A Little Mouth to Feed: MACGREGOR, BARRY GREEN, JIMERSON, HUDSON & JDS

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

VIEW THE FILM BY CLICKING ON THE POSTER OR CLICKING HERE (http://www.dvxfest.com/allhallowsfest/loader.php?id=39936).

http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/7195/1193816556.jpg (http://www.dvxfest.com/allhallowsfest/loader.php?id=39936)

VIEW THE FILM BY CLICKING ON THE POSTER OR CLICKING HERE (http://www.dvxfest.com/allhallowsfest/loader.php?id=39936).


OK ... thanks to Barry David and Hudson for making this happen.
What can I say guys except, wow and thank you so much for the amazing support.
Thanks for my best filmmaking experience yet :beer: :cry: :love4:

There will be more thanks to come because everyone, everyone associated with this went above
and beyond in a very intense, attempting-to-spin-gold-from-straw situation.

.... Did I mention Mac shot this thing :2vrolijk_08:yikes.


...

Hope everyone enjoys. Had a problem working in YUV in FCP for the first time once it came to
rendering out a QT movie, so the version that's up right now is slightly washed out/too light.
But I'm working on a fix now :)

EDIT: the correct version's been up for a while now :thumbsup:

[Ben Sliker]

awesome piece jack! I'll hit you up with a more detailed review, but it definitely creeped me out, it's got that rosemary's baby feel to it.

[Michael Anthony Horrigan]

Beautiful looking, no doubt. Great acting as well.... very creepy.

I do have to say... when the midwife was attacked, and the shot of her legs quickly zipped away out of frame... I chuckled a bit.

Maybe that's just me.

Overall, the film rocked! Seriously.... it's awesome!
Glad it's not in the running. :)

BTW, did I mention how good it looked?

WOW!
The shot of her outside with the little crosses, ... golden!

Cheers,

Mike

[Luis Caffesse]

Great job.
Your lead actress did a fantastic job.

Great look - script - etc etc etc as always.
Of course with that crew - I would expect nothing less.

Hats off to all of you.
:thumbsup:

[Billy Pilgrim]

I liked this film a lot. Great all around on a technical level (especially the cinematography) great acting, interesting concept. Kind of reminded me of Rosemary's Baby, but in a good way. Great job, guys.

[Mark Harris]

What's up with the gamma curves?

And how on Earth did you squeeze Hudson into that baby costume????

A more detailed review later, after I consult with a certain member on this board who has it in for you (you all know who I'm talking about)...

[mikkowilson]

**********SPOLIERS***********

TOP NOTCH.

Seriously Jack, thanks for distracting Mac onto another Exhebition only film, it's the only way the rest of us have a chance! :grin:

I wasn't super thrilled by the story, but the excecution of the film was absoloutly top notch from all points. Cinamtography, lightig, set, acting- wow, costumes, everything was dead on.

I did guess the pull back & reveal of the "garden" the moment that first shot came up.


You didn't have BTS for "Lens cap", how about some BTS for this? I can only imagine the fun you guys had making this.

- Mikko

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

thanks guys ...

Kyser, laughing is allowed ... and encouraged :)

that part is absolutely absurd after all ... I mean from a physics standpoint alone :cheesy:

[Barry_S]

Very cool film guys. The production value was impressive on this one. Great mise-en-scene, lighting, and art direction. Very solid actors and Herman's score rocked. Slightly choppy in a few parts, but i realize the rush job--overall the editing is excellent. The baby was a little bit of a tough sell to me, I'd think I'd cut a little faster so you see shorter darker glimpses. Also would have liked to seen more emotion/fear in the midwife's face as she holds the baby--the lead up to the attack is slightly flat. Overall, very nice with a lot of style. loved the pullback with the little crosses--pow!

[Justin Kuhn]

That's messed up Jack. Heartwarming too though.

[Edgen]

Cheers Jack and "Crew" :)

Very slick story and film. I actually saw the gravestone(s) shot coming as soon as she started to bury the fetus. Twisted.. argh. I dig!

of course the score was top notch Herman! Kudos buddy.

/j

[TimurCivan]

Looks great mac.

Good edit jack.

Who did the art direction, its outstanding.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

That's messed up Jack. Heartwarming too though.

so glad you said that :)

Some people simply won't get / connect with this piece. Barry G saw how excited I was about it, and so because we were not making a $70million dollar pic (though it almost felt that way to David I'm sure sometimes :cheesy: ) we decided to go for it. So since the risk was minimal I was afforded the opportunity to go for / play with some conflicting and dissonant tones within a fairly odd world. But what you said is exactly what we were going for.

Barry_S. I wan to re-edit about half of it allreadyI think, I may not have the footy to cut some parts differently, but I want to take another look when things settle down, at which point you will be asked for critique list with timecode annotation. :)

[Blaine]

I took a sneak peak at this, Jack, since it was exhibition and I've got to say you did an excellent job. Now I want to see "the other one." :beer:

As a whole, this may be my favorite of anything you've done.

[Brandon Rice]

OK! Nice work here Jack....

I do think it could be a tad tighter overall... and I did see the ending coming, but darn it all man, you sure can direct actors, nice work! Some of the scenes lacked a little staging movement (getting nit-picky) but dang it... I have nothing more negative to say.... Good work team!

[Luis Caffesse]

... I have nothing more negative to say....

Exactly what every director likes to hear
:thumbsup:

[Barry_Green]

Who did the art direction, its outstanding.
Art direction was primarily Jack, teamed with Mac. Jack decided what he wanted it to look like and sent us a preliminary "style sheet", detailing the color palette and overall feel he was going for, gave some lighting and character references, but he also worked with Mac to determine what would look best in the final picture.

Then he spent an inordinate amount of time shopping for appropriate costumes, and we all pitched in to build the sets.

[StefanHaynes]

As usual to be expected from Jack, it's absolutely visually and aurally spectacular. The art design, the grading, the cinematography, (that shot of the crack of light piercing through the door was pushing orgasmic). Stylistically beautiful, with a truly well composed and haunting score as subtle backing. The sound effects didn't disappoint either, although the actors could have been somewhat better mic'd. But still, excellent.

Speaking of actors, these fellows not only looked the part, but did an excellent job as well. Of course, this was certainly assisted by Jack, who has proved himself adept at direction (no doubt assisted by his excellent degree) in every film he's made.

That said, like seemingly all of JDS's films, I absolutely hated this one. Through and through. It wasn't quite the unmitigated disaster 18 Seconds (again, in my opinion) was, but I'll be a drained freezedried turnip if it wasn't close.

The writing on display here was: Atrocious. Trite. Silly. Pretentious. And poor. The plot was silly and contrived, the characters bland and completely uninteresting, the dialog almost hysterically cliche, and the ending, completely predictable and banal. Nothing of any interest (by that I mean originality, of course) what-so-ever going on here, and I dare anyone to defend that there was.

Ohkhay, here's the plot: Lady wants a child. Prays to God. God won't answer. Prays to Satan. Satan Answers. Baby randomly eats people. Woman values Satan baby over husband. The End. Uh-huh.

If this film is simply a tech-reel, then Bravo, it is indeed fantastic. If this is actually a short film that should be judged artistically and with definite artistic merit-- it fails. Completely and utterly and even more completely and utterly.

In summary, this film is a prime example of the ever-so-popular style-over-substance that seems to be permeating film making as of late.

Now, what I would like to see is a JDS film with a solid writer. That could be really fantastic.


Note: I am not attacking JDS as a director. Only as a writer. He indeed could be an Oscar winning director.

Good Luck

Stefan

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Art direction like this is very taxing on a shoe string production.

So I'm glad to hear kudos for that from an artistic perspective, but more so for Barry and particularly David to hear it. Barry was occupied readying the "studio" for general use a large part of the time so David did a lot of running for the production. The brown overalls for example, were a pain and the most expensive and only non thrift store element. So David's responsible for making a lot of the small details happen and I really appreciate him sticking with me when blue overalls would have done for another type of film. But there were tons of instances like that where it was tough to get or do X,Y, or Z and they found a way to do it.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

As usual to be expected from Jack, it's absolutely visually and aurally spectacular. The art design, the grading, the cinematography, (that shot of the crack of light piercing through the door was pushing orgasmic). Stylistically beautiful, with a truly well composed and haunting score as subtle backing. The sound effects didn't disappoint either, although the actors could have been somewhat better mic'd. But still, excellent.

Speaking of actors, these fellows not only looked the part, but did an excellent job as well. Of course, this was certainly assisted by Jack, who has proved himself adept at direction (no doubt assisted by his excellent degree) in every film he's made.

That said, like seemingly all of JDS's films, I absolutely hated this one. Through and through. It wasn't quite the unmitigated disaster 18 Seconds (again, in my opinion) was, but I'll be a drained freezedried turnip if it wasn't close.

The writing on display here was: Atrocious. Trite. Silly. Pretentious. And poor. The plot was silly and contrived, the characters bland and completely uninteresting, the dialog almost hysterically cliche, and the ending, completely predictable and banal. Nothing of any interest (by that I mean originality, of course) what-so-ever going on here, and I dare anyone to defend that there was.

Ohkhay, here's the plot: Lady wants a child. Prays to God. God won't answer. Prays to Satan. Satan Answers. Baby randomly eats people. Woman values Satan baby over husband. The End. Uh-huh.

If this film is simply a tech-reel, then Bravo, it is indeed fantastic. If this is actually a short film that should be judged artistically and with definite artistic merit-- it fails. Completely and utterly and even more completely and utterly.

In summary, this film is a prime example of the ever-so-popular style-over-substance that seems to be permeating film making as of late.

Now, what I would like to see is a JDS film with a solid writer. That could be really fantastic.


Note: I am not attacking JDS as a director. Only as a writer. He indeed could be an Oscar winning director.

Good Luck

Stefan

Stefan thanks so much for taking the time to watch and respond so thoroughly and with such passion and gusto.

Maybe you should take a Jack break until I work with another writer though. I mean why put yourself through such torture :)

I do appreciate the comments and time sir, no joke.

:beer:

[David Jimerson]

Those were some long, long, long days. :) Kudos to everyone for staying professional and keeping their eyes on the final product -- as everyone can see, it was well worth it.

I'm thrilled that everyone gets to see the fruits of their labors so quickly, and that everyone else appreciates it so much.

Special "boo-yah" to Jack for staying rock-solid steady when it came to his vision. Lesser men would have compromised in many, many areas, but Jack knew what he wanted and didn't settle for anything less -- that's integrity.

And Mikko, there's a looooot of BTS to follow. Stay tuned.

[Luis Caffesse]

Hmmmmm maybe a JDS film written by StefanHaynes needs to be put in the works?
:)

[Brandon Rice]

How fast did ya'll shoot this, and how fast was the edit Jack?

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

We took four days to shoot it. We only have three walls and one door so part of that time was rebuilding and configuring and painting while our extremely tolerant and patient actors waited and waited and waited. I think they "got it" though. They knew we were reaching for something a tad unreasonable given our means and were down to go there with us. They gave everything they had like everyone did.

[David Jimerson]

Principal photography (for this one) was over three 15-hour nights. We began late afternoon on the 10th finished mid-morning on the 13th. Principal set construction was the 15-hour day BEFORE all that.

[Brandon Rice]

Nice job :)

[Kholi]

Slick images, guys. I won't get into the Letus EX, the image proves it all.

[DimmuJed]

As usual to be expected from Jack, it's absolutely visually and aurally spectacular. The art design, the grading, the cinematography, (that shot of the crack of light piercing through the door was pushing orgasmic). Stylistically beautiful, with a truly well composed and haunting score as subtle backing. The sound effects didn't disappoint either, although the actors could have been somewhat better mic'd. But still, excellent.

Speaking of actors, these fellows not only looked the part, but did an excellent job as well. Of course, this was certainly assisted by Jack, who has proved himself adept at direction (no doubt assisted by his excellent degree) in every film he's made.

That said, like seemingly all of JDS's films, I absolutely hated this one. Through and through. It wasn't quite the unmitigated disaster 18 Seconds (again, in my opinion) was, but I'll be a drained freezedried turnip if it wasn't close.

The writing on display here was: Atrocious. Trite. Silly. Pretentious. And poor. The plot was silly and contrived, the characters bland and completely uninteresting, the dialog almost hysterically cliche, and the ending, completely predictable and banal. Nothing of any interest (by that I mean originality, of course) what-so-ever going on here, and I dare anyone to defend that there was.

Ohkhay, here's the plot: Lady wants a child. Prays to God. God won't answer. Prays to Satan. Satan Answers. Baby randomly eats people. Woman values Satan baby over husband. The End. Uh-huh.

If this film is simply a tech-reel, then Bravo, it is indeed fantastic. If this is actually a short film that should be judged artistically and with definite artistic merit-- it fails. Completely and utterly and even more completely and utterly.

In summary, this film is a prime example of the ever-so-popular style-over-substance that seems to be permeating film making as of late.

Now, what I would like to see is a JDS film with a solid writer. That could be really fantastic.


Note: I am not attacking JDS as a director. Only as a writer. He indeed could be an Oscar winning director.

Good Luck

Stefan


obviously you didn't realize this had a time limit of 5 minutes. What did you want in it? The Titanic 2? Zodiac? The Green mile? Forrest Gump? Other classic movies pushing 3 hours?

Short film is made to be just that, short. Short story, twist ending, and some shocks to keep the film in the viewers mind.

But all in all i'm saying stay away from MY MAN! Jack I LOVE YOU! In a strictly fatherly son way.

[StefanHaynes]

I guess you've never seen a Cannes short?

[Kholi]

And here comes the fight, right on schedule.

[Brandon Rice]

I won't get into any arguments about the story here... but I felt it was mainstream, and simple... but well executed... every story, or script doesn't have to be "brilliant" IMHO


And here comes the fight, right on schedule.


HA HA... and this time we have Jack AND Mac in the same thread!

[Jared Meyer]

And here comes the fight, right on schedule.
Kholi, you took the words right out of my mouth. :violin:

[David Jimerson]

As usual to be expected from Jack, it's absolutely visually and aurally spectacular. The art design, the grading,

You may be interested to note that while there's some grading there, the images are pretty close to the raw footage. The look of the film is almost entirely a product of the lighting, and carefully-chosen design. This is what you can get when the director and cinematographer work closely together . . .

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

The grading is actually a little darker than the version that's currently up.
Basically mac shoots to preserve lots of shadow detail. With mac, the post process is usually one of desaturating and and bringing the blacks down to just 0 or crushing them slightly. With this one it's a lot of desaturation in post and it goes pretty dark so it has a darker feel to it.

[StefanHaynes]

Well, it looks absolutely stunning, regardless.

[Billy Pilgrim]

The grading is actually a little darker than the version that's currently up.
Basically mac shoots to preserve lots of shadow detail. With mac, the post process is usually one of desaturating and and bringing the blacks down to just 0 or crushing them slightly. With this one it's a lot of desaturation in post and it goes pretty dark so it has a darker feel to it.

Of course, it would have been darker if you had just used a lens cap.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

hehee hee
yeah that one looked great, but the writing was so bad Barry_S wouldn'y even let me upload it for exhibition :D

[StefanHaynes]

Hmmmmm maybe a JDS film written by StefanHaynes needs to be put in the works?
:)

Speaking of Cannes... :laugh:

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Yeah I can think of one can to put that film in.

[Billy Pilgrim]

Oh Snap!

[Justin Kuhn]

http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/7383/1193828625.jpg

[Luis Caffesse]

http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/7383/1193828625.jpg

Hahhahhaahhaaha
:)

[Mark Harris]

I just want to add to my earlier review: Jack, you suck. And you smell.





When are going to go eat? I'm hungry.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

As soon as I buy some deodorant and get rid of this pacifier.

[Gord.T]

The scene were the cam pulls back in the yard was great. Didn't expect what was all there.
5 out of 5. No problems here.

[cinebuddy]

It was ok. I mean if you like something that's really good. I mean if production value is your thing it was cool. Well built flats and excellent lighting with great exposure are things i'm just not into.

[Sacksnack]

I liked this film better the first time, when it was called "it's Alive.":laugh:
Seriously I thought you guys did a stellar job. First dibs on the baby when it hits the marketplace.
-Kevin

[HAIRY_STUFF!!!]

Oh Snap... Where me come from that the sound of arm bone when me eat it.

About Film, me wonder, Is JDS running evil baby traffic ring? ME want in on action. Or me Eat bernie, and Junkyard.

Also, me get red camera. Me take DVX and put it in hell till red hot. Red CAmera.

[Brandon Rice]

He's back!!!

[Mark Harris]

Oh Snap... Where me come from that the sound of arm bone when me eat it.

About Film, me wonder, Is JDS running evil baby traffic ring? ME want in on action. Or me Eat bernie, and Junkyard.

Also, me get red camera. Me take DVX and put it in hell till red hot. Red CAmera.

What about your entry, Hairy? The one you were doing with your brother, SCARY STUFF!?

[ProjX v2.0]

Basically mac shoots to preserve lots of shadow detail.

