• READ BEFORE POSTING!
    • If posting a video, please post HERE, unless it is a video as part of an advertisement and then post it in this section.
    • If replying to threads please remember this is the Promotion area and the person posting may not be open to feedback.

watch Beyond the Wall of Sleep

Gonzo_Entertainment

Gonzo_Entertainment

I've been posting for a while, so wanted to show a little something of what I've been working on. This is a rough cut (I want to change some of this edit slightly) non-color corrected VERY low res version of the first meeting between Dr Kaufman and his patient Joe Slater. None of the music is there, and quite a bit of foley hospital sounds to be added as well. This just gives you some idea of the "look" of the film.

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=56841815

Well that lkink seems to be problematic. I'll youtube it and post that link.

Youtube link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8jgD1zJx6k

First draft of the trailer, 16:9, but not HD

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MyXjrmhGcA
 
Ahoy! Ze trailer is very very nice... I like the first clip a lot too. My only comment is that if the pacing is that slow on purpose, you need to something to up the tension level. Specifically, I almost clicked away when he was walking down the hall. I needed louder footsteps, or escalating sound, or something. There were also a couple points where I would cut away a second or two sooner... for example, when the guard is closing the door after the intern. But in general it looks excellent, keep us updated where we can watch it! :)
 
Not to bad. What I saw was a 5-minute black and white clip so that is what I will comment on. There were some good things and some things you can work on for next time. One thing that jumped out at me right away was the lighting. Remember lighting is a huge part in film you can do so much with it. And if you have poor lighting it can really ruin a nice shot. Remember to use diffusion so you don't have really harsh shadows. Light everything in the shot not just your actors/actresses. Light each individual person not them as a group. Use the basic three-point lighting system, it is commonly used for a reason. Also I know it is a rough cut so sound effects, music, post-effects I am not going to comment on. The other thing that I thought was great was the use of props and locations. For the most part the props and wardobe seemed very stream-lined. They felt like they were all from the same time period and seemed to all fit together. The female nurse, the doctor, the tape recorder, all that was great. Even the locations seemed real to me. The only prop that didn't sell me was the male--nurses scrubs. I felt he should have been wearing a more period related piece as well. (Check out Frighteners by Peter Jackson. In the hospital scene at the end of the movie. Same female nurses outfit, same doctors outfit, different male nurses out fit. Worth a look.) I do have to agree with HZ. The pacing was slow. Maybe you wanted it that way on purpose. Add more cuts, angles, different lighting, music, effects, camera movements. Some of those maybe you use for your next shoot, others for the next edit but keep in mind all can be used to speed up or slow down pacing. The last thing I noticed was the lack of establishing shots. At certain points I would kind of lose where I was and again maybe you haven't put these in yet because it was just a rough cut.

I will say for the most part the actors were pretty good. They seemed like they were the proper age of the part they were playing. To often in the independent world we see a 21 year old play the father of a 15 year old. It just doesn't seem right. The best thing about this film was that it is there. Your doing it and that is something to be proud of. Having something done and being able to look back in the future and say "Yeah, that was me. I created that." That is something to be cherished.

Anyway that is my two cents I hope it helps and doesn't hurt. Can't wait for the next edit.
 
H.Z. said:
Ahoy! Ze trailer is very very nice... I like the first clip a lot too. My only comment is that if the pacing is that slow on purpose, you need to something to up the tension level. Specifically, I almost clicked away when he was walking down the hall. I needed louder footsteps, or escalating sound, or something. There were also a couple points where I would cut away a second or two sooner... for example, when the guard is closing the door after the intern. But in general it looks excellent, keep us updated where we can watch it! :)
Click to expand...


Some of that is stylistic choice, though a few edits tightened up in the final version. Thanks for the feedback,
 
Not to bad. What I saw was a 5-minute black and white clip so that is what I will comment on. There were some good things and some things you can work on for next time. One thing that jumped out at me right away was the lighting. Remember lighting is a huge part in film you can do so much with it. And if you have poor lighting it can really ruin a nice shot. Remember to use diffusion so you don't have really harsh shadows. Light everything in the shot not just your actors/actresses. Light each individual person not them as a group.

Lighting is all intentional. We used basically no diffusion and purposefully attempted to create harsh shadows , half lit faces, etc... It's not classically a "noir" film, but we used a lot of elements of noir.


Also I know it is a rough cut so sound effects, music, post-effects I am not going to comment on.

