• 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 Would you please critique my first rough cut...

G

gorillaonabike

This is my first rough cut of my first ever no budget short so would greatly appreciate your advice and if you would please let me know your thoughts. Not that I'm nervous or anything... * gulp *

Password fzr400 - https://vimeo.com/47688049 - starts 29 seconds in. I will be taking it down in a week as I will be applying the ideas that come through this forum.

It's sort of... 'experimental' and unusual and not a 'normal' narrative. If any of you have thoughts, I'd really appreciate it. Naturally, it needs to have the sound cleaned up, colouring, a few cuts and music.

It's my first ever short and I learned around a million things, most of which I will put into my next short. Experience is a cruel, harsh mistress... However, if I could have the benefit of your opinions, I would really appreciate it.

Many thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:
for me theres too many interviews, why? because they're all about the same thing, the concept is good, the cuts need to be refined, also the sound when cutting give a little blip now and again so watch out for that, i didnt watch it to the end i just forwarded it abit more to see what was coming which was the same thing over and over again, i cant give a better analysis at the moment coz im at work, but just keep refining it i say, also the sound levels need to be adjusted, monitor them carefully.

your harsh critic...
 
8salacious9 said:
for me theres too many interviews, why? because they're all about the same thing, the concept is good, the cuts need to be refined, also the sound when cutting give a little blip now and again so watch out for that, i didnt watch it to the end i just forwarded it abit more to see what was coming which was the same thing over and over again, i cant give a better analysis at the moment coz im at work, but just keep refining it i say, also the sound levels need to be adjusted, monitor them carefully.

your harsh critic...
Click to expand...

My first harsh critic... I kinda feel special now ;)

Seriously, thanks for this I really appreciate all criticism. The sound, colouring and a couple of edits need to be fixed but this is a rough cut so I am more concerned about the artistic side. If it is so boring that the viewer falls asleep then, well, that's not great.

* Edit * But everything is done for a reason, especially the four interviews...
 
Last edited:
For a fledgling effort this is fairly nice in concept and execution.
You've got some nice actors. Keep them busy if you can.

It's my first ever short and I learned around a million things, most of which I will put into my next short. Experience is a cruel, harsh mistress...
Click to expand...
Ayuh!
You may have seen me tell folks "You're better off making five four-minute shorts than four five-minute shorts, and certainly better than three seven-minute or two ten-minute shorts because one twenty-minute short isn't good for too many people at all."

You learn a lot about solving problems every time, and you do bring the solutions forward to subsequent projects.

Now, what you have here is essentially four, maybe five shorts tabbed together into a nine-minute piece.
Technologically daunting, I see.

Video + Audio: Consistency.

Premise aside, which is fine although lengthy, I like the way you shot and edited these, ESPECIALLY the boxer, er... former boxer.
That was done reasonably well.
I like the overlapping dialog with changes in video cuts.
A few more extreme closeups and wide shots might have broken up the relatively narrow visual distance from viewer to subject. Due to the subject content and overall length of the planned project this viewer's (admitted short) attention span wanes at about the three-minute mark.

Develop and maintain a consistent visual style from subject to subject and setting to setting.
It ain't easy.

And there's some L-R compression thingie going on there. ??

Likewise, the audio is a all-over-the-place... disaster is too strong, how about near-debacle.
Fair enough??

The differences in spaces DOES make that challenge difficult. Agreed. No contest. Welcome to the biz.
Whatever assistance IT audio-pros can give TAKE IT.
My audio collection skill level just allows me to point and grunt in confirmation of suspicions.

And some of the sound effects are too strong, competing with the dialog.
I try to keep the sound effects a quiet background thing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxjBVn4xnwM

Again, overall, I like the concept - only more brief.
The concluding segment is nice.


Congratulations on completing this.

What camera/lenses and audio collection equipment did you use?
 
Last edited:
rayw said:
For a fledgling effort this is fairly nice in concept and execution.
You've got some nice actors. Keep them busy if you can.


Ayuh!
You may have seen me tell folks "You're better off making five four-minute shorts than four five-minute shorts, and certainly better than three seven-minute or two ten-minute shorts because one twenty-minute short isn't good for too many people at all."

