watch Casting Call

[shawnmelton]

Critique.

I've scratched together a page of critique to review my thoughts...

Find it here: http://www.batterystudio.com/indietalk
Please excuse all my type-o's.

Let me know what you think.

Shawn.

 

[SpiffyMarc]

I've scratched together a page of critique to review my thoughts...

Find it here: http://www.batterystudio.com/indietalk
Please excuse all my type-o's.

Let me know what you think.

Shawn.

Shawn,

Hi. My name is Marc Chambers, and I was the editor for Casting Call. I also directed the photography for several scenes.

I've got to say, I definitely dug your critique of the flick. As a self-proclaimed artist, I love having an impact on people with my art. Whether the result was intentional or not, someone paying attention and responding, rather than simply ignoring you and your creations, is always very encouraging and rewarding.

I promised myself I wouldn't respond to each line item, but I will say this -- your discussion of parallax, while seemingly warranted, is a style issue to me, not a technical one. While I do not particularly like this angle, and kick myself for not requesting coverage or a tighter angle here, a decision was made to shoot it this way, and it was not just because that's where the camera would fit. This applies to the mirror shot as well -- no shots were done simply because that's how the camera would fit into the room. Every shot was considered and done on purpose. Shooting certain angles simply because "The Five C's of Cinematography" says they can convey a certain idea isn't something I typically do. It's art -- experiment! Have fun!

(Reading your critique again has provided me with one additional irritant -- the unnecessary, possibly condescending use of "industry terms." The actual "footage" of the movie wasn't 1:30, that was its running time. The actual footage seems, to me anyway, to refer to everything that was shot, which was about three and a half hours. Just had to note that -- sorry!!)

In closing, again, I sincerely appreciate your critique of the film. I always say, if I can't be the best, I want to be the worst, just so I get noticed. I'm not saying that we were the worst by any means, but, I'd rather get criticism of our style and technique than no reaction at all.

If you're interested, I'd love to see a critique of a film I wrote and produced. You can find it here.

Thanks,

Marc Chambers
Editor, "Casting Call"

 

[shawnmelton]

Footage.

Marc,

Point taken, and I apoligize... I meant running time (changed it on the page already).
I meant no harm by my verbage and I certainly didn't mean to sound condescending.

When you talk about the intentional style of the shots, could you define that style?
You probably have great reasons for them, but what I see (with my over-critical eye) are angles that seems poorly planned.
Did you storyboard? Just curious.

I keep seeing fluffy critiques - which makes me feel like people aren't taking this stuff seriously (as a craft). These groups poured tons of time into these flicks, and I think they deserve a good hard review.

Side note: you shot 3.5 hours of footage?
Holy crap - that's a 140:1 ratio of deliverable footage. How much footage were you left with after the hurricane?

I know we are all just trying to tell stories by way of an unforgiving medium.
It's a hell of a ride, ain't it?

When you've had enough of my crap, tell me to get lost. I can take it.

Shawn.

 

[CootDog]

Shawn,

Wow I don't know if that's a critique or an obsessive ploy to try and get others to vote for the film you like, who knows. I do thank you for taking the time you did to do what you did. I'm not going to go over every point that you had. There are reasons certain shots are the way they are.

Effects were not able to be done on the scenes due to absolutely no time. In fact, I just got the tapes today so I can do the VFX work. Your Parallax problem in that scene is appreciated, but with all the effects you would have seen on that shot, you wouldn't have said anything. That angle and off kiltered lines are purposefully there because that will be footage from a "security camera". I've never seen a video feed from a security camera that had straight lines. Hence, to make it more realistic, make it more like a security camera.

I differ from your craziness feelings about centering the subject. Centering is what every person with a home video camera does. I don't like it. I did it for some of the scenes of "Scarred for Life" and won't do it again. That's a personal preference not a rule.

I really love the comments about contrast. It's something that we'll definitely mess with in the final version of the short. It was always going to be colorized and crimped but due to time and logistical constraints we did what we did with what we had time to do. I'm sure you may have heard a little about that.

I saved your page in case you take it down, so I can go back to your points when we get back to doing post on the film. Right now, everyone is still trying to get their lives back in order.

And no, we don't want you to get lost... We welcome your over critical response... That's how people learn right!

 

[Spatula]

Wow- if you find the time, I'd love a similar critique of "Bloody Hell"!!! I was fairly happy with how our shoot went (considering me, the director, arrives late on set because of an "alarm clock failure"), but I totally agree with you about cranking down and getting an honest critique!

I do think you're being a little harsh, though. Some of these movies are either people's first attempts making movies, or at least first forays into the genre of horror. When I review these films, I take into account how well developed my first shorts were, and the endless sea of crap out there on the web. Considering some of the stuff I have sat through- this group of 10 films is pretty good in comparison.

