Yakoob on 24/12/2009 at 23:59
Hey all, sorry for getting back to this so late. Got caught up with other stuff and forgot that I made this thread. Anyway, thanks for all the feedback, especially the negative kind; everyone at my uni who sees it creams itself over what an amazing director I am and how gifted I am and shit like that, which really doesn't help me improve...
Quote Posted by Fingernail
A bit of the editing lets it down towards the start of the imagined conflicts, the chess shots linger a bit too long rather than being snappy, if you know what I mean ... There were just a couple of lines there that didn't flow in terms of comic timing, and I think it was the editing to blame as I say.
Quote Posted by Tonamel
As with most amateur productions, the pacing is too slow, and really dragged in parts. It's four and a half minutes long, but it could probably have been thirty seconds... maybe as much as a minute shorter.
Interestingly, you are one of many who commented on the same issue. "Make it quicker, make it snappier" is the general consensus here. Hmm, when I edited and watched it I felt it was good and cutting the shots even shorter would be too short for the audience to grasp what exactly is going on in the shot.
There are a few shots that I fucked up and turned out too long (like when all the ppl walk into the TV room, that should've been like 3-4 seconds, not 10, but that's all I could do with my footage). In any case, lesson learned. I would like to defend the chess sequence, tho - I know it's kinda slow, but that's deliberate; I didn't want a super quick action. I wanted it to feel a bit more like a growing conflict, with a slow build up and lingering, if not overwhelming, sense of a struggle. The tension is then completely broken up when the girl goes "but..." and the camera pulls back to a wide shot. so I guess the problem isn't really the editing of the scene to make it quicker; it's that I fundamentally failed to build the tension I wanted...
I guess it's time to experiment though. My next movie I will cut much more tightly, even if I feel it's a little too tight, and see how it turns out in the end and what people think. Like I said, this is the most repeated complaint I got (online at least, all ppl IRL couldn't find a single flaw, pfft -.-) so I'm excited to use the feedback :D
Quote Posted by Fingernail
perhaps could've used some creative linking between shots to make it clear it's imaginary, even wipes or something
Personally I am against wipes and transition like that, they always feel cheesy to me. I actually thought it was better to go straight into fantasy rather than going back and from with them standing and the chess (as Tonamel said), as it both shows how (exaggeratedly) serious they are about it, and it helps to build the tension I wanted in the chess scene I mentioned above.
Sure it's a bit confusing at first, but as long as you can figure out what's going on by the end, it's all good in my book. I feel that, perhaps even it engages the audience a bit more.
Quote Posted by Stitch
the lighting is sometimes dim
True, I hate the way the chess scene was lit but alas, lack of equipment and time and experience...
Quote:
and you tend to get a little in over your head when it comes to creative shots and cuts
Could you elaborate? I know which shots you refer to (chess opening, prolly the arm wrestle), but why are they "over-your-head?"
Quote:
(like the last bit in which the handle to the door seems to rise, vibrating, out of the ground
Hahah, yea. But think how the area is structured and you will realize there was no way of shooting that shot aside from having the cameraman stand to the side with his arm stretched all the way out, which equals arm getting tired and shaking really badly. If only I had a crane...
Quote:
Also: from a pacing standpoint, the entire coin toss bit takes too long, keeping it short and abrupt would better mirror the impatience of the friends.
This, and a few of your points, I think boil down to different tastes rather than technicalities really. In case of the coin toss, the longer sequence, the eyes looking up (and the hold), as well as the echoing coin sound create a tension and a sense of incoming resolution. I didn't want to mirror impatience of the friends - I wanted to evoke it in the audience themselves. It's like holding your breath before something big - at last, after two hours of ridiculousness, the impasse is getting resolved! It's an important feeling that I wanted to convey and keeping the toss longer accentuates that. If I made it quick and snappy, it would be over before the audience could really understand its impact.
Quote:
Having said all that, you've produced a solid little film and you should be proud. Most of its faults could be cleared up with a little editing, and I'm curious what's next.
Thanks. After comparing this to the amount of "work" I put in my previous shorts, as well as watching what more experienced filmmakers are doing (I spent the summer in LA working on various sets right before this), despite having produced movies in the past I believe this is the first one I "truly" directed. It has its flaws, but its a good beginning and I feel happy with the outcome :)
Quote Posted by Scots Taffer
We're bordering on 16 seconds of them walking to the video room and we feel every step of it because the guy's dialogue/demeanour is fucking annoying and he sounds like a douchebag who I would never want to watch a movie with - a suggestion, how about in a dorm room or whatever, "movie night!"/"my call!"/"MASH."/"Cool." and then they're off walking for a second or so, then CUT TO...
