Right.
I've noticed a lot of new members on here, so I hope a few of you can take the time out to let me know what you think to this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHF32Rdy5Fg
It's the opening of our new flick, 'Monsters'.
It begins as a light-hearted teen comedy, but an unexpected twist will see things getting pretty dark by the end.
The plot's pretty complex and hard to explain, though I will go into it if anyone's interested?? However, it's not important to this scene as this is just establishing the location and characters.
Enjoy, please let me know what you think.
'MONSTERS': New film
Moderator: Moderator Team
-
Kentertainment
- Forum Addict
- Posts: 799
- Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 1:32 am
- Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Overal me likey, you've got a great opener just don't give it away with some slow paced story, it'll be hard for people to watch the whole thing as I've learned with people here. The cinematography, camera work, and editing is the key elements that stick out and it's all done beautifully; it's paced well and the framing of shots and the way you used them to capture the city was great so once again great work with that.
My favorite shot was the high shot with stripped shirt walking with the bridge on the left of the frame.
Here are some problems I found:
One problem I would advise doing a reshoot since it is one angle. At minute mark 2:37 as stripped shirt walks across the street you can see some kids in the store watching and pointing at the camera.
Also minute mark 2:40 there is this weird pixalated transition that didn't look that great, it's just cuts then all of the sudden a new transition...or it could have been a dirty tape, I dunno. If it was a dirty tape just cut out where it goes all pixalated
During the dialogue there is a bit of 180 rule breakage but it didn't seem to throw me off at all so no need to do anything there....just letting you know for future dialogue stuff.
disturbing dialogue, haha.
Now I want to see the whole thing.
My favorite shot was the high shot with stripped shirt walking with the bridge on the left of the frame.
Here are some problems I found:
One problem I would advise doing a reshoot since it is one angle. At minute mark 2:37 as stripped shirt walks across the street you can see some kids in the store watching and pointing at the camera.
Also minute mark 2:40 there is this weird pixalated transition that didn't look that great, it's just cuts then all of the sudden a new transition...or it could have been a dirty tape, I dunno. If it was a dirty tape just cut out where it goes all pixalated
During the dialogue there is a bit of 180 rule breakage but it didn't seem to throw me off at all so no need to do anything there....just letting you know for future dialogue stuff.
disturbing dialogue, haha.
Now I want to see the whole thing.
Hey that’s really good liked the opening ,nice song also, it looks like this one is going to be a nice movie cant wait for the hole thing, when it is coming out?
Ou btw that guy in the black and white shirt I presume he doesn’t smoke? It kind of looked like the doesn’t smoke I don’t know how, something about how he is holding the cigar in his hand but maybe I am wrong
Ou btw that guy in the black and white shirt I presume he doesn’t smoke? It kind of looked like the doesn’t smoke I don’t know how, something about how he is holding the cigar in his hand but maybe I am wrong
[url=http://www.mfbb.net/mongoloidbitche/mongoloidbitche.html][img]http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/6712/mbgif2mq0.gif[/img][/url]
-
Lawriejaffa
- Forum Addict
- Posts: 709
- Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 6:38 pm
I'm going to be a little sterner on this film so far (I hope you don't mind!)
I find the beginning montage extremely contrived, and is edited (and shown visually) a style that is extremely dated and redundent. In fact, it is actually a 'joke' among british filmmakers, those UK films that start with student montages in bathrooms, (normally with some East london indy music with a rythmn)
Right away your film will be judged negatively for the level of cliche prevelant at the start... While this is radical (and may seem horrific to consider) i suggest you change the start completely.
While some may recognise this style of opening (and think its commoness and its efficient replication here is a good thing) it is on the contrary a very bad thing.
Then after this cliched opening 'edit' which is smooth but tedious we are thrown into a pretty sloppy 'talking head's soap style convo scene, (with some uncomfortable cutaway shots.) With pretty poor noisy sound (and dialogue that is rather confused.)
If you are not using an external microphone (like a seineisser or anything on a rifle mic etc.) then your sound cannot be recorded via normal cinematography if you are recording on board sound on the camera. (well u can but it will sound cr**)
Note, a 'real' film, will have a wide aspect ratio, making soap talking heads pretty silly looking (as a way of shooting a convo.)
This may sound pretty harsh, and american folks here might struggle to understand the venomous nature of this post. But point is, that clip is indicative of all that is often wrong with British film.
I find the beginning montage extremely contrived, and is edited (and shown visually) a style that is extremely dated and redundent. In fact, it is actually a 'joke' among british filmmakers, those UK films that start with student montages in bathrooms, (normally with some East london indy music with a rythmn)
Right away your film will be judged negatively for the level of cliche prevelant at the start... While this is radical (and may seem horrific to consider) i suggest you change the start completely.
