Hi, my names Max and I'm new here. This is a short film that I recently completed and I think that experimental is the right catagory for it. It is mostly live action, with a little bit of stop motion animation. Here is the link to it on youtube, watch it in HD if you can.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RJOpSMvFfE&feature=channel_page

And please let me know what you think.
Thanks very much,
Max

that was awesome, actually the coolest thing i've seen in ages.

I loved the alice in wonderland/arkham asylum reference at the end.

In fact I loved all of it, well done :)

Thanks very much, glad you enjoyed it.

i really liked that man. very creative. i am actually left speechless as to how i feel about it, which is really cool. that doesn't happen too often.

Very cool for sure. Odd and macabre. Whimsical. The photography and lighting was really well done, and the overblown audio was a nice accompaniment. Very strange.

What does it mean to YOU?

Your work, as a whole, is the most refreshing thing I've seen in ages.

Love it.

Great short. I loved how it had a subtle aged style.
Reminded me of Jan svankmajer's films and some of the shorts by David Firth.

Love it Max! You should post Mr. Pike too.

Haha that was brilliant!

I never know how to articulate how I feel about stuff like this, all I know is that often they're as likely to infuriate me as entertain me. This one was most definitely the latter. Great aesthetic and loved the sound design and editing. Probably dead on length wise too.

I loved it. You made me really uncomfortable with that mask, which is I'm hoping what you were going for. I really really liked the cinematography, that look you got was perfect.

so cool, creepy, the fish movie was good too lol. Very creative and the humor was spot on!

I gotta say, I really loved that. The lighting and cinematography were perfect! What editing software did you use and could you show me how to do that lighting/color? I would LOVE to make films as good as that :D

Please become famous and make major motion pictures you're a genius.

That is all.

Your blend of darkness, surrealism and humor reminds me of David Lynch.

Really really love it!

i really enjoy the creepy imagery.

was this before or after 'fantastic mr fox' came out? some of it seemed very wes-andersonesque. especially the lettering, it looks like the same font he uses in all of his pictures.

I am so confused. Maybe I'm just a simpleton, but I didn't get it.

I am so confused. Maybe I'm just a simpleton, but I didn't get it.

Not just you. I think this is the best-produced video that makes not a lick of sense. In my opinion, when symbolism and metaphor are so fucking obscure that everyone will have their own unique interpretation, the filmmaker isn't really saying anything at all.

You wanna say something? Don't hide behind vague symbology. Just say what you wanna say, for Christ's sake.

This Swintex was genius. His other film with the fish was even better. Had a few threads going almost two years ago.

Influences no doubt include this guy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_%C5%A0vankmajer) and his surreal stopmotion fantasy worlds. (Alice (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2-TPdB70Lg) & Faust (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnOh6ZdN9Fg) are both top-notch).

Good stuff. :cool:

Not just you. I think this is the best-produced video that makes not a lick of sense. In my opinion, when symbolism and metaphor are so fucking obscure that everyone will have their own unique interpretation, the filmmaker isn't really saying anything at all.

You wanna say something? Don't hide behind vague symbology. Just say what you wanna say, for Christ's sake.

So the fact I don't get it is good? :s

So the fact I don't get it is good? :s

Well, I would ask anyone who "get's it" to explain exactly what it is that they "get". Sometimes people read into shit a whole lot more than is there, and super-symbolic stuff like this allows them to use their imaginations and interpret it any way they please. That's fine. If you enjoy that kinda stuff, great. I'm just saying that if it's so fucking open to interpretation that you can think whatever you want about it, then the filmmaker really hasn't said anything at all.

Oooh. So we're not talking about me? Why the hell am I even having this conversation then? :p

i thought the imagery was great but it really through me on what it was trying to accomplish , plus all i could think about was wes anderson and how awesome serious house on a serious earth was ... which further through me off on any meaning

i feel like it would fit inside another movie kinda like the wall like or again something anderson would do ... idk lol

Not just you. I think this is the best-produced video that makes not a lick of sense. In my opinion, when symbolism and metaphor are so fucking obscure that everyone will have their own unique interpretation, the filmmaker isn't really saying anything at all.

You wanna say something? Don't hide behind vague symbology. Just say what you wanna say, for Christ's sake.

david lynch never explains anything in his movies because he wants everyone to have their own interpretation. He started as a painter before he was a filmmaker, so he has an artistic philosophy on film. he let's the movie exist for itself, and not necessarily mean one thing, but is abstract enough, and pieces together in a way that many people can have many interpretations.

THAT'S PART OF WHAT MAKES IT ART

what's so fun about having a message preached to you? wouldn't you rather be put in the situation to make your own ideas? That's also much more challenging for a filmmaker, and personally i have more respect for someone who can do that rather than make a movie like furn gully.

but i understand not everyone here is interested in art. but it would be a great thing for modern film if everyone was.
we could have more 'trash humpers' and less 'transformers 2 3D'

I personally didn't get it either.

It's all very good to say that many people have many interpretations, but the artists job is to, at the least, point his audience in a specific direction from which to make that interpretation. Lynch is most definitely a surrealist, but he always provides a context from which to view his work. I didn't find a context from which to view "Mr Fox" so consequently didn't find any meaning in it.

If you got something out of it that's fine for you, but it didn't do anything for me. I didn't even find the imagery especially intriguing for more than one viewing. I've seen plenty of weird experimental pieces; some bored me to tears, others captivated me - different strokes and all that. But the ones that captivated me seemed to capture the rest of the audience as well.

Nothing annoys me more than an artist who complains "you just don't understand"; it is the artists job to communicate with me, not intentionally create something in a secret code and then sneer at me for not being able to break the code. 99% of the time there isn't even a code anyway, it's the supposed artist throwing feces at a blanket and seeing what sticks. These artists are mostly technicians; they know all about and can reproduce the form but have none of the substance of a true artist.

trippy man, nice bloody job