Any chance of Mac sharing his camera settings? I'm in awe that there wasn't any noise considering the blacks were not crushed.

Awesome job guys. :thumbup:

[bosindy]

Jack, everything you shoot usually has some of the strongest acting in it and I hate you for it. I absolutely loved the shot in the homemade cemetery. The pull away was really creepy. the lighting was unobtrusive and completely appropriate for the piece. The baby had its intended affect on me. Something wrong with a newborn gets a visceral reaction like little else.

From what I have seen, and specifically gleaned from this piece, you have a real talent for Southern Gothic story telling. It must be from all that time in the Big Easy. Points deducted for the all star crew but I really liked it.

[TimurCivan]

Any chance of Mac sharing his camera settings? I'm in awe that there wasn't any noise considering the blacks were not crushed.

Awesome job guys. :thumbup:

He uses lights and keeps an eye on contrast ratios.

[Luis Caffesse]

He uses lights and keeps an eye on contrast ratios.

so THAT'S how he does it!
Aha, the secret it out!
:)


Keep in mind, in terms of the lack of noise, that the compression definitely helps in that regard somewhat. I'm not saying there was noise - just saying its nearly impossible to make an accurate assesment based on an H.264 file (or whatever codec was used).

[wesley]

im saving this for last, always excited when you guys make something.

[J.R. Hudson]

Great to finally see what was laboured over and thanks for adding my name to the credits, but I assure you folks, I was there in a support capacity. I can take no credit for how good this turned out. I only did what I was told.

It was great working with Jack and Mac. Jack was exactly what I expected in qood way; a true artist, determined, focused. Mellow as yellow and fun to work around.

Mac exceeded my expectations;a true class act. Professional in every sense of the word, easy going and relaxed. I learned a lot simply from watching and particapting; I would hire MAC in a second to lens a project for me.

I look forward to meeting them both again, hopefully under more casual circumstances; like chicks and beers.

I was fortunate enough to see much of the fottage as it was being shot via monitors as well as what Jack had digi'd into his laptop and it looks exactly as I expected. The finished project looks almost to the T what the raw footy came out as; that's lighting and calibration of the equiptment; they knew exactly what they were gunning for and nailed it visually. A sleight belach is all I noitce differently.

If you saw the actual sets and props and could see outside the frame, one would see true movie magic in the works. Film is an illusion and Jack totally sells and works within his limitations on set.

Working in the yard with the little crosses and the fog was a riot; 3:00 am and the wind just mocking each and every take. We tried frantically to get the smoke to obey and finally got some cooperation

The rain coming down; oh if you could see what a mess that was.

The baby crawling past the frame was another fun movie making experience. Pure low-budget, but effective in the end.

Everyone on set busted their asses and the talent was top nothc and patient as could be. Overall a fun shoot and I would not hesitate to help Jack and Mac again if called upon.


-

I thought the story, simple and having been told before to work nicely on this. It may be another spin on Satan's Baby, but so what ? It works. An element I think sells that is the bookends of the creepy house. A storybook sort of tale.

Visually, wonderful. Mac knows what the hell he is doing; period.

-

I know Jack purposely went for a more tradtional storytelling technique in visual terms and I think he suceeded in that. I would love to see further exploration of the space in the frame; I believe every single shot (Give or take) is from a staged point of view.

I think getting that camera behind the lines, whether through movement or staging is important to allow the audience into the world. Seeing things from the STAGE I think breaks a lot of potential intimacy that could be caught.

The best shots for me were the overhead of the woman in the bathroom and the cut to the male inside of the cold, blue room (hand-held). It is shots like these that really have a visual impact. A shot moves beyond the woman bringing us between the two characters. NOW WE FEEL LIKE WE"RE RIGHT THERE.

I also would like to see more movement from the sticks; panning, tilting, etc even if preferring to stay locked on.

The score, EPIC. Awesome. Creepy.

Overall; I enjoyed this and really enjoyed working with JAck and MAcgregor.

J

[Dmitry Yun]

My wife saw this on my laptop at home today, and she called me and was like WTF! :P hehehe she actually really liked it beyond the fact that we have a newborn and now she's afraid of him hehe. Just gotta go around the house and make sure my crosses are all right side up :) this made me feel queasy and uneasy and I guess that's the intended feeling. That shot in the bathroom though...those people never heard of Mr. Clean? ;) awesome job, and super professional.

[Billy Pilgrim]

I think you guys should give away the prop fetus as a prize...to me.

[mentatDUKE]

Downloaded the films last night and decided to check the exhibition only films before delving into the festival films this weekend. VERY impressed and surprised. I didn't know the Jack & Mac team were back. You guys STAY busy. The Red "Engagement" project, this, etc. How do you find time?

And of course the DVX all stars: Barry, Hudson, et al. Cool beans.

So of course the film is great. I was actually scared at one point. The doorway shot and the mother turning the cross upside down turned my stomach. You conveyed an IDEA. And that's what did it. You took a woman of extreme faith and had her go full throttle in the opposite direction. That's the type of horror that works on me. Establishing expectations, then confounding them.
Religious old ladies don't make pacts with Lucifer. Oh wait. Yes they do.
Babies don't eat people. Oh wait. Yes they do. Job one was accomplished. You creeped me out.

Macgregor's cinematography was amazing as per usual. That rack focus after the husband/wife copulation was money. Where did you guys shoot? On location? In a studio? Both?

The actors were really great also. How do you find such great actors? Do you cast in NY or are they people from your theater experience? Great finds!
I believed all these characters really existed. Especially the maid. She looked like she was actually delivering a baby.

Job well done. What's the next project? Is this the same team that's doing the JDS feature?

Congrats.

[David Jimerson]

Everything was shot in "studio" except for the graveyard scene (and the bookend establishing shots of the house).

As for the actors, we held auditions here in Wilmington; lots of great local actors to be found. Michele Seidman (Flora) put some GREAT effort into additional casting for us.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

...

The baby crawling past the frame was another fun movie making experience. Pure low-budget, but effective in the end.

yeah I want to put up outtakes of that and dragging Doug across the floor for the first time.




I thought the story, simple and having been told before to work nicely on this. It may be another spin on Satan's Baby, but so what ? It works.

True. Though I think its some of the trappings we've seen before, not actually this story. See what I quote from Mentaduke and my response.


I know Jack purposely went for a more tradtional storytelling technique in visual terms and I think he suceeded in that. I would love to see further exploration of the space in the frame; I believe every single shot (Give or take) is from a staged point of view.

I think getting that camera behind the lines, whether through movement or staging is important to allow the audience into the world. Seeing things from the STAGE I think breaks a lot of potential intimacy that could be caught.

The best shots for me were the overhead of the woman in the bathroom and the cut to the male inside of the cold, blue room (hand-held). It is shots like these that really have a visual impact. A shot moves beyond the woman bringing us between the two characters. NOW WE FEEL LIKE WE"RE RIGHT THERE.

I also would like to see more movement from the sticks; panning, tilting, etc even if preferring to stay locked on.

Stylistically I wanted to shoot this like old TV as much as possible. Simple. Glad you liked it for the most part. It was a vocabulary for this piece. Within that we tried to manipulate things within the frame. i.e., in the beginning of the movie Clovis takes up more / spills off the edge of the frame and is closer to the camera exagerating his size some. At the end of the movie when the power balance has shifted, we have more negative space around him and framed her tighter.

But yeah the idea for this one was mostly sticks as a choice. Something about it just screamed old serial to me. Like Gunsmoke or something.



The score, EPIC. Awesome. Creepy.

Overall; I enjoyed this and really enjoyed working with JAck and MAcgregor.

J

You were great man. You're a great person to have on set and ask to check the shot out at the monitor.




My wife saw this on my laptop at home today, and she called me and was like WTF! :P hehehe she actually really liked it beyond the fact that we have a newborn and now she's afraid of him hehe. Just gotta go around the house and make sure my crosses are all right side up :) this made me feel queasy and uneasy and I guess that's the intended feeling. That shot in the bathroom though...those people never heard of Mr. Clean? ;) awesome job, and super professional.


heheh :thumbsup: don't worry the bathroom was only dirty with dirt from barry's yard and spraypaint :D

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

I think you guys should give away the prop fetus as a prize...to me.

It's no great shakes off camera. Just sculpted packing styrofoam with a fresh coat of skin colored latex. But send me your address if you are serious. heh heh.



Downloaded the films last night and decided to check the exhibition only films before delving into the festival films this weekend. VERY impressed and surprised. I didn't know the Jack & Mac team were back. You guys STAY busy. The Red "Engagement" project, this, etc. How do you find time?
We shot Engagement like the 9/27th through the 3rd or something in Utah, then I flew directly to Wilmington and Mac arrived a few days later and then we shot this and another project something like through 10/5 - 10/13





And of course the DVX all stars: Barry, Hudson, et al. Cool beans.

So of course the film is great. I was actually scared at one point. The doorway shot and the mother turning the cross upside down turned my stomach. You conveyed an IDEA. And that's what did it. You took a woman of extreme faith and had her go full throttle in the opposite direction. That's the type of horror that works on me. Establishing expectations, then confounding them.
Religious old ladies don't make pacts with Lucifer. Oh wait. Yes they do.
Babies don't eat people. Oh wait. Yes they do. Job one was accomplished. You creeped me out.

(bolding above is mine)

YES YES YES. That's what we were going for and I think this speaks to the point of originality. First - there is no such thing and people that think there is haven't read enough or seen enough or spent any significant time trying to make their own art.

The demon baby is just the McGuffin (wiki link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mcguffin)). And as Hitchock says. The McGuffin can be anything. It's what the characters are concerned with getting but the story is really about something else. The story could be about Flora wanting her own room in the house to do needlepoint, so she turns to the devil and pust a curse on Clovis that causes him to die so she can have his work shop. Same character arc same theme. i.e., how heartbroken and filled with longing would someone have to be to do what she does. That's the story. That's what we tried to tell and what Michelle potrays so beautifully.

Rosemary's baby involves a woman who unknowingly is impregnated with the anti christ.

It's Alive is a mutant baby, nothing to do with the Devil. The parents aren't sure what to do when it comes. The father is embarrassed and wants to kill it. The mother wants to protect it. It's actually a fairly nuanced film that takes a fairly realistic look at what parents might do / feel if they had a mutant baby that killed people. At no point does the film ever suggest that the parents would willingly aid it in killing people. The mother secretly feeds it lots of raw steaks. And I saw it after I wrote this as part of research.

But show me another movie where a very religious woman willingly and knowingly makes a pact with the Devil, accepts the horrible offspring enthusiastically from the get go, and then works in league with it to feed it humans. That's her situation now ... she will go out and get more humans somehow for this thing.

It's incredibly obscure if it exists.

So that's pretty original with the caveat that almost nothing is original. Most of shakespeare's stories were from older poets.

That's why our demon baby doesn't even show up until almost 6 minutes into an 8 minute ride. A lot of story happens before then and it's Floras.


Macgregor's cinematography was amazing as per usual. That rack focus after the husband/wife copulation was money. Where did you guys shoot? On location? In a studio? Both?

The actors were really great also. How do you find such great actors? Do you cast in NY or are they people from your theater experience? Great finds!
I believed all these characters really existed. Especially the maid. She looked like she was actually delivering a baby.

Job well done. What's the next project? Is this the same team that's doing the JDS feature?

Congrats.

Hopefully a larger percentage of this team will be able to put that together. :beer:

[TimurCivan]

so THAT'S how he does it!
Aha, the secret it out!
:)


Keep in mind, in terms of the lack of noise, that the compression definitely helps in that regard somewhat. I'm not saying there was noise - just saying its nearly impossible to make an accurate assesment based on an H.264 file (or whatever codec was used).

Yea i kinda ment that sarcastically, but its true. You need light to make an image.

[Brandon Rice]

Regarding the "JDS feature"

Any news? :):)

[TimurCivan]

I like it more on the second viewing Jack. Simple, but cool. like a sketch.

The demon baby is kinda funny looking but, its looks good enough. :)

[Michele Seidman]

Great job.
Your lead actress did a fantastic job.

Great look - script - etc etc etc as always.
Of course with that crew - I would expect nothing less.

Hats off to all of you.
:thumbsup:

Thank you!

Sincerely

Flora Barren

:)

[StefanHaynes]

But your execution of those ideas are inherently flawed since the piece requires the exigencies of a psychological drama (dealing with ulterior forms of parental rejection and religious values) but delivers it more as a low-brow horror film. None of your characters have the slightest bit of motivation or purpose: they are simply "borne" on screen with cardboard characteristics, and we, the audience are just supposed to accept it. The piece meanders around for a while in an inanely predictable manner... then... ends. There are no stops pulled out, no characters with real depth. Nothing that implies a strive towards a higher form of art. If it weren't for the great soundtrack, I would have been bored to tears.

But that's fine, right? Hostel was able to make it onto the big-screen, so what's wrong with this? As I said, the piece demands intellectuality, but is given no treatment of it. It's like making the main course of gourmet meal befitting of a king to be made out of Manwich. Sure, Manwhich tastes fine cooked in an iron skillet and served on white bread, but thrown next to caviar and a bottle of Château Latour... let's just say Henry the VIII might have gotten a little more 'stump happy.'

You need to stop assuming character traits, and instead create some of your own. Since you're a man of the theatre, you'll get this: More Mee Less May.*

In a bit, I'll write a detailed list of either questions that could bring additional depth to the characters, or statements that would have made the piece much more stable.

*(Charles Mee, Elaine May)

[Luis Caffesse]

Thank you!

Sincerely

Flora Barren

:)

When you sign your posts 'Flora'..... it kind of creeps me out.
:)

[Barry_S]

Michele--great performance in LMTF! You brought a lot to the film and were a pleasure to watch. I pray to god they let you keep that sexy dress. :)

[Kholi]

But your execution of those ideas are inherently flawed since the piece requires the exigencies of a psychological drama (dealing with ulterior forms of parental rejection and religious values) but delivers it more as a low-brow horror film. None of your characters have the slightest bit of motivation or purpose: they are simply "borne" on screen with cardboard characteristics, and we, the audience are just supposed to accept it. The piece meanders around for a while in an inanely predictable manner... then... ends. There are no stops pulled out, no characters with real depth. Nothing that implies a strive towards a higher form of art. If it weren't for the great soundtrack, I would have been bored to tears.

But that's fine, right? Hostel was able to make it onto the big-screen, so what's wrong with this? As I said, the piece demands intellectuality, but is given no treatment of it. It's like making the main course of gourmet meal befitting of a king to be made out of Manwich. Sure, Manwhich tastes fine cooked in an iron skillet and served on white bread, but thrown next to caviar and a bottle of Château Latour... let's just say Henry the VIII might have gotten a little more 'stump happy.'

You need to stop assuming character traits, and instead create some of your own. Since you're a man of the theatre, you'll get this: More Mee Less May.*

In a bit, I'll write a detailed list of either questions that could bring additional depth to the characters, or statements that would have made the piece much more stable.

*(Charles Mee, Elaine May)



I'm not here to defend Jack or this movie.

I am however wondering how you can be bored with this and not a Cannes short? Oh, I know: personal tastes. For most of us, a Cannes short is pretty damned boring. If you want to watch immigrants hide in a field for ten minutes straight, that's fine with me. But, a great deal of the population doesn't expect a short movie to be the next City of God.

It's entertaining, it's easy to sit through the entire time (most of us would say) and it's not pretentious.

Hey, even I sat up in my nest-- at one time-- molting over the lack of character depth and story in short "films". Then, I realized that it's a short: Five minutes to interest as many people as you can with your vision.

Says by this thread I, it was accomplished.

Maybe you should write Jack a short?

And, I still can't fathom why these guys attract so much negative attention. They tackle ambitious pieces, most which are above what today's average can be considered, thanks to the "digital boom". Why so much dark matter?

[Beat Takeshi]

Hey Jack, I really liked this film. Technically it was flawless and the art direction rocked. The lighting really gave the piece a nice texture. The pacing on this was very nice and no gimmicks like your other movies. The acting was on point and the story was great up until the death of the nanny. I thought it got really predictable so then the story kind of fell apart for me. I truly love it though. Mac did an excellent job shooting this, felt really organic like it should have been for such an intimate story.

EDIT:

Kholi:
I thought that immigrants in a field short was kick ass. Thats one of the ones that stand out from all the shorts from Cannes.

[Justin Kuhn]

In a bit, I'll write a detailed list of either questions that could bring additional depth to the characters, or statements that would have made the piece much more stable.

Gonna get (film) schooled. :costumed-smiley-047

Seriously, the debate over JDS's movie has led me to consider the fundementals of filmmaking more closely than I have in years. Ok, months. Thank you sir.

[Kholi]

Kholi:
I thought that immigrants in a field short was kick ass. Thats one of the ones that stand out from all the shorts from Cannes.

I thought it was visually bad-ass, dunno though it bored me. BUGS or whatever that one was... now that was freaky.

Again, though, everyone sees something different.

