room this morning, we found him dead in his bed.” All the saliva in my mouth seemed to have dried up and I was barely able to muster, “He died? How could that be?” Now, this was a person who was eating, drinking, and laughing with us just the night before. Dead? The nephew went on to tell me, “The paramedics said he must have had another heart attack in his sleep. He didn’t survive this one.”

After regaining my senses somewhat, I expressed how shocked I was to hear the news and clumsily began offering my condolences. The nephew then told me, “You know, it’s the weirdest thing. Last night was the happiest he’s been since he had the heart attack. I’d never seen him in such a good mood. He never plays video games but after you guys left, he played video games with us until three in the morning. He was so happy that you guys had come over.” I was speechless.

Needless to say, my wife was visibly shaken and stunned when I told her what had happened. Even the news about how happy he had been after we had left did little to raise her spirits, or mine; what had happened was just too weird. Later that week, we were on our way to Victor’s funeral. When we arrived, I sought out Victor’s sister. Upon seeing my wife and I, she rushed over to us with tears in her eyes. As we embraced, she began to tell us how happy our visit had made Victor, how he hadn’t been in such a good mood in months. In a strange way, it began to make my wife and I feel good that with no knowledge of what the future would hold, we had helped make another human being’s last night on Earth a special one.

THEIR LAST DAY?

Victor died at forty years old. He had no wife or children. I was far from his best friend but at the funeral I met many of his friends and loved ones that surely wished they had seen him once more before he passed. Which brings me back to that overused phrase: “Live each day as if it’s your last”. We hear it often enough but only a very rare few can actually live their lives that way. It’s too damn hard to squeeze every possible sliver of life out of every single day, right?

But what if we spun it around a bit so that it applied not to us but to our family and friends; our loved ones? That we live each day as if it might be *their* last? That we cherish the time spent with those we love – that we make sure we find a reason to laugh together and that when we say goodbye, there’s nothing left unsaid. That we put aside petty differences and say, “I forgive you” and “I’m sorry”. That we not take the special people in our life for granted but rather, we let them know that we’re thankful for them, that we love them.

Because they may not wake up the next morning.

[Photographs by Ric Capucho]

December 8, 2013

Blog It Is Written The Written Word

Working for Free: Why Exposure Just Isn’t Enough

by Dan Perez November 10, 2013

written by Dan Perez

I came across an article in the New York Times recently titled Slaves of the Internet, Unite!, a scathing observation on the practice of asking creative people to offer their services for free in exchange for “exposure”. I mean, if you’re a writer, painter, illustrator, musician, singer, photographer, video producer, or purveyor of any other creative artform, you’ve probably been asked to hand over that thing you love to do and are trying desperately to make a living at – for free.
Well, not exactly for free – for “exposure”.

Exposure. You hear that word enough you begin to hate it. The practice of investing time and effort doing something you’re good at just to hand it over to someone who will most likely benefit from its use right away while you wait and hope that whatever “exposure” you receive will create an opportunity for you to actually earn some dough.

But one exposure opportunity usually leads to more exposure opportunities and before you know it you’re giving that gift of yours away like it’s merely a handful of extra change.

It ain’t easy making a living as a creative person, especially in this “content crazed” online society. Everybody wants content to share with their website’s “audience”, content that their “audience” will enjoy, content that will help boost their site’s popularity, attract a new “audience” hungry for fresh content – and they want you to provide it for them at no charge. Oh, my bad, I meant in exchange for exposure. Everybody else is giving it away – why should you get paid?

You do all the work, they get the immediate reward. It’s kind of like the relationship between a pimp and a prostitute, no? Except you don’t have to worry about getting gonorrhea – even if you do get burned most of the time.

“So what you’re saying, Dan, is that we should never give up our unique talents in exchange for exposure, right?”
Wrong.
“OK, so WTF are you saying?”

What I’m saying is that exchanging your work for exposure can indeed produce positive results; even lead to acquiring new business opportunities. It helped launch my business and I still produce a few videos a year in exchange for exposure. What I’ve learned, however, is that when we give up our good stuff for nothing more than exposure, sometimes we leave money on the table; we give too much and settle for too little.

And sometimes we even start believing that our good stuff ain’t worth that much; that as long as one exposure opportunity leads to another exposure opportunity (then another and yet another) that we’re making progress. Ultimately, we find ourselves merely working for free – and comfortable doing it. Comfortably numb.

It all begins with an honest look at your abilities; your expertise. Is what you do even worth paying for? There was a time when I started my business that I was happy to just get exposure. I wasn’t sure if my work was really worth paying for (yet) and if it was, how much? Then I stumbled upon an opportunity to produce a big video for Miami Children’s Hospital Foundation‘s annual “Diamond Ball”, a $1000 per head fundraising event. A friend of mine who was an event planner and liked my work brought me in on the project, even got me paid very nicely (for that time). The scope of the video, however, was more ambitious than anything I had ever produced. I was a bit nervous about it but I sure as shit wasn’t gonna turn down that money.

So I shot it and edited it and then took it down to show the folks at the Foundation. They watched it in a conference room as I sat outside waiting. I thought the video came out pretty good but I was still very nervous. When it was over, they called me in to discuss it. I had a pad and pen in hand ready to jot down all their feedback and any changes they wanted. My palms were sweaty. When I entered the room, they were all smiling; they loved the video and didn’t want a thing changed. For me, however, everything changed on that day.