You learn a lot about solving problems every time, and you do bring the solutions forward to subsequent projects.

Now, what you have here is essentially four, maybe five shorts tabbed together into a nine-minute piece.
Technologically daunting, I see.

Video + Audio: Consistency.

Premise aside, which is fine although lengthy, I like the way you shot and edited these, ESPECIALLY the boxer, er... former boxer.
That was done reasonably well.
A few more extreme closeups and wide shots might have broken up the relatively narrow visual distance from viewer to subject. Due to the subject content and overall length of the planned project this viewer's (admitted short) attention span wanes at about the three-minute mark.

Develop and maintain a consistent visual style from subject to subject and setting to setting.
It ain't easy.

And there's some L-R compression thingie going on there. ??

Likewise, the audio is a all-over-the-place... disaster is too strong, how about near-debacle.
Fair enough??

The differences in spaces DOES make that challenge difficult. Agreed. No contest. Welcome to the biz.
Whatever assistance IT audio-pros can give TAKE IT.
My audio collection skill level just allows me to point and grunt in confirmation of suspicions.

Again, overall, I like the concept - only more brief.
The concluding segment is nice.


Congratulations on completing this.

What camera/lenses and audio collection equipment did you use?
Click to expand...

Wow, thanks, this is extremely useful to me! Especially as you hit the nail absolutely on the head about the shorts as I thought it would be a better learning experience to shoot 5 shorts and effectively gain more experience in one go, hence the format. Well spotted sir! It was a huge learning experience because of this and phenomenally useful.

In terms of the actors, again, well spotted. I am waiting to see if anyone in the UK watches daytime TV / goes to theatre and recognises someone in there. I have a couple of contacts in this space and there is one actress I really want for my next production. She has done some TV stuff and might possibly come on board for the right concept.

And I appreciate your take on the conclusion. Having that kind of ending / concept is a little scary because it is experimental and strange so did not know if it would 'touch.'

Also, I take on board your comments about brevity. I am trimming the shears even as I write this. Thinking about it, I need to whip off a few minutes.

As a note, the audio has not been balanced / edited and the whole thing needs to be coloured. The issue I had was my editor decided to do nothing for 8 months and then landed me with it so I will smooth out the audio and colouring once I have a cut I am satisfied with.

In terms of kit, we used:

7D, VG10, 2 * Tascam DR 100s - the first died on set but I had a spare. Mics were Sennies (sorry audiophiles) and a mix of lavs and the 60 (naturally with a boom etc...). With the 7D there was a shoulder rig with follow focus, tripods, slider and with my little VG I have a steadicam which is genuinely a fantastic combo. This meant learning how to use this kit during the different shoots and we made lots of mistakes but now understand how it all works. Lenses were a mixture of 'stock' on the VG (surprisingly half-decent footage) to some nice Canon primes on the 7D.

Lighting was with a 3-point rig and reflector. My lighting kit is just off skin colour so we used gels to bring it down.

Editing is on Avid with a complete klutz (me) as I am learning as I go.
 
Last edited:
I should have time to take a look this weekend and give you my two cents, but wanted to say off the bad, congrats for finishing!
 
JoshL said:
I should have time to take a look this weekend and give you my two cents, but wanted to say off the bad, congrats for finishing!
Click to expand...

Ah! It is unfinished - need to sort out the sound, the colouring, also the music and looking for feedback as to the rest.

This is purely a rough cut and looking to complete shortly.
 
Very nice.

I also like your cutting, especially with The Boxer.

On that note, I'm guessing that the reason it isn't already in there might be due to cost and difficulty. But in The Singer's segment I was kind of missing at least one cutaway to what she was describing: that is, taking the stage to sing, an audience, etc.

I admit to also feeling the piece getting a bit longish and repetitive. But I also wouldn't really want to cut any of them out. Uh-oh, maybe I wouldn't be any good at killing my darlings. You're trying to make your point. I sympathize with you. Two would probably be too few to make that point. Same, I'm guessing, with three. Maybe some trimming.