[Herman Witkam]

Cheers Jack and "Crew" :)

Very slick story and film. I actually saw the gravestone(s) shot coming as soon as she started to bury the fetus. Twisted.. argh. I dig!

of course the score was top notch Herman! Kudos buddy.

/j

Thanks Justin! I'll have to check out your scores too :-)

[jvi97]

you guys did an awesome job, to bad it was over 5 min. I think you could have won.

-Jeff
http://www.dvxfest.com/allhallowsfes...r.php?id=20480

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

...
In a bit, I'll write a detailed list of either questions that could bring additional depth to the characters, or statements that would have made the piece much more stable.


Ah sweet. I was half way through your post thinking I hope this never stops. I'm sure I will learn as much from your further posts as I have from your previous ones.

:beer:

[J.R. Hudson]

I was supporting the idea of Satan's Baby but it working; to be clear.


Thank you!

Sincerely

Flora Barren

:)

Hey Flora ! Jezebel !


But your execution of those ideas are inherently flawed since the piece requires the exigencies of a psychological drama (dealing with ulterior forms of parental rejection and religious values) but delivers it more as a low-brow horror film. None of your characters have the slightest bit of motivation or purpose: they are simply "borne" on screen with cardboard characteristics, and we, the audience are just supposed to accept it. The piece meanders around for a while in an inanely predictable manner... then... ends. There are no stops pulled out, no characters with real depth. Nothing that implies a strive towards a higher form of art. If it weren't for the great soundtrack, I would have been bored to tears.

But that's fine, right? Hostel was able to make it onto the big-screen, so what's wrong with this? As I said, the piece demands intellectuality, but is given no treatment of it. It's like making the main course of gourmet meal befitting of a king to be made out of Manwich. Sure, Manwhich tastes fine cooked in an iron skillet and served on white bread, but thrown next to caviar and a bottle of Château Latour... let's just say Henry the VIII might have gotten a little more 'stump happy.'

You need to stop assuming character traits, and instead create some of your own. Since you're a man of the theatre, you'll get this: More Mee Less May.*

In a bit, I'll write a detailed list of either questions that could bring additional depth to the characters, or statements that would have made the piece much more stable.

*(Charles Mee, Elaine May)


This wasn't Cannes; it was Hallowfest.

I think it is great that you get your point and opinion out there and in honesty. I find myself agreeing with you at times in many threads.

But hopefully it does not turn into a debate whereas you are trying to change peoples minds ?

Your opinion was planey heard and respected. No need to hammer it into the ground.

[Jared Meyer]

Ah sweet. I was half way through your post thinking I hope this never stops. I'm sure I will learn as much from your further posts as I have from your previous ones.

:beer:

This is sarcasm, right? Maybe I've had too much halloween candy, but I can't tell.

[Barry_Green]

Regarding the "JDS feature"

Any news? :):)
Just got the latest rewrite of the script a couple of days ago; planning to read it on the plane to India.

LMTF and The Unawakening were part of furthering the feature plan, so it's coming together, just slower than we ever anticipated.

[Jared Meyer]

Barry, what's The Unawakening?

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

The response to Movie Master's Horror Fest entry "The Awakening".

[Jared Meyer]

I must have missed that.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

The sarcasm or the movie? :D

Maybe it's coming soon to a URL near you:shocked:

[Beat Takeshi]

I thought it was visually bad-ass, dunno though it bored me. BUGS or whatever that one was... now that was freaky.

Again, though, everyone sees something different.

It was slow as hell but just to think of what it took to choreograph all that in one take is an amazing feat if you ask me.

[Barry_Green]

Barry, what's The Unawakening?

The Unawakening is the other film we did with Jack and Mac. (hey, if you had that combo, would you stop at just making one pic?)

It's still in post; it was shot on an HPX500. It was also intended to be a Hallows Fest entry, but there simply wasn't enough time to get 'em both done in time. It also features a cameo by one of our most well-known DVXUser personalities in his acting debut... :evil:

And no, it has nothing to do with Movie Master. If it did, I would have insisted on there being a tupperware scene.

[Kdawg]

Well, been thru most of the films, have not been scared yet and a little dissapointed. This one was very fun to watch, thanks for submitting it, and fantastic work everyone. The sound of the baby was very erie. Acting.. cinematography.. everything was very enjoyable. Great casting too. They look like they would fit the bill with that painting that has the farmer with his pitchfork and his wife. Great job and what a crew on this one.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

haha American Gothic - the painting you are referring to, was research for the Art Direction.

And actually, along those lines ... Mac and I make very subtle cameos in this movie. Maybe too small to tell on the internet, now that I look at it mine is mostly cropped out (mac you bastard) :)

1:55 & 4:23

[Kdawg]

NO way... I am watching it again after dinner. Gotta see this... I'll bet those are your eyes Jack.

[J.R. Hudson]

Ha ha

I forgot about that Jack. Awesome.

-

The bed; total movie magic.

[Michael Anthony Horrigan]

I thought it was the pictures on the wall?

[J.R. Hudson]

It was

But the bed reminded me ..

nevermind,

[Michael Anthony Horrigan]

It was

But the bed reminded me ..

nevermind,
LOL! Say no more.....
:shocked:

[mentatDUKE]

You need to stop assuming character traits, and instead create some of your own. Since you're a man of the theatre, you'll get this: More Mee Less May.*


I tend to disagree with this. By your logic, one should never deal in archetypes. That obviously isn't true as we see archetypes all the time. Jack Bauer is an archetype. Tim Robbins in Shawshank portrays an archetype. The soldiers in Saving Private Ryan are archetypal. And to plug our own film, the husband and wife in "How to Get Away With Murder" are archetypal.

The cinema language. We as film makers leverage over 100 years of cinema history along with centuries of storytelling history in general to convey thoughts and ideas. Utilizing this shorthand is a GOOD THING(tm). Rather than waste time re-inventing the wheel, we can actually examine the characters in a novel way since the skeletal framework comes pre-built for us.

I challenge you to list examples of wholly original character traits. It's simply not possible. I'm sure you know there are only a basic handful of stories to be told. It's all in execution.

[Jason Ramsey]

I just brought home our newborn baby today and then watched this... Luckily our baby doesn't look like that :)

Aside from the fact that you stole my idea.... only kidding (slightly inside unfunny joke).

My only observations on one watch may be easily chalked up to lack of time, resources, etc... But, when the play goes up, it goes up.

Firstly, there seemed to be some issues with what time frame this was set in. The costumes and the set design of the inside of the house, the characters and the execution of the characters, etc would suggest perhaps the early 1900's at the latest.

The pregnancy test, and the house in the background of the outdoor shot would suggest otherwise.

On the acting. It was effective, except for the delivery of the first line (to me). I found myself being more pulled into their performances as it went along, but disconnected from them in the very beginning. I thought their exchanges together were very good and there was some strong character development and/or direction of the performances. The intention, the beats, the "status" of their relationship were all there and of pro quality.

As far as the execution of the performances though, I felt they lacked a bit of.... punch for lack of a better word. As I said, it was apparent that you were working with some skilled actors. I found the performances to be very strong for a DVXFest. But, I found them not to be terribly dynamic in the execution. Everything else about them was pro.

Everything else about the flick was great, of course. And, of course I really dug it, and would loved to have been a fly on the wall during that process.... or an actor in one of your pieces some day.

Now none of this may make any sense at all.... But, having a new baby and no sleep and a super jealous toddler will do that to you...

Great as always.

And, for the record, I didn't feel disturbed at all by the content, even with my current situation.... But, maybe I'm just twisted like that.

Later,
Jason

[dmc]

I tend to disagree with this. By your logic, one should never deal in archetypes. That obviously isn't true as we see archetypes all the time. Jack Bauer is an archetype. Tim Robbins in Shawshank portrays an archetype. The soldiers in Saving Private Ryan are archetypal. And to plug our own film, the husband and wife in "How to Get Away With Murder" are archetypal.

The cinema language. We as film makers leverage over 100 years of cinema history along with centuries of storytelling history in general to convey thoughts and ideas. Utilizing this shorthand is a GOOD THING(tm). Rather than waste time re-inventing the wheel, we can actually examine the characters in a novel way since the skeletal framework comes pre-built for us.

I challenge you to list examples of wholly original character traits. It's simply not possible. I'm sure you know there are only a basic handful of stories to be told. It's all in execution.



This is one of the most succinct examples of character development I've ever heard/read. This storytelling technique allows the author/filmmaker to compress a great deal of data (data that the audience needs to be given credit for already having) to move the story forward. Archetypal characters aren't necessarily executed as stereotypes and it becomes redundant and a little insulting to the audience to re-explain the concept of villainy (for example).

Nice one mentatDUKE!!




dmc

[Brandon Rice]

Just got the latest rewrite of the script a couple of days ago; planning to read it on the plane to India.

LMTF and The Unawakening were part of furthering the feature plan, so it's coming together, just slower than we ever anticipated.

Awesome! :) Really can't wait to see this thing off the ground!:Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)

[MOVIE STUNTS]

I'm glad this wasn't in competition, because I don't think it would have been as great had it been only 5 mins. long! Loved it! Thanks, for bringing the Halloween spirit!:zombie_smiley:

[Marlon Ladd]

Man, you guys are so good, you make me sick! LOL.

I do agree with Jason a little about the whole time period thing (didn't think about any of this until I read his post), but I just thought that they were some small town country folk. The actors did get better and better as the film went along and I thought the shot of the girl outside burrying the baby and the pan out to see the rest of the crosses was FREAKIN' FREAKY!!!!! Great shot.

Great job and so glad you weren't in the competition. LOL. Please, keep me in mind for any acting roles in the future.

[Ming]

Yep that was far and away my favorite shot too, the crosses. My main criticism was that the ending was just a little too campy relative to the beginning. It should have taken itself more seriously. A pinch more "the omen" a pinch less "evil dead." Everything was visually thumbs up though.

As for archtypes... by definition they're static. They're the primary colors of the character palette (of humanity of course, but let's keep the conversation focused on writing) and no amount of irony escapes them. They're embedded -crossing cultural lines as easily as rivers on a map. We can twist and mold and pull and blend as we will- but a character will always be nothing but a mixture of hero, saint, savior, villian, martyr, ruler, begger, sage.. etc.

Stereotypes are not the same as archtypes. First off, they're external. They're the expectations "of the people" of which properties (the term "archtypal" quickly becomes redundant) a character will exibit based upon prior experience.

Just felt the need to distinguish.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

...
I do agree with Jason a little about the whole time period thing (didn't think about any of this until I read his post), but I just thought that they were some small town country folk. ...

Yeah that's it. The show was costumed entirely from things you could find in a thrift store in 2007 except for the overalls which were from a department store. The wall paper was purchased at home depot.

So there is nothing in the movie that could only be before X date.

So why let Jason sway you to the dark side when you had it right from the beginning :)

Seriously though my take is that they are just backward people stuck in time, probably not even in a small town but in the boonies outside a small town.

The house belonged to FLora's parents.

So there's nothing in it that's impossible to exist in a home or closet in 2007. But it should feel anachronistic - they are from another time in a sense.

Most of all, the "period feel" helped define the characters and set the mood. I might have gone ahead and set it in 1910, but for one thing I think it's a touch more powerful and creepy if they are walking around dressing and talking this way - and they are folks, meet Dexter Elliot from my home town, or some of the little old ladies in the Appalachian mountains I met on a highschool mission trip. Secondly its low budget. To really pull off period then we would have to worrry about the flip side of the coin - Flora's blouse at the end is polyester ...., her brown sweater at the top is a shawl collar v-neck with a woven pattern that didn't show up until the 1980's, Clovis's overalls are Carharts, the midwife's turbin is spandex - so what we've done is technically far less anachronistic than if we had done the same thing but gotten a different house and had some other device to expediently tell she was in the early stages of pregnancy at the beginning. Also it would have stuck out more I think if we presented it as period, then you see all of these little wardrobe details that aren't quite period, it would have felt false even if you couldn't identify exactly why.

They're just backwards people that don't watch MTV that buy the things from Woolworths in the next town that look most like what their parents wore.

If it was a feature I'd show them driving through McDonalds or buying groceries at the Hoggly Woggly and have some kid or the cashier with a nose ring looking at them funny.

I realize it may be a tad confusing to the critical viewer, but at worst I think its what Hitchcock called a "refrigerator question" meaning if we are doing our jobs properly and the viewer is "with us" its not something that should bother them until they are home making a sandwich after the movie and as they pull open the door of the refrigerator they think "would an oxygen tank really explode a whole shark like that if you shot it?" And again, better than trying to actually pull off a period look.

Also ... I would love to do a scene in a feature where to get more food for the baby, FLora has to update her wardrobe and start wearing makeup to lure men back home.

Part of the inspiration for her and the story came from Hellraiser 1, where the woman has to keep going out to get bodies and blood for her partially physically reincarnated lover - whose body forms slowly back system by system ... bones, muscles, nerve endings, flesh ... so she brings guys back an hits them in the back of the head with a claw hammer while her lover "Frank" slithers on all fours, dripping and oozing out of the darkness and gobbles them up.

That's what Flora and the baby come to eventually, after the credits role.

[MOVIE STUNTS]

Guess she didn't want blood on the toilet seat so she just ripped the damn thing off!:thumbsup:

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Or it didn't come with the one we bought at home depot. D'oh!

"toilet seat sold separately" lol

that was on a fine line of justification along with our poorly done and hard to maintain wallpapering job, meaning yeah we can justify that in this world "they're too poor to buy a toilet seat ... yeah that's it ... sure Clovis might fix peeling wallpaper with a staple gun ... yeah that's it"

[Ming]

Funny you should mention that.. I was going to suggest it would have been a little more believable and scary had the mother been maiming the victims. The root of the story really isn't the child, but the womans transformation from the submissive Christian backwoods emotionally abused wife desperate for an escape (via motherdom) to a monster -in order to get there. To me the chucky baby brought me out of the story by being so self-sufficient. It would have lent itself better to the story by appearing as completely evil while at the same time extremely vulnerable and needing of it's mother. (which was her motivation)

[Bill Clar]

All around great film. Nothing I can say that hasn't already been said.

[Ramon Boutviseth]

This is a great piece.

[Brandon Rice]

Part of the inspiration for her and the story came from Hellraiser 1, where the woman has to keep going out to get bodies and blood for her partially physically reincarnated lover - whose body forms slowly back system by system ... bones, muscles, nerve endings, flesh ... so she brings guys back an hits them in the back of the head with a claw hammer while her lover "Frank" slithers on all fours, dripping and oozing out of the darkness and gobbles them up.

That's what Flora and the baby come to eventually, after the credits role.

Maybe you also got the idea from "Little Shop of Horrors" :)

Feeding the plant people... hehe

[Slimothy]

Great job Jack! I really think this was great and would have won had it been entered. You constantly are improving and showing that you're worthy of the big leagues. It doesn't hurt to have some of the best cinematography on the friggin planet.

Question: How'd you do the monster baby gag? That thing was truly creepy.

Tim.

[Michele Seidman]

Man, you guys are so good, you make me sick! LOL.

I do agree with Jason a little about the whole time period thing (didn't think about any of this until I read his post), but I just thought that they were some small town country folk. The actors did get better and better as the film went along and I thought the shot of the girl outside burrying the baby and the pan out to see the rest of the crosses was FREAKIN' FREAKY!!!!! Great shot.

Great job and so glad you weren't in the competition. LOL. Please, keep me in mind for any acting roles in the future.

If you do get to work with Jack be prepared to want to spit the last day but then look back and figure he got you to push it to the wall like very few directors ever can!

Honestly...Jack even took some weaker moments of mine and made them look strong in the final edit....that was him not me! Hope you get to work with him and if he ever needs me I would be there in a heart beat....

he was easy to talk with....he understands the process for the actor and was willing to let the crew wait while he got us where we needed to be....even talked to me during one scene that sound could be edited...and honestly....when i see that reaction shot from it....it is my favorite moment in the whole thing because i have never seen that look on my face....

THAT was Jack working with the actor!

[Michele Seidman]

Also ... I would love to do a scene in a feature where to get more food for the baby, FLora has to update her wardrobe and start wearing makeup to lure men back home.

That's what Flora and the baby come to eventually, after the credits role.


Jack....tell me when....lol it will be nice to put make up back on and not look so haggard!

M

[Michele Seidman]

Guess she didn't want blood on the toilet seat so she just ripped the damn thing off!:thumbsup:

yup...yup...thats it...and ya know...i was a bad bad house keeper....might have lost the darned thing....lol

[Michele Seidman]

Everything was shot in "studio" except for the graveyard scene (and the bookend establishing shots of the house).

As for the actors, we held auditions here in Wilmington; lots of great local actors to be found. Michele Seidman (Flora) put some GREAT effort into additional casting for us.


and she was very happy to do it....let me know if i can help anytime....it was so worth any effort and time consumption....