A lot of the filmmakers are aware of thier major faults- so it's of no use to dwell on them. I usually find it more helpful to accentuate the positive aspects and make suggestions as to how the negative aspects can be improved. This competition in paritcular is a learning tool, as well as a motivation to just go out there and "do it". I know I had lots of trouble just due to the deadline as well- my composer/DoP sent me the score literally the night before the deadline... my editing program crashed about 15-20 times during the editing... the DoP shot half of our footage on 24p advanced, and I shot the other half in 29.97 (BAH!)... point being- even though this is not my first short, per se, it was an oppourtunity to face more production challenges (so as to be more prepared next time). But then again, compared to a hurricane, that's small beans. (still, to be fair, everyone must be judged according to the final product at the deadline!)

Most people have even asked for a hard critique- I mention again, I would LOVE one- so feel free to go ahead- but it's important to remember that many people here are pursuing film as a hobby, side-projects, etc.
I myself hope to be able to make a living of indie-films one day, but there is a REALLY huge learning curve to overcome. Film involves so many aspects, it's incredible. Most people try to build on one aspect at a time- my first short I focused on content and editing, my next on pacing/cinematography/sound, and Bloody Hell on acting/non-linear story/gore. Next short, I will try and pull all the elements together. I, as well as other people, would love to know what ares need improvement, and what areas seem good enough to get by with!

So to conclude (this wordy post), feel free to give out the critiques people are craving, but do try to sound like you are trying to be helpful, versus condescending. I thought the review on Casting Call was very well done- a bit biting- but that's good. If you get the time, throw me your worst!!!

 

[bird]

I've scratched together a page of critique to review my thoughts...

Find it here: http://www.batterystudio.com/indietalk
Please excuse all my type-o's.

Let me know what you think.

Shawn.

Holy sh*t, Mr. Melton, that is quite the effort in analysis! Will you be devoting a page to the breakdown of ALL the entries. I think your critical eye, as well as everyone else's is appreciated but perhaps a little tact...I'm assuming you are part of the 'Talking Dead' posse as you provided the much appreciated mov file....and since 'Casting Call' and 'Talking Dead' seem to be running head to head. perhaps you could have saved this indepth for after the competition has ended.

I may not appreciate some of the tactics used to garner votes but we are not going to start placing qualifiers on who can vote or not..

And of course we want you to stay...we are here to help each other

PS and I just have to add that this rate the thread really gets on my nerves, it's like propaganda, this was a 5 star then a 3 star (sour grapes)

 

[CootDog]

PS and I just have to add that this rate the thread really gets on my nerves, it's like propaganda, this was a 5 star then a 3 star (sour grapes)

Bird, For some reason I don't understand your PS. Are you saying that this thread is getting on your nerves? If so, why? 5 star 3star sour grapes, Please explain.

 

[Spatula]

Bird, For some reason I don't understand your PS. Are you saying that this thread is getting on your nerves? If so, why? 5 star 3star sour grapes, Please explain.

I believe she is referring to the "Rate this thread" option. Obviously, somebody voted the thread highly, and then someone else came and knocked it down- the thread rating tool is not for that use- it's to determine what would be a helpful/good thread versus a detrimental/negative thread.
Generally, you would use the fuction to rate a thread containing valuable information highly, and one filled with mis-information and slander with a lower rating.

 

[shawnmelton]

Votes?

Great - so much to discuss.
I'll be brief - sorry if this has turned sour for anyone. Definitely not my intention.

I started my critique on this because it's in the running. I'm creating a similar page on "Talking Dead" right now. It'll be posted soon.

Quote from CootDog:
I am not a lighting guy but I'd like you to expand on what you mean specifically.

(I may have run farther than CootDog asked me to on this one... Sorry. Since he asked, I responded. )

I'm assuming you are part of the 'Talking Dead' posse as you provided the much appreciated mov file....

Clarification - I didn't help with the "Talking Dead" concept, , preperation, shoot or editing.
I posted it to their website for them as I am their webmaster. That's it.
I did help concept, prep (a little), shoot (a little) with "No Strings Attached."
It was Boz's baby, and was executed his way.

I don't know if that's a critique or an obsessive ploy to try and get others to vote for the film you like.

I may not appreciate some of the tactics used to garner votes

I don't really care how this ends up - as there is no benifit for me. I think people should vote for whichever film impresses them and tells the story effectively. I was actually leaning towards "Annoying Brian" because it's so frickin funny, and I love it!

Effects were not able to be done on the scenes due to absolutely no time.....
That angle and off kiltered lines are purposefully there because that will be footage from a "security camera".

Since it doesn't look like security camera footage, how would I ever know that?
You seem to have lots of "my footage is distroyed so I couldn't do this" and "we ran out of time, so this isn't how we wanted it" replies.
I can truly appreciate - and I fully understand your lose. That TRULY sucks... but I'm just reviewing the film I'm seeing - not the potential film you keep describing. They seem like 2 different animals. Again - I'm sorry for your lose down there. I'd love to see the finished product.

I differ from your craziness feelings about centering the subject....
That's a personal preference not a rule.

My comment says - "side note" - not "rule." Feel free to differ.

Will you be devoting a page to the breakdown of ALL the entries.

I just don't have time to do them all.