While some may recognise this style of opening (and think its commoness and its efficient replication here is a good thing) it is on the contrary a very bad thing.
Then after this cliched opening 'edit' which is smooth but tedious we are thrown into a pretty sloppy 'talking head's soap style convo scene, (with some uncomfortable cutaway shots.) With pretty poor noisy sound (and dialogue that is rather confused.)
If you are not using an external microphone (like a seineisser or anything on a rifle mic etc.) then your sound cannot be recorded via normal cinematography if you are recording on board sound on the camera. (well u can but it will sound cr**)
Note, a 'real' film, will have a wide aspect ratio, making soap talking heads pretty silly looking (as a way of shooting a convo.)
This may sound pretty harsh, and american folks here might struggle to understand the venomous nature of this post. But point is, that clip is indicative of all that is often wrong with British film.
Thanks for taking the time to comment, guys. I really appreciate it.
I hadn't noticed those kids in the shop, Kenny, so thanks for pointing them out. I'll certainly do something about that. About the pixelated transitiony thing though; I don't know what the hell's up with that. It's just appeared when I uploaded it to YouTube and is not in the full-quality version. The dialogue... Yeah, disturbing, lol. But I hope you enjoyed it??
Djokicko, we've only started the film this week so it might not be finished for a while. Sorry, but keep your eyes peeled for further updates.
Lawriejaffa, thanks alot for what you said. Though I may not agree 100% I appreciate you taking the time out to critique the scene. But if you could just clarify what about the dialogue you found confusing? And which of the cutaways were particularly uncomfortable?
I don't intend to change the opening as the familiarity of it is something we did intentionally. Like I said earlier, the film has a big twist at the start of the second act after which the story becomes much darker. This 'cliched' opening is neccesary, I think, to support audience expectations (lulling them into a false sense of security, kinda) and thus increase the effect of the drastic change in tone later on. If they've seen it all before and think they know what's coming next, the unpredictable events will be all the more shocking? Get me?
It's also pretty important to show how similar these boys are, in the way their routines are nearly identical. That's an important thing to notice which will become integral to the plot.
Thanks again, lads.
Anyone else got anything to add?
I hadn't noticed those kids in the shop, Kenny, so thanks for pointing them out. I'll certainly do something about that. About the pixelated transitiony thing though; I don't know what the hell's up with that. It's just appeared when I uploaded it to YouTube and is not in the full-quality version. The dialogue... Yeah, disturbing, lol. But I hope you enjoyed it??
Djokicko, we've only started the film this week so it might not be finished for a while. Sorry, but keep your eyes peeled for further updates.
Lawriejaffa, thanks alot for what you said. Though I may not agree 100% I appreciate you taking the time out to critique the scene. But if you could just clarify what about the dialogue you found confusing? And which of the cutaways were particularly uncomfortable?
I don't intend to change the opening as the familiarity of it is something we did intentionally. Like I said earlier, the film has a big twist at the start of the second act after which the story becomes much darker. This 'cliched' opening is neccesary, I think, to support audience expectations (lulling them into a false sense of security, kinda) and thus increase the effect of the drastic change in tone later on. If they've seen it all before and think they know what's coming next, the unpredictable events will be all the more shocking? Get me?
It's also pretty important to show how similar these boys are, in the way their routines are nearly identical. That's an important thing to notice which will become integral to the plot.
Thanks again, lads.
Anyone else got anything to add?
So Lawriejaffa, you really saw no merit in those first five minutes at all? Nothing that showed any kind of promise? Not in the dialogue? Acting? Cinematography? Editing? Nothing?
I find that quite stunning, considering that your work pales in comparison in pretty much all those areas. I mean, can you look at your films and honestly say "the dialogue's better" or "the direction is more professional"? Honestly?
I dunno. Maybe you've got some good points to make within your post, but I feel they may have been too heavily suffocated by the wealth of jealously at pulsed from that damning little reply. "Couple of kids who actually have something going for them? Oh no!"
With regards to everyone else, thanks for the comments. Your encouragement is much appreciated and your critisisms will be used creatively. So, yeah, thanks.
Oh, and I'm stripey black and white, and I am a smoker *my sordid shame
* and that is how I smoke. I guess I'm just a weirdo lol.
I find that quite stunning, considering that your work pales in comparison in pretty much all those areas. I mean, can you look at your films and honestly say "the dialogue's better" or "the direction is more professional"? Honestly?
I dunno. Maybe you've got some good points to make within your post, but I feel they may have been too heavily suffocated by the wealth of jealously at pulsed from that damning little reply. "Couple of kids who actually have something going for them? Oh no!"