[Michele Seidman]

dag nab it you make me feel good when you say nice stuff about my acting cause i think you direct so darned well.....

if anyone is lucky enough to work with you, you are one of the rare directors who can talk to tech and talent....

trust me on this....been doing camera work for 30 some odd years and worked with some names too...don't have to be famous to know a good director when you see one....

thank you for the opportunity! i don't even mind some of the folks who have bashed the acting or project because i can honestly say i am proud to have been part and proud to have worked with you and Mac, Barry, David, Shaun and everyone else too....Doug and Patty made the job easier too!

Got to give Doug props for pulling it out! the acting i mean...not his...ehem...

[Michele Seidman]

When you sign your posts 'Flora'..... it kind of creeps me out.
:)


oh...would not want to do that...want to come see the baby? honestly...would love to have you stop by the house and see the new addition....no harm...sincerely...

flora barren


(tee hee)

[Jay Rodriguez]

oooooooh! Good job guys.... loved everything about it. wish I could make movies this well put together.

[Michele Seidman]

Funny you should mention that.. I was going to suggest it would have been a little more believable and scary had the mother been maiming the victims. The root of the story really isn't the child, but the womans transformation from the submissive Christian backwoods emotionally abused wife desperate for an escape (via motherdom) to a monster -in order to get there. To me the chucky baby brought me out of the story by being so self-sufficient. It would have lent itself better to the story by appearing as completely evil while at the same time extremely vulnerable and needing of it's mother. (which was her motivation)

my fear is the darned child is going to grow big enough to not need me anymore....dang...i like your suggestion now...

[Luis Caffesse]

oh...would not want to do that...want to come see the baby? honestly...would love to have you stop by the house and see the new addition....no harm...sincerely...

flora barren


(tee hee)

Okay, not THAT is creepy.
(shivers)

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

heheh

yeah you've just gotten a invite to "see the baby"

I bet she "just can't wait to show him to ya"

Nice knowin' ya buddy :D

[Ben Sliker]

Jack,

First off, I thought this film was really great, so hopefully I can write you some very specific notes, not necessarily things that need to be changed, just stuff you can roll around in your head.

1. "this one'll end up just like the others" - unfortunately, this line took the impact that awesome pull back in the graveyard of babies for me because I already knew there were going to be A LOT more dead babies out there already. i know it's hard to change anything, a little less info there would have made the payoff greater for me.

2. flora barren ... just got that ... awesome little touch.

3. The cutting together of the wine bit bothered me, it's seems rushed in comparison to the rest of the film (like you were trying to get under that 5 min) I mean, you didn't make it under anyway, why not just cut it? Or just allude to the fact that she's drinking, I don't know, they just don't seem like wine people to me anyway ... maybe ... a little jack?

4. I really liked your explanation of how these people are stuck in time, but even through two views, that didn't come to me naturally, and it was a little bothersome for the people that i watched it with as well. So, just so that you know, it was more than just a refrigerator question, and to be weary, cause you don't want your audience to even potentially be focused on that instead of the rest of the film.

5. Can we see like a technically bad take from Mac so that we know he's human and not a robot sent from the future to save all cinematography?

6. Anywhere you post-zoomed, it's always kind of bothered me, i don't like 'em or use 'em, i keep asking in my head ... why didn't they just dolly out?

But thanks again Jack for another kick ass short, I think I would have voted for your film over mine ... again. Hopefully some of my random thoughts can help in the future.

[Luis Caffesse]

5. Can we see like a technically bad take from Mac so that we know he's human and not a robot sent from the future to save all cinematography?

Lets start a petition.
:thumbsup:

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Jack,

First off, I thought this film was really great, so hopefully I can write you some very specific notes, not necessarily things that need to be changed, just stuff you can roll around in your head.

1. "this one'll end up just like the others" - unfortunately, this line took the impact that awesome pull back in the graveyard of babies for me because I already knew there were going to be A LOT more dead babies out there already. i know it's hard to change anything, a little less info there would have made the payoff greater for me.

I hear you. Tough call. I wonder what that scene would be like without that line. Could probably be cut since it's standard TV coverage. Closeup, Closeup, Wide.

I wonder if I could get away with that. Right now I feel like it justifies his anger. Again with this baby stuff when will this woman learn. Would "Don't you know by now, god'd sooner grow a potato in a rock pile than a baby in that dried up little apricot you call a womb" make sense without the previous line ... if so would it not telegraph the crosses just as much?

Just wondering - I am open to cutting it you could be right.



2. flora barren ... just got that ... awesome little touch.
heheh yes the barren flower ...




3. The cutting together of the wine bit bothered me, it's seems rushed in comparison to the rest of the film (like you were trying to get under that 5 min) I mean, you didn't make it under anyway, why not just cut it? Or just allude to the fact that she's drinking, I don't know, they just don't seem like wine people to me anyway ... maybe ... a little jack?

Yeah I want to look at that section again. I had already though that it should be moonshine or whiskey and have kicked myself a few time for not doing an alternate take. As it is I thought maybe it was justified because of the religious thing - wine you know? maybe?

Problem is I'm not sure what to use there now. The wine kinda has to stay in. It's the emotional lubricant that allows her to sleep with her awful nasty mean husband.

As for the paciing -- like I said I think I want to recut that sequence if I can. Was it just the wine, or through the baby's birth that felt rushed to you?



4. I really liked your explanation of how these people are stuck in time, but even through two views, that didn't come to me naturally, and it was a little bothersome for the people that i watched it with as well. So, just so that you know, it was more than just a refrigerator question, and to be weary, cause you don't want your audience to even potentially be focused on that instead of the rest of the film.

Ok ok, "Uncle!" already. :) Yeah I know it is a weird choice. But at this point oh well. Don't know how it can be fixed. I was just following the "vision" in my head on this as much as possible within our production budget. I'd do it again though. The payoff is greater than the problem for me.

If anyone can think how this problem can be dealt with in post, or with getting like one additional shot, please shout it out.


5. Can we see like a technically bad take from Mac so that we know he's human and not a robot sent from the future to save all cinematography?

Haha, I will look for one if I have some time here and ask Mac if it's OK to post it. It happens rarely but he does occasionally say "Nope, bad for me, can we have another one please". But very rarely. And you know it will only be bad due to a bad focus pull or something, which is inevitable without a crew.



6. Anywhere you post-zoomed, it's always kind of bothered me, i don't like 'em or use 'em, i keep asking in my head ... why didn't they just dolly out?

But thanks again Jack for another kick ass short, I think I would have voted for your film over mine ... again. Hopefully some of my random thoughts can help in the future.

No, hopefully this will be a good discussion that can help me fix what I can, like maybe cutting that "this'n'll wind up spent same as the others" line.

[Kholi]

Funny you should mention that.. I was going to suggest it would have been a little more believable and scary had the mother been maiming the victims. The root of the story really isn't the child, but the womans transformation from the submissive Christian backwoods emotionally abused wife desperate for an escape (via motherdom) to a monster -in order to get there. To me the chucky baby brought me out of the story by being so self-sufficient. It would have lent itself better to the story by appearing as completely evil while at the same time extremely vulnerable and needing of it's mother. (which was her motivation)

I haven't had a chance to really comment yet, I am hoping to get to a review and comment of all of the shorts tonight but, before this slips my mind, I want to acknowledge Ming's post as a fantastic one.

Very great thoughts, and shows that you actually looked beyond the pretty image that we can expect from such a great team and get into what's behind it.

[Ben Sliker]

dammit jack, now i had to go back and watch it ... again ... lol

as i watch the first sequence back again, it's "the others" that gets me, I think the rest of the conversation could slip by without making me think there's a bunch of babies somewhere. That being said, I don't think the scene would flow nearly as well without it.

With the wine, the part that bothered me the most about it was the close-up pouring shot ... i think that could be cut altogether and the effect that's she's "boozing" herself up would still play from the painful drinking of the next shot and the "where you at?" line afterwards. I think that would fix the pacing of those couple shots too, cause the rest of the sex/birth sequence is money.

[EJ Pennypacker]

Hey JDS and crew,

I had the chance to view this last night, so just some GOOD and BAD I'm gonna throw out there (probably repeated but I'm not going thru all 13pgs lol).

GOOD

The set design was professional and 'polished'. Big WELL DONE on that front.

The color palete/choice of the production was fitting with tone of the film. Nice.

The acting was solid and professional.

The sound/score the same.

The pull-back reveal of the crosses in the ground was a nice touch.

The baby-doll CGI was excellent. Hats off.

The editing was nice and smooth and each scene impressed me how easily it flowed into the next.

BAD

Minor point, but the actual time setting of the story I thought was 'period' like in the 18/19th century (costumes/sets), so when we cut to a modern-day light-bulb in the woman's hand, it threw me off big time. It made me think of 2008. I'd love to have seen perhaps the home lit with candles and laterns instead.

also another *minor* point, the coverage/blocking in the very first scene seemed off with the man CU talking, then cutting to a 2-shot of them both. It seemed the guy walked out of frame or was positioned at an odd angle to the camera so when you cut back to them both, it didn't seem to synch up with continuity. (I can get an exact time-reference if you'd like)

Other than that, a nice tight production that plays on all our greatest fears, THE DARK. well done.

EJ

[Marlon Ladd]

If you do get to work with Jack be prepared to want to spit the last day but then look back and figure he got you to push it to the wall like very few directors ever can!

Honestly...Jack even took some weaker moments of mine and made them look strong in the final edit....that was him not me! Hope you get to work with him and if he ever needs me I would be there in a heart beat....

he was easy to talk with....he understands the process for the actor and was willing to let the crew wait while he got us where we needed to be....even talked to me during one scene that sound could be edited...and honestly....when i see that reaction shot from it....it is my favorite moment in the whole thing because i have never seen that look on my face....

THAT was Jack working with the actor!
You did a really good job Michele (I still see you as that character - freaky - LOL) and you can tell that Jack knows what he's doing. And since I'm a director myself I know that's it's much easier to be able to direct actors and actresses if you know where they're coming from, like Jack does - since he has also acted before.

[Marlon Ladd]

Jack, yeah, I let Jason take me to the dark side. LOL. Sorry, I was right all along!

[Kirk Attard]

Great work Jack.

I think it's one of the films with the best production value i've seen on this site. I hope to see a full feature in the future.

I especially enjoyed the scene where the camera pulls out and shows all the little crosses. Camera work throughout the film is great. Definitely the best all rounder. I think everyone is relieved it is not competing.

Good job to all the team and good luck for future productions.
Keep it coming.!

[sean90291]

As usual, Jack and Mac show they have keen eyes and masterful control. I'm sure everyone loved the reveal of all the small crosses as much as I did. This had beautiful production values (though I couldn't help noticing the anachronistic light switch). I loved your casting. You got great performances. Flawless choices...except for a few lines that hurt my ears bad. Best of the fest for me so far.

[Darkline]

Hiya Jack,

You've certainly added another great looking film to your body of work here. Shot selection was great, good performances... technically flawless. The cross shot has been commented on but it really did work well.

My only useless comment would be that the story went exactly where you expected it to once you'd had the gobbling baby midwife scene. But I think this is minor as you've provided the most well rounded film in the festival (from what I've seen so far) and excelled in all other departments.

great job. I think people are harsh on you because they know what you're capable of.

PS there wasnt enough nudity for my liking, I want to see porn and more offensive material to all sections of society. I want to leave feeling dirty. I hope you dont dissapoint next time.

[Cool Lights]

Hi Jack,

Great entry here! The pullback in the cemetery is great and I love the little light in the background and the smoke / fog. It's those little touches that really add something to each scene.

Really top level cinematography on every scene and it looks like a lot of attention was paid to small details. Maybe I missed it in this long thread but what did you use for a studio, where the sets were shot?

Would love to see a BTS of lighting, etc. Also, I didn't think the baby looked bad and it's actually a good thing to only show glimpses of something like that--regardless of how well the puppet was done. Remember the original Alien? We didn't see so much of the Alien itself except in quick cuts and that worked in favor of creating a lot of tension and making it far scarier.

[Matt Harris]

thats the funniest thing ever, i downloaded the jpeg and plan to send to people.
who came up with that? if somehow im posting this wrong, im refering to the "oh snap" flow chart.

[Maximus]

Good job.

I've been a big fan of macgregor since Similo (the best film I've seen yet on dvxuser IMHO). :love4: Hope we can work together someday. Aren't I cheeky?

Solid work Jack as always. I almost used that poster font - Bleeding Cowboy? Looks cool.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Good job.
.... I almost used that poster font - Bleeding Cowboy? Looks cool.

Yeah that's it. I think I may change the title font at the end to that.

Folks that don't know, check out
http://dafont.com


Hi Jack,

Great entry here! The pullback in the cemetery is great and I love the little light in the background and the smoke / fog. It's those little touches that really add something to each scene.

Really top level cinematography on every scene and it looks like a lot of attention was paid to small details. Maybe I missed it in this long thread but what did you use for a studio, where the sets were shot?

Barry's garage. He has a sweet little set up. He's got a corner lot and there's a garage attached. But on the other corner there is another garage with a small workspace. So that one he has converted into a mini studio with as much sound proofing as possible etc.

If you notice, it's the same door in every scene. We used the practical door that leads from the small workspace into the garage. So the door is also oversized. For the bathroom scenes, we flipped the whole scene in post - had the actors part their hair on different sides just so we could have the door open left to right in one room.

Everything was shot on the same side of the wall except for going into the darkened bedroom. To match continuity from when we see the midwife against the door and now seeing it from the other side, we dressed the opposite side of the wall in the workroom.


Would love to see a BTS of lighting, etc.

There's something special planned for that. I think. :)


Also, I didn't think the baby looked bad and it's actually a good thing to only show glimpses of something like that--regardless of how well the puppet was done. Remember the original Alien? We didn't see so much of the Alien itself except in quick cuts and that worked in favor of creating a lot of tension and making it far scarier.

In general I agree with that approach and the baby is getting mixed reviews. But I have this scene in my head though where he looks up and creepily into the camera ... post was a very condensed process and I had to learn matchmoving and how to replace the puppet's eye within a few days. Hopefully it will get better with some more TLC when there is time, or maybe I can find away to just throw a shaft of light over the eye. Maybe that shot can be trimmed significantly as well.

[Tom Marshall]

Minor point, but the actual time setting of the story I thought was 'period' like in the 18/19th century (costumes/sets), so when we cut to a modern-day light-bulb in the woman's hand, it threw me off big time. It made me think of 2008. I'd love to have seen perhaps the home lit with candles and laterns instead.

It wasn't a period piece. The very first shot was of the woman holding a pregnancy test, so that sets the timeframe to within the past 10 / 15 years or so. The wardrobe choice was a legitimate one, as I'm sure there are people to this day that dress that way. Almost had an Amish feel to the characters, although that's a different geographical area and not the same, but similar. And lighbulbs have been around for quite a while now, so that didn't bother me.

I think this thing had a great look to it. I would have liked to see some more fog in the cemetary scene, but that's just my choice. I would have liked to see a little more grittiness in the scenes too. The lighting was great and the shots cut together well. The story was pretty good. I don't have a frame of reference for the characters, so I can't really comment on whether their behavior was realistic or not, but I'm assuming it's accurate. I would have liked to see more of the characters exposed, per se, as in more elaborate set design or more colorful dialog. I realize it's hard to pull something like that off in 5 minutes though... This would be better as a 15 - 20 minute short as you could explore the characters more...

[Matt Harris]

Jack (and crew) i just saw this now, it wasn't downloading correctly for me all week.
I gotta say i am pretty impressed (read: blown away) on all aspects of the film. This short offically elevates the bar on dvxuser films, and has personally inspired me to make better work. Thank god, er, i mean satan that you aren't able to receive votes.

[Cool Lights]

For the bathroom scenes, we flipped the whole scene in post - had the actors part their hair on different sides just so we could have the door open left to right in one room.

Hehe. Good thinking. I have heard about Barry's garage and I know he's got lots of other interesting things planned there.



In general I agree with that approach and the baby is getting mixed reviews. But I have this scene in my head though where he looks up and creepily into the camera ... post was a very condensed process and I had to learn matchmoving and how to replace the puppet's eye within a few days. Hopefully it will get better with some more TLC when there is time, or maybe I can find away to just throw a shaft of light over the eye. Maybe that shot can be trimmed significantly as well.

Or make friends with a CG artist ;-)

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

.....


Or make friends with a CG artist ;-)

I have a guy. But he moved to Canada and I don't have his new number :(

He has some very good vamp outs on his real -- you know like in buffy where the personal is normal and then their face changes. He also put glowing sushi eyes in the thug in bonehand, so he should be able to do something much better.

[Billy Pilgrim]

Did he do the part in 18 Seconds where you get run over by a car? I thought that looked great.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

No I did that. Entirely composited from location footage. It was a lock down shot, so I didn't have to know how to match move at that point.

[Mark Johnson]

For the bathroom scenes, we flipped the whole scene in post - had the actors part their hair on different sides just so we could have the door open left to right in one room.


This is the kind of dedication and attention to detail that characterizes every Jack Stanley production. I still am so very grateful to have had the chance to work with Jack on REKINDLED last year so that I could see how he interweaves detail throughout production.