I started to realize that maybe I was better than I thought I was; that I could actually provide real value to a client with my video productions; that what I did was worth paying for – that was a game changer.

The following year, when my very first documentary film (which I shot and edited by myself) won an award at a film festival, I was a true believer in Dan Perez. I believed I was not only worth paying for, but paying well for…

And that’s where the change begins; where a hobby becomes a career; where exposure alone just isn’t good enough anymore.

{But Dan, you said you still produce a few videos a year for exposure – what gives?}

You gotta still market your business, yes? Find new eyes for your work, yes? I’ve found a few worthwhile exposure opportunities that help me “dig my well” so I won’t go thirsty. They usually involve producing videos for organizations that will play at fundraising events and award galas – events with an affluent audience that might have the need for my services. These “exposure” opportunities have proved beneficial to my business over the years but now I don’t just stop at exposure – I ask to be listed as an event sponsor with my company name, logo, and/or ad listed in the event program and invitations. I ask for more now because I believe I’m worth it.

Are you maximizing your exposure opportunities? Ask for more exposure than you’re being offered and you just might get it.

Creative people are usually very passionate about whatever art they produce. They’ve realized the ability to create something, whether it be with the written word, a song, a photograph or a painting, that can touch the soul of others. Their creations can make you laugh, make you angry, make you cry, calm a savage breast. They have a gift that the rest of the people who just work to make a living don’t have.

There’s value in that, no?

I know it ain’t easy making a living being creative – for many folks it’s damn near impossible. Being good isn’t enough. Passion isn’t enough. The difference between a guy selling his paintings for $250 one year then selling his paintings for $10,000 a few years later is merely a set of circumstances. Exposure helps create circumstances but once you get into the habit of giving it away, you’re gonna find less and less people willing to pay for what you’ve got to offer.

Exposure is never enough.

Eventually, we need to take a good look at what we do, gauge how good we really are at what we do, determine who would want to pay us for what we do (and how much we’re worth) and then target those individuals. Social media has made it much easier to get our work seen by others; facebook, twitter, linkedin (plenty of good groups to join there), and google+ (check out the many communities) are good places to start – if you’re not already there, get there and get active. Then consider first how your work can benefit *you* before passing it along for others to benefit from.

As creative people trying to make a living doing that thing that we do, we’ve got to know when to hold ’em, know when to fold ’em, know when to walk away and know when to run. For many creatives, exposure and keeping their fingers crossed is as good as they’re gonna get because that’s all their talent can command. But for those of us whose creativity is worthy of more, when we keep giving it away, what we do begins to lose value – in the eyes of others and, more importantly, in our own eyes as well.

And we’re better than that…

right?

[Photographs by Donnie Nunley]

November 10, 2013

Blog It Is Written The Written Word

20 Great Movie Villains You Won’t Find On Most ‘Greatest Movie Villains’ Lists

by Dan Perez October 20, 2013

written by Dan Perez

I’ve been perusing several ‘Greatest Movie Villains’ lists over the past week after watching Heath Ledger’s sensational portrayal of the Joker in Christopher Nolan’s “The Dark Knight” for about the 17th time. It made me curious to see where Ledger’s Joker ranks among the other movie villains (he’s usually in the top 10 on most lists). Every list produced the usual suspects (no pun intended) when it came to movie villains: Anthony Hopkins’ Hannibal Lecter, Kevin Spacey’s John Doe from “Seven”, Terence Stamp’s brilliant General Zod from “Superman II”, Alan Rickman’s Hans Gruber, Keyser Söze, Freddy Kreuger, Jason, etc, etc.

What I found odd was the glaring omission of several great movie villains (even on the Top 100 lists!) that rank right up there with the crème de la crème of diabolical film characters. So, without further ado, I present you with my own list of 20 Great Movie Villains (ranked in order of sinisterness) for your displeasure. I didn’t want anyone just scrolling down to see who I chose as the #1 villain so I broke up the post into two pages. Here are villains 20-10:

20. SCREWFACE “MARKED FOR DEATH” (1990)

To say that a Steve Seagal film sucks is to confuse a Steven Seagal film with anything other than a vehicle for Seagal to beat and/or shoot the shit out of any bad guys who come up against him (with the aforementioned bad guys rarely ever landing a punch and/or eschewing the use of their guns in order to engage in hand-to-hand combat). That’s the case in “Marked for Death”, Seagal’s third film. The film does feature a standout performance by NYU grad Basil Wallace who plays Jamaican drug kingpin Screwface with sinister intensity. When Seagal kicks the shit out of one of Screwface’s men then threatens more ass kicking if he doesn’t tell him where Screwface is, the man replies, “Screwface kill me a thousand deaths worse than you. Go find him your *bleeping* self!” then proceeds to jump out of a window of a very tall building. That.

19. EDDIE DANE “MILLER’S CROSSING” (1990)

With all due respect to Jon Polito’s portrayal of mob boss Johnny Caspar, it’s J.E. Freeman’s Eddie Dane who’s the real badass in this great Coen Brothers gangster film. When he asks a wounded hitman (courtesy of Dane) where a rival mob boss is hiding out, the hitman asks him, “If I tell you, how do I know you won’t kill me?” to which Dane responds, “Because if you told me and I killed you and you were lying I wouldn’t get to kill you *then*.” That’s a badass dude.