However, I really suspect that once you clean up that audio and perhaps add some music, those things might go a long way towards making the film feel less longish.

About the ending with all the "I love yous." Of course I like the sentiment. I like it. But. Full disclosure, the way it was done felt a little out of left field for me. In particular, when they're looking and talking directly into the camera at around 8:56 and onwards, what was going through my head was, "Are they talking to me? Why are they saying that they love me? That feels kind of odd in the context of the film so far. Or are they talking to him? The filmmaker? Are they all his lovers, each of them, or something? Hmmm, I wasn't expecting that."

Where did that come from? Is it a sexual kind of love? Is it love like Jesus told us? Is it some sort of familial love? I'm asking silly questions, but I think that they are understandably spurred in my mind by the content. In other words, I felt like the content was suddenly begging these sorts of questions of me. Which didn't really seem to follow so much from the set-up...for me. Maybe if there were a little more build-up of your train of thought to bring us along through their stories of personal failure and not winning the lottery of success to their...loving me, then I wouldn't have felt a little disconcerted like I sort of did. But then again, if you're going for arthouse, maybe that's exactly what you want.

Not that I don't appreciate their loving me. (Though...I'm not worthy!).

I hope I'm commenting on your film's artistic and dramatic elements, like you asked. And I'm not trying to make an argument that you should alter a thing. You are the artist. This is your art. It should say what you want it to say, how you want to say it. I'm only writing about my initial reaction and how it struck me first-off. Maybe I'll feel differently about those "I love yous" later. :)

Really nice work in progress. I bet it's gonna be great when all finished too. Looks like you're off to an awesome start. =)
 
Last edited:
richy said:
Very nice.

I also like your cutting, especially with The Boxer.

On that note, I'm guessing that the reason it isn't already in there might be due to cost and difficulty. But in The Singer's segment I was kind of missing at least one cutaway to what she was describing: that is, taking the stage to sing, an audience, etc.

I admit to also feeling the piece getting a bit longish and repetitive. But I also wouldn't really want to cut any of them out. Uh-oh, maybe I wouldn't be any good at killing my darlings. You're trying to make your point. I sympathize with you. Two would probably be too few to make that point. Same, I'm guessing, with three. Maybe some trimming.

However, I really suspect that once you clean up that audio and perhaps add some music, those things might go a long way towards making the film feel less longish.

About the ending with all the "I love yous." Of course I like the sentiment. I like it. But. Full disclosure, the way it was done felt a little out of left field for me. In particular, when they're looking and talking directly into the camera at around 8:56 and onwards, what was going through my head was, "Are they talking to me? Why are they saying that they love me? That feels kind of odd in the context of the film so far. Or are they talking to him? The filmmaker? Are they all his lovers, each of them, or something? Hmmm, I wasn't expecting that."

Where did that come from? Is it a sexual kind of love? Is it love like Jesus told us? Is it some sort of familial love? I'm asking silly questions, but I think that they are understandably spurred in my mind by the content. In other words, I felt like the content was suddenly begging these sorts of questions of me. Which didn't really seem to follow so much from the set-up...for me. Maybe if there were a little more build-up of your train of thought to bring us along through their stories of personal failure and not winning the lottery of success to their...loving me, then I wouldn't have felt a little disconcerted like I sort of did. But then again, if you're going for arthouse, maybe that's exactly what you want.

Not that I don't appreciate their loving me. (Though...I'm not worthy!).

I hope I'm commenting on your film's artistic and dramatic elements, like you asked. And I'm not trying to make an argument that you should alter a thing. You are the artist. This is your art. It should say what you want it to say, how you want to say it. I'm only writing about my initial reaction and how it struck me first-off. Maybe I'll feel differently about those "I love yous" later. :)

Really nice work in progress. I bet it's gonna be great when all finished too. Looks like you're off to an awesome start. =)
Click to expand...

Thanks, this is a great critique and I appreciate the sentiment. It's a weird 'arthouse' style - that's for sure - and I am unsure if making an abstract point around an abstract idea with zero budget will even begin to be entertaining to more than 10% of viewers. I am working out whether to put something right at the beginning of the credits - just four words which will explain it all. Otherwise, I don't know.