The pull-back of the makeshift graveyard is my favorite image yet seen on this board. We had a group watching on a big plasma and everybody softly said "sh*t" as the reveal occurred. That's a classic marriage of beautiful framing/lighting with story information that really hits you in the gut.

I do hope that the relatively new members of the forum go to Jack's site to view all his shorts. You can pick up so much and Jack has always been very willing to share info about how he achieved his images.

Last thing, Jack. Do you have a finish target for the companion piece you guys have been working on?

[Michael Anthony Horrigan]

I do hope that the relatively new members of the forum go to Jack's site to view all his shorts. You can pick up so much and Jack has always been very willing to share info about how he achieved his images.

I've watched all of Jack's shorts on his site. Rekindled is one of my favourites!


Cheers,

Mike

[EJ Pennypacker]

It wasn't a period piece. The very first shot was of the woman holding a pregnancy test, so that sets the timeframe to within the past 10 / 15 years or so. The wardrobe choice was a legitimate one, as I'm sure there are people to this day that dress that way. Almost had an Amish feel to the characters, although that's a different geographical area and not the same, but similar. And lighbulbs have been around for quite a while now, so that didn't bother me.

Quiet right you are. I completely forgot about the test pregnancy moment.

EJ

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

yeah but you're both right, it''s confusing

[Barry_Green]

Jack was concerned about this from day one. We even talked about making it a full-on "period piece", but -- the imagery of the cross going to the cross on the pregnancy test told the story in a flash. How would it have been if we'd cut from, say, the cross to a dead rabbit? Or to her vomiting in the morning with morning sickness?

From the beginning, Jack's idea was to make a film that made people a bit uncomfortable. He wanted us to be horrified and heartwarmed at the same time, which is no small task (in fact, it's quite incongruous); thematically then we decided that it was okay that there was some incongruity in the overall pic (modern light bulb, modern pregnancy test, but people who dressed and acted old-school, etc). The world moved on past these people.

But yes, Jack was concerned whether that would "work", or if it would bother people. His rough cut didn't have the lightbulb cutaway; I suggested he put it back in just to convey the deliberateness of her actions in setting Clovis up. In the actual scene, in the fixtures, I think at one point we were using CFL bulbs -- now that would have been really modern! But we used conventional incandescents for the shot; they've been with us a long, long time and didn't really "scream" modern (like the pregnancy test did).

In the end it was an experimental piece, experimenting with a few ideas. The incongruity was one.

[David Jimerson]

Also, something that's not clear in the exterior establishing shots of the house is that there's a broken down, but not terribly old, Ford Ranger right outside. If it were more visible in the shot, things may have been less confusing from the start.

The ambiguity is in part style. I have mixed feelings myself on how well it worked in the final edit, but I was never troubled by the idea during development or shooting. It made sense to me, and heightened the eeriness of the setting, to think that people would still live like that in the present day.

[Blaine]

It made sense to me, and heightened the eeriness of the setting, to think that people would still live like that in the present day.
And you can find people in isolated parts of the country that do in fact live like that. It was absolutely no stretch for me what so ever. Unfortunately, if it's outside a person's experience it can be harder for them to accept what can be rare but nonetheless an actual situation.

[Jason Ramsey]

That sounds an interesting idea. The midwife screams period to me as well, though. I can see the husband and wife being in their own little world, stuck in time, but the midwife comes across the same both in dialect and in costume choice. That is the part that seems a stretch to me. But, then there are explanations one could come up with for that as well, I suppose. The midwife is a generational descendant of past "slaves" turned employees of the family through the years.... then it could make sense. But there was obviously no time to establish that, so perhaps going a different direction with the midwife could have helped make your choice more clear.

Now that I have read what you guys have said about it, it seems clear and is quite an interesting choice and adds to the dynamic.

I think perhaps though, it could have added to the dynamic if the midwife were a slice out of modern times in her speech and/or costume. And, I think given the time constraints that could have been an interesting choice to help convey what you guys have been describing here. As it stands, (for me) she pushes it towards attempt at period more than stylistic choice. I know you would know the house is modern and the test is modern, so now that I have read what you said it makes perfect sense what you were going for. The midwife can cloudy that, or make it clear depending on the direction that you go with her. In this case she was 'period' as well. She is an outside character to an extent.

Ma' feeble opinion.

Later,
Jason

[David Jimerson]

We did talk about that -- we talked about putting her in modern scrubs, or at least more modern clothes, and at one point were set to do it. It's a fine line.

[Cool Lights]

The pull-back of the makeshift graveyard is my favorite image yet seen on this board. We had a group watching on a big plasma and everybody softly said "sh*t" as the reveal occurred. That's a classic marriage of beautiful framing/lighting with story information that really hits you in the gut.


You had us at the pullback!

[Blaine]

This is the kind of dedication and attention to detail that characterizes every Jack Stanley production. I still am so very grateful to have had the chance to work with Jack on REKINDLED last year so that I could see how he interweaves detail throughout production.

...

I do hope that the relatively new members of the forum go to Jack's site to view all his shorts. You can pick up so much and Jack has always been very willing to share info about how he achieved his images.The other thing that everyone needs to see is the production value JDS is able to achieve with what others might think is just an ordinary apartment. Jack actually painted his apartment in order to shoot it for Rekindled, arguably the best art design I've seen in a DVXUser production of ANY kind. (Of course this movie is awfully damned good, too.) It's not an accident JDS get the results he does.

So many times, we aren't willing to go the extra mile to get that incredible look. Jack does a lot of things well. I think this is his best project yet. He has finally put everything together in one movie.

(Now, where's the companion piece?)

[Mark Harris]

I think I've told Jack everything i think about this film, but I wanted to say good job to all who worked on this.

I also heard from Jack about how quick the shoot was and all, and it seems like everyone put in 110% to get this made.

Nice work, all.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Jack was concerned about this from day one. We even talked about making it a full-on "period piece", but -- the imagery of the cross going to the cross on the pregnancy test told the story in a flash. How would it have been if we'd cut from, say, the cross to a dead rabbit? Or to her vomiting in the morning with morning sickness?

From the beginning, Jack's idea was to make a film that made people a bit uncomfortable. He wanted us to be horrified and heartwarmed at the same time, which is no small task (in fact, it's quite incongruous); thematically then we decided that it was okay that there was some incongruity in the overall pic (modern light bulb, modern pregnancy test, but people who dressed and acted old-school, etc). The world moved on past these people.

But yes, Jack was concerned whether that would "work", or if it would bother people. His rough cut didn't have the lightbulb cutaway; I suggested he put it back in just to convey the deliberateness of her actions in setting Clovis up. In the actual scene, in the fixtures, I think at one point we were using CFL bulbs -- now that would have been really modern! But we used conventional incandescents for the shot; they've been with us a long, long time and didn't really "scream" modern (like the pregnancy test did).

In the end it was an experimental piece, experimenting with a few ideas. The incongruity was one.

Careful. You will have people thinking there is actually some thought behind the pretty images :)


That sounds an interesting idea. The midwife screams period to me as well, though. I can see the husband and wife being in their own little world, stuck in time, but the midwife comes across the same both in dialect and in costume choice. ...

The funny thing about the midwife ... the real person, meaning the actor, brought all that dialect to it based on her experience. One of her relatives was even a midwife. I even to toned it down a bit on set and in editing. There was lots of "Oh Lawdy" in the takes I didn't use.

Her headware is a spandex dew rag from the local African American beauty shop purchased in October 2007.

So ... again, I can't argue with people's experience, just what's actually plausible or period.

What would have been a mistake is scrubs though. I think it would have looked like we wanted a hospital set or scene and couldn't pull it off. Even if it didn't seem anachronistic in our stylized world, which I think it would have, it would have been even more confusing ... are we in a hospital? no I think those are the same walls, is that a nurse? nurses don't make house calls to deliver babies ... etc.


Also, something that's not clear in the exterior establishing shots of the house is that there's a broken down, but not terribly old, Ford Ranger right outside. If it were more visible in the shot, things may have been less confusing from the start... .

That truck is not actually in the shot I chose at all.

I would have used one of the other shots (which were done the day after I left town for a freind's wedding), but the shots which featured the truck showed the whole house, which seemed way to small for the interior we had ... maybe not ... but that was my concern. So I picked a shot that obscured the back half of the house so you couldn't see it though I did like some of the shots that showed the truck, especially the dolly shots.

Maybe I will post some of those shots and see if people think that our interior could fit in that exterior, just in terms of size.

[TimurCivan]

yea it created a nice "world"... i liek the mix of old and modern. Bladerunner anyone?

[Michele Seidman]

I was supporting the idea of Satan's Baby but it working; to be clear.



Hey Flora ! Jezebel !

THIS coming from Jezebels knees...ha!



Okay, not THAT is creepy.
(shivers)

I hate it when a man gets the shivers, let me make yo some soup....you still need to see the baby...


heheh

Nice knowin' ya buddy :D

Shush up now Jack.....don't you be given all my secrets away...I did let you walk out!


Jack,

2. flora barren ... just got that ... awesome little touch.

That is so nice of you to say.


Hey JDS and crew,

The acting was solid and professional.

EJ
Pennypacker...thank you kindly for that comment.


You did a really good job Michele (I still see you as that character - freaky - LOL) and you can tell that Jack knows what he's doing.

Thank you....sincerely!


So many times, we aren't willing to go the extra mile to get that incredible look. Jack does a lot of things well.

(Now, where's the companion piece?)

Agreed on Jack.


I think I've told Jack everything i think about this film, but I wanted to say good job to all who worked on this.

I also heard from Jack about how quick the shoot was and all, and it seems like everyone put in 110% to get this made.

Nice work, all.

Everyone really did try to give their all on this and I am so proud to have been part myself.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

yea it created a nice "world"... i liek the mix of old and modern. Bladerunner anyone?

True, but I don't think we gave them enough of a clue that is is another world, or enough hints that it has modern elements. Bladerunner is like PAPOW! We're not in Kansans anymore

Hold on. I'm gonna re cut the opening and see if you guys think it would help.

[Michael_Petro]

Damnit if i was half as good as you id move to hollywood.... im very impressed

[Blaine]

Damnit if i was half as good as you id move to hollywood.... im very impressedWe've spoken to him about it in the past. One day he'll make the move...:evil:

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

OK pretend the opening shot is properly graded day for night. With some power masks I can do that and make sure the truck stays visible. The rest of the junk will disappear.

http://frenchquarterfeatures.com/lmtf/LMTFnewopenning.mov (http://frenchquarterfeatures.com/lmtf/LMTFnewopenning.mov)
(again, unfinished day for night CC on first clip)


The reason I didn't use this clip was because I was afraid the house looked to small for all we fit in it.

But now I don't care about that. I prefer this clip to the one I used anyway and I think it might go some distance towards solving the time period problem.

If I show the audience a pickup truck, a pregnancy test and 20th century house ... don't much know how they could miss this is not 1890 - 1910.

What do you think does the different opening shot ...
A clearly set the piece in time
B help set the piece in time
C make no difference, people will be confused anyway due to the costumes etc

[Blaine]

Jeez, I don't see the problem. The opening shot is a quick establishing shot of where they live. I NEVER saw this as a period piece and I think it is the best thing I've seen from you, yet...now the companion piece with Julie?

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Jeez, I don't see the problem. The opening shot is a quick establishing shot of where they live. I NEVER saw this as a period piece and I think it is the best thing I've seen from you, yet ...

right but I can use it to clarify ... does the new shot do that?


... now the companion piece with Julie?heheh ... whip cracks, FCP up and running ... back on task

[Jason Ramsey]

Hey, Jack. I don't want to dwell on this, of course...

I'm not really saying that I incorrectly interpreted that you were placing this in x time period. I just feel that perhaps your choice was a bit cloudy (for me, for whatever meaningful reason I may have, or stupidity/lack of examination on my own part).

The thing that pushes it over the bounds of the choice that I hear described in the thread here is the midwife. If there were more time to establish her family history as being tied to the family history of Flora, then it could completely work for me and make it a very compelling choice. But, as is... I feel giving her a touch of modern-ness might have helped convey your overall setting a bit better. Not suggesting scrubs or any of that. She is not the immediate family, so in a small way she is kind of a way to put the family in perspective of their surrounding world. So, for me, it's either take the moment to establish her longtime family connection/lineage, or let her (even slightly) represent the "reality" that is outside these folks walls. If that makes any sense at all :)

Mind not clear... newborn baby... food poisoning... movie with evil baby...

[Blaine]

right but I can use it to clarify ... does the new shot do that?Sorry, I missed the new shot. It definitely sets the time frame as current. BUT I prefer the one you used...it's much more ominous. You gave enough information in the original to show it wasn't a period piece.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

hmmm ... I think/hope the lack of ominousity in the new one is due to it not really being graded for night ... there's like 5 power windows in the shot I used masking different areas.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

... the midwife. If there were more time to establish her family history as being tied to the family history of Flora,... or let her (even slightly) represent the "reality" that is outside these folks walls. If that makes any sense at all :)

Mind not clear... newborn baby... food poisoning... movie with evil baby...


hahaha no no no

I did not say her family was tied to Flora.

What I said was ... the real life person. The actor. Is from a line of midwives ... talks like that - even more so than what was in the movie ... and all her clothes are new .... nothing about what my imagined world or her relationship to Flora is, I was telling you that that was the "reality" outside the movie, that it does exist out there ...

again, I can't argue anyone's experience watching ... but all that does factually exist out there right this second

what is probably confusing is that it is not a 100% real world. If it felt like a documentary, then you would have no choice but to buy this woman in the sticks in North Carolina or in the Appalachan(sp?) mountains as real and now, but it does feel makebelieve ... still if I show you the truck and you know it's not period, and you just won't go there with me then you just won't go there.

Maybe if I make more of an effort to say this is contemporary with the truck then it will seem less cloudy at least, if not dissonant.

That's what I want. Dissonance with no cloudiness. "These two things indeed do not go together and the resulting dissonance is intentional."

[Blaine]

Do what you want, Jack, but I'm with you all the way on the original... I've seen these people and I know they exist.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Well the midwife would look pretty weird getting out of her Hyundai in that outfit ... or maybe not ... shed did have some clothes like that but all brightly colored prints

... which is another thing that makes it feel period ... restricting the colors to black brown and tan in the art direction gives it a sepia feel.

and what I want is to effectively communicate with as many people as possible ... so if I loose nothing by changing a shot that can potentially do that, then I'm all for it ...

and thanks for being there for the as is version, BTW

[Jason Ramsey]

Appalachian :)


In response to your post 163:
I got all that :) I was just saying that she came across for me as someone who was "stuck" in that same world that the hubby and wife were in. So, I would have liked to have either seen her established as having her family connected to Flora's family, or letting her represent some other perspective just a bit. I'm not saying right or wrong of course. I don't know... :) I guess I'm just asking is which "world" is the midwife living in? If she is on the same side, I would like to see the connection, the history (time allowing). Otherwise, I would like to see her represent a bit of that "otherside". I like the contrast... the "dissonance".

The house or whatever (the other shot) doesn't make it any more/less clear for me. I think it's in the midwife. With your choice, which I see as putting her (for terrible lack of terminology) from the same general "mold" of the husband and wife, I would like to see some sort of connection between her family history and flora's or the husbands...

bah, nevermind :) I'm not good with words anyways... Just ignore me. I think it's in the midwife. Either in giving her some history somehow, or giving her the connection to the pregnancy test, outside of house world....

Sorry, I'm just stuck on it, and it's obviously nothing to be stuck on :)

Later,
Jason
EDIT: I think that was too many smileys

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

No need for apologies, trying to figure out how to make it best and I'm willing to listen to the vocal minority.

I can't add history to the relationship, it would be superfluous to a story that just needs to go ahead and move along at that point, we need a functionary character to show up, get that baby out, and get eatin - that's it, and its not in the budget to fly back to wilmy and reshoot scenes. So all I can do is work with the footage I have and that seems to equal: show more trucks. :)

If no one feels our interior wouldn't fit in that exterior in terms of size, then I will go with the new shot since that was the only reason I didn't.

[Blaine]

Get the color grading correct and you should be gold. The writer in me says stick with the original, but the producer in me says do what it takes to make it accessible by the majority. The producer in me almost always wins out since you always have to be cognizant of the concerns of your "money". This is more a concern of the producer than the director but I know you are one of the new breed of directors...:Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)

[David Jimerson]

The producer in ME, being one of the producers of the film :), isn't all that bothered by the dissonance, because the more people talking about the film makes all the more people want to watch it. :)

[J.R. Hudson]

I think the new shot is more effective in setting up the location Jack; I like it, it is a wider shot that establishes a world.

[Michael Anthony Horrigan]

I think the new shot is more effective in setting up the location Jack; I like it, it is a wider shot that establishes a world.Ditto! I love the new shot.

Cheers,

Mike

[Darkline]

Hey Jack,

I don't see it as being a big problem either, but if you want to open the discussion, my thoughts would be that this shot does help to explain visually that we're not in the 1800's so I'd probably keep it.... but it does raise in the audience a question of 'why'?