18. EL INDIO “FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE” (1965)

Great actors make great villains and Gian Maria Volonté, one of Italy’s most celebrated actors, does not disappoint in Sergio Leone’s “For A Few Dollars More”. Volonté’s portrayal of the brutal desperado El Indio was preceded by playing a similar villain, Ramón Rojo, in Leone’s previous “Spaghetti Western” “A Fistful of Dollars” in 1964. One of the qualities of a great villain is that they’re often troubled souls who can actually be likable at times – that Volonté, with a steely gaze that rivaled his co-star Clint Eastwood, pulls this off despite being dubbed in English showed he was not just a badass villain but a badass actor.

17. THE MAN WITH THE PLAN “THINGS TO DO IN DENVER WHEN YOU’RE DEAD” (1995)

You think you’ve seen Christopher Walken at his creepiest? True Romance, King of New York, The Prophecy, The Addiction? Forget it. Pete Travers of Rolling Stone calls Walken’s portrayal of The Man with the Plan, the self-loathing quadriplegic who runs Denver’s crime scene, “Christopher Walken at his spookiest, which is saying something.” Indeed it is. With lines like, “One day you’re saving the rainforest, the next you’re chugging cock” and “I’m a criminal; my word don’t mean dick!”, Walken makes a tepid crime drama featuring a smooth performance by Andy Garcia and a killer performance by Treat Williams (maybe his best?) a little hotter.

16. HADES “HERCULES” (1997)

Gotta have at least one cartoon villain on my list, right? That would be Hades from Disney’s “Hercules”. James Woods easily steals the film in what Owen Gleiberman of Entertainment Weekly called “an inspired piece of deadpan vaudeville”. Playing Hades with “diabolical glee” (Roger Ebert), Woods creates “the most vibrant Disney creation since Robin Williams’ Genie” wrote film critic James Berardinelli. The film, which features one of the weaker Disney heroes in the tepid Hercules (voiced by Tate Donovan), is worth watching on Woods’ sinister performance alone.

15. MORTWELL “MONA LISA” (1986)

With over a hundred films to his credit, two Academy Awards and six nominations, few actors are better than Michael Caine; and few possess more range. In Neil Jordan’s romantic thriller “Mona Lisa”, Caine plays Mortwell, a sinister and dangerous vice king of the London underground. It’s to Caine’s credit that Mortwell projects menace with chilling subtlety; as Roger Ebert put it, “he plays the character without apology and without exaggeration, as a businessman. That’s why Mortwell is so creepy.” Oh, and the film, which also stars a terrific Bob Hoskins and a stunning Cathy Tyson is excellent.

14. CASTOR TROY “FACE/OFF” (1997)

In a role actually shared by Nicolas Cage and (mostly) John Travolta, Castor Troy is a loose-cannon killer (Cage) who switches places (faces) with an FBI agent (Travolta) in John Woo’s wildly entertaining summer blockbuster “Face/Off”. “Mr. Travolta is shockingly good, summoning a slinky, mockingly vicious personality that could be his evil twin” wrote Janet Maslin of The New York Times. Travolta “twinkles with evil” (Stephen Hunter, Washington Post) as Castor, taking devilish glee in his new role as FBI agent, even slipping into bed with the agent’s unsuspecting wife(!) while flirting with his daughter(!). It’s Travolta at his most badass.

13. DENNIS PECK “INTERNAL AFFAIRS” (1990)

Richard Gere as a murderous sociopathic police officer? Uh, yeah. And not only is our beloved “Pretty Woman” star a rotten cop but “one of the rottenest movie cops in memory” said Janet Maslin, film critic for the New York Times. Gere is totally believable as sergeant Dennis Peck, who comes under investigation by Internal Affairs officer Raymond Avilla (played by Andy Garcia) in Mike Figgis’ excellent crime thriller. Need more evidence? Film critic James Berardinelli said of Gere’s performance: “he outacts co-star Andy Garcia so forcefully that the latter is often unable to hold his own”(!). If you haven’t seen it, see it.

12. O-DOG “MENACE II SOCIETY” (1993)

When you can gun down a Korean grocery store owner and his wife, snatch the surveillance camera tape of the crime and then proudly watch it with your homeboys over and over – you’re a bad dude. That’s the case with O-Dog, played with terrifying realism by Larenz Tate, in The Hughes Brothers’ breakthrough inner-city Los Angeles drama “Menace II Society”. O-Dog’s homeboy Caine, played by Tyrin Turner, descibes him best, “Now O-Dog was the craziest nigga alive. America’s nightmare. Young, black, and didn’t give a (well, you know the rest, yes?)”.

11. VINCENT “COLLATERAL” (2004)

My admiration for Tom Cruise is no secret and it’s mainly because of the many risks he takes as an actor. Allow me to introduce as evidence Cruise’s portrayal of the chilling hitman Vincent in Michael Mann’s gritty crime drama “Collateral”. Playing a bad guy for the very first time “Cruise takes his game to a whole new level” says Pete Travers of Rolling Stone. Cruise plays a hitman who makes cab driver Max (played by Jamie Foxx) his unwilling driver as he makes his rounds from hit to hit over the course of one night in Los Angeles. In his comparison of Cruise to two-time Academy Award winner Tom Hanks, Andrew Sarris of the New York Observer put it best: “Mr. Hanks has been overrated as a supposedly subtle character actor just as much as Mr. Cruise has been underrated. For another, Mr. Hanks has never played a role as unabashedly monstrous and menacing as Mr. Cruise’s Vincent.” Nuff said?