With regards to everyone else, thanks for the comments. Your encouragement is much appreciated and your critisisms will be used creatively. So, yeah, thanks.
Oh, and I'm stripey black and white, and I am a smoker *my sordid shame
* and that is how I smoke. I guess I'm just a weirdo lol.Ever Listen To K-Billy's Super Sounds of the Seventies?
-
Lawriejaffa
- Forum Addict
- Posts: 709
- Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 6:38 pm
You... honestly want me to answer your rhetorical question? lolSo Lawriejaffa, you really saw no merit in those first five minutes at all? Nothing that showed any kind of promise? Not in the dialogue? Acting? Cinematography? Editing? Nothing?
*shrugs*
Almost everything ive ever posted in this forum are modest student projects or films i did a while ago *shrugs* no shame in it, its a bit of fun. TRY ever finding a post where i link you to a film that i proclaim defines me as the ultimate film maker etc... Ive never suggested that whatever work ive posted before makes my criticism more valid than anyone elses, instead i can rely on the points of my criticism, be it negative or positive.
*breathes deep* Some guys... if some could just grow up a little lol
NGFilms, i will go into a little detail about some advice, however if you can tell me what your technical set up for this production is, that will help.
Pffft.
First things first. If I would have known I was about to watch two emo kids get dressed and then talk about how they 'bust Cherry's'...I would of ran fookin' mile away from that footage. How contrived at trying to show wit.....Badly.
Honestly, your editing is good, it flows, but dialogue and acting are way too tongue in cheek. The direction and the dialogue it's self just literally a bad attempt at you trying to show how you're trying to show these two teens in a normal British society, and my problem with that is it seems way to forced at what your trying to set with your audience, because the dialogue seems, forced, it delivered badly and it comes off bad because it's way too obvious you're tyring to quirky.
Now, I'm not saying you don't have the ability to make this a great film, but from that opener, it wouldn't interest me or keep me amused one bit, and it does pretty much does as you so distinctly put it, show no merit or any kind of promise in dialogue, acting or directing.
Now Lawriejaffa pretty much hit most of it on the head toom even if he is generally a total bell. So quit Bitchin' and accept the criticisms you bell-ends. Oh and Stripey top guy smokes a cigarette like a gay. Nothing' personal.
First things first. If I would have known I was about to watch two emo kids get dressed and then talk about how they 'bust Cherry's'...I would of ran fookin' mile away from that footage. How contrived at trying to show wit.....Badly.
Honestly, your editing is good, it flows, but dialogue and acting are way too tongue in cheek. The direction and the dialogue it's self just literally a bad attempt at you trying to show how you're trying to show these two teens in a normal British society, and my problem with that is it seems way to forced at what your trying to set with your audience, because the dialogue seems, forced, it delivered badly and it comes off bad because it's way too obvious you're tyring to quirky.
Now, I'm not saying you don't have the ability to make this a great film, but from that opener, it wouldn't interest me or keep me amused one bit, and it does pretty much does as you so distinctly put it, show no merit or any kind of promise in dialogue, acting or directing.
Now Lawriejaffa pretty much hit most of it on the head toom even if he is generally a total bell. So quit Bitchin' and accept the criticisms you bell-ends. Oh and Stripey top guy smokes a cigarette like a gay. Nothing' personal.
Sgtpadrino doesn't pose topless on public forums like a bellend.
Two emo kids? Where'd you get that from, Freed? Were they crying or cutting their wrists or.... what? 
And what exactly about the direction and dialogue did you find 'contrived'? It's just two kids having a conversation... We were not trying to be quirky or tongue-in-cheek. Do you and your mates never sit down and talk?
Lawriejaffa, our technical set-up... is not actually that technical at all, lol. We are just shooting on a Sony Handycam - no external mic or anything (sorry, no money) - and editing on Adobe Premiere.
And what exactly about the direction and dialogue did you find 'contrived'? It's just two kids having a conversation... We were not trying to be quirky or tongue-in-cheek. Do you and your mates never sit down and talk?Lawriejaffa, our technical set-up... is not actually that technical at all, lol. We are just shooting on a Sony Handycam - no external mic or anything (sorry, no money) - and editing on Adobe Premiere.
You don't have to cut yourself to be emo, it was just a sarcastic remark on there style.
Now accept the criticisms and stop fighting over it, your opening hasn't impressed, get over it you fanny.
I believe I answered this already sir. You also answer this yourself in your above post.And what exactly about the direction and dialogue did you find 'contrived'?
Yes we do, in fact most of the time we sit around talking about popping cherrys. It's right fun.Do your mates never sit down and talk?
