Director: Will Gorski
Writer: Will Gorski
Cast: Will Gorski
Running time: 2mins
Blending is a film which is explicit in having nothing to say for itself. Writer, director and solo-star Will Gorski has used this super-short narrative-light affair as a proving-ground for his skills as a cinematographer. To an extent, there is nothing wrong with that. Where possible, fledgling filmmakers should make the time and effort to enhance each element of their skillset individually, as that can come in very useful when creating a more holistic vision later on.
The with delivering simplicity, however, is that there is nowhere to hide. There are no frills to distract the audience’s eyes from any of the visual shortcomings here, and deprived of any intrigue in this supremely pedestrian narrative, their bored eyes will be seeking those shortcomings out hungrily.
The film follows a nameless protagonist, played by Gorski himself, as he attempts to settle down to an undefined task on his computer. There are no efforts to establish stakes here – even a cursory pan of the camera over a calendar with ‘ESSAY DEADLINE’ circled of red could have done this – meaning that his following actions are not remotely relatable. Looking up from his MacBook, he winces at a buzzing sound which he believes is coming from the overhead lighting – and one bulb in particular. With whatever important task is on his laptop (the reflection in his glasses looks conspicuously like a social media feed) apparently weighing heavily on his mind, he determines to shatter the bulb with a claw hammer.
The lights are plugged in to the mains and turned on when Gorski attacks them, so we’re primed for things going much, much worse than what actually transpires.A shot of the glass of the shattered bulb laying on the ground is contrasted with the buzzing sound, still churning away. Glimpsing through the kitchen window, Gorski realises that he has absent-mindedly left his blender running for presumably the entire evening – and that this was the source of the pesky noise all along.
As noted, it’s not much of a story, and in some cases, that would be fair enough. But the problem is that it is so basic, your mind cannot help but wander into finding relatively simple ways it could be more interesting. Had Gorski bothered to establish some stakes, allowed himself to ham up a more pantomime-level of visible frustration, or served up a more gruesome finale to this extremely dangerous, slapstick scenario, it would have made this infinitely more palatable. Even as a simple means to serve up some nicely realised camera-angles.
The thing is though, there isn’t much visually going on here either. Some of the shots are nicely framed, and Gorski’s lens makes good use of the atmospheric outdoor lighting that the film centres upon. But many of the shots lack depth or movement. Coupled with an itchy trigger-finger in the editing suite – the film suffers from quickly cutting to different angles rather than allowing any time or space to develop a cohesive mood – leaving us feeling like we are sitting through a turgid slideshow rather than a living, breathing story. I appreciate that I inescapably sound like I have crawled up my own backside by saying anything as po-faced about a project like this from a 17-year-old film student, but the point is that Gorski is developing these skills presumably to enhance his storytelling with projects that actually will matter to him.
Two stand-out images are close-ups of Gorski himself. The first, while he is still seated, staring up at the lights, have a depth and darkness behind him which can visualise his feelings – while the sky above dazzles his eyes, he is alone, and in the dark about the source of his woes. The second sees him coming face-to-bulb with his assumed foe – and the handheld shot introduces a brief moment of frenetic energy to proceedings, bringing his escalating frustrations and anger to life through the movement of the camera. Both of these moments are glimpses of a developing artist, who will tell compelling visual stories one day.
But, looking at the director’s statement accompanying the film, they aren’t quite enough. According to Gorski, he took inspiration from “Spike Lee and Wes Anderson to make this really simple theme have a magical look”. He will need to redouble his efforts to emulate those directors more effectively in the future.
Spike Lee’s signature cinematographic move is the double-dolly – a visual where an actor is placed on a camera dolly to produce the effect of a motionless central character moves through space while backgrounds glide past – using visual movement to speak to the inner turmoil of a person, or to contrast the chaos around them with their unnerving calm. Meanwhile, amid Wes Anderson’s vast array of visual trickery, colour is often used to accompany thematic change in a story, while stationary or tracking long-takes are used to produce immersive continuity – something which can then be used to emphasise feelings of panic when sudden editorial cuts enter back into the fray.
Those are excellent sources of inspiration for a young filmmaker, and I look forward to the time when Gorski finds a way to really incorporate them into his own style. But on present evidence, he has some way to go yet.
One final piece of advice, to any filmmaker looking to hone their visual style, is not to dismiss the importance of storytelling in the project. I have a feeling that had Gorski given himself more to think about in terms of his character, more to empathise with and build on, he might have been more inspired to use his camera and editing work to reflect their feelings in the moment. And if you don’t want to have to deal with all that yourself, then collaborate with someone who does – because as you see here, style without substance has a habit of undermining itself.