GO TO THE NEXT PAGE TO SEE MY TOP 10 UNSUNG MOVIE VILLAINS

October 20, 2013

Blog The Written Word

Fear and Loathing in the Social Media Space: An Observation

by Dan Perez May 19, 2013

written by Dan Perez

How many times have you read a blog post from some social media marketing consultant about how the industry has become overrun with false prophets and phonies? How the current fast track to social media success is more about creating perception than producing results? How the path of the righteous social media man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men?

A few times, yes?

Now, how many times has said post actually named a particular person? Identified by name the object of their scorn and/or frustration?

Not too often.

This past week, I came across yet another such post titled “Is it time to embrace the social media faker?” by Matt Ridings, a popular internet marketing consultant. In the post, he calls out the authenticity of “this guy” (and “others like him”) in the social media business scene whose garnered quite the online reputation but, in the opinion of Mr. Ridings, “tweets nothing unique”, “writes nothing original” and seems “more concerned about image than reality”. Fighting words for sure.

Unfortunately, at least for me, this nefarious person’s name is never mentioned in the post. Why?

Now, I don’t know Mr. Ridings personally but I’ll hazard a guess that he didn’t want to shit where he sleeps; divide the so-called “leadership” of the social media world and have people choose sides. Perhaps, he’s concerned that he’ll be excommunicated from the social media fraternity; cast out like the leper. Maybe he just feels it ain’t nice to call people out publicly.

Then why write the post?

Sure it’ll get you plenty of, “I totally agree with you!” comments but is it really effective in creating change? If there’s this level of frustration in the social media space with who’s a real expert, a perceived expert, or a poseur (and it has existed for quite some time now), how the heck is anything supposed to change if these frustrated people don’t start not only identifying those who frustrate them but, more importantly, explaining why?

Without the name, it’s merely sound and fury signifying nothing. Barking without the bite. Blog fodder.

It’s really not a matter of whether Mr. Ridings is right or wrong in his observations about “this guy” but at least it presents an opposing viewpoint; another perspective for folks to consider. I mean, a large percentage of people on the social media space are just sheep and/or stupid; you just have to show up with 100,000+ twitter followers and many of them will follow you like the rats enchanted by the sweet melody of the Pied Piper.

Most of them won’t bother checking your past history, real work experience or credentials anyway. Heck, if you’ve got that many twitter followers, you’ve gotta be pretty dang smart!

One-eyed Jacks is what they are – why not show the sheep the other side of the card?

We have no problem publicly expressing our views and engaging in healthy (and heated) debates on politics, religion, gun control, immigration, etc – but when it comes to social media, it appears it’s better to stay shut and keep your social media club membership than to speak out against the practices of an industry whose credibility has fallen just short of used car sales. And guess what? It’s the fault of its own “leadership” that it has become so.

Again, it ain’t about who’s right and who’s wrong – it’s about giving people something else to consider.

Maybe one of the sheep will say, “Gee, I never thought of that” or “Wow, why didn’t that guy ever disclose that?” or “Boy, I’m glad Mr. Ridings pointed that out about how that guy handles his business – I’m gonna go find someone else to follow and this time, I’m gonna do my homework!”

“Whether he is a sinner or not, I don’t know. One thing I do know. I was blind but now I see!” John 9:25

Ridings, when asked in the comments section of his post why he didn’t name a name, defended the point of his post as merely “that internal struggle with my dislike for something I find distasteful with the objective point of view that perhaps it can sometimes drive positive change.”

You wanna really drive positive change? Start naming names. It may make for an awkward situation if you and the person you call out are both attending the same social media conference but if you’re gonna take issue with how a person handles their business then give them a smile and a bro-hug at SXSW or Blogworld, then you’re a just a hypocrite anyway, right? Why not just draw a line in the sand and choose your side?

{But Dan, many of these social media “A-listers” are used to having their egos stroked by their following – they’re a bunch of thin-skinned cry-babies who take the slightest disagreement with their ideology as a personal attack and sic their zombies on you, call you a “hater”, say that you’re just “jealous”, “trying to make a name for yourself”, mock you to their followers (Guy Kawasaki, anyone?) or even ban you from ever commenting on their blog again!}

So what?

If these people are gonna proclaim themselves as experts by merely regurgitating the words of Dale Carnegie, Jim Rohn, and Stephen Covey; label themselves as “thought leaders” by introducing fantastic ideologies that are totally disconnected from reality, and write “How To” business books despite never having held an executive position in any company AND PUT IT OUT THERE FOR THE WHOLE DANG WORLD TO SEE – shouldn’t we be able to challenge its validity? Yes. Yes we should.

If not, then keep silent and simply repeat to yourself over and over again the words of Hyman Roth to Michael Corleone in “The Godfather II”, “This is the business we’ve chosen” – and then go write a post about Klout or something.

People love those, too.

Now, where’s my “Serpico” dvd?

[Photographs by George Christakis]

May 19, 2013

Blog The Written Word

Are You A Blogger Sell-Out?

by Dan Perez April 14, 2013

written by Dan Perez

This past week, I spent a day at Hispanicize, a self-proclaimed “iconic annual event for Latino trendsetters and newsmakers in social media, journalism, marketing, film, music and innovation”. In just four years, it’s become quite the event. Corporate sponsors, celebrity film screenings and Latino music stars were aplenty. I was actually contacted a few weeks before the conference by the good folks at General Motors, who were one of the event sponsors. Apparently, they got the crazy idea that I was a blogger of some import and invited me to attend the four-day event on their dime. They let me know that I was free to attend any event I wanted but they would love to have me at one of the GM sponsored presentations.