Now accept the criticisms and stop fighting over it, your opening hasn't impressed, get over it you fanny.
Sgtpadrino doesn't pose topless on public forums like a bellend.
Their style? What about their style is 'emo'? I'm still really confused. Besides, what does their 'style' have to do with the scene? It's just how we dress... You mean to say you wouldn't have watched it if you'd known we were going to dress that way? Does it usually put you off films if someone's wearing a t-shirt you dislike.
"Man, dat Trainspotting was a tight flick. But why'd Ewan have to wear <i>those</i> jeans?"
This ain't a fashion forum, man.
And I've accepted everyone elses's criticism, dude. Just not yours. And I wonder why? Everyone else is offering <b>constructive</b> critism. You are just being a prick. If you wanted to help us out you'd drop the sarcasm (and you comment on our wit?) and answer my questions properly - you didn't answer a single thing in that last post. I'm not 'fighting' anything; I just asked you to clarify a few things.
Does it usually put you off films if someone's wearing a t-shirt you dislike."Man, dat Trainspotting was a tight flick. But why'd Ewan have to wear <i>those</i> jeans?"
This ain't a fashion forum, man.
And I've accepted everyone elses's criticism, dude. Just not yours. And I wonder why? Everyone else is offering <b>constructive</b> critism. You are just being a prick. If you wanted to help us out you'd drop the sarcasm (and you comment on our wit?) and answer my questions properly - you didn't answer a single thing in that last post. I'm not 'fighting' anything; I just asked you to clarify a few things.
Man what a retard.
If you weren't such a gorm you would realize if answered everything you've thrown at me. Now, again about the emo thing, as I said it was 'Sarcastic remark' nothing you should take personally. But nice straighteners by the way. I know isn't a fashion forum hence a one line sarcastic note at the start and then a big paragraphs on your film.
Now dipshiz you're not accepting anyone's criticisms nor are you asking to clarify, you're just being an out right bellend, because you're arguing with people points rather than just accepting what they didn't like. Take me for example, as for my constructiveness, you're right. I am not being constructive, but if you can't deal with that, then don't read my posts tit for brains. My reason for lack of constructive criticism is simply because you are arseholes that won't accept it. After seeing how you responded to Lawriejaffa, I really don't see why I should bother to help you bitches.
Now shrup and get over it, and quit bitching bitches.......Just grow up and accept you haven't got a winner her, and I don't like you.
If you weren't such a gorm you would realize if answered everything you've thrown at me. Now, again about the emo thing, as I said it was 'Sarcastic remark' nothing you should take personally. But nice straighteners by the way. I know isn't a fashion forum hence a one line sarcastic note at the start and then a big paragraphs on your film.
Now dipshiz you're not accepting anyone's criticisms nor are you asking to clarify, you're just being an out right bellend, because you're arguing with people points rather than just accepting what they didn't like. Take me for example, as for my constructiveness, you're right. I am not being constructive, but if you can't deal with that, then don't read my posts tit for brains. My reason for lack of constructive criticism is simply because you are arseholes that won't accept it. After seeing how you responded to Lawriejaffa, I really don't see why I should bother to help you bitches.
Now shrup and get over it, and quit bitching bitches.......Just grow up and accept you haven't got a winner her, and I don't like you.
Sgtpadrino doesn't pose topless on public forums like a bellend.
-
JoshyGoTechno!
- Newbie
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 6:11 pm
- Location: Bedford, England
Freed, you are a total moron. You don't make any sense. If you're not even <i>intending</i> to be constructive then what's the point in even responding? In the Read-Me it does say only constructive criticism is welcome...
I don't see how I responded to Lawriejaffa in any negative way, or anyone else criticising me. Just you. For being a grade A arsehole.
But oh well, I've never seen one of your films, so I can't say anything back.
And btw, I wasn't in the scene and don't straighten my hair.
I was going to take your advice and grow up... But then I saw your new signiture and it made me LOL even more than Snakes on a Plane.
Laters, mate
.
xxx
I don't see how I responded to Lawriejaffa in any negative way, or anyone else criticising me. Just you. For being a grade A arsehole.
But oh well, I've never seen one of your films, so I can't say anything back.
And btw, I wasn't in the scene and don't straighten my hair.
I was going to take your advice and grow up... But then I saw your new signiture and it made me LOL even more than Snakes on a Plane.
Laters, mate
.xxx
I'm a moron?....don't me larf you petal. I make a lot of sense, but you're too thick to understand. So why should I respond if I'm not going to be constructive, what 's the point ?....well first of all, you asked... I decided to respond when you asked what we thought, you didn't ask for what any improvements. but you asked for our opinions and that's all i did, give you my opinion, not my fault you're a complete f*** pussy that cannot accept it, but that's your problem.
