"A New Tomorrow" - Insight Blue Productions

[InsightBlue]

Hi.

This is the comment thread for "A New Tomorrow." It's an "in depth" look at "how" the emerging "technology" known as "Nanites" affects us "all."

Or is it? Tell me, friend, what do you think? Thank you in advance! (Unless of course you didn't reply, in which case you're a bad person and I hope you feel guilt and shame and have very expensive therapy bills for years to come.)

[Brandon Rice]

I really liked the concept of this film. Very interesting story idea. The acting was a bit off, and the lighting seemed too dark sometimes (maybe it was the compression). Overall, I'd say the best performance was the skinny dude. The one other thing I didn't get was the ending. Was his girlfriend dead? What happened?

[InsightBlue]

I really liked the concept of this film. Very interesting story idea. The acting was a bit off, and the lighting seemed too dark sometimes (maybe it was the compression). Overall, I'd say the best performance was the skinny dude. The one other thing I didn't get was the ending. Was his girlfriend dead? What happened?
The darkness had more to do with me being extremely tired at 5am (I had a wedding to get to...) and not paying attention to the gamma settings. On set light was just dandy.

The skinny dude playing "Tom" was a gentleman by the name of Mike Tomasulo and I'm sure he greatly appreciates the acting compliment! Actors and their fragile egos...

She was dead but, through the nanites, re-imagined, re-shaped, re-built (whatever you'd like to call it). I realize it wasn't very obvious, but all the signs are there. Or, y'know, I imagine they're there.

Thanks for the comments!

[JimtheJib]

i though that it was welle shot and i thought it was funny (in a good way) i didn't like the secretary. could you tell us how you got some of those doors opening and closing?

i really liked the concept and the way you followed through in terms of story (except the ending which was lacking)

good job..!

[Z B Brox]

Hey there, I wrote the first draft of this script and did some of the acting, too. I'll let Jim field the questions, as it's his baby, but just thought I'd say I appreciate the kind words and the criticism. I look forward to being able to see everyone else's flick now that I'm home from work and have a decent connection.

[InsightBlue]

i though that it was welle shot and i thought it was funny (in a good way) i didn't like the secretary. could you tell us how you got some of those doors opening and closing?

i really liked the concept and the way you followed through in terms of story (except the ending which was lacking)

good job..!
First, thanks for watching and the kind comments! I especially appreciate the comment about it being funny (in a good way) more than anything. Not sure why... Maybe because it was my main contribution to the script...

Unlike Briceman and his comment, I will not pass on the acting comment to Ms. Baas who potrayed the secretary, "Beth." She will take her anger out on me and I'm so very fragile (she's a hitter). Instead, let me ask: What, specifically, didn't you like about her?

The door thing was fairly simple in that I had someone out of frame maniupulating the door. You'll notice that our framing is of the 2.35 variety, meaning we had a wee bit less on screen. If you look closely at one of the conference room shots, you'll see some legs hidden behind the table. That was our "door-closer," Tony. For the opening we had another actor (not in frame) quickly open the door as "Tom" was knocking. Easy stuff. We are but novices.

And finally -- The ending was meant to be somewhat ambiguous and subtle. It's not necessarily a shock or surprise. It's more about the choice and how, with a technology that allows for just about any fantasy to become reality, all he really wanted was this person back in his life. Steve (ZB Brox) can fill that in a bit more.

[Z B Brox]

If Jim's gonna hand that off to me, I'll say a little.

We hoped the dialogue throughout would give the impression that Tom, the lead, had lost someone he loved. The relationship isn't precisely the point, though we had "wife" in the script. If we got that across, that's step one. If not, I'll claim the responsibility. And thanks for letting me know. ;)

At the end, as Jim said, we find out that he wanted his wife back so badly that he made it happen. We left it simple because we didn't want to get into whether she's "real" or not. That's not really the point. What we want is to leave the audience thinking this: Science is becoming more and more powerful, and more and more invasive, every day. Eventually, it will reach this point, the point where there is no need that isn't automatically fulfilled, no wish that isn't immediately granted. What speaks to both the wonder and the horror of that better than the power to resurrect the dead?