Interesting feedback. I guess you'll never watch movies with me, then ;)
Quote:
I don't think the coin toss scene needs much except maybe the whole group pushing past with the DVD in one motion rather than one by one, and again, speed it up after that
Aye, I agree and as I pointed out above, I fucked up that shot. It was supposed to be much quicker, but that's the footage I ended up with...
Based on your other comments Scots, at the risk of sounding like a total pretentious movie fag, I think you kinda missed the point of the film. Like the opening, the "icy" robotic demeanor, the two movies they hold, the scenarios and the ending. Nothing of it is serious, nothing of it is supposed to be realistic; it's all just comedy and exaggeration.
Nonetheless, I do take everything you say in consideration; whether I agree with it or not, it will help me be a better filmmaker!
Quote Posted by Fafhrd
I find the entire premise ridiculous.
Exactly :)
Quote Posted by Muzman
Next time try getting some actual actors. It's a worthwhile exercise.
Interesting how the feedback I get goes back and forth between "great acting" and "terrible acting." Personal tastes, I suppose...
Scots Taffer on 25/12/2009 at 00:25
Quote Posted by Yakoob
Based on your other comments Scots, at the risk of sounding like a total pretentious movie fag, I think you kinda missed the point of the film. Like the opening, the "icy" robotic demeanor, the two movies they hold, the scenarios and the ending. Nothing of it is serious, nothing of it is supposed to be realistic; it's all just comedy and exaggeration.
At the risk of sounding like a pretentious critical fag, I think you're kinda sweeping away many valid criticisms in favour of self-pleasing thoughts like "different tastes" - perhaps because of how much people have "creamed" over your attempt here, and presumably their taste aligned better?
Don't get me wrong, you're taking the majority of the criticism well but your response smacks of "yeah, thanks but it means this and
you don't get it", which basically means you'll struggle to meet as wide an audience as possible if you're only concerned with pleasing yourself and those whose tastes align with yours.
The consensus here is that you need to tighten up your editing and get some actors next time - not bad advice really.
IMO shots are simply far too long in the majority of the cases and it's not building tension, it's just sloppy editing. My feeling is that the robot voices and blank expressions meaning to convey exaggerated tension or whatever is just down to bad acting, no offence.
And as far as me missing the point, if you're saying the way they stand-off immediately upon seeing each other (which I described as robotic voices/blank expressions) isn't in any way meant to be an exaggerated attempt to mimic the tension of Western-style stand-offs at high-noon, then I guess
I was giving you too much credit!
There's also no place for excuses like "you'd see that you can't do this any other way... tired arm /etc" are meaningless, you basically shouldn't attempt anything you cannot convincingly or technically achieve if you want to be taken seriously (artistically or otherwise).
Also, try not to take anything personally, just because of the way I disliked your manner onscreen doesn't mean I think
you are a douchebag.
Unless that really is the way you are. ;)
Yakoob on 25/12/2009 at 00:52
hahah, nah man, I am not blowing you off. I already covered most of your points replying to others so I just didn't reiterate. I know I have a bad habit of coming stand-offish when people give me feedback, but trust me, as someone who is overly self-aware, I do take everything into consideration and appreciate it, as bad at showing it as I may be :D
If anything, as I hinted in my reply, it's those poeple who do cream themselves over my movies and can't tell me a single thing they didn't like whose opinions I instantly disregard as "you don't know shit."
Quote Posted by Scots Taffer
The consensus here is that you need to tighten up your editing and get some actors next time - not bad advice really.
And I already said that, while I didn't quite feel it myself, I do agree with it and will be doing that next time around - why did you get the feeling I was sweeping it away?
Quote:
My feeling is that the robot voices and blank expressions meaning to convey exaggerated tension or whatever is just down to bad acting, no offence.
And as far as me missing the point, if you're saying the way they stand-off immediately upon seeing each other (which I described as robotic voices/blank expressions) isn't in any way meant to be an exaggerated attempt to mimic the tension of Western-style stand-offs at high-noon, then I guess
I was giving you too much credit!