I guess if you do something so distinct in your scripting/cinematic choice (people living out of time), it's going to be a question the audience will want to have answered at some point. We're almost thinking this is somehow integral to the story itself, maybe like 'the village' (or hopefully not!). We're waiting to find out why that is important to the story.

But if you wanted to clarify futher, perhaps theres a section near the opening where you could have the man listening to the TV in the other room while she takes the test. Something that hints at modernity from the start as audio only. He could switch it off before he comes knocking on the door... It might not work but could help to establish period.

I dont want to rain on your entry at all, or sound like I know what's the best thing to do, but you seem someone who's always open to all kinds of feedback to his work so I'll be totally honest with what I thought if that's ok.... just what my gut reaction to the piece was.

For me, the most distracting element was the ending. I just felt once we had the reveal of the devil eating baby, well, it wasnt enough to have the end being another eating baby scene. It didnt really provide us with anything new... The fact she was content to see the midwife get eaten was enough to know she was a changed character and she had a 'bad' baby. So the final scene seemed to be an extension of the previous scene rather than an 'ending'.... am I making any sense? It's like 2 endings which were back to back with the same values. Maybe if he changed at the end (into someone who embraced the devil child, like he always wanted one), or there was another reversal of some kind, but to play it the same as the previous scene left me feeling flat.

Or if you had some set of circumstances where the father had to deliver the baby instead of the midwife, then you'd get the reveal and death all in the same scene, perhaps making it tighter and more dramatic ending.

But I know what it's like, people give you advice and you think 'well what do you know'. At the end of the day if you listened to all advice you'd have a very unfocussed and meandering story. I actually really liked the short. I loved that you set it in an older period. There's so much about this short film that actually works really well. The pacing, editing, sound design...all excellent Contrary to others I loved the baby fx and thought you did a subtle but good job.

Hope the comments didn't seem harsh, I guess I'm more ciritcal because I was with you all the way up tp the final moments

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

hmmm ...

well the midwife eating scene just could end with Flora having a stunned look on her face ...

So she demands to see the baby.
She sees the baby.
"Oh he's beatuiful."
Baby attacks.
Flora gasps and looks stunned.
Midwife is yanked out of frame

So we end not knowing exactly what she thought about the eating ... maybe when clovis comes home we think she's just gonna hide the fact that baby ate the midwife ...

What do you think?

MY only flip side to that would be ... that unlike establishing the world better with a different opening shot, this may start to get into schizo-directing where I'm not fully committing to one path - you are supposed to see the end coming ... I thought it would be fun and satisfying with a bit of suspense to see the old jerk, finally get eaten ...

But maybe it is OK because in the next frame after we cut she could supposedly say "goodness he's a hungry little thing" as she does in the scene now, and even not hearing that wouldn't mean that I had showed anything inconsistent with how the end played out. ... but then again everything is directed and scored after that moment to say "look what's coming" not "I wonder what's coming."

It has surprised me when some people said that they saw the ending coming .... well yeah, you'd have to be on the short bus not to see it coming, her expression, the way its scored, everything, are neon signs that blink "here it comes. he's gonna get it. it's not gonna be purdy" So I was trying to show you the bomb on the bus then build some suspense as to how exacty it would go off. I mean how many people does Norman bates kill, are they uninteresting after the first? We know Peter Parker now has and embraces his super powers. When he finally gets the big bad guy at the end are we surprised that he uses them and wins?

I've wondered if this "story fell apart for me" or "saw the end coming" experience some people are having is somewhat contextual - meaning they think, and they think that I think, that Rod Serling has to come out at the end of everything I do and present a twist ending.

BUT .... Maybe the audience is just 1% too much ahead of the movie here. And maybe it is her complete complicity withe the baby eating the midwife. Maybe that says so/too resoundingly - OK she will feed anyone and everyone to this thing without blinking, no question. So maybe if I can end ambiguously there ... then I can buy that 1% back and keep some kind of question going for the audience ....

Posts on writing strategy for short films aside, I don't thin a twist ending is the only viable ending for a short.

And I don't think her character arc is over after the baby shows up and she loves it. God (the character in the story) is an oppressor. She loosens that shackle, (for now). But what about Clovis? Will he be Okay with the fact that she finally had a baby? Will she still be under his thumb? Because she is down with baby does not explicitly say she will be able to step out of the cycle of abuse with Clovis.

Plus the story is not complete until she trades one monster for another. Plus it's not like the movie goes on for 20 minutes after the world has changed (baby born, midwife eaten). Its like a minute out of 8, and while the world has changed with the baby being born we have not seen HOW the world has changed for her - the fallout from that.

Re why people living out of time -
Older times. Smaller minds. Flora is more vulnerable and likeable if her world view is very small and she's somewhat of a victim to that. I don't think it's something people will dwell on as to why if I make the fact that it's not 1800 clearer in the opening shot.

Re TV at the top -
I may explore the idea of having a religious TV broadcast on in the next room which you hear get switched off before hearing Clovis's heavy footsteps in the hall.

[Darkline]

All good points Jack.

I agree that you don't have to have a twist ending, and Peter Parker does get the bad guy, but through an inner insight or revelation of his own character just moments before. So while there might not be a twist, there would be a moment of discovery, even internally, of some kind.... For Flora this moment has already happened in the previous scene. Maybe delaying that moment fully to the final scene would add to the satisfaction. Your suggestion may well work.

So perhaps that's what I'm missing. If like you say, the audience did not see her reaction to the midwife then you'd only see her 'change' in the moments before Clovis's death. However, that is again alluded to when we see she has taken the lightbulb out. Just thinking aloud here but does the baby need to eat the midwife? I know it was a lot of work, but would the ending be more powerful if Clovis was the only death we saw? Maybe we see the babys eyes open and then cut to Clovis arriving home. I guess I felt the midwife scene 'topped' the final scene, both visually and dramatically. Cutting it out would certainly leave the audience asking more questions and save the impact for Clovis.... but is that what you really want or intended?

It's a tough one if your intention was to say to the audience 'here it comes folks' then we must really enjoy the moment when he's killed and not be expecting a twist. Why was I? I dont know, maybe because of the reasons above.

As they say you can give the audience exactly what they want, boy gets girl, hero kills villian, but just not in the way they expected it to happen. Maybe because the death of Clovis happens off-screen could be a reason why I felt less satisfied too. If his death is what we're waiting for, the defining moment, then it needs to be bigger visually than the midwife death scene.

Or maybe if Clovis had been (if possible) more horrible to her previously, we'd hate him more. Personally I was still thinking he wasn't beyond redemption completely. He almost seems to have a change of heart in the final scene before he is killed which makes makes him (slightly) less of a desirable target.

As you say you have to work with what you've got and it might be just perfect as it is. You should only ever try to satisfy yourself. Dont change a thing if you're happy and think the reaction you're getting is 50/50. The best films are often devisive.

But if you wanted you could try a few different cuts on the timeline to see what works. Hide her reaction, or take the midwife death out (as cool as it is!), hide her putting the lightbulb into her pocket so you're saving the moment right till the end where we see the satisfaction on her face. All would give the film a slightly different inflection.

I'll stop now cos it sounds like I think Im a filmmaker - you didnt see anything from me in this fest right? lol....... All your points are valid and there nothing actually 'wrong' with the film at all.

I think it's one of the best of the festival.

[Brandon Rice]

Hey Jack... people dissect these shorts way too much (and features as well for that matter) instead of just watching and enjoying... who cares if you "saw the end coming" or "was that motivated enough?" Sometimes we (as the audience) have to suspend our belief... it's a MOVIE! In the words of George Lucas (who I don't think is the best director, but he's had some good stories) "It's not real" People need to just watch and enjoy :) Since I've learned that, I've had a lot better experience watching films, be it at home, or the movie theatre.

[J.R. Hudson]

Hey Jack... people dissect these shorts way too much (and features as well for that matter) instead of just watching and enjoying... who cares if you "saw the end coming" or "was that motivated enough?" Sometimes we (as the audience) have to suspend our belief... it's a MOVIE! In the words of George Lucas (who I don't think is the best director, but he's had some good stories) "It's not real" People need to just watch and enjoy :) Since I've learned that, I've had a lot better experience watching films, be it at home, or the movie theatre.

I see that side Bricemasta

For me though; this is like film school. I expect growth and great things to happen. Nothing is better than being judged by real filmmaking peers.

Sitting back and enjoying is much easier when the the filmmaker nails it. :thumbsup:

[Jason Ramsey]

Jack. My wife just watched your film with our 6 day old baby in her arms :)

She liked it a lot. She said: "That's wierd.... It's good".

[Brandon Rice]

I see that side Bricemasta

For me though; this is like film school. I expect growth and great things to happen. Nothing is better than being judged by real filmmaking peers.

Sitting back and enjoying is much easier when the the filmmaker nails it. :thumbsup:

I know man, but at some point, you have to take yourself away from being a "filmmaker" and just enjoy the show... for years I constantly picked movies apart every single time I saw a new film, and I stopped enjoying them... now if I watch a film I'll just watch to enjoy... if it blows me away, then I'll pick it apart to see what it was about it that worked so well... and if it fails miserably for me, I'll do the same (find out what doesn't work for me) and then some just fall in the middle as well...

I don't know, just sayin...

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

To me I think there are two things.
1) LOOK AT THE FILM FOR WHAT IT IS & IN THE CONTEXT OF THE FILMMAKER's VOICE:
It's important when watching a piece to view it in the context of
what that piece wants to be / what the filmmaker was going for / what's important to the filmmaker. It would be asinine to go to a Roger Corman screening and tell him that his films are not good enough for Cannes. Nor would it make sense to go to a David Lynch screening and scream at him because you couldn't follow the narrative. It also presupposes that film or art is supposed to fit into someone's definition (yours) and that you're right. And in the case of Lynch, like picasso, he can paint the best damn nudes you've ever scene (The Straight Story / Elephant Man) if he wants to. Thing is, he doesn't want to. Look at John G.'s (Cinealma's) movies. They defy convention. And I am pleased that the majority of DVXusers go to Cinealma and Dale's (Deedive's) movies with an open enough mind to let the movies speak for themselves in a way that challenges the audience be it narratively as with Deedive's last two pieces, or in a host of ways as with most of Cinealma's pieces. Their is a difference between a clueless filmmaker who has no idea of the kind of vocabulary they are playing with or who are just failing to tell a story well and filmmakers who are challenging the audience in some way or who have a unique and idiosyncratic voice.

2) REMEMBER THAT WHEN THERE'S AN AUDIENCE, ENCODING AND DECODING (COMMUNICATION) IS THE NATURE OF THE PROCESS.
It is always film school, it is always test audience, it is always how can I make a film better and be a better filmmaker. My job is to be a communicator. I am concerned with both the ENCODING and the DECODING of the film. If there is a barrier to communication that I have unintentionally placed between the film and the audience I want to know about it and discuss how to remove it or build a bridge around it. It doesn't matter if something really happened to me or really exists in the world or if I meant "Y" and everyone perceives "X".

Everyone here now is providing me, and Barry, and David, a great great service in discussing the impact of various moments where they lead and if they pay off in the way I intended or not.

Jason has apologized a few times. Darkline said I hope I am not being to harsh ... no no no. As I said you are providing a great and generous service and it's what this forum is all about.

That's very different than telling the filmmaker they are wrong and only your way is right and if only the filmmaker would wake up and smell your coffee then one day they might stand a chance of making a movie that doesn't suck.

Tying #1 to #2. David Lynch and John G. (and Dale to a lesser extent based on the two films I've seen) don't care so much if you can explain exactly the plot of their movie afterwards over coffee. They are communication on a different level, going for a deeper truth. (at least IMHO)

I want to make characters you care about. I want the horror elements of my work to be extended physical metaphors that relate to the characters arc or journey in someway. But I also want to have fun. Especially for these small films for this audience - DVXuser. So I care about Flora very much and I hope you feel something for her too. But I cannot resist leaning into the B movie curve with the demon baby.

[Drew Ott]

Great post Jack.

A great middle view on the extremes of storytelling.

[Brandon Rice]

Hey Jack, I in no way meant my post to be taken as not discussing the elements of the story, or the ENCODING/DECODING method you wrote above (which is exactly what a director has to do right(ENCODE) so that the audience can DECODE it, and it make sense)

I am just saying, have an open mind, and watch to be entertained... and as I said above... if something doesn't work, analyze, and if something works great, analyze. :)

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Thanks for all the responses and the PM's.

I think I know here I may have taken a mis-step. In an effort to move things along at the speed of short film, we had Flora accept the baby and what it does immediately. We worried if this would be believable or not. Apparently it is so believable that the movie feels somewhat over.

So I am definitely going to try to recut the scene so that she accepts the baby immediately but then ends on an ambiguous note when the baby eats the midwife. The baby definitely needs to eat the midwife because we need to know what it does before the last scene. But I can find a shot where Flora looks slightly perplexed about the eating I think ...

The bulb and the rest will play at the end because now the movie will (hopefully) be slightly ahead of the viewer. Seeing the bulb will be how we learn that Flora ultimately was OK with the baby eating people and exactly what she is doing now.

We will move the start of the supense scoring from her closeup at the end of the previous scene "I can't wait to show him to you" to the moment the door opens to the bedroom or when they are walking down the hall and hopefully use some scoring at the end of the scene that says she is conflicted.

May not work. But it is a good plan. If it does work then I think it will be the best combination of what I was going for and what the audience is getting out of it.

[J.R. Hudson]

OFF TOPIC in JACKS THREAD

I first and foremost want to be entertained

Fest after fest after fest, that has been my mantra

'At the end of the day, was I entertained?'

I have picked my FAVORITE films based soley on that element alone; Zombiefest, Scifest, all of them.

I do not judge on technical merit. But I need all of those categories to be at least competent for me to be entertained. Maybe the filmmaker in me cannot help but notice things the average viewer would not; but aren't we a more discerning voice than the average viewer ?

As long as the competency level is met; it's all good for me.

THREAD JACK OVER ! (Get it, THREAD Jack?)

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Hey Jack, I in no way meant my post to be taken as not discussing the elements of the story, or the ENCODING/DECODING method you wrote above (which is exactly what a director has to do right(ENCODE) so that the audience can DECODE it, and it make sense)

I am just saying, have an open mind, and watch to be entertained... and as I said above... if something doesn't work, analyze, and if something works great, analyze. :)

No no I didn't take it that way.

Haha I feel like my thread has gone from super contentious to super polite.

There are no eggshells here amongst my friends.

[Drew Ott]

Jack, I think that would be better than the original.

Having her motives being slightly unclear will definitely make the ending more suspenseful and interesting.

Hopefully you can find that perfect shot.

[Brandon Rice]

OFF TOPIC in JACKS THREAD

I first and foremost want to be entertained

Fest after fest after fest, that has been my mantra

'At the end of the day, was I entertained?'

I have picked my FAVORITE films based soley on that element alone; Zombiefest, Scifest, all of them.

I do not judge on technical merit. But I need all of those categories to be at least competent for me to be entertained. Maybe the filmmaker in me cannot help but notice things the average viewer would not; but aren't we a more discerning voice than the average viewer ?

As long as the competency level is met; it's all good for me.

THREAD JACK OVER ! (Get it, THREAD Jack?)

Yeah J.R.!

I agree 100%, and technical "issues" can pull a viewer OUT of a film, hence the reason a film must be somewhat technically sound to work IMHO.

But yes, it's about being entertained, it's about going along for the ride, and feeling satisfied at the end of it... :beer:


No no I didn't take it that way.

Haha I feel like my thread has gone from super contentious to super polite.

There are no eggshells here amongst my friends.

Awesome Jack! Ok :) cool. Wasn't worried about being polite, just clear in the point I was making. Though I hope I am polite most of the time as well :) :beer:

[Michael Anthony Horrigan]

'At the end of the day, was I entertained?'

Reminds me of...

"Are you not entertained?"
http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/23237/1194317991.jpg

:grin:

I was definitely entertained.

Cheers,

Mike

[Brandon Rice]

Reminds me of...

"Are you not entertained?"
http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/23237/1194317991.jpg

:grin:

I was definitely entertained.

Cheers,

Mike

CLASSIC! Ha ha great stuff...

sorry for such the threadjack jack...

[Michael Anthony Horrigan]

Back on topic... :)

Jack, I loved her reaction and acceptance of what the baby did to the midwife. I think it would be a shame to lose that moment. The choice is really yours though of course. Just my 2 cents...

Cheers,

Mike

[J.R. Hudson]

Reminds me of...

"Are you not entertained?"
http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/23237/1194317991.jpg

:grin:

I was definitely entertained.

Cheers,

Mike


Awesome !

[Brandon Rice]

Back on topic... :)

Jack, I loved her reaction and acceptance of what the baby did to the midwife. I think it would be a shame to lose that moment. The choice is really yours though of course. Just my 2 cents...

Cheers,

Mike


and Jack, I tend to agree... it makes the whole film that much darker... she's completely accepted the life she'll live... and she's happy with the deal she made with the devil.