If you want to view it as a monkey's paw, resurrecting soulless automatons, great. If you want to view it as the final, greatest achievement of mankind, equally great. The characters can't make up their minds, either. ;)

Anyway, I'm rambling. I'm generally a prose writer, and I doubt I conveyed any of that half so well on screen, but I hope it's of interest here.

[MojoTrancer]

After all that exposition I needed a bit more closure. But I still liked it. Great concept. And I for one liked the secretary's voice. :)

[InsightBlue]

After all that exposition I needed a bit more closure. But I still liked it. Great concept. And I for one liked the secretary's voice. :)
Well, to that I say... um... your mind has been poisoned by Hollywood? Liberals? I guess? Maybe?

I need more closure too. I swear. We went back and forth on that. I think a draft had something slightly resembling closure, but we went for the "subtle" route. (I'll just start puting quotes around everything.)

I'll just call it an artistic decision and say that it's not meant for whomever doesn't understand! They love it in France.

Thanks for the comments. :) I'll pass the voice thing onto the "secretary!"

[Norm Sanders]

Opening shot was brilliant through the fish tank loved it. I'd have prefered some locked down camera vs. the constantly moving hand held thing, but I got used to it. Also loved the choice of CC that was used ... worked well, I felt.

The acting by all, for the most part, was pretty solid. The lead probably being the best, the boss probably bringing up the bottom. The secretary at first had me cringe with the first line or two (not sure why, just my initial response), but then I LOVED the oddity of her voice ... had a lot of character to it, and she did her role well.

There was a spot or two that seemed a little forced/expository, the one that pops to mind is right after the lead opens the door & the guy & girl are talking in the hall ... I'm thinking, move it along people. I could be wrong, but I'm not sure I heard anything too "new" in that conversation, other than it appeared now that even those two were going to hook up, and now ony our lead character was left alone in a world where everyone else "had someone".

The ending was ambigious, but I kind of dug it ... though I also wondered if she was alive or not.

Didn't really get the SFX near the beginning when they were being called into the office, but that's nit-picking now. Did well on my score card.

[penfever]

I liked your lead actor - a lot. He has a really interesting face, although he's a bit immature. (you don't have to tell him that last part). This film was fairly well-written, and it's good to see you put so much attention into telling a story with characters, a plot, and all that good stuff.
Problem is, it's not cinematic. Reminds me of my own stuff a lot of the time, actually. You have to tell the story with pictures, not words. Things like framing and editing, the lifeblood of the filmic art, are sort of throwaways here. What does the editing contribute to pacing? Style? Most of the shots are utilitarian 2 or 3-shots. There's nothing to help suggest, this is a FILM. Could just as well be a play with music.
Anyway, with the way you write, I doubt you'll have any trouble continuing to make interesting and challenging work. Best of luck, and keep shooting.

[Dahopafilms]

I liked this short very much.

First, having read some of the comments above, I've got to say that I really liked the secretary's acting. Flat out believable and added to the whole feel - not "acting" - "being" (if you catch my drift). I thought her voice was perfect - maybe she'd been crying for the last day or two. Anyway, hat's off to her. Nice choice in casting (the ony point where I paused was in relation to her "giggle" during the hallway conversation with Danny, but perhaps that's looking a little too hard).

Tom was good, too. Very believeable.

Danny was a dickhead - but then again he was supposed to be. I know guys like that in offices I've worked in. There's always one. Nice job.

I wasn't as convinced by the "boss", Zoe, but that is not intended as criticism. I would have gone with an older actor, but that's a personal choice.

I had a bit of an issue on the sound as they headed for the conference room. I lost some of the dialogue as they moved away.

The opening fish tank shot was good, but I would have really liked to have lit the tropical fish so they "popped" with colour more than they did. Almost seemed like a lost opportunity there.

Finally, I liked the story a lot. Premise was great. Some good dialogue. Some aspects didn't ring true (such as Zoe opening the office door to the conversation between the secretary and Danny but just standing there to permit them to finish their conversation. I just don't see that happening in reality - she needed a reason to stand there, having opened the door and I just didn't see it), but the story was very interesting to me.

Thanks for your efforts on this. I look forward to your next one.

[Z B Brox]

Danny was a dickhead - but then again he was supposed to be. I know guys like that in offices I've worked in. There's always one. Nice job.