No that wasn't supposed to be tension at all, you were correct in your original assumption. While a western wasn't exactly my driving inspiration here, it's definitely very similar in spirit. It's supposed to not only be a juxtaposition (normal happy banter then wham, sudden switch to coldness), but also be an exaggaration of mutual repressed hate to the point of emoionlessness / disregard for the other person. That's probably where you got the western from as I can see the connection you're drawing here.
If you didn't feel that worked then that's exactly why I am saying it's personal tastes. The acting wasn't "bad" - it was exactly what I wanted. It's just that you (and a few others) believe that this sort of acting doesn't work for the effect I wanted to achieve. Ergo, different tastes. I am not using it as an excuse to just go out and do whatever the fuck I want disregarding my audience, I am just explaining the crux of the disagreement on the issue. There is nothing wrong with you criticizing my personal taste and as part of me becoming a better filmmaker, aside from technicalities like editing, my personal tastes, too, will have to change.
Quote:
There's also no place for excuses like "you'd see that you can't do this any other way... tired arm /etc" are meaningless, you basically shouldn't attempt anything you cannot convincingly or technically achieve if you want to be taken seriously (artistically or otherwise).
Oh yea, I agree, no one will know and no one will give a shit. I was just explaining what happened - it wasn't until I got to shooting that scene that I realized "oh fuck" and, at that point, I just had to run with it due to time limitations.
But I actually learned from that too. The handle scene and the armwrestle (the sweep with the long speech pause) turning out as shaky as they have taught me to never ever rely on a cameraman's hand when stability is required. I figured that, if I dont have a crane or a dolly, I can always MAKE one with some tripods, pipes and ductapes. That was actually the plan for the armwrestle scene, but my camerman (wrongly) assured me he can do it well without those little gizmos...
Quote:
Also, try not to take anything personally, just because of the way I disliked your manner onscreen doesn't mean I think
you are a douchebag.
Unless that really is the way you are. ;)
Nah, I'm not one of those dipshits that gets butthurt when people tell them negative things. I actually want to improve my skills so no matter how negative the feedback is, I take it into account as it does reflect some flaw in my movie :)
-------------------
Quote Posted by Scots Taffer
Don't get me wrong, you're taking the majority of the criticism well but your response smacks of "yeah, thanks but it means this and
you don't get it", which basically means you'll struggle to meet as wide an audience as possible if
you're only concerned with pleasing yourself and those whose tastes align with yours. Going off topic from my movie, but in the end isn't that what art has always been about?
Muzman on 10/1/2010 at 01:55
Before this one gets away...
Quote Posted by Yakoob
Interestingly, you are one of many who commented on the same issue. "Make it quicker, make it snappier" is the general consensus here. Hmm, when I edited and watched it I felt it was good and cutting the shots even shorter would be too short for the audience to grasp what exactly is going on in the shot.
If you're showing people something important to the story, yes. The beginning does this fairly well. Where the amateur stuff shows is when you have to hold a long time for framing like the crane arounds in the chess and arm wrestling scenes. It seems like the dialogue is waiting for the shot (it's actually not all that often but the rhythm is funny). Amateur acting pauses are usually a bit of a dead givaway for me so, cutting around them is a good idea I find.
Quote:
Personally I am against wipes and transition like that, they always feel cheesy to me.
Here sound can help out. In fact, through most of it some extra in that department wouldn't hurt.
Quote:
I know which shots you refer to (chess opening, prolly the arm wrestle), but why are they "over-your-head?"
I suspect he means they are beyond the equipment and skill present on the day (I mean, is there any real reason why the wide shot in the chess scene isn't level?). You can do big handheld crane shots over a small area with some practice. If you're really good you can do it by propping a tripod against your hip and things of that sort.
I guess the point is if on the day the shot is ever extending the limits of movement you have it's better to cut out of it or think of something else.
(Although the track across the chessboard is wonky as anything and that's only a foot)
Quote:
But think how the area is structured and you will realize there was no way of shooting that shot aside from having the cameraman stand to the side with his arm stretched all the way out, which equals arm getting tired and shaking really badly.
Here you use the most solid thing available to you, namely the door or the frame and lean against it hard. If the angle isn't quite right at the start, prop it (that is, the camera) up on a book or some sort of wedge shaped thing. Friction is your friend.
If you actually had a crane you'd probably find that the mount and general aperatus wouldn't fit close enough to the door for the shot anyway.
Quote:
Nothing of it is serious, nothing of it is supposed to be realistic; it's all just comedy and exaggeration.