Yes, the sound is not there yet. Hopefully have the video locked down this week so we can move on to that. I actually have a composer and a string trio doing all the incidental music, and there is a lot of foley (Announcements on hospital PA for example) yet to come.


The other thing that I thought was great was the use of props and locations. For the most part the props and wardobe seemed very stream-lined. They felt like they were all from the same time period and seemed to all fit together. The female nurse, the doctor, the tape recorder, all that was great. Even the locations seemed real to me. The only prop that didn't sell me was the male--nurses scrubs. I felt he should have been wearing a more period related piece as well. (Check out Frighteners by Peter Jackson. In the hospital scene at the end of the movie. Same female nurses outfit, same doctors outfit, different male nurses out fit. Worth a look.)


Partially intentional, partially not. I was NOT making a period piece in the sense of trying to have everything period correct. The scrubs were a compromise to budget contraints.


I do have to agree with HZ. The pacing was slow. Maybe you wanted it that way on purpose. Add more cuts, angles, different lighting, music, effects, camera movements. Some of those maybe you use for your next shoot, others for the next edit but keep in mind all can be used to speed up or slow down pacing.

Partially intentional, and some of it has been tightened slightly.


The last thing I noticed was the lack of establishing shots. At certain points I would kind of lose where I was and again maybe you haven't put these in yet because it was just a rough cut.

I do have establishing shoes of both the hospital and the Doctor's house, but didn't use them, still considering whether to or not.


I will say for the most part the actors were pretty good. They seemed like they were the proper age of the part they were playing. To often in the independent world we see a 21 year old play the father of a 15 year old. It just doesn't seem right. The best thing about this film was that it is there. Your doing it and that is something to be proud of. Having something done and being able to look back in the future and say "Yeah, that was me. I created that." That is something to be cherished.

Anyway that is my two cents I hope it helps and doesn't hurt. Can't wait for the next edit.


Thanks for the input.
 
Um... wow. I am not even sure what to say. I really don't think you needed to be so defensive about your piece, you did ask for opinions and comments. I was just trying to help.

You say you were trying to go more film noir, saying you intentionally lit the faces that way. Well, no offense but I think you need to study more film noir pieces then. If you look at noir lighting it isn't about harsh shadows and half lit faces. It is using the light to set a mood or a feeling. Your lighting didn't. It looked and felt like you were trying to light the scene but wasn't sure how. Film noir means lighting the person's face but not the background to portray isolation, lighting a cup that has meaning to a person's childhood but not the pencil right next to it that his father left when he walked out. Subtle things like that in a shot is film noir. I am sure you were trying to achieve a "style" when you were shooting this piece. However, there were some shots that just flat out didn't have good lighting, and I think a person should know the basics before trying their own style. For example the first time the doctor and male nurse are interacting in the hall. There is only one light source and it is clearly 1 foot to the left of the camera and about 3 feet higher then the camera. That isn't film noir. But I digress...

Like I said before I liked the props, locations, costumes. But if you say it wasn't your intent to do it this way, then way to go. That is one of the best mistakes in an independent film I have ever seen. All those elements really brought the whole piece together (Except the male scrubs). But again if you say it wasn't by choice then that is too bad.

I understand slow pacing and how it can be intentional, I really do. But viewers can only take that for so long before they start to get bored with it. Maybe it will be better with the final edit.

The last thing I can say is none of my comments were suppose to offend you or make you angry. They are there for you to learn from. If everything you did was intentional and turned out just how you planned, then bravo. Unfortunately not everyone is going to see it that way, and I was just trying to help. Remember there are going to be people out there who give you feedback about your work and I strongly suggest you try to take some of it to heart. You will definitely get farther in this industry if you learn to take critique a little better.
 
didn't seem too defensive to me, just explained his position on what you pointed out...though he really should have answered my question. that was an ass move.
 
Brooksy said:
Um... wow. I am not even sure what to say. I really don't think you needed to be so defensive about your piece, you did ask for opinions and comments. I was just trying to help.

You say you were trying to go more film noir, saying you intentionally lit the faces that way. Well, no offense but I think you need to study more film noir pieces then. If you look at noir lighting it isn't about harsh shadows and half lit faces. It is using the light to set a mood or a feeling. Your lighting didn't. It looked and felt like you were trying to light the scene but wasn't sure how. Film noir means lighting the person's face but not the background to portray isolation, lighting a cup that has meaning to a person's childhood but not the pencil right next to it that his father left when he walked out. Subtle things like that in a shot is film noir. I am sure you were trying to achieve a "style" when you were shooting this piece. However, there were some shots that just flat out didn't have good lighting, and I think a person should know the basics before trying their own style. For example the first time the doctor and male nurse are interacting in the hall. There is only one light source and it is clearly 1 foot to the left of the camera and about 3 feet higher then the camera. That isn't film noir. But I digress...