It's always easier when you play true-to-life ;)

Seriously, on behalf of the actors, thanks a lot for the kind words.

[Dahopafilms]

Oh yeah - and check the typo in your opening title.

Again, thanks!

[InsightBlue]

I liked this short very much.
You, sir, have my gratitude!


Nice choice in casting (the ony point where I paused was in relation to her "giggle" during the hallway conversation with Danny, but perhaps that's looking a little too hard).
Way too hard. Stop looking right before that point and then start looking again immediately after.


Danny was a dickhead - but then again he was supposed to be. I know guys like that in offices I've worked in. There's always one. Nice job.
Steve (the actor who played "Danny") gets that a lot in person. I'm not sure what that says about him...


I had a bit of an issue on the sound as they headed for the conference room. I lost some of the dialogue as they moved away.
That's fair and accurate. I unfortunately didn't have any good/usable audio for that portion and we ran out of time for dialogue replacement. As strange as it may sound, that bit right there is my biggest regret.

(Also, I lack style -- but hey, this is the first thing we've all done, so I expect we'll improve. Er, I hope we'll improve. You hear that penfever? We'll make ya proud.)

I found out about the typo the next day. It was too late to resubmit (or so I thought) at that point. C'est la vie!

Thank you for the other comments and critiques. Know that all of this goes into bettering our next film. Despite the demeanor, I take none of the comments lightly and appreciate everything everyone has said (good and bad).

-Jim

[ali]

Hi, I'm Beth. Er, Ali. ANYWAY I feel it my obligation to my fans to sayyyy... It was the worst laryngitis of my life. I drank like 50 cups of tea, and had several different medicines running through me. After filming, I could only squeak. I hope in future you won't fault me for my actual voice, which is much more annoying. T__T


I liked this short very much.

First, having read some of the comments above, I've got to say that I really liked the secretary's acting. Flat out believable and added to the whole feel - not "acting" - "being" (if you catch my drift). I thought her voice was perfect - maybe she'd been crying for the last day or two. Anyway, hat's off to her. Nice choice in casting (the ony point where I paused was in relation to her "giggle" during the hallway conversation with Danny, but perhaps that's looking a little too hard).


This really makes me blush. I'm really not that good at acting. I'm just good at pretending to be an actor. The giggle I really wasn't feeling, especially since I had to pause and giggle again. Woe.


Unlike Briceman and his comment, I will not pass on the acting comment to Ms. Baas who potrayed the secretary, "Beth." She will take her anger out on me and I'm so very fragile (she's a hitter).

Thanks for sheltering me. I realize that I'm irrational and can't accept constructive criticism. If you ever call me "Ms. Baas" again, I really will hit you. Cheers. :kiss:

Soon we'll have the whole cast in our thread. Yeeha.

[angrynerdrock07]

I liked your piece a lot. I had no problems with Beth's acting, but it did distract me a little bit because I kept thinking about how she's obviously loosing her voice. Was it the nanos that did this to her? j/k. Kudos to all your actors by the way. They did very well.

I have to disagree with the people who say the ending is lacking. I really like the subtlety, but I tend to be the type of moviegoer who likes a story left up to me to ponder rather than being forcefed an all-together, overly wrapped up ending. Great job!

[EditPhish]

First off I thought the camera work and lighting were very good. From a story standpoint, and I hope you take this in a good way, it was like the "Clerks" of sci-fi concept. Very wordy... lots of dialogue to pay attention to. That's not at all a bad thing, and I didn't find myself bored because of it... and ya know dude, there's a lot to be said for that. It's not easy to have so much dialogue and keep it from getting tiresome, especially when it all takes place in one setting.

I guess I'm a little out of the loop on Nanites, so I kept wondering what the "news" was. Your story did get me to assume that Tom had suffered a loss, and somehow the news and that loss were going to impact each other in some way... but it wasn't completely clear... the overall concept got a little TOO abstract for me at times.

What I had guessed Tom was going through and where it would go did come to fruition at the end, and I have to say I loved the shot from over his dead wife's shoulder... the fact you could see him through her glasses was great.