If you want me to be constructive, take every criticism I gave you and do the opposite you spanner. If your brain is way too small to handle that much work, take your 'Read me' and shove it You fungus Hymen.
By the way, why do spend your time arguing with a 'Grade A arsehole' over the internet ?....are you really that superior silly billy.
If you want me to be constructive, take every criticism I gave you and do the opposite you spanner. If your brain is way too small to handle that much work, take your 'Read me' and shove it You fungus Hymen.
By the way, why do spend your time arguing with a 'Grade A arsehole' over the internet ?....are you really that superior silly billy.
Sgtpadrino doesn't pose topless on public forums like a bellend.
I think you have some anger management issues, princess. You're worse than Rhys. Someone who gets this worked up on the Internet clearly has problems....
I'm not the one arguing - just responding to what you say in a thread I started. If you don't want an argument, just don't post again? Or better yet; don't post such provactive and downright rude comments in the first place?
I'm not the one arguing - just responding to what you say in a thread I started. If you don't want an argument, just don't post again? Or better yet; don't post such provactive and downright rude comments in the first place?
LOL great work Sherlock, but did it ever occur to you that that my 'Proactive' and 'downright rude' commenting has a lot to do with the fact I get a kick out of it in the first place, Otherwise I wouldn't do it anyway.
Anger management issues?, you clearly aren't a frequent poster of the community here, otherwise you'd feel embarrassed about how that comment becomes laughable; and as for you not 'arguing' could you put anymore icing on the cake sweetheart?...Your constant debating, insults and profanity are a sure fire and I'm sure it's clear to any user that reads this topic that this is an argument and you are one serious mofo with an ego and a bad judge of character trying to defend his lame film. Get over it you snotty noes petal.
Think of it like you will, but I'm taking you for fool and loving every minute of it. I deal with whiny bitches like yourself every time I review a film in this forum, and you kid, are just same repetitive dipsh!t, who helps my self esteem as I laugh at you attempts to attack me yet where you blatantly contradict yourself and dodge my questions. Judge me as you will, but a lot of people do respect my opinions and attitude towards films in here, and you sugar are just another nob head on the belt with something to prove that no one cares about. Now, I'm done with you. Keep responding if you want, but I gotta go take a lean dump, have fun kiddies.
Anger management issues?, you clearly aren't a frequent poster of the community here, otherwise you'd feel embarrassed about how that comment becomes laughable; and as for you not 'arguing' could you put anymore icing on the cake sweetheart?...Your constant debating, insults and profanity are a sure fire and I'm sure it's clear to any user that reads this topic that this is an argument and you are one serious mofo with an ego and a bad judge of character trying to defend his lame film. Get over it you snotty noes petal.
Think of it like you will, but I'm taking you for fool and loving every minute of it. I deal with whiny bitches like yourself every time I review a film in this forum, and you kid, are just same repetitive dipsh!t, who helps my self esteem as I laugh at you attempts to attack me yet where you blatantly contradict yourself and dodge my questions. Judge me as you will, but a lot of people do respect my opinions and attitude towards films in here, and you sugar are just another nob head on the belt with something to prove that no one cares about. Now, I'm done with you. Keep responding if you want, but I gotta go take a lean dump, have fun kiddies.
Sgtpadrino doesn't pose topless on public forums like a bellend.
-
Lawriejaffa
- Forum Addict
- Posts: 709
- Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 6:38 pm
Right gentleman we all need to take a deep breath!
I gave it a second look, so i'd like to alter some of my comments.
Regarding the recording of sound, i see your shots are already pretty close in. Truth is your film will generally sound s*** unless you get or hire out an external microphone.
Your council will have a so called 'media access' center somewhere near you, where you can actually hire, AND be shown how to attach and use an external microphone, extremely cheaply. This is the only way to really record decent production sound on a low budget. If this film is anything over 5mins, you will be lucky to get people watching a lot of on board camera mic audio. Cos cheap dialogue audio mixed with unlicensed pop songs, is a humiliating kind of soundtrack for any film to have.
That said, the audio of the conversation is already about as good as you'll get it for an onboard camera mic.
The cutaways that look awkward, are the sparse shots of the milkshake glass, and really just in general the cinematography for that conversation appears awkward and misplaced at times.
Im not sure what the film is really about, as you've not told us its synopsis yet. What i can say though, is that for a light hearted teen comedy, the conversation of the 2 protagonists at the start is really very explicit.