Now, I’m many things but I’m not ungrateful. So, despite a busy week of video shoots, I managed to make it down to Miami and pop in on their “How to Plan and Execute a Great Latino Blogger Event” presentation. And no, I have no intention of ever planning and/or executing a great Latino blogger event, but again, I’m not ungrateful. Moreover, I had always been curious about the growing interest from corporations to bloggers and the seemingly endless blogger events of all kinds going on weekly (it seems) around the globe. Attending this particular presentation, however, did make one thing unreservedly clear.

Bloggers are being used by corporations.

Now, I’m not talking about the A-List blogs with tens of thousands of subscribers; the interest there is pretty obvious – tap into their massive audience. That particular blogger, however, doesn’t really need the brand boost as they’ve already built up their audience and possess quite a bit of leverage. I’m talking about the mid-level blogger with a few hundred subscribers; the guy or gal that holds down a 9-5 job (or is supported by a spouse) and blogs on a particular topic (tech, fashion, parenting, filmmaking, etc) in their spare time. That blogger.

The blogger who saves up every year to attend conferences like Blogworld and SXSW because they feel they “have to” be there. The blogger who emails/tweets (stalks) the folks from the high-traffic blogs in the hopes of landing a guest post spot. The blogger who desires to earn a living by blogging. The blogger who dreams of becoming the next Arianna Huffington or Pete Cashmore (but deep down knows it’s just a dream). This is the blogger I’m talking about.

Now, let’s move on to where I start getting suspicious, yes?

The presentation featured a panel of social media/PR folks, Connie Burke, Communications Manager for General Motors, Rory Lassanske of Mama Contemporanea, a Spanish mommy blog, Megan Connelly, PR & Events Assistant Manager for Bloomingdale’s, and Jose Resendez, Account Executive for Fleishman-Hillard.

During the hour presentation, the panelists all stated that they give certain bloggers exclusive access to VIP events, offer them free beauty products, even give them a brand new car to drive for a week. What’s the catch? A blog post, that’s what. A positive blog post.

Now, put yourself in the shoes of a blogger who spends lots of time on their blog in the hopes of an eventual return (we all know that there are probably several dozen better ways to spend your time in the hopes of making money but to those who blog – more power to you). Along comes a major brand inviting you to an exclusive event, or giving you free products to try and/or to give away to one or more lucky readers of your blog, or offering you the opportunity to drive a brand new car around for a week.

Wow! All the hundreds of hours I spend blogging is finally starting to pay off!

It’s called validation. And when you spend a lot of time doing something for little to no money, we need it eventually, no? Validation means somebody has acknowledged that what you do has value; that you’re on the right track, that your tiny little blogger voice crying out in the online wilderness has been heard; that you matter.

Anybody who’s been there knows that feels good, right?

Ok, so here’s where I get suspicious. Corporations validate the blogger, reach out their hand to them like the cartoon guy to the girl sitting in the diner in the A-ha video “Take On Me“, get them thinking about that private island they’re gonna buy with all the dough they’re finally gonna start making with their blog. But what the corporations really want is to channel their voice through the blogger to the blogger’s audience. I get that and I’m cool with it.

So here’s my dilemma: How credible is the blogger’s voice after that?

I get the whole full disclosure thing, but am I really gonna expect a poor write-up of a company’s product or service after they made that C-list blogger feel all warm and fuzzy with their validation? After they offered them free products? Gave them exclusive access to VIP events? Gave them cool stuff to give away on their blog? Let them drive a new car for a week?

Sure, it can happen. But then that blogger, who finally broke on through to the other side, can kiss away that relationship with that brand. Maybe even land on a corporate blacklist (“Bloggers Who Might Just Tell It Like They See It“) and go back to just blogging as a full-time hobby. And what about the “perception” by your audience that your blog suddenly matters because GM gave you a car to drive for a week?

“Wow! GM let you drive a brand new car for a week? You must be a really important blogger!”

“Yeah, but then I wrote that the car sucked monkey balls on gas mileage and didn’t have enough horsepower to pass a Fiat on the highway. Now GM won’t return my tweets or emails. Oh, well.”

There goes the private island.

I spoke about this after the presentation with Connie Burke of GM. She assured me that blogger honesty and integrity were very important in deciding who to let drive a brand new car. I believed her. My problem lies more with the blogger and their sudden feeling of importance. And what about ROI for GM using bloggers as spokespersons for their automobiles? Burke stated that other than the usual social media metrics (hashtags, mentions, etc), tracking sales is still a work in progress.

Megan Connelly of Bloomingdale’s informed me that she goes as far as establishing long-term relationships with her bloggers; staying in touch with them and really getting to know them. A wise move. People like people who like them…but do they really believe in the product? There’s the rub, yes? Do I still trust you or are have you sold out?

Ultimately, as in all things business, sales and profits will determine whether catering to bloggers (and the so-called online “influencers”) can move product or not. But what about the integrity of the blogger? One day you’re sharing with your audience the deepest fears and desires of your soul, the next day, you’re pushing Pam Non-Stick Cooking Spray on them. When you stop telling and start selling, people are gonna get suspicious.

I’ve seen it happen. So have you. Especially in the mommy blogger circuit which has quickly become a main target of those eager corporations. So has the Hispanic community, as evidenced by the overwhelming corporate presence at Hispanicize. Hispanics accounted for most of the nation’s growth (56%) from 2000 to 2010. Moreover, with a purchasing power of $1.2 trillion dollars, big brands are looking for a way to engage with this fast-growing and fiercely loyal demographic.