In the current condition, there is a 'camera as a confessor' style of shooting - they are looking directly into the camera and pouring out their soul. The part you are talking about is an extension of that - this is coming from the heart.

In terms of having a theatre, more footage etc... so it's less of a 'shock,' these are all mistakes. The ending was problematic because of the lack of footage.

And trimming coming up - that's a clear sentiment and I think I can get it down to 7 minutes. When the sound is cleaned up and music is added, I am hoping that will also add to it. I may have to be really cunning with the music for this reason or possibly get someone in who is cunning with music.
 
Last edited:
gorillaonabike said:
The sound, colouring and a couple of edits need to be fixed but this is a rough cut so I am more concerned about the artistic side.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to critique the sound because you've stated that you haven't started with the sound yet and you obviously realize it needs quite a bit of work.

I just wanted to comment on the statement I've quoted above though. Perhaps it was just a "slip of the tongue" and I'm preaching to the converted but generally I find this approach to sound to be quite prevalent and one of the most obvious differences between indy filmmakers and the most talented/respected/successful directors. Cleaning up the dialogue, cutting in room tones, Foley/sound FX and balancing it all out is usually taught/viewed as largely a technical exercise. However, this is not how the top filmmakers approach sound. Good sound design is about manipulating the audience's perception of the energy, pace, continuity, emotional impact and even the overall meaning of every scene and the film overall. So while sound design incorporates many technical facets, it is primarily an artistic endeavour. These artistic abilities of sound design (pacing, continuity, emotional impact, etc.) are obviously going to affect the picture editing process but the difficulty for the filmmaker is that the editing has to be carried out before the sound design is available. Part of what makes a good director is therefore the knowledge and ability to appreciate how sound design can be employed and how it can help and inform the editing process. Obviously to gain this knowledge/skill requires experience and initially a conscious effort on the part of the director/filmmaker to study films specifically with the intention of learning how sound design has been employed by others.

I don't want to derail this thread, I just thought it might be useful for you to start to consider the artistic contribution of sound design while you're still at the rough cut stage.

G
 
AudioPostExpert said:
I'm not going to critique the sound because you've stated that you haven't started with the sound yet and you obviously realize it needs quite a bit of work.

I just wanted to comment on the statement I've quoted above though. Perhaps it was just a "slip of the tongue" and I'm preaching to the converted but generally I find this approach to sound to be quite prevalent and one of the most obvious differences between indy filmmakers and the most talented/respected/successful directors. Cleaning up the dialogue, cutting in room tones, Foley/sound FX and balancing it all out is usually taught/viewed as largely a technical exercise. However, this is not how the top filmmakers approach sound. Good sound design is about manipulating the audience's perception of the energy, pace, continuity, emotional impact and even the overall meaning of every scene and the film overall. So while sound design incorporates many technical facets, it is primarily an artistic endeavour. These artistic abilities of sound design (pacing, continuity, emotional impact, etc.) are obviously going to affect the picture editing process but the difficulty for the filmmaker is that the editing has to be carried out before the sound design is available. Part of what makes a good director is therefore the knowledge and ability to appreciate how sound design can be employed and how it can help and inform the editing process. Obviously to gain this knowledge/skill requires experience and initially a conscious effort on the part of the director/filmmaker to study films specifically with the intention of learning how sound design has been employed by others.

I don't want to derail this thread, I just thought it might be useful for you to start to consider the artistic contribution of sound design while you're still at the rough cut stage.

G
Click to expand...

Understood and thanks! It's a good point and taken on board. Coincidentally, I have a sound designer who owes me a significant favour - a favour I will remind him of very shortly... However, I think I will save the major favour for my second 'major' short which is going to be more complex, difficult and with fight scenes. It is still artistic and will carry artistically-driven themes but at the same time, it will be making its point through violent themes. This violence will unfortunately make it more accessible.