1 The convo is explicit, and would be to a popular mainstream 'revolting' or 'exploitative. At best these would be the films villains. Remember, nobody cares what you might justify as 'happening in real life' - this isnt real life, its a movie, and for a light hearted teen comedy, its pretty brutal.
2 The characters are pretty unconvincing. Again both performers appear so young, that id be amazed if they've already popped their own cherries hehe, rather than have sex and smoke! Now of course in real life we have 12 year old single moms etc etc, but in this film, no way is it particularly believable.
3 Emo issue. As young men, you have taken this comment by freed to 'heart', truth is freeds right in a certain context. Because to anyone unfamiliar with the peculiarities of adolescent fashion they will, simply go by the obvious stereotype. Both these performers are dressed effiminately, with effeminate hairdos that emphasise black hair etc. In fact, check, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emo_%28slang%29
This is an obvious problem, but because they appear so effeminate, there is NO WAY people can co-relate that with the MACHO highschool jock conversation there having. Instead they should be sharing an ipod crying together on a a particularly soppy greenday cover or something.
When people are ignorant of the specifics they will always go by stereotypes, so like it or not most ordinary folks will see them as emo, (fine if they were emo characters.)
Another problem is the dialogue. The campy performances and script is remnicisent of the kind of post shakespearan dialogue in films like the remake of 'Cruel Intentions'. Heres a comical example that could easily be in your film, just of the top of my head.
JOKE SCRIPT
Jason flops back his swathe of foppish black hair, then grins wickedly at Ryan.
Jason
'Thus Ryan, allow me a moment of enquiry... after all... you were quite singular with Michelle in thou dorm cupboard for... (dramatic pause) quite some time.
Ryan.
'Quite dear Jason, but let me remind you, she was unwieldy and quite to the contrary of my teetotal state, completely (dramatic pause) at my disposal...'
END
If that didnt make sense, then thats why your script shown in the clip doesnt make sense either. If it did make sense, thats why your camp characters appear to be completely camp, effeminate, pretentious and utterly unlikeable
I can give some more help, but can you give us a breakdown of the films story, a synopsis if you will.
lol PS heres an emo
I gave it a second look, so i'd like to alter some of my comments.
Regarding the recording of sound, i see your shots are already pretty close in. Truth is your film will generally sound s*** unless you get or hire out an external microphone.
Your council will have a so called 'media access' center somewhere near you, where you can actually hire, AND be shown how to attach and use an external microphone, extremely cheaply. This is the only way to really record decent production sound on a low budget. If this film is anything over 5mins, you will be lucky to get people watching a lot of on board camera mic audio. Cos cheap dialogue audio mixed with unlicensed pop songs, is a humiliating kind of soundtrack for any film to have.
That said, the audio of the conversation is already about as good as you'll get it for an onboard camera mic.
The cutaways that look awkward, are the sparse shots of the milkshake glass, and really just in general the cinematography for that conversation appears awkward and misplaced at times.
Im not sure what the film is really about, as you've not told us its synopsis yet. What i can say though, is that for a light hearted teen comedy, the conversation of the 2 protagonists at the start is really very explicit.
1 The convo is explicit, and would be to a popular mainstream 'revolting' or 'exploitative. At best these would be the films villains. Remember, nobody cares what you might justify as 'happening in real life' - this isnt real life, its a movie, and for a light hearted teen comedy, its pretty brutal.
2 The characters are pretty unconvincing. Again both performers appear so young, that id be amazed if they've already popped their own cherries hehe, rather than have sex and smoke! Now of course in real life we have 12 year old single moms etc etc, but in this film, no way is it particularly believable.
3 Emo issue. As young men, you have taken this comment by freed to 'heart', truth is freeds right in a certain context. Because to anyone unfamiliar with the peculiarities of adolescent fashion they will, simply go by the obvious stereotype. Both these performers are dressed effiminately, with effeminate hairdos that emphasise black hair etc. In fact, check, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emo_%28slang%29
This is an obvious problem, but because they appear so effeminate, there is NO WAY people can co-relate that with the MACHO highschool jock conversation there having. Instead they should be sharing an ipod crying together on a a particularly soppy greenday cover or something.
When people are ignorant of the specifics they will always go by stereotypes, so like it or not most ordinary folks will see them as emo, (fine if they were emo characters.)
Another problem is the dialogue. The campy performances and script is remnicisent of the kind of post shakespearan dialogue in films like the remake of 'Cruel Intentions'. Heres a comical example that could easily be in your film, just of the top of my head.
JOKE SCRIPT
Jason flops back his swathe of foppish black hair, then grins wickedly at Ryan.