And they’re also looking for a few good bloggers.

So as more and more corporations dig deeper into the blogosphere for brand ambassadors, I wonder what effect it will have on the state of blogging, which has already become a rank toilet bowl of redundancy and thrice told tales. Blogging today is more of a strategy than an artform anyway. Coloring by the numbers will often get you farther along than those who dare to color outside the lines. The buzzwords of “authenticity” and “transparency” have become as bastardized as the word “author” these days. People are gonna do what’s best for them – now and always. As long as you can live with yourself, I guess it’s all good, right?

If Metallica’s massive sell out with The Black Album taught us anything it’s that if you fail one audience, another, larger audience might just appear. That’s why we sell out in the first place, isn’t it? To get more. Lots of big brands are looking to hook up with bloggers to spread their message and lots of bloggers are looking to hook up with big brands to boost their blogging cred.

The blogging game has certainly changed, people.

But is it changing for the better?

[Photography by Helen Warner]

NOTE:
I want to thank Catherine Cuello of profero.com and GM for their kind invitation, it was very nice meeting you all.

April 14, 2013

Blog It Is Written The Written Word

The Fallacy of Pursuing Your Life’s Passion

by Dan Perez March 24, 2013

written by Dan Perez

How often have you heard the question: “What would you be doing with your life if money were no object?” It’s a trick question really because money is always an object, no? As much as the motivational speakers, life coaches and TED talkers want you to carefully consider the answer to that question before racing to work on Monday morning to hand in your resignation and announce to your boss, “Take this job and shove it! I’m gonna follow my dream of becoming a professional surfer!” – eventually, money will become an object.

I mean, for many Americans, by the time they become young adults, they already owe a substantial amount of money in college loans.

You need money to pay those back.

For those who pass on a college education, the time comes where they need to move out of their parents’ home/apartment; become independent and get their own place.

You need money for rent.

First comes love, then comes marriage, then comes the baby in the baby carriage, yes? It isn’t long after that when the whispers of the American Dream start to tickle your ear; the three bedroom house in the suburbs, the white picket fence, the Ikea living room set, the minivan.

You need money to pay that mortgage.

Soon your kids become teenagers and you’re gonna need money to send them to a good college because if they don’t go to college your beloved kids will end up sharing a rat infested apartment in some God forsaken ghetto with creepy tattooed people, smoking weed every day and/or drinking themselves to sleep every night.

You need money to send your kids to college. A lot of money in some cases.

So you paid back the college loans, you have the wife, the house, the kid(s), the college savings fund, a good paying job – but are you doing what you would be doing with your life if money wasn’t an object?

“No.”
But what you are doing is earning some good money and that’s a good thing, right?
“Sure.”
And you need that money, right?
“Heck yes!”
So all is good, right?
“Uh, right. I think?”

But eventually, you’ll find yourself in a position too many people ultimately find themselves in; the position that disallows you from living that beautiful life as if money were no object…

you NEED your job.

As much as you wish you were doing that thing you really wanted to do before the college loans, the rent, the baby, the mortgage, the minivan, the hour and a half commute to work, the promotion to Assistant Vice President, the 60 hour work week, the Lipitor…you need that job. Because the job provides you with the money. And without the money your whole world will burn right to hell like Atlanta in “Gone With The Wind”, right? Right.

Oh, and don’t even get me started on those precious health insurance benefits.

“But Dan, I’m wise to the lies of the so-called American Dream. I know the only thing she’s selling is debt and I ain’t buying. I’ll be damned if I’m gonna bury myself in college loans just so I can land some shit job in a stale corporate cubicle while some overworked manager blows smoke up my ass every day. I’m gonna live well below my means, pursue my dreams of becoming a photographer and just love doing it for as long as I can!”

But how long does “as long as I can” last?

As long as you can find a place to rest your head at night? As long as you have enough for the Taco Bell value menu? As long as your 1998 Nissan Sentra holds up? As long as you don’t have a child to provide for? As long as you don’t miss the top step of that staircase and tumble down it and find yourself owing some hospital $16,000 for fixing your broken leg?

Sooner or later, money becomes one heck of an object.

“But Dan, what about all those success stories about people who pursued their passion and succeeded? Wasn’t Steven Spielberg rejected from the University of Southern California School of Theater three times? Wasn’t J.K. Rowling on welfare while writing her first Harry Potter novel? Weren’t The Beatles told by recording companies that guitar music was “on the way out”? Wasn’t Michael Jordan cut from his High School basketball team? Wasn’t Jerry Seinfeld booed off the stage at his first comedy gig?”

Sure thing.

But for every J.K. Rowling there’s a few thousand equally talented (and dead broke) writers whose books will never be published. For every Steven Spielberg, there’s a few thousand (potentially) equally talented filmmakers living in the basements of their parents’ home who will never get a shot at Hollywood. For every Jerry Seinfeld, there’s a few thousand equally talented comedians sharing one bathroom apartments with two roommates in New York’s West Village and other cities around the country.

As long as those sneaky motivational speakers and life coaches (who make their money dangling that rare success carrot in front of the tired, frustrated and overworked masses) have a Michael Jordan success story to pull out of their hat, they’ll continue to remind you that “if you commit to following your dreams, anything is possible!”

They forget to tell you, however, that if you commit to following your dreams, even failure is possible. Not only is it possible, it’s highly probable. But why spoil all the fun by introducing reality into the equation? That’s not how they make their money.