When I first started out, I thought the picture would be the trickiest bit. In fact, it is the easiest. Sound is mind-bendingly complex and needs to be treated with a lot of respect as the smallest changes make the largest differences.

Recently, I did some stuff on the short of a feature film director. He was creating a short which he spent around $15k USD to take out to investors in order to raise cash. He had a Red, an underwater 5D, an Arri for one shot etc... and he completely disregarded the sound. I talked with him about it and discovered how little he knew / understood. Although the visuals are great, the lack of attention to the sound has really detracted from the quality of the short.

On a completely different note - how did you find opus no.1? What are your thoughts? The comments immediately lead me to think I need to do a lot of trimming...
 
gorillaonabike said:
...my second 'major' short which is going to be more complex, difficult and with fight scenes.
Click to expand...

I enjoy fight scenes because thery're such a challenge. Unless the director is looking for something antonymic or abstract, just recreating reality isn't going to work, something far more creative and imaginative is going to be needed.

gorillaonabike said:
When I first started out, I thought the picture would be the trickiest bit. In fact, it is the easiest. Sound is mind-bendingly complex and needs to be treated with a lot of respect as the smallest changes make the largest differences.
Click to expand...

Even after twenty odd years doing this job I'm still learning all the time and still discovering aspects in which I feel I'm little better than a beginner. It's this though that has kept me so fascinated and enthusiastic about sound design for all these years.

gorillaonabike said:
He had a Red, an underwater 5D, an Arri for one shot etc... and he completely disregarded the sound. I talked with him about it and discovered how little he knew / understood. Although the visuals are great, the lack of attention to the sound has really detracted from the quality of the short.
Click to expand...

Except at the high end of the business (and obviously with individual exceptions) this attitude/approach to sound is surprisingly common. I've visited/lectured at several prestigious film schools and without exception have been absolutely gob-smacked at how badly they teach sound.

Beyond the fact there are so many directors/filmmakers out there who just can't be bothered, those who are bothered have to face a catch 22 situation. To really understand what's possible with good sound design you really need to spend time working with a top sound designer but to work with a top sound designer you need a serious budget and you're not going to get a serious budget unless you're already an experienced and accomplished director/filmmaker!

gorillaonabike said:
On a completely different note - how did you find opus no.1? What are your thoughts? The comments immediately lead me to think I need to do a lot of trimming...
Click to expand...

You've got the basis of a powerful and poignant film in my opinion. I like the concept of how you cut from one interviewee to another but there is obviously a fair bit of tightening up and final polishing to be done with the editing. In one or two instances I thought the framing was a little off-putting. There are also one or two parts where the pace and emotional impact dip a little too much for my taste and at these points you have the choice of taking the artistically simple route of just trimming the scene down or the more challenging but potentially more powerful and emotional route of using sound design to alter the perception of pace and emphasise what is going on inside the head of the interviewee. I'm not sure I would be looking at having a music score per se, personally I think it would work particularly well to use something which blurs the line between music and sound design. Overall I like it, I think it's got a lot of potential and to be honest, because it offers such a good opportunity for creative and effective sound design, I would have quite fancied doing the sound design on this one myself!

G
 
Really cool! You did a good job, I enjoyed watching it even though it is a rough cut. You know what you need to do for the most part. Trust your instincts, they seem to be leading you in the right direction. I especially enjoyed the transitions. Anyway, as you know sound is what needs a lot of work. I would really focus on the vocals and keep them at a consistent volume throughout, some need to be much louder. I don't think it necessarily needs much if any music to it. Some more sound effects might help enhance it. Might I also suggest a bigger opening. Maybe something with the four squares and some good-looking titles, that's also where some mood-setting music would help. Overall, you have already made something good out of this so try not to worry. Good luck!
 
Yeah it's pretty good for a rough cut. After all the interviews are over though, and they are talking to each other, it felt kind like that could use a recut for sure. And some pops in the sound but that should be able to be smoothed, no problem.

I thought some of the shots were too close like the boxer does go out of frame a lot with the top half of his head, and his punching was shot real close. Sometimes this is good sometimes not, and it mostly comes down to personal taste.