Jason
'Thus Ryan, allow me a moment of enquiry... after all... you were quite singular with Michelle in thou dorm cupboard for... (dramatic pause) quite some time.
Ryan.
'Quite dear Jason, but let me remind you, she was unwieldy and quite to the contrary of my teetotal state, completely (dramatic pause) at my disposal...'
END
If that didnt make sense, then thats why your script shown in the clip doesnt make sense either. If it did make sense, thats why your camp characters appear to be completely camp, effeminate, pretentious and utterly unlikeable
I can give some more help, but can you give us a breakdown of the films story, a synopsis if you will.
lol PS heres an emo
Thanks a lot for that post. I'll try and address some issues you've raised...
1. Hmm, perhaps I was wrong in classing it as a teen comedy. What I meant was that the first act is just a lot more light-hearted than the rest of the movie but I do see your point. Hmm... Perhaps I will have to think about re-writing and re-shooting that opening scene. Did you really think it was <i>too</i> explicit? I've seen a lot worse personally... lol. What the characters were discussing was actually intended to be pretty brutal.
It's funny that you say they come across as the villains, as that was kinda what we were aiming for. These boys are not nice guys; they are nihilistic, alienated and really don't care about anybody else expect themselves. 'Pretentious and utterly unlikeable' is actually how I would describe them myself.
2. Do they really look that young? Both actors are, in fact, 16, so at the legal age to both smoke and have sex... This kind of conversation really wouldn't be out of place amongst people I know.
3. Right, this is something I don't fully understand so I guess I'll have to let it slide... But as far as I know, just wearing a t-shirt and jeans as the actors were isn't particularly effeminate. Isn't that what most guys wear, lol? Is it just that they do both have longish (not black though) hair??
Thanks again for taking the time to post. I really appreciate the advice.
1. Hmm, perhaps I was wrong in classing it as a teen comedy. What I meant was that the first act is just a lot more light-hearted than the rest of the movie but I do see your point. Hmm... Perhaps I will have to think about re-writing and re-shooting that opening scene. Did you really think it was <i>too</i> explicit? I've seen a lot worse personally... lol. What the characters were discussing was actually intended to be pretty brutal.
It's funny that you say they come across as the villains, as that was kinda what we were aiming for. These boys are not nice guys; they are nihilistic, alienated and really don't care about anybody else expect themselves. 'Pretentious and utterly unlikeable' is actually how I would describe them myself
. 2. Do they really look that young? Both actors are, in fact, 16, so at the legal age to both smoke and have sex... This kind of conversation really wouldn't be out of place amongst people I know.
3. Right, this is something I don't fully understand so I guess I'll have to let it slide... But as far as I know, just wearing a t-shirt and jeans as the actors were isn't particularly effeminate. Isn't that what most guys wear, lol? Is it just that they do both have longish (not black though
) hair??Thanks again for taking the time to post. I really appreciate the advice.
Last edited by NGFilms03 on Sat Aug 19, 2006 1:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
Lawriejaffa
- Forum Addict
- Posts: 709
- Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 6:38 pm
Yup, well again you really have to tell us what your film is about, as giving advice to the story is difficult otherwise! Regarding the characters, their convo is brutal (imagine how female audiences 50% + would feel watching it.) They would immediately feel threatened and antagonistic to the protaginist characters. Incidentally male audiences don't usually respond well to these kinds of scenes too.
For weird reasons, but ill go onto explain. Take Stiffler in American Pie, note he was by far the big 'jock strap' ladies man, yet he would always befall strange jokes (like the loveable nerd character) but take for example American Pie 2, again although he's a success with the ladies, we keep seeing him fail thru humour (for the most part.) If there had been no humour, and he was this boastful guy, being explicit and egotistical, he would have been utterly hated lol. Through humour that character was redempted (and hence loved) by comedy audiences.
You see, male audiences will feel impotent watching 16 year olds (who look like 14 year olds) boasting of sexual conquests. The derision they would arise in the male audience cannot be dealt with (as the audience is subject to a film they can only watch). So the male audiences ego is getting bashed, by kids, and hence they'll switch off the film, deride it as unrealistic and probably be quite hostile. You might think im nuts for saying this, but check out a famous film critic Laura Mulvey and her thoughts on sexual expression, its a moot point.
If you want to make them villains, beware that doing so through such conversations does not make them to audiences 'anti-heroes' which i feel is more what your aiming for. Regarding 16, it makes NO DIFFERENCE what age you say they are... its how old they look to audiences, and these guys could be 30, but looking as they do, they look utterly unconvincing as the kinda guys their supposed to be in the film.
If you are ignorant as to why your actors looked emo'ish then you must pay far more attention to the look of your actors hair and clothes (when matched with their performances.) They were not dressed as 'Average Joe'... (this is a small point really tho.)