[bosindy]

I think I know here I may have taken a mis-step. In an effort to move things along at the speed of short film, we had Flora accept the baby and what it does immediately. We worried if this would be believable or not. Apparently it is so believable that the movie feels somewhat over.

So I am definitely going to try to recut the scene so that she accepts the baby immediately but then ends on an ambiguous note when the baby eats the midwife. The baby definitely needs to eat the midwife because we need to know what it does before the last scene. But I can find a shot where Flora looks slightly perplexed about the eating I think ...

The bulb and the rest will play at the end because now the movie will (hopefully) be slightly ahead of the viewer. Seeing the bulb will be how we learn that Flora ultimately was OK with the baby eating people and exactly what she is doing now.



I for one, like it the way it is. Her reaction gives it a bit of a campy feel that works well with the babies attack on the mid wife ( that I find very humorous in a dark way). If you want the end to be more serious then you should cut it and show her more conflicted, but for me it works the way it is.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

hmmm ok

well that IS my voice coming through (campy darkness) ...

OK I will have to let some time go by on this one.

[Brandon Rice]

go with your gut Jack!!

[Darkline]

I applaud Jack for being so open about the process.

The difference is that on here we're all at least aspiring film-makers, DVX is unique in that it's the only festival that offers the feedback from peers across the globe. It's not a normal festival. The 'sit back and enjoy' is certainly an element, but discussion is what this board is famous for.

I'd have shut up sooner :-) but Jack could have just said 'thanks for the comments' and I'd have taken the hint. I only discussed it futher because he showed an interest in doing so.

You might be right to take a break from it Jack. I just read a script of mine that I remember being really happy with 2 weeks ago. Today its chessy as s**t. Sometimes a bit of breathing space is good before diving in.

Your original instincts may have been spot on. Except it needed more porn for MM's sake.

[Barry_Green]

I'd like to see the cut with the ambiguity in it. This was one of those things we struggled with; how to play her reaction to this horrifying scene. The way it plays out now it takes a humorous twist, accented by the baby yanking the 250-pound body quickly offscreen. Which also makes Clovis' bloody pleading play a bit more humorously than it might otherwise.

If she has a tad of shock before accepting, that reconfirms her decision at the cross-turning: second-thoughts, then plunging forward. Will it make it better? I don't know, but it'll be a somewhat different journey, and probably worth exploring.

[Drew Ott]

If she has a tad of shock before accepting, that reconfirms her decision at the cross-turning: second-thoughts, then plunging forward. Will it make it better? I don't know, but it'll be a somewhat different journey, and probably worth exploring.To be completely honest, the slightly humorous aspect at the end took me from, "I'm going to show this all of my friends that I have told about DVXuser to showcase some of its members' talent," to "I really enjoyed that and it entertained me."

It was still great on every level, but like all films, it could have some improvement.

I still think it's one of the best festival entries I've seen in the history of the DVXuser festival, along with Similo.

[Michele Seidman]

The thing that pushes it over the bounds of the choice that I hear described in the thread here is the midwife. If there were more time to establish her family history as being tied to the family history of Flora, then it could completely work for me and make it a very compelling choice.

Jason you know what I find interesting is, as an actress reading the script I could easily see why there was a midwife. I mean here was this back wood couple who probably don't go to doctors hardly ever to begin with. She is uber religious and he is not. Someone else suggested maybe he had to deliver the baby and all I could think is...Clovis would be the type to walk out. The idea of a midwife seemed exactly right to me when I read it. It was one of the things I never questioned for a moment. As an actor reading all of this it really surprised me to see so many bring that point up.


I think the new shot is more effective in setting up the location Jack; I like it, it is a wider shot that establishes a world.

I understand why so many like it because it ties things up in a neat package. I guess I am about to sound jaded for the first time. The first shot worked fine for me. The new shot does not work as much in my view and for the first time I understand Kubrik a bit better (did i spell that right). His work often bothers me because it leaves to many questions. The fact so many are worried about the time line when that pregnancy test is there is interesting to say the least.

As a 'talent' and not a writer or reviewer or critique watching you all discuss this has been enlightening


Hey Jack,

For me, the most distracting element was the ending. I just felt once we had the reveal of the devil eating baby, well, it wasnt enough to have the end being another eating baby scene. It didnt really provide us with anything new...

Hmmm Darkline I guess I see where you are coming from but when I read the script I felt like the midwifes death was something Flora accepted as part of her babies life...However I think she set up Clovis on purpose which was new...for Flora at least.


All good points Jack.

For Flora this moment has already happened in the previous scene. Maybe delaying that moment fully to the final scene would add to the satisfaction. Your suggestion may well work.

Your making me think it could work....dag nab it stop making me think



So I am definitely going to try to recut the scene so that she accepts the baby immediately but then ends on an ambiguous note when the baby eats the midwife. The baby definitely needs to eat the midwife because we need to know what it does before the last scene. But I can find a shot where Flora looks slightly perplexed about the eating I think ...

I look forward to seeing that. Hope it does not lose that feeling it has now and I admit liking the dark humor of that line but if you have to lose it...you have to lose it


No no I didn't take it that way.

Haha I feel like my thread has gone from super contentious to super polite.

There are no eggshells here amongst my friends.

HA HA HA HA....OF COURSE IT HAS...I joined and have the baby with me...do you think that any of them dare to be rude to you with me watching? Clovis Junior has not eaten since this afternoon....anyone want to come over and help feed the baby? First one to mess with Clovis Juniors Uncle Jack gets to change the next dirty diaper!


and Jack, I tend to agree... it makes the whole film that much darker... she's completely accepted the life she'll live... and she's happy with the deal she made with the devil.


See...that is what I thought the first death was too. Her accepting it...but the second death she set up herself and planned. I guess that is why I don't ultimately want Jack to change that moment but it is his baby....I mean Clovis's baby...I mean Satan's....oh never mind... :)

[Jason Ramsey]

Hi Michele... I'm never clear. I didn't mean that I didn't think there should be a midwife. On the contrary. I just meant that she was portrayed as from the same 'mold' as your character and the husband. That made me want a little something more to justify (wrong word) that choice. I didn't mean to imply that I didn't think the midwife character should be there. Just the fact that her being from the same mold as your character took it somewhere that made me wish I had a little more info on the relationship history between her and Clovis... or that she had represented that 'outside' world. But, she was definitely a valid character, and looked a lot like the midwife who delivered our two children. Without the costume :)

My wife and I had a midwife for our second Baby last week by the way. Midwives are the way to go.... THough ours was born in a hospital.... but if I had to do it over again, we would do it at home... The hospital was the worst part of the experience :)

Take care,
Jason

[Michele Seidman]

Hi Michele... I'm never clear. I didn't mean that I didn't think there should be a midwife.
My wife and I had a midwife for our second Baby last week by the way.
Take care,
Jason

Jason

I am sleepy as heck and might have made a bad word choice too. I did not think you thought the midwife should not be there but I am curious now that you mention your wife used a midwife...may I ask this?

How well did your wife know her? Did they have a history together other than things related to the pregnancy? Do you live in a fairly large town?

The reason I ask is partly based on how I see it from the female point of view and having once lived in the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains. I know a few women in big cities who went that route and they 'shopped' for the midwife and the facility to have the child in. But often in rural areas, even today...there is a local midwife everyone knows about and that is who they call on when it is time. There is often no relationship between them other than that of need.

I guess that is why the whole debate on the midwife kind of makes me wonder. Is it because a lot of men are talking about it and they seldom actually consider the birthing process? Not trying to assume that you or other men did not pay attention but even men I know who went in the delivery room tend to see the whole thing from a very different perspective.

I really assumed when I was reading the script that the midwife character was the local woman everyone in this rural community called on when the time came because the hospital was too far away or to costly.

Maybe that is just me though...right now I wish there were other women on the thread to throw an opinion to see if it is just me.

[Jason Ramsey]

Hey Michele. Our midwife we knew nothing of before we got pregnant with the first baby. We just knew we didn't want a doctor. We live in a relatively small town. She is the only midwife and is well known throughout the town. I'm not a great and noble dad or anything, but I was there for every prenatal check up for both babies :) She was fantastic though, and the only reason we went to that hospital again after what they did to my wife the last time (long, long story) was b/c we wanted her.

Concerning the midwife in this piece. I guess the point I am trying to make is... (as best I can.... I am not a writer, reviewer, critique, etc, etc either. Just an untrained actor-ish) Because of the choice to play her from that same mold as Clovis and Hubby, she seems tied to that family within the context of this piece (for me).

That's what makes me want to know more to be able to accept that character/directorial choice (at least how I perceive it). I guess the question (for me) is how deeply connected to that same little world of Clovis is she? It appears as though she is from the same box. So much so, that she may be more than a midwife to that family. Perhaps even a live in maid of sorts, and her mother and grandmother and on down the line were the same.

That's why I either wish there was a (bit of a) distinction between her and the others in terms of portrayal, or something to let me know the history.

There's the side of the line that your character is on, and there is the side of the line that the pregnancy test, etc is on. The midwife (to me) is plainly on your side of that line. But, if she is just some local woman... well, then this becomes much more like an episode of Carnival or something... Meaning the whole town is like Clovis and Hubby. Maybe that is the point. But, the bulb, pregnancy test, exterior of house, would suggest otherwise, and I never get the impression that I am supposed to believe that as the story is told in that house. It's an internal thing. Unless the midwife is supposed to be my clue to tell me that this is just the reality of this world, or town, or whatever within the context of the film.

It's great to have an actor from one of the fest films join up on the board and become an active participant. Thanks for that, by the way.

Ltaer,
Jason

[Michele Seidman]

Meaning the whole town is like Clovis and Hubby. Maybe that is the point. But, the bulb, pregnancy test, exterior of house, would suggest otherwise, and I never get the impression that I am supposed to believe that as the story is told in that house. It's an internal thing. Unless the midwife is supposed to be my clue to tell me that this is just the reality of this world, or town, or whatever within the context of the film.

It's great to have an actor from one of the fest films join up on the board and become an active participant. Thanks for that, by the way.

Later,
Jason

Interestingly enough I always had the impression not only were Flora and Clovis backwood rural types but I also felt the whole town was kind of odd even though we never see the town. The Carnival reference made sense to me when you used it. I guess it was just something I felt when reading it and thinking about the character. Sort of like the meanness of Clovis...even at the end another poster mentions how he softens and all I can think, as the Flora character..."my bastard of a husband is thinking now he is going to be nice after all these years, after all the mean words and all the beatings...it is just too late"...again in her voice/head

It is fun to be the talent watching all these chats and being one of the few here. I am getting a serious kick out of the discussions. It is fun throwing in the way I break down a script in comparison...but then I do look at it for a different reason and in a different manner. I did not think so until I started watching these threads!

ciao

Michele

[Chris Messineo]

I thought this was excellent.

I loved the style of it. The retro look, the dirtiness of it all. I felt like I could almost smell the foulness in the air.

Really everything from the acting, to the cinematography, to the direction was great and as usual, Herman's score was off the charts good.

Simply wonderful.

[Herman Witkam]

Herman's score was off the charts good.

Thanks Chris - Looking forward to the 100 hour challenge in Dec. :)

[cinealma]

So I just watched this film and read through the 200 posts in this thread. We really do have a nice little film community here (or as I tell people, "my filmmaking group"). Anyway, first off let me say that this is a great little film. So much has been said already and it appears that you are re-editing some stuff. I'll try and touch on a few things and try not to repeat too much of what's already been discussed.

Firstly, I really got the TV vibe you were going for. Somewhere between Night Gallery and X-Files. Speaking of X-Files, that's kind of why the whole people out of time/out of place thing worked for me. I can't remember if that was your intention, but I didn't mind it a bit and gave it a really interesting atmosphere.

Loved the pull back on the crosses, didn't see it coming.

The craft in this is A-1. Kudos to your team, and I know that having a good team is going to only help you in directing.

Acting was superb.

Ok, so speaking of timing, so, it SEEMED like the woman was recovering from her 2nd trimester miscarriage in bed when the husband shows up and pretty much demands sex from her. Was that your intention? Because I took it that way and that's pretty poo pooing disturbing and brilliant at the same time. If not, well, who cares, I'm going to read it that way.

I can see where there might be a problem in the story structure. The character arcs work out fine, but it seems to be missing something. With the end, what I'm feeling is that, going with the TV show vibe, we just went to commercial and I'm waiting for the rest of the show. She's a mother with a baby now. We've seen what she'll do to feed it. How about to protect it? I think her new found happiness needs to be threatened somehow, whether it's the threat of losing her baby or? Oooh.. HEY!

WHAT IF...

Her baby is hungry. She can't obtain any "food" for him, so she winds up feeding herself to him. The ultimate mother's sacrifice. Also plays to the religious angle in that maybe the devil is collecting his payment for her prayer. And now this baby is alone in this house, eyes in the dark corner of the room, waiting...

Ooph! Lots of ideas flowing (you got me thinking), but obviously unless you're going to re-open production, you have to make do with the footage you have.

Anyway, thanks for the nice comments you made about me in some previous posts. You know the respect is mutual.:beer:

I'll watch it again and post it... my mind is a churning. :thumbsup:

[Michael Anthony Horrigan]

Ok, so speaking of timing, so, it SEEMED like the woman was recovering from her 2nd trimester miscarriage in bed when the husband shows up and pretty much demands sex from her. Was that your intention? Because I took it that way and that's pretty poo pooing disturbing and brilliant at the same time. If not, well, who cares, I'm going to read it that way.
Wow! I took this the other way... SHE lured HIM to bed. She puts down her hair and calls out to him... she wanted to conceive the child from hell.

Maybe it was just me? :)

Mike

[cinealma]

Wow! I took this the other way... SHE lured HIM to bed. She puts down her hair and calls out to him... she wanted to conceive the child from hell.

Maybe it was just me? :)

Mike

YOU ARE RIGHT! I am rewatching as I post this. You are absolutely right!

[cinealma]

I just wanted to bring everybody's attention to something. JDS gets a lot of attention here. Some people like him, some don't. Sometime, success breeds contempt, as they say.

Whether you love him or hate him, he is a filmmaker you should pay attention to, especially if you really want to learn something.

Do you all know how much of a visual artist Mr. Stanley is? We watch his stuff and know it's pretty good, but we don't really realize why. Maybe the writing bit isn't his stongest point, although he does have his moments, but he is a very fine filmmaker.

As much as I hate taking things apart, I just want to point out some reasons why you should pay attention to this man, especially all those who want to improve their craft:

(Now, some of this may be intended, some not, but I know that Jack will appreciate it)

***********************************

A Little Mouth to Feed (sorry if the times are not exactly spot on):

:06 The opening dissolves from the shot of the door, to the shot of the cross (matching shapes, one on top of the other), and then to the shot of the pregancy test going positive (matching "plus" shapes and the fade in of the positive sign, again strengthening the religious tone of the film).

:22 On the door is a small wreath. The cross on the wall (wife) and the circle (husband emerges from behind it), opposites, the ying and the yang, once in union, here they are seperated.

1:20 The husband bangs on the wall, the upside down cross, the rejection of Jesus, the husband's polarity

1:28 The nail on the floor, more religious imagery

1:40 She puts the nail back in, her faith is still strong

1:50 Nice time cut focused on the woman

2:00 She ends her prayer as in a letter, with her full name, as if she feels God might not know who she is

2:12 Overhead shot in bathroom, very nice setting her up in the triangle, the very skewed angle door (the husband) dominates the left side of the screen as if he could come through any minute just to tell her "I told you so!"

2:26 The lighting: the bright light over her left shoulder, the eye of God, the red-tinged lights in the window, the eyes of Satan

3:32 The bright light (eye of God) is now obscured by the trees while the lights in the window (eyes of Satan) glow bright. Her faith is now aligned to the darkness.

3:50 Another nice dissolve from the crosses in the ground lower half of screen to the bathroom with the cross on the top half of the screen

3:52 The wife enters the bathroom through the door with the wreath, as she now shares the same negative polarity with her husband

4:00 By her own hand, the wife turns the cross upside down, her "transformation" now complete

4:15 The wine, blood of Jesus, however she is drinking the wine in preparation of having sex with her husband, wine/sex, Satanic ritual, Dionysus

4:42 The shot of the window: again the cross, rain drops of the glass, tears of God?

4:54 She gives birth. The two lamps in the upper left of the screen. Are these the same lights that glow in the scene where she buries her stillborn child? The eyes of Satan watching over?

Other good stuff:

The bookend shots: camera pushes in to the house in the 1st shot of the film, last shot, same as first, camera pulling out, entering and then exiting the film's world (dare I say you used the same shot and just reversed one of them? :))

For the first half of the film before her switch in faith, she is always on/facing off from the right side of the screen, for most of the second half after, she is on/facing off from the left side of the screen

***********************************

I could go on and on, but I don't want to over-analyze. Go back and watch Rekindled, Bone Hand, et. al, and really take a look at what Jack is SHOWING you. It's pretty great stuff!

:beer::beer::beer:

[Chris Messineo]

I am definitely in the JDS fan club.

I have all his films saved on my computer and I seriously find inspiration in each of them.