The reality is that circumstances ultimately determine our fate. Not so much our passion, our love or even our effort.

Circumstances. You either get the breaks you need or you don’t. Oh, and you know the best thing about that? [in my best Heath Ledger Joker voice] It’s fair.

“So what you’re saying, Dan, is to forget about pursuing your passion and doing what you love because it’s just a roll of the dice? That despite how passionate I am and how hard I’m ready to work at living a life where I’m doing what I love to do…that the aspect of failure exists? Is that what you’re saying?”
Yes. And no. Yes, you might fail; most people do. No, you might not. It all depends on the circumstances you encounter. Oh, and you know the best thing about that? It’s fair.
“What the heck is so fair about that, Dan?”
Well, for one, it doesn’t matter what race you are, how tall or short you are, how handsome or pretty you are, how much money your parents have, whether you’re male or female – heck, it sometimes doesn’t even matter how good you are (Keanu Reeves, anyone?). What matters are the circumstances.
“OK, Dan, so you’re saying I shouldn’t even bother then, right?”
Wrong.

There’s a bible verse I’ve taken to heart (you heard right), Proverbs 21:31 “The horse is made ready for the day of battle, but the victory belongs to the Lord.” That’s what you need to do. Get your horse ready for the day of battle. If you wanna be a writer, painter, musician, photographer, filmmaker, blogger, rock climber, whatever – make sure you put your best into everything you do.

That’s how you tip the scales in your favor.

If you plan on doing that thing you really want to do with your life if money were no object, make sure you do it with excellence. Because you never know who might stumble onto your work; who might need that thing you really want to do and – this is the most important part – might be willing to pay you for it.

Yeah, I’m talking about money.

Doing what you’re passionate about is great. Doing what you love is great. Doing it so good that people will pay you good money for it? That’s heaven. The trick is getting that thing you do in front of the right people – that’s where the circumstances come in. But if you strive to not only put out the best work you can but to constantly get better at it, if that time ever comes when your work finds its way to the right person, the person who needs that thing you do, your chances of that breakthrough circumstance increase dramatically.

I left a very nice paying job as a Director of Sales to pursue a sudden passion I developed “late” in life (I was 37 years old) to start my own video production business. I knew you couldn’t start a business part-time – the safety net of a paycheck reduces the urgency needed to succeed as an entrepreneur. All the barriers were in place: I was the sole provider, I had a family, a mortgage, car payments, and plenty of bills. I took that leap anyway.

Over the next two years we had burned through all our savings, maxed out every credit card, and sank our credit scores. There was even a time where I considered looking for a job. The business was growing but it was growing at a snail’s pace. To expand my thin portfolio, I offered my services to several non-profit organizations, working for free in many cases just to have some work to show future prospects. Everything I did, no matter what (if) they paid me, I did as if I was being paid top dollar. I knew that if my work ever found the right eyeballs, I wanted them to say, “This guy’s good!”

Over the past 6+ years, my company has grown rather nicely and my work has found its way to the right people; people that understood you get what you pay for and that Dan Perez is very good at what he does. I can easily trace the attainment of some of my biggest clients today with videos I produced for free years ago. Videos I produced with all the excellence I was capable of. Videos I produced for people that came into my life for only a short while but who indirectly opened big doors for me.

I make my horse ready for the day of battle.

Circumstances ultimately determine our fate. The right people came into my life, the right people saw my work, the right doors opened, I had the right wife and daughter to get through what were tough financial times as I struggled to get my business off the ground and earn a nice living doing that thing that I want to be doing with my life so that money won’t ever be an object – it’ll be expected.

But, of course, a few years from now I might just find myself on monster.com in need of a job, the business failing, the circumstances having taken a sudden sharp turn for the worse. It can happen and I know it. Nothing is guaranteed.

But until then I’m gonna continue to make my horse ready for the day of battle. And come what may, I’ll be able to look myself in the mirror and know I wasn’t afraid of the fight. I’ll also know, if even for just a short while, what I would be doing with my life if money were no object.

I’ll know.

And that’ll feel good.

[Photographs by Donnie Nunley]

March 24, 2013

Featured

Why We Can’t All Just Get Along (And Why It’s OK)

by Dan Perez October 14, 2012

written by Dan Perez

Can’t we all just get along? That would be nice, yes? Everybody just smiling and waving at each other with nary an ill word spoken. Everybody having civil discussions about politics, abortion, and immigration. Yankees and Red Sox fans shaking hands as they leave Fenway Park after a game, “Nice game. Better luck next time!” Unfortunately, we’ll never know how nice (or how totally lame) that would actually be. Why? Because it just isn’t the way human beings are wired, that’s why.

Wasn’t the essence of human nature made abundantly clear from the very beginning of creation? Eve throwing Adam under the bus before God, Cain killing his brother Abel in a fit of jealousy, and God telling Noah to build an ark because he was gonna “make it rain up in here” and flush the whole of humanity down his almighty toilet bowl? And this is just book one of the Old Testament(!). Yet the blog posts wanting everyone to just shut up and play nice keep coming. Why?

Allow me to introduce into evidence a recent post by marketing strategist Geoff Livingston, “It’s Not OK“, an apparent lamentation on the state of “nice” on the social space. Livingston includes in his post a link to an observation in the Wall Street Journal called “Why We Are So Rude Online” which is based on a study of 541 facebook users by professors at Columbia University and the University of Pittsburgh. 541. The soon-to-be-published study shows that browsing facebook lowers your self-control AND makes you more likely to choose a chocolate-chip cookie than a granola bar as a snack. Seriously.