I also noticed that the motorcycle shots look sped up to make them look like they are going faster than they were. That's good, but it would look more real to viewers if you added motion blur to it as well!
 
harmonica44 said:
Yeah it's pretty good for a rough cut. After all the interviews are over though, and they are talking to each other, it felt kind like that could use a recut for sure. And some pops in the sound but that should be able to be smoothed, no problem.

I thought some of the shots were too close like the boxer does go out of frame a lot with the top half of his head, and his punching was shot real close. Sometimes this is good sometimes not, and it mostly comes down to personal taste.

I also noticed that the motorcycle shots look sped up to make them look like they are going faster than they were. That's good, but it would look more real to viewers if you added motion blur to it as well!
Click to expand...

Thanks for the critique! The motorcycle shots aren't sped up. They're all shot at speed. It's a trackday - a real trackday at a sh!tty little track in the UK but the only place I could shoot at without massive insurance etc... If the bike looks like it's going past at 100mph+, it is because the bike is travelling at 100mph+ It's all real (reality is all I could afford...)

As for the ending, unfortunately we didn't get enough footage... This is something I've learned. I need more footage because most of the footage I used was 'unexpected.' The shots I thought would be amazing were terrible and vice versa except for the dancing.
 
AudioPostExpert said:
I enjoy fight scenes because thery're such a challenge. Unless the director is looking for something antonymic or abstract, just recreating reality isn't going to work, something far more creative and imaginative is going to be needed.



Even after twenty odd years doing this job I'm still learning all the time and still discovering aspects in which I feel I'm little better than a beginner. It's this though that has kept me so fascinated and enthusiastic about sound design for all these years.



Except at the high end of the business (and obviously with individual exceptions) this attitude/approach to sound is surprisingly common. I've visited/lectured at several prestigious film schools and without exception have been absolutely gob-smacked at how badly they teach sound.

Beyond the fact there are so many directors/filmmakers out there who just can't be bothered, those who are bothered have to face a catch 22 situation. To really understand what's possible with good sound design you really need to spend time working with a top sound designer but to work with a top sound designer you need a serious budget and you're not going to get a serious budget unless you're already an experienced and accomplished director/filmmaker!



You've got the basis of a powerful and poignant film in my opinion. I like the concept of how you cut from one interviewee to another but there is obviously a fair bit of tightening up and final polishing to be done with the editing. In one or two instances I thought the framing was a little off-putting. There are also one or two parts where the pace and emotional impact dip a little too much for my taste and at these points you have the choice of taking the artistically simple route of just trimming the scene down or the more challenging but potentially more powerful and emotional route of using sound design to alter the perception of pace and emphasise what is going on inside the head of the interviewee. I'm not sure I would be looking at having a music score per se, personally I think it would work particularly well to use something which blurs the line between music and sound design. Overall I like it, I think it's got a lot of potential and to be honest, because it offers such a good opportunity for creative and effective sound design, I would have quite fancied doing the sound design on this one myself!

G
Click to expand...

Thanks and I would've loved you to do the sound design on this too! Unfortunately, I am cashless... :(

I think the short won't be powerful enough because I don't have enough understanding of sound to really power through the changes. I have some ideas - 'heartbeats' in a couple of places, stereo effects, crowd noises, silence etc... but these are just random tinkering.

And as a note, we have already shot a trailer for another short with a little fighting in as an experiment for the next 'full' short. It's tricky - really tricky to make it real but I'm working on it.

Also, the next short will be 'arthouse' but probably in a more accessible way. I wanted the first short to be more 'me.'
 
blakehamiltonfilms said:
Really cool! You did a good job, I enjoyed watching it even though it is a rough cut. You know what you need to do for the most part. Trust your instincts, they seem to be leading you in the right direction. I especially enjoyed the transitions. Anyway, as you know sound is what needs a lot of work. I would really focus on the vocals and keep them at a consistent volume throughout, some need to be much louder. I don't think it necessarily needs much if any music to it. Some more sound effects might help enhance it. Might I also suggest a bigger opening. Maybe something with the four squares and some good-looking titles, that's also where some mood-setting music would help. Overall, you have already made something good out of this so try not to worry. Good luck!
Click to expand...