For weird reasons, but ill go onto explain. Take Stiffler in American Pie, note he was by far the big 'jock strap' ladies man, yet he would always befall strange jokes (like the loveable nerd character) but take for example American Pie 2, again although he's a success with the ladies, we keep seeing him fail thru humour (for the most part.) If there had been no humour, and he was this boastful guy, being explicit and egotistical, he would have been utterly hated lol. Through humour that character was redempted (and hence loved) by comedy audiences.
You see, male audiences will feel impotent watching 16 year olds (who look like 14 year olds) boasting of sexual conquests. The derision they would arise in the male audience cannot be dealt with (as the audience is subject to a film they can only watch). So the male audiences ego is getting bashed, by kids, and hence they'll switch off the film, deride it as unrealistic and probably be quite hostile. You might think im nuts for saying this, but check out a famous film critic Laura Mulvey and her thoughts on sexual expression, its a moot point.
If you want to make them villains, beware that doing so through such conversations does not make them to audiences 'anti-heroes' which i feel is more what your aiming for. Regarding 16, it makes NO DIFFERENCE what age you say they are... its how old they look to audiences, and these guys could be 30, but looking as they do, they look utterly unconvincing as the kinda guys their supposed to be in the film.
If you are ignorant as to why your actors looked emo'ish then you must pay far more attention to the look of your actors hair and clothes (when matched with their performances.) They were not dressed as 'Average Joe'... (this is a small point really tho.)
Ok, I'll try to sum up the story breifly, lol...
Aaron Samuels (the character in black) is pretty much a total arsehole. He's self-centered, nilhilistic and arrogant. He is bereft of any sort of morals; some might even call him 'evil'. He has a girlfriend, but still messes around with a thousand girls behind her back. He also treats his so-called best friend, Jake (striped shirt), like cr**. Jake is constantly striving to be like Aaron but is, at heart, a much nicer guy and has always lived in his shadow.
When Aaron's girlfriend leaves him for Jake the two boys' friendship becomes merely a facade to cover their hidden hatred of eachother and bitter rivalry.
After a drunken night goes horribly wrong, the boys argue and Jake ends up killing Aaron. He automatically feels terrible remorse and therefore his mind ends up 'erasing' the event and replacing it with the memory of a totally different one where the two boys were mugged and Aaron stabbed by one of the attackers.
Everyone believes this and Jake gets away with the murder, even though he cannot actually recall it even happening
So, to cut a long story short, Jake's memory of the real murder is unlocked and he is again plagued with guilt. So his sub-conscious thinks of another way to make sure the deed 'never happened': To replace Aaron so he lives again.
Slowly, Jake begins to take of the characteristics of the Aaron; becoming more and more like him (f*** people about, etc.) and losing everything he holds dear in the process, destroying the people who care about him the most.
The film is about the character of Jake and his struggle to maintain his own identity and prevent himself from becoming the 'evil' Aaron.
Hope that makes sense... It's a complicated plot to try and explain. Especially this late at night, lol. What do you think? Any questions? Suggestions?
Aaron Samuels (the character in black) is pretty much a total arsehole. He's self-centered, nilhilistic and arrogant. He is bereft of any sort of morals; some might even call him 'evil'. He has a girlfriend, but still messes around with a thousand girls behind her back. He also treats his so-called best friend, Jake (striped shirt), like cr**. Jake is constantly striving to be like Aaron but is, at heart, a much nicer guy and has always lived in his shadow.
When Aaron's girlfriend leaves him for Jake the two boys' friendship becomes merely a facade to cover their hidden hatred of eachother and bitter rivalry.
After a drunken night goes horribly wrong, the boys argue and Jake ends up killing Aaron. He automatically feels terrible remorse and therefore his mind ends up 'erasing' the event and replacing it with the memory of a totally different one where the two boys were mugged and Aaron stabbed by one of the attackers.
Everyone believes this and Jake gets away with the murder, even though he cannot actually recall it even happening
So, to cut a long story short, Jake's memory of the real murder is unlocked and he is again plagued with guilt. So his sub-conscious thinks of another way to make sure the deed 'never happened': To replace Aaron so he lives again.
Slowly, Jake begins to take of the characteristics of the Aaron; becoming more and more like him (f*** people about, etc.) and losing everything he holds dear in the process, destroying the people who care about him the most.
The film is about the character of Jake and his struggle to maintain his own identity and prevent himself from becoming the 'evil' Aaron.
Hope that makes sense... It's a complicated plot to try and explain. Especially this late at night, lol. What do you think? Any questions? Suggestions?