[abalex]

great job guys. loved how the hvx200 did on this one. I would have voted for you BUT.... you're not in....(evil laugh) I should have done something for this festival though
DAMN IT!!

[Justin Kuhn]

As long as we're talking about how awesome JDS's movies are, I think Odd Squad is my favorite. Post apocalyptic blade runners for mutants from the 70s...how awesome is that? I mean, good job with all of 'em and whatnot, but that's just cool. Blast from the past right UP in yer face!

Watch Jack get on here and say it's his least favorite.

[Matt Harris]

cinealma, wow, i feel like a idiot because i missed ALL THAT. but now that you pointed it out... new rule: jack must be exhibition only. kidding of course.

[Michele Seidman]

I thought this was excellent.

I loved the style of it. The retro look, the dirtiness of it all. I felt like I could almost smell the foulness in the air.

Really everything from the acting, to the cinematography, to the direction was great and as usual, Herman's score was off the charts good.

Simply wonderful.

Thank you Chris...for the comment on the actors...we all worked hard on this one and I think each of us feels pretty good about being part.


Looking forward to the 100 hour challenge in Dec. :)

Hey Herman...

Just wanted to say hello and wow...thank you for the music on the project. It all works.



Acting was superb.

Ok, so speaking of timing, so, it SEEMED like the woman was recovering from her 2nd trimester miscarriage in bed when the husband shows up and pretty much demands sex from her. Was that your intention?
WHAT IF...
Her baby is hungry. She can't obtain any "food" for him, so she winds up feeding herself to him. The ultimate mother's sacrifice.

Cinealma

It is a lure after she makes her new pact with the fellow down below...as another person mentioned taking it.

As for feeding myself...dag nab it Jack gave me a part where I look like hell...I like the other idea Jack had about me tramping up to lure men back to feed my baby better...for goodness sake let a girl put her make up back on for at least one scene....tee hee...


Wow! I took this the other way... SHE lured HIM to bed. She puts down her hair and calls out to him... she wanted to conceive the child from hell.

Maybe it was just me?

Mike


Nope nope....not just you!

[cinealma]

cinealma, wow, i feel like a idiot because i missed ALL THAT. but now that you pointed it out... new rule: jack must be exhibition only. kidding of course.

Don't feel like an idiot. Of course, I didn't catch all that the first time I watched it. I was tuned into a few things because it's just how I watch films, but a lot of the "finding" came from watching it a couple of times and specifically looking for and analyzing stuff.

You might not "see" it while you are watching, but your brain processes it... you sense it.

My point was to show you that Jack the filmmaker takes the time to THINK OUT AND PLAN every shot in his film. I'm of the "make films for myself first" school, and I'm pretty sure Jack is too. A lot of the little things I pointed out were there because Jack the artist put them there for himself. BUT, these essentially are the building blocks of his style. That's why there's "something about Jack's films" that people talk about. It's style, baby!

It's very easy to just set up a camera, put a couple of actors in front of it, and record what they do. There aren't very many good films that are shot that way.

But take a look at any of the biggies: Hitchcock, Spielberg, Scorsese, Fellini, Kubrick, etc., etc., etc.... man, they painstakenly plan their shots.

Ok, film school is out.

:beer:

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

cinealma, wow, i feel like a idiot because i missed ALL THAT. but now that you pointed it out... new rule: jack must be exhibition only. kidding of course.
heh heh, :D

Yeah, the idea is that the shots reinforce meaning in the piece and work ON you even, and perhaps preferably, if you are not noticing them.

Then later, as John did, hopefully you can derive a deeper even more satisfying experience by looking deeper into the images on a 2nd viewing.

John was about 90% on in his deconstruction of what we put in the pudding and why. Thanks for taking the time to look behind the pretty pictures. :beer:

Listen to the director commentary on / rewatch the original Die Hard. McTiernan really explains a lot of this type of work he did in the movie.

For example, John picked up on the fact that Flora predominantly occupies one side of the screen before her change of heart and then the other after it ...

In Die Hard, when McClane gets to Nakatomi Plaza, he is constantly framed small and on the lower left side of the frame, a weak area that causes tension in our eyeline because he is out of his element in this posh corporate environment. When the terrorists show up, the camera crosses him and puts him n the other side of the frame, the right (as I remember) where our eye naturally falls to rest ... now he is in his element - bombs, guns and badguys.

Im about 99% sure that the notion of switching screen direction for a character to underscore a change in their arc or situation got into my vocabulary from the BTS on Die Hard.

That's the kind of stuff that is fun for me as an audience member and filmmaker.

[Matt Harris]

very cool, thanks for sharing.

[John LaBonney]

Awesome.

Enough said.

[andoguru]

Hey Jack Daniel Stanley and Michele,

Can't really say anything bad about this. It was shot very well. The acting was superb.

Creepiest looking zombie baby ever.

That part with the baby crosses and after your performance at that scene Michele, was terrifyingly awesome.

Location was great. I can't really give any constructive criticisms with it because, shucks, I didn't see any problems with it.

You all get paid to make movies, right? If not, you should be.

Laters,
Ando

[Michele Seidman]

Hey Jack Daniel Stanley and Michele,

The acting was superb.

That part with the baby crosses and after your performance at that scene Michele, was terrifyingly awesome.

You all get paid to make movies, right?

Ando

Thank you so much for those kind comments. The way Jack wrote that scene and directed it...it got a lot out of me. Then the fog just decided to be a diva and almost steal the scene. I admit...I love that scene too. I think most of us get a pay check now and then :cool:

[Tom Marshall]

Hi Michele... from one actor to another, I think you did an excellent job with this role. You had a very good grasp of the character and her mannerisms. It was slightly underplayed and I think that was a great choice on your part (and possibly Jack's). It was a pleasure to watch you in this short. :)

[Michele Seidman]

Hi Michele... from one actor to another, I think you did an excellent job with this role. You had a very good grasp of the character and her mannerisms. It was slightly underplayed and I think that was a great choice on your part (and possibly Jack's). It was a pleasure to watch you in this short. :)


Tommy

Thank you so much. That means a lot coming from another actor. The choice to be understated was a bit of both Jack and myself. When I read the script I knew I was going to have to seem weak during the audition reading.

This was the first time I ever got to play a victim. I normally get cast to play very tough women and this was a great deal of fun for me. I got to stretch for a change and honestly...Jack got some of my best work out of me.

You know as well as I do that we actors get 'typed' and as much as most directors like to say they have an imagination when looking at actors during casting...I find few of them really do.

Jack saw something that no one else looked at before and gave me that rare chance. I have had directors tell me I don't look 'period' enough for a project only to see me in period wardrobe in some other project and to comment "Oh, I guess you could pull off the period."

If any directors are reading this...take note. Jack took a chance and see what he got out of it? The project speaks for itself and no one ever tried to cast me in this type of role until Jack. I honestly think some directors...not all but some forget actors act and are not just a type.

Jack has vision and the ability to think outside of the box.

[Michael Anthony Horrigan]

Michele, I just wanted to add that your reaction when the baby claimed its first victim was priceless. Spot on!

Throughout the entire movie I really enjoyed your performance, the male lead as well.

Cheers,

Mike

[Michele Seidman]

Michele, I just wanted to add that your reaction when the baby claimed its first victim was priceless. Spot on!

Throughout the entire movie I really enjoyed your performance, the male lead as well.

Cheers,

Mike

Mike

Thank you so much. Doug who played Clovis...I dare say he felt it was one of his better performances too. The cool part is Doug and I have known each other from the film community for years but never got to work together before...this was a great project for us both.

The reaction to the baby the first time....I knew in my heart it had to be played straight on or it would read campy. She just had to love that baby as hard as she worked to have it.

[Michele Seidman]

Jack

I just watched ALMTF again and dag nab it...you did have to wrestle with my eye lines on the end didn't you? I think I forgot to tell everyone I was night blind. I don't know if anyone catches it but me...but I have a feeling you did in post. I know you wanted that shot of the eyes following him and it must have not come across. Sighhh, perfection does not exists in nature...and certainly not in actors.

Yes...I am my own worst critique.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

enh.

Eyeline is like the 4rth or 5th thing to look for in selecting a take.

Besides no one knows the exact geography of the space or where the imaginary baby is in it.

And, your eyeline is fine at the end.

[Herman Witkam]

Hey Herman...

Just wanted to say hello and wow...thank you for the music on the project. It all works.

Thanks :) - I thought your performance was great!

[Mark Johnson]

Let me also say that the score was incredible Herman. You are so exceptionally gifted and I find myself always amazed at how facile you are with creating tone pictures that match the narrative themes.

And, Michele, your work was wonderful (as is clearly the consensus by everyone). You and Doug turned in such great work here. It is a pleasure to watch this piece over and over to see the nuances put in all aspects of the production.

Jack, Mac, Jimerson, Hudson and Barry ... what a dream team. Not to be too effusive here, but I just want to thank all of you for putting in the work to create another gem for us to watch and learn from.

[Michele Seidman]

Eyeline is like the 4rth or 5th thing to look for in selecting a take.

And, your eyeline is fine at the end.


Good to know and thank you. Now you see why I avoid the playback...ha ha ha


Thanks :) - I thought your performance was great!

Herman you certainly enhanced it!


Let me also say that the score was incredible Herman. You are so exceptionally gifted and I find myself always amazed at how facile you are with creating tone pictures that match the narrative themes.

And, Michele, your work was wonderful (as is clearly the consensus by everyone). You and Doug turned in such great work here. It is a pleasure to watch this piece over and over to see the nuances put in all aspects of the production.

Jack, Mac, Jimerson, Hudson and Barry ... what a dream team. Not to be too effusive here, but I just want to thank all of you for putting in the work to create another gem for us to watch and learn from.


Thanks for the acting comment and you are right on those guys being the dream team...just glad I got to work with them!

[Barry_Green]

I think Doug did a fantastic job with Clovis -- so menacing in the beginning, and such a jerk at the end. Well played through and through.

[J.R. Hudson]

Let us not forget Shaun O'Rourke; the lead actor from Dissonance and a yet to be spoken of project. This guy was just doing everything on set.

(Credit is / Credit due)

[Barry_Green]

No doubt, Shaun was MVP.

[J.R. Hudson]

"Damn Barry."

[kimko]

Tommy

Thank you so much. That means a lot coming from another actor. The choice to be understated was a bit of both Jack and myself. When I read the script I knew I was going to have to seem weak during the audition reading.

This was the first time I ever got to play a victim. I normally get cast to play very tough women and this was a great deal of fun for me. I got to stretch for a change and honestly...Jack got some of my best work out of me.

You know as well as I do that we actors get 'typed' and as much as most directors like to say they have an imagination when looking at actors during casting...I find few of them really do.

Jack saw something that no one else looked at before and gave me that rare chance. I have had directors tell me I don't look 'period' enough for a project only to see me in period wardrobe in some other project and to comment "Oh, I guess you could pull off the period."

If any directors are reading this...take note. Jack took a chance and see what he got out of it? The project speaks for itself and no one ever tried to cast me in this type of role until Jack. I honestly think some directors...not all but some forget actors act and are not just a type.

Jack has vision and the ability to think outside of the box. wow well said! actors act! if everyone does their job there would be a story...............when i get back home i have to see this short

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

"Damn Barry."

Heheh. You're my MVP John.

You had me at "What the hell're you doin' dumbass. Move it!"

:grin:

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Blooper/outtakes of dragging Clovis away at the end.

I don't think anything could have gone more wrong with the first take, lol.

http://www.frenchquarterfeatures.com/lmtf/LMTFbloopers.mov
:cheesy:

[Michael Anthony Horrigan]

LOL! That was great! :)
Thanks for sharing...


Mike

[cinealma]

Blooper/outtakes of dragging Clovis away at the end.

I don't think anything could have gone more wrong with the first take, lol.

http://www.frenchquarterfeatures.com/lmtf/LMTFbloopers.mov
:cheesy:

Oh, no... the magic's gone. :cry:

Ain't filmmaking great? My mantra is always this: the world of the film is within the frame, nothing else outside of that matters.

Love the hardwood floors, by the way! :thumbsup:

[Geoff_R]

I really enjoyed this one, Jack. Catchy title and story idea, production design was well thought out and accounted for, great cinematography by Mac, and last but not least, a killer, satan entwined infant which feasts on living flesh :) Sick but awesome stuff!! I can't wait to see some more work from you and your team.

[J.R. Hudson]

Heheh. You're my MVP John.

You had me at "What the hell're you doin' dumbass. Move it!"

:grin:

Heh heh

I still can't say that without laughing. :cheesy:

[Justin Kuhn]

"Disaster!"

Nice. Very succinct.

[Michele Seidman]

I think Doug did a fantastic job with Clovis -- so menacing in the beginning, and such a jerk at the end. Well played through and through.

Doug was perfect for this part. Funny thing...we all know what a nice guy he really is and he played a dirt bag so well!


Let us not forget Shaun O'Rourke; the lead actor from Dissonance and a yet to be spoken of project. This guy was just doing everything on set.

(Credit is / Credit due)

Let us not forget he not only did everything...he WAS Floras knees for giving birth too. I still love that!


Blooper/outtakes of dragging Clovis away at the end.

I don't think anything could have gone more wrong with the first take, lol.

http://www.frenchquarterfeatures.com/lmtf/LMTFbloopers.mov
:cheesy:

That was funny. I was inside when you were dragging him...lol I love when the board goes sliding with him...

PS Jack and Barry...David is doing a great job talking things up at festival here this weekend. I even got to peek at some of what you all have done with the other film...omg how cool it is looking. I cannot wait to see it....talk about Shaun being an MVP!

[Michele Seidman]

Blooper/outtakes of dragging Clovis away at the end.

I don't think anything could have gone more wrong with the first take, lol.

http://www.frenchquarterfeatures.com/lmtf/LMTFbloopers.mov
:cheesy:


Is there a way for me to fly the LMTF banner too? or only the person who submitted it?

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Open two windows, one showing this post, the other with your control panel open to modify your signature.

From this one, copy the image location of my banner to your clip board.

In the other window, modify your signature by clicking the picture icon (mountains with a sun) and pasting the link location in the dialogue box that appears.

With the banner in your sig, now copy this link
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=114243
which is he link to the beginning of this thread.

Now go back to your signature window and select the banner. With the banner selected, click the link icon (world with an infinity symbol) and paste the link in the dialogue box that appears.

Then add some text of you want that says they can click the link to visit the thread and/or for a direct link to the film.

:beer:

[Michele Seidman]

ta da....she flies it! i feel so cool...

[Jazz Dog]

Jack,
I loved your short. Was this the one that Barry commissioned you to do after Rekindled?
I aspire to do something that looks as pro as this and I loved watching the bloopers because it showed that you guys are using creativity over budget. A piece of cheap wood paneling on the floor...brilliant. Nobody would have ever known that had it not been for that blooper reel. The acting was wonderful and I am a big fan of using religious imagery to make a point. I loved the cutaway of the nail on the floor. Great.
Hope to see more of your work.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Jack,
I loved your short. Was this the one that Barry commissioned you to do after Rekindled?
Barry signed me on to do a feature.
This is a step towards that and this will be bundled as content in another project that Barry and David are doing.


I aspire to do something that looks as pro as this and I loved watching the bloopers because it showed that you guys are using creativity over budget. A piece of cheap wood paneling on the floor...brilliant. Nobody would have ever known that had it not been for that blooper reel. The acting was wonderful and I am a big fan of using religious imagery to make a point. I loved the cutaway of the nail on the floor. Great.
Hope to see more of your work.
Heheh, thanks :) ... I just found your short today and thought it looked great. Loved the idea of a paper mache mask made of pages from the bible, very original.

If you're serious about wanting to see more of our work ... check the All Hallows forum again tomorrow afternoon :lipsrseal:laugh:

[Michele Seidman]

If you're serious about wanting to see more of our work ... check the All Hallows forum again tomorrow afternoon :lipsrseal:laugh:


Dag NAB IT...David and I were chatting at the film festival and both hoped when we checked our respective computers we would find....we would find.....dag nab it....you really like to make a girl wait. Talk about working them up to wanting it...

David...you seeing this? You home and signed on?

The man is making us wait....

[Blaine]

If you're serious about wanting to see more of our work ... check the All Hallows forum again tomorrow afternoon :lipsrseal:laugh:That better mean what I think it means...:Drogar-BigGrin(DBG):lipsrseal

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

OK OK so it was not Sunday afternoon, it was the middle of the night ...

But yep Barry and David and Michelle and John and I have a whole 'nother complete hallows fest film that is now online and ready for your viewing pleasure. (see signature)

Hope you enjoy :)

[capitalP]

I finally got a chance to watch this, the Cinematography was just awesome, specially the part with the fog in the yard, and the lead actress was incredible. My best part of the film is when she's in bed and the little baby devil ate that lady and she says that infamous line "Hungry little fella.." or something like that, that freaked me out.

The only thing I would of loved to see more, is for the baby to do more damage, don't know how you wanna take this, but it reminded me of Basket Case a little..

But overall, good work.