Really appreciate your thoughts. Some interesting ideas around this and I wish I could execute a couple of them. There is a lack of footage. The shoot was so fast and almost 'too' organised. What I mean is we had a tight shotlist, went in, did what we had to in the time available and got the hell out. It would've been so much better if we had let the camera roll in certain circumstances and just picked up random footage.

In addition, it just needed a few more shots to make it work. Nothing much more than just a few, dinky little shots but hey... hindsight's a terrible thing!

And thanks for your encouragement. At this stage, I have no idea if it's a good short or not. It's so arthouse, personal, weird and individual that I don't know if anyone really 'gets' it.... But I'll complete it using some of the suggestion here and see what the festivals think about it!
 
I just watched it on my laptop, on the roof of my house, so I'll be honest and say that some of the audio was completely lost to me.

@GOAB: You have nothing to be insecure about- the short is very accomplished, well made, well acted and with a clear stylistic identity. However the final cut ends up looking, this is definitely going to be a very good short film.

These are my criticisms (constructive and pointless):

There are two many interview subjects. If it weren't for the ending then I'd say ditch the motorcycle rider and the singer and just use the first two. They provide enough of a contrast to one another and are the best shot and acted segments (who is the actress playing the dancer?). It might be impractical but you're going to have to shave a couple of minutes off it because, let's face it, it's too long. My recommendation, brutal as it sounds, is to ditch the last two interviews.

Other than that though I don't have much else to say. Why the aspect ratio? That won't be there for the finished version, will it?

It feels very theatrical (which is a good and a bad thing) sort of like when they filmed all those wonderful Alan Bennett monologues with people like Maggie Smith and Julie Walters. They have this great, albeit slightly affected, eloquence that is always interesting to watch.
 
NickClapper said:
I just watched it on my laptop, on the roof of my house, so I'll be honest and say that some of the audio was completely lost to me.

@GOAB: You have nothing to be insecure about- the short is very accomplished, well made, well acted and with a clear stylistic identity. However the final cut ends up looking, this is definitely going to be a very good short film.

These are my criticisms (constructive and pointless):

There are two many interview subjects. If it weren't for the ending then I'd say ditch the motorcycle rider and the singer and just use the first two. They provide enough of a contrast to one another and are the best shot and acted segments (who is the actress playing the dancer?). It might be impractical but you're going to have to shave a couple of minutes off it because, let's face it, it's too long. My recommendation, brutal as it sounds, is to ditch the last two interviews.

Other than that though I don't have much else to say. Why the aspect ratio? That won't be there for the finished version, will it?

It feels very theatrical (which is a good and a bad thing) sort of like when they filmed all those wonderful Alan Bennett monologues with people like Maggie Smith and Julie Walters. They have this great, albeit slightly affected, eloquence that is always interesting to watch.
Click to expand...

How are you? Appreciate the critique and the encouragement, particularly because this is my first short and therefore I have no idea what I'm doing! I didn't want to copy anyone and just ploughed ahead with my own style hoping it might work and just keeping my fingers crossed. It might look OK to me, but hell, my own sense of fashion looks good to me and that's definitely terrible!

You've hit on some elements I am wrestling with - head on. The 'interviews' are tricky because I can now see they cross the line between art and boredom. Sure, the four characters are all 'me' and each brings different elements but the elements are not different enough, partly because they are all 'me'. Through the comments on this thread, I am really beginning to understand this and need to use sound for dramatic purposes to create / build / maintain tension and interest as well as getting the shears out.

As a note, the actress playing the dancer might be on the edge of your consciousness - you will certainly have seen her on daytime TV and possibly in magazines but primarily in advertising and she is the face of a certain, well-known brand. Also, a couple of the others are primarily theatrically-driven and one is a jobbing actor who has played all over the West End but has now bitten the bullet and wants to get a showreel together. I'm lucky to have accessed 'real' talent which is great for a no budget short. They wanted to do it because they liked it on paper whereas they had no idea that I was a complete, clueless novice!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top