Like I said before I liked the props, locations, costumes. But if you say it wasn't your intent to do it this way, then way to go. That is one of the best mistakes in an independent film I have ever seen. All those elements really brought the whole piece together (Except the male scrubs). But again if you say it wasn't by choice then that is too bad.

I understand slow pacing and how it can be intentional, I really do. But viewers can only take that for so long before they start to get bored with it. Maybe it will be better with the final edit.

The last thing I can say is none of my comments were suppose to offend you or make you angry. They are there for you to learn from. If everything you did was intentional and turned out just how you planned, then bravo. Unfortunately not everyone is going to see it that way, and I was just trying to help. Remember there are going to be people out there who give you feedback about your work and I strongly suggest you try to take some of it to heart. You will definitely get farther in this industry if you learn to take critique a little better.
Click to expand...

I wasn't defensive, I examined your points, agreed with some (like pacing), and explained why other things are the way they are. I also thanked you for your feedback.

As to the lighting, it was light by a professional DP with 25 years LA experience who has been an operator and second unit DP on major features and network television shows. He captued the look I wanted, part of which is all lighting being a reflection of some type of practical lighting. In an old mental institution of this type, for example, the light pools created by the single overhead you'd find in the hall. We disagree on the lighting, which is fine. I think that is one of the areas where we succeeded beyond my wildest expectations. I think it look gorgeous. I'd also add that this footage hasn't been color corrected of course.

Yes, some of the props and costuming was intention, not an "accident", my point was the film is "out of time". Some things are period (like the nurses dresses) and some things aren't (there is a scene in the patient's house where a fairly modern TV is visible). This also was intentional. Some other things (like the scrubs you pointed out) were a concession to my single wardrobe person and the budget. If I had the money to spend on white pants and jackets for the orderlies, I probably would have, but I didn't, so it falls in with the rest of the things strangely out of place.
 
Well, again wow. I said my two cents and you didn't want to accept that fine. I am not going to argue anymore. It came out the way you wanted it to. That's great for you, too bad for your audience. You say your lighting guy is a professional with 25 years experience and worked on major productions. Can you give me his name? I would like to look him up.

As for me, I won't comment anymore, clearly it is falling on deaf ears. You go on doing what your doing and I'll see you in Hollywood.
 
Brooksy said:
Well, again wow. I said my two cents and you didn't want to accept that fine. I am not going to argue anymore. It came out the way you wanted it to. That's great for you, too bad for your audience. You say your lighting guy is a professional with 25 years experience and worked on major productions. Can you give me his name? I would like to look him up.

As for me, I won't comment anymore, clearly it is falling on deaf ears. You go on doing what your doing and I'll see you in Hollywood.
Click to expand...

I don't understand why you're acting like a complete asshole? Yes, you said "your two cents", I listened, I agreed with some, I explained why I disagree with some, all in a calm, respectful tone, twice thanking you for your feedback. If you think someone not agreeing on every point with the high lord of all film knowledge (apparently your opinion of yourself) is "not listening", then so be it.
 
Brooksy said:
And the name of your lighting guy?
Click to expand...

If you mean my "Director of Photography" it's Ron Coons. Most (but I don't think all) of his film stuff is on IMDB, not sure where you look to see his years as a camera operaor and grip on 90201 and Moonlighting. What seems to not penetrate your thick head is the term "intentional". You may not like it, and that is fine, you are entitled to your opinion, but it wasn't a mistake, or Ron not knowing what he was doing. He got the effect I asked him to get.
 
I shouldn't let people get under my skin, and the input didn't, some of it is valid (editing needing tightening, etc...). I just felt accused of behaving in a way I wasn't.

That being said, some FYI

Shot on an HVX200a with a redrock micro adapter for Nikon and Nikon 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, and 115mm lenses. Shot in 5 days for $6000, runtime will be about 31 minutes. Cameo by my friend Lloyd Kaufman (he's in the trailer). In the midst of all that Universal Horror/Noir B&W is about a 4 minute color sequence when the doctor goes inside the patient's dream, a mixture of after effects, stock footage, and footage we shot including a full on black mass.
 
Video locked down FINALLY!
Editor working on putting in the three original songs (one for the closing credits), and all the sound effects. We start recording the incidental music with the string trio next week.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top