I'm sorry to anyone who finds this thread annoying - I can definitely hold off with any more commentary until after the voting.
Like I said, just let me know if you don't want to hear it anymore. I know my critiques are biting - I've never been soft-spoken. But I welcome it just like I give it. If we don't sharpen each other, we'll never make it out there.

 

[CootDog]

Like I said, just let me know if you don't want to hear it anymore. I know my critiques are biting - I've never been soft-spoken. But I welcome it just like I give it. If we don't sharpen each other, we'll never make it out there.

I totally agree! If we don't tell each other what's right or wrong how can we progress and become better at this?

About your critiques biting and not being soft, I'd rather have the exactness that you did on the website you created.

I have always said "It's better to be cut from a sharp knife than a dull one. It heals faster."

So even if this hurts or bites, it's brief. Take a deep breath and absorb the information. Use it or discard it, but don't ignore it.

 

[John@Bophe]

Shawn -- My experience with this board is that the members appreciate criticism...as long as not hurtful or mean-spirited. So far, your comments have been specific and constructive, so you should not shy away from offering your opinions.

One thing I would like to point out, though (to everyone, really) -- we should remember that some filmmakers opt to "break" or "ignore" filmmaking rules for stylistic reasons. There seems to be an accepted standard set of rules for making a commercially viable film. If your goal is to make a commercial success, you would do well to study and follow these rules. If your goal is to make a movie that personally satisfies your sense of style, then the same rules need not apply. You are always free to make the movie your way.

People may not always like the movie you make ... but that doesn't mean it is wrong ... only different.

 

[bird]

I believe she is referring to the "Rate this thread" option. Obviously, somebody voted the thread highly, and then someone else came and knocked it down- the thread rating tool is not for that use- it's to determine what would be a helpful/good thread versus a detrimental/negative thread.
Generally, you would use the fuction to rate a thread containing valuable information highly, and one filled with mis-information and slander with a lower rating.

Exactly! I apologize if I wasn't clear.

Everyone appreciates constructive criticism, I just question Mr. Melton's choice of (the only critical) 'example' and it's timing, then his disclaimer regarding his lack of time to give the other entries equal critique time. If I had voted for either of the frontrunners, I think I'd rescind my vote for 'bad sportsmenship'.

ps-I just noticed this was my 666th post....

 

[shawnmelton]

Repeat

Like I said, I have nothing to gain.
I wasn't plotting and scheming to drop a bomb on anyone, just offering my opinions.

Also, I am working up a critique of "Talking Dead" - the other front runner. I just don't have time to review them ALL.

SM.

 

[dylan61]

If I had voted for either of the frontrunners, I think I'd rescind my vote for 'bad sportsmenship'.

That would suck, considering I haven't said anything about any of this. So much for trying to stay out of it I guess.

 

[CootDog]

Timing is everything

Also, I am working up a critique of "Talking Dead" - the other front runner.
SM.

I wonder why this isn't up yet Maybe out of convenience With only one and a half days left to vote I guess it won't matter

While I love the critique and the site of examples explaining what you think is wrong, I am just wondering if the timeing of mine being up early and the other one being up late has mal. intent. I don't know?? But Friday morning before the big push it was put up and now it's Sunday and still nothing. I guess you all can make your own decisions.

I also find it curious that the only posts by Mr. Melton have been about helping "Talking Dead" and well if you're reading this thread, you know what has been said here.

 

[indietalk]

I also find it curious that the only posts by Mr. Melton have been about helping "Talking Dead" and well if you're reading this thread, you know what has been said here.

You are correct. shawnmelton and dylan61 are using the same IP address and the same DSL subscriber. There are also three more, liquidrogue, GirlsGripToo, SteadySam. All 5 voted for this film. Four votes removed.

One vote per IP. If this happens again, the film will be disqualified.

Let's keep this thing fair folks, or there isn't going to be another contest.

 

[CootDog]

Well there were also some people using the same computer to vote for my film as well. I don't know how many, but I think you caught them and removed the votes.

To stop the contreversy and do it politically, removing the "People's Choice Award" must have been the only option by management. Do I like it, ofcourse not because I was in the lead, at least the last time I checked.

I definitely do not want the ITOOFC's to end. If this is what has to happen in order for there to be an ITOOFC#5 then so be it.

Maybe some official rules should be drawn up if there is another people's choice.

Since there is no more People's Choice award, does that mean the poster contest is removed as well?

 

[skankis]

wow

Didnt realize people took this contest seriously enough to cheat on it. Crazy stuff. Very interesting observations there coot dog. I still like his review though even it its sole purpose was to bring down your votes.

 

[CootDog]

I agree. I wonder if he backed out before or after the People's Choice Award was removed. I think that we could have won the award at least we were in the lead the last time I checked, before it was canceled.

 

[skankis]

yea

probably after, when he found out he got busted
when was it canceled? isnt it supposed to end tommorow anyway?
was there more multiple ips found to be used under the casting call votes after the first initial one from the people using the same comp at the cafe?
whatevers clever. Maybe another award will come your way.