New Film Feedback

[aden]

Hello fellow filmmakers.
I'm loving Film riot and I see this becoming a very strong film maker community. That's why I'm turning to the forums for constructive criticism from a film we have just released online.

First off, note that this film was made for the 48 Hour Film Project (http://www.48hourfilm.com/about/history.php)
So we had 48 hours to write, shoot, and deliver this movie to them for the competition. Film couldn't be more than 8 minutes with credits.

Would love to hear any and all feedback no matter how brutal.
Note: at the time I think only the first episode of film riot was out when we filmed, so no cool special effects were used.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97UzelF-Nrg

[aden]

So an interesting question has arisen to me. Where on the web can I go to get a film reviewed/ critiqued? I'm seeing view counts go up on the post but what I'm really interested in is what people really think.
This was part of the St. Louis 48 Hour Film Project a coupe weeks ago. Well we didn't win anything and the competition provides no feedback either. So besides my own friends saying great job I'm at a lose as to where to go.

[ronnzor]

The only reason I didn't make a critique post was because I wasn't sure what I would say. I'm not going to comment on technical limitations, because I assume this was a no-budget film.

The first thing that really leaps into my head as a poor decision was to use effects on the text that appeared in the film. Words tend to lose all impact and importance once you have swiping lights or spiraling effects applied to them. If I can't read the words right away, there is a problem.

Obviously the film is of a very amateur design from a direction and writing standpoint. I'm assuming it's supposed to be a comedy, but the choices on the camera placement and movement feel very stagnant and stale. Having still shots of people talking doesn't usually work very well in a comedic context (Clerks being a good example of an exception, just because the writing was strong enough to pull it through). Being more adventurous with the camera helps, take more chances and be willing to toss the tripod aside.

While I could tell it was to be funny, I didn't actually find any particular part funny. I've played games like that in cars, and I've seen people get questioned by police for it, but it seems like the kind of thing that you have to be physically invested in for the comedy to come through.

That's all I have at the moment.
-Josh-

[aden]

Thanks ronnzor (Josh),

You are correct with the no budget assumption. I would be interested in what you would have to say as far as technical limitations are concerned.

On that note:
Basically our group is setup just like the Film Riot guys.
We are using the same camera the Canon XL-H1, Final Cut Pro, and Adobe Aftereffects. From what I've read that's the same. I'm limited to the stock lens that comes with the H1 and they are not I know. One thing I'm currently looking into.

But again thanks for commenting.

[tokenuser]

Don't focus on the technology.

If this was a technology showcase then you might have some merit, but I suspect the issue isn't so much technical prowess as compelling content.

I often say that it doesn't matter how smart you are if you are incapable of communicating it to others. From a film making perspective, the flip of that argument is that it does matter how good the delivery is if the content is not compelling.

The Blair Witch Project was not exactly a technological marvel, but it had an original and compelling story line and was produced on a shoe string.

Technically - your film was OK. No real criticism there. You were working within your constraints. A different lens would have made little difference.

Structurally - it just didn't grab me. If you are male, you have 30 seconds to hook someone with your pitch. If you are female, you can add 10-15 seconds, and if you have an interesting (but clear) accent another 10-15. If you haven't grabbed someones attention in that time span, you've lost them, and I am afraid thats what happened to me with your film.

Looking at your film in comparison to the one that won, how do you feel they stacked up? What was it that you think made their film better than yours?

[spzshipfilms]

You know what I did chuckle a couple of times :) I suck at criticism movies in text form so I won't attempt that. There we're a couple of shots I liked. What I missed in it the most was more shots. for instance when they all walk to the car I wanted to see a closer shot of them getting into the car and so on.
The script probably could have used more adjustments and so on but it's about the things you learn when it comes to these kind of projects.
So was it the best short I've seen? No but I'm sure you learned tons by doing a 48h project.
Me and two friends did that the beginning of this year and we did a short mockumentary (you check check it on my Vimeo page, it's in Swedish so I probably wouldn't make that much sense).

/Danny

[aden]

Thanks guys,

I don't really want to comment in defense because this is exactly what I'm looking for. Good honest comments.
But I did bring up the technical aspect in my last post because I was trying to bring in the comparison with Film Riot. We are on their forums.

So to keep things on track. Had we broke someones arm apar (http://revision3.com/filmriot/batman?rec=true)t at the beginning of the film would we have drawn in more attention? Rather then having a cop ask "Why were you naked?"

I am concerned with tokenuser: "You were working within your constraints." and ronnzor: "I assume this was a no-budget film."
What makes the film give you these assumptions? Is it beyond the film? Meaning I've freely put it out on youtube? Or is it in the film? Acting, dialogue, lighting, or sound?

"What I missed in it the most was more shots. for instance when they all walk to the car I wanted to see a closer shot of them getting into the car and so on." I did have a shot of the car pulling out of the drive way but cut it because I didn't think it added anything to the film.

"Looking at your film in comparison to the one that won, how do you feel they stacked up? What was it that you think made their film better than yours?" I did not see the winning film from our city yet. They did not screen at the same time but I will as soon as it's release on DVD.
My team and I did however do this comparison with last years winners.

"The script probably could have used more adjustments" Here's the big shocker. There was no script. It was a true life story of the kid in the main role. He told us the story and we just started rolling. The only thing we changed was the fact that the people in the backseat were women as apposed to dudes.
On note with that it wasn't my call in the fact that a script wasn't made. Personally I wish there had been. So does that show in the film?

Thanks guys I'm loving this and passing on all the messages to my crew.

[ronnzor]

No, breaking an arm in the beginning would not have made sense in this film within the context. I will tell you that if you continue to try to stack your work against anyone else's work you will consistently be disappointed in your specific shortcomings. Everybody has strengths and weaknesses, find your strengths and work to make your weaknesses less pronounced.

Take inspiration from other things, but be unique as a filmmaker. The effects work that the Film Riot guys do are great, but don't feel the need to toss them in at random points through the film. They are designed to work in the context in which they are presented.

As for things that lead people to believe something is a no-budget work, poor acting, and lack of proper lighting and sound work are the major ones that leap off the screen.

[tokenuser]

On note with that it wasn't my call in the fact that a script wasn't made. Personally I wish there had been. So does that show in the film?Yeah, I'm afraid so. Adlib in front of a camera is risky. It can be great - the greatest comedic monologues on film were adlibs. It takes timing and delivery to pull off ... and I think thats where you were missing out. A script would have made the flow from shot to shot tighter and given you a known endpoint, instead of one that you would get there with eventually. Sometimes its about the journey, but often you need it mapped out.

I have to say, I think you did a great job and its not all negative, but you were after a critique, so thats what I was contributing.

[scoobydiesel]

I found it fine, Not something i see winning but not something that would be boo'd at you know?

The audio kept bugging me with the cop, going outside and what not.

The story was fine but you didnt hit the sticky note to make me care I guess.

I suck at this lol.