Based on the aforementioned study, Livingston writes: “So now we know the medium is toxic. Does that give us license to behave poorly?”

Now, one man’s “poorly” is another man’s “awesome” but I get what his interpretation is here – not being nice. Now, on this point I actually disagree AND agree somewhat. I’ll explain…

Sigmund Freud, known as the founding father of psychoanalysis, elaborating on his observations on the essence of human nature, concluded that, “the deepest essence of human nature, which are similar in all men and which aim at the satisfaction of certain needs [are] self-preservation, aggression, need for love, and the impulse to attain pleasure and avoid pain.” It’s hard to argue with Freud’s conclusion. These needs drive our behavior in the “real world” AND online.

Growing up in the Bronx, I witnessed the good, the bad, and the ugly in people; from those who just wanted to buy the world a Coke to those who wanted to smash your face in with the very same Coke bottle and laugh while you bled. Unfortunately, for many inner-city kids going to public schools in my era, the “Anti-Bullying” movement wasn’t the big sensation it is today. I saw a lot of kids pay for that, even myself at times.

People aren’t always nice. But when I consider why, I recall Stephen Covey’s story from his best-selling book “The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People” about the man who became irritated on a subway train by another passenger’s indifference to his kids as they ran amok in the car. “Sir, your children are really disturbing a lot of people. I wonder if you couldn’t control them a little more?” The indifferent father replied, ‘Oh, you’re right. I guess I should do something about it. We just came from the hospital where their mother died about an hour ago. I don’t know what to think, and I guess they don’t know how to handle it either.’

Human nature can be a bitch sometimes, yes? Accept it or get off the train.

We never know which of Freud’s human needs are at play when we encounter “toxic” engagement, online or off. Many of the bullies in my playground were abused themselves at home; were treated with indifference and scorn; came from households where drugs and/or alcohol dictated behavior. As I grew older, my hatred for those that bullied me was replaced with sympathy for the cause of their rage and frustration.

Similarly, we should allow a measure of understanding for those who’s online behavior can be described as adverse. Perhaps, the source of their online “venom” comes from their inability to forgive past offenses or abuse directed at them or their loved ones. Maybe their parents raised them to despise Hispanics, gays, or Republicans. Perhaps they’ve seen their wife lose a painful battle with cancer, or had their brother taken away by a drunk driver, or lost their home to foreclosure, or had to endure their newborn child never making it out of the NICU.

There are many reasons why people want to piss on the rest of the world. These reasons aren’t always clear to us; nor, in many cases, are they even justifiable. But they have to be accepted. Moreover, people can also be very passionate about their beliefs (“Stand up for what you believe in!”, right?) and are often unable to taper their fiery passion for what they believe in when confronted with another person with contrary views (Obama vs Romney, anyone?).

To wish impossible things (that we can actually all just get along with each other) is foolish; the world will never live as one (sorry, John). But what we can do is accept that there are many different human needs that drive human beings to behave like they do; and all the blog posts and twitter chats and folk songs sung around a big ol’ bonfire ain’t gonna change that.

Accept it or get off the train.

Now, I don’t know Mr. Livingston personally but it appears he’s also publicly confronting his own past history of “toxic” online engagement and its consequences: “Leaving a trail of human wreckage behind me, all because of an inflated sense of self online doesn’t cut the mustard. I can’t live with that. It’s not OK.”

Consequences. The great equalizer.

Growing up in the Bronx, I also learned that there are sometimes consequences for those that run their mouths too much; for those that happen to talk smack about the wrong person; get in the wrong person’s face. Consequences. Beware of whom you speak of lest that person find you and put their foot up your ass. You go from running your mouth one day to having your jaw wired shut the next. Sometimes you take a busted jaw and consider yourself lucky. Lesson learned. Others weren’t so lucky.

Now, back to Mr. Livingston’s conclusion on the medium: Is it really toxic? It certainly can be. Does it give us license to behave poorly? License, no. The means, yes. In the online world, it’s easy to run your little fingers over the keyboard and say whatever you want to whomever you want in whatever way you want. It’s unlikely that somebody living in New Mexico is gonna hop a plane to London with the intention of tracking down the person who left a nasty comment on his blog post and whupping his ass.

Consequences are a reality on the street. Unfortunately, not so much online. That’s a shame. Especially in the case of those who refuse to identify themselves online; who run their hateful social mouths behind the anonymity of a fake name and profile pic. These people are cowards and not only should they be ignored but felt sorry for.

Ultimately, the fact that social media brings together all types of people with all types of personalities, views and opinions from all over the world should be celebrated – not lamented. If you don’t like the shit someone’s shoveling, ignore them or give it back as good as you’re getting it. If you wanna talk smack online, be ready to deal with whatever consequences may come.

I mean, if everybody was supposed to just get along, there would never have been any wars, any bloodshed in the name of religion, politics, or even sports. One peek into the history books should offer a sobering reminder that human beings tend to not always agree with each other. That doesn’t mean the world is a bad place; heck, even I believe that most people are generally good. It just makes it all the more sweeter when you find people with like minds.

Accept it or get off the train.

“This is a choice, and everyone is free to have the conversations they want.” writes Livingston. Indeed they do.

It would do us all good to remember that.

[Photographs by Sofia Ajram]

October 14, 2012

Newer Posts

Older Posts