Indeed, and there's ways you could play this up with sound and shot selection and music too. An old school motif heavy comedy soundtrack would do well for it (frankly I'd like more pretentiousness myself too "You're trying to get Charlie and Chocolate Factory in ahead of MASH?! Burton's weakest effort! Taste alone means we win!")
Also, both groups should be established approaching the room at the start.
Quote:
Interesting how the feedback I get goes back and forth between "great acting" and "terrible acting." Personal tastes, I suppose...
Not really. The stiffness of the performance and the awkward delivery isn't going to fool anyone that this a high grade effort. The pauses are amatuerish. There's obvious attempts at comic timing that don't quite click. When it breaks from the script into adlibbing is really plain at the end there. It sounds read more than performed for the most part (and the exceptions make it all the more apparent. There's quite good films with stilted or stagey performances, but they are consistently so). While it's not supposed to be great naturalism, it's not playing to its strengths (or cutting around its failings) either. The central performances could work, with some tweaking (her in particular), But they also need something real to work against. Notably the guy at the end needed to be the straight man acting as a back-to-reality for these overthinking leads, but he's having trouble talking and emoting and waving his arms at the same time. That role probably needed to go to the best overall actor in the piece.
The thing is, as most students do, thinking you'll have a few laughs you've picked one of the least casual and harder things to get right in all of movies. Farce just looks straightforward. So we'll cut you guys some slack (or I will anyway).
The other thing is, even great actors aren't necessarily going to fix this. They can be poorly handled and misunderstand the moment or the material too. The director has to be very ying and yang about the whole thing when it comes to getting what they want versus making the best of what they get. And this isn't even in the edit. This is in take four of some line you thought would be easy and the actor has just changed the whole meaning of it (and the scene) and can't seem to do it another way. You'll know this by now, in principle. Sadly it's really only experience that tells you the practicalities (not that I have a hell of a lot, but I see that much). So it's worth the exercise of going through the process of choosing and working with proper actors.
lastly
Quote:
I figured that, if I dont have a crane or a dolly, I can always MAKE one with some tripods, pipes and ductapes. That was actually the plan for the armwrestle scene, but my camerman (wrongly) assured me he can do it well without those little gizmos...
Haha, yeah. If you've seen what the real thing looks like and how they work you'd probably work out that this can be an adventure.
You might be a great tinker for all I know, just don't bring the thing to the set and hope it works on the day. See if you can do what you want long before and figure out what you're going to do when the thing breaks on you. That's all I'm saying.
They look pretty straightforward, and for the most part the principles at work are easy to understand and have parts that look fairly common. But there's usually one piece, a bearing or a gimble or hinge or something, that's the finest piece of titanium precisely machined to the nanometre and costs a fortune by itself. Those bits are key to the real things working as well as they do.
Good luck with it all anyways.
Yakoob on 10/1/2010 at 06:42
Thanks for the long-ass post Muzman. Lots of food for thought there :D
AR Master on 10/1/2010 at 18:37
was the blue hoodie person a guy or a girl
37637598 on 10/1/2010 at 20:51
Well I, for one, am not a self proclaimed hollywood movie critic, so I judge your work with an outgoing personal mindset, and can easily say: This was great! The acting was fun, the dialogue was awesome! I liked it, and you should continue making more and more, and someday maybe your gained experience will be enough to conquer the judging eye of all the college know-it-alls who frequently pretend to know everything about everything on this forum. Including myself on a day that I did something great.
The girl was kinda cute too! And you certainly have the potential to become a great actor for serious cuts, so keep at it.
Yakoob on 11/1/2010 at 01:08
Quote Posted by AR Master
was the blue hoodie person a guy or a girl
Girl. And yes you are not the only one confused about that (my first meeting with her: "why is this dude named Natalie?" )
Muzman on 11/1/2010 at 01:50
Quote Posted by Yakoob
Thanks for the long-ass post Muzman. Lots of food for thought there :D
s'aright. Good to get reasons for me to blab in my favourite way.
Incidentally I like the coinflip bit and the immediate aftermath (although I think the blocking could have had everyone push past them into the room in more frame-crowding ways). I think your assessment is correct; if people don't like it it's because it hasn't been 'earned' elsewhere. But in itself it's good.
AR Master on 11/1/2010 at 03:05
Quote Posted by Yakoob
Girl. And yes you are not the only one confused about that (my first meeting with her: "why is this dude named Natalie?" )
id throw her a bone