Acting was good... I think Tom was the best of the bunch... I found the guy with the glasses a little annoying, but I assume he was supposed to be ;)

The music was good... it was subtle and appropriate for the story... and your sound was good overall.

Overall it was a good job... the six minutes didn't at all drag and that's a good testiment to what you were trying to accomplish... especially with so much dialogue.

[Jimmy John Worley]

I thought the concept was really neat. You did a really good job. The one thing that I got held up on was the secretary actress. Her voice kept bothering me. But that's a small thing to say- your film was really cool.

[InsightBlue]

angrynerdrock07: Thanks for the kind words. You hit it right on the nose with your comment on the ending. It is food for thought (sci-fi should make you think!) and I'm glad you enjoyed that. With Beth's voice, well... nanites work in mysterious ways! :)

EditPhish: Again, thank you for the kind words and the great review! Believe me when I say (and I'm sure I speak for Steve on this too) calling it the "Clerks" of sci-fi is an amazing compliment. We both love us some Kevin Smith (I give Steve most of the credit for the dialogue). I'm happy to hear it kept you locked in. If we can't keep you somewhat entertained for at least six minutes, then I guarantee you'll never see another video from us.

As for the news on the nanites, there was a lot more on that in the original scripted opening, but due to the length, we cut it hoping that people would pick up on the basics through the other dialogue (seems to have worked). Thanks for the compliment on the final shot, the music, the acting and the sound! Remind me to send you a gift basket. Or cash. Whichever you prefer.

Jimmy John Worley: First, awesome name. Second, thank you for the compliments! Third, it seems like people are going back and forth on her voice -- but, hey, keeps it interesting. She had a bad case of laryngitis that day! If only nanites DID exist to help her.

I'm really digging the feedback! Thanks again!


-Jim

[Matt Sconce]

This is one of the few films here I thought worked in every dimension. I absolutely loved it and liked the subtle ending. It was well done and the acting, actors and story were engaging and powerful. This is one of the films I gave a perfect 10. I liked everything about it. Congratulations, and I hope to do as well in the future.

[Blaine]

Okay, here's my major problem with this short. His wife is dead. I didn't catch this because as we looked over her shoulder she was moving. I didn't realize until a subsequent viewing that she couldn't hold out a little bit longer, and I was wondering after the first viewing what the point was. Because I thought she was still alive, I was wondering what I had missed. (Bad on me.)

This was actually one of the first ones I watched but had to wait until I figured out what was going on to comment on the short.

[bc5431]

OK, I am going to try to say something new and different about this short because I really liked it and had only a few small quibbles with it and I don't think anyone has brought them up yet. The first, and largest, is - similar to what penfever was saying - the pace was a tad slow, because most of the shots were basic 2-shots or 3-shots so it tends to drag a little bit (i had this same problem with Clerks, to continue that comparison, and it is one that I think is warranted). The other is the exposition in the begining between the secretary and the guy with glasses. It seemed far to convenient to have a character simply not understand what was going on so that another could explain it to her (and us). It is a technique used over and over by lazy writers (do not think I am calling you lazy, with this one exception, the writing was deep, textured, and subtle, but also CLEAR) and it stands out as particularly bas because it is surrounded by what is otherwise an exceptional script. The very high quality of the rest of your writing made it seem that much worse by comparison.
Speaking of that high quality, though, here are my 2 cents on the ending: I loved it. The long tracking shot of him walking up to the house with the eerie sort of haunted amusement park piano in the background was amazing and the final shot is about as powerful as you can get. Really fine work all around. On a second watching I really saw how much of the dialogue (and not just those lines that you put into the soundtrack during that last shot) builds towards that moment. His discussion of the strangeness of his morning when, presumably, he awoke to find his dead wife by his side, his overwhelming desire for things to return to the way they were, even when that means working at a job that is not necessary in the least. The actor does a really nice job of bringing across the conflict without screaming out "I AM CONFLICTED!" either literally or metaphorically. He just seems off, and as we understand more and more why he is off, we understand more and more what is missing from his world.
Most importantly, this is a film that, after I watched it, made me sit for a moment and in a rare moment of pure un-cynicism think about what I have and what I have lost and make me glad to be here. So I leave you with two thoughts:
1) Had I 100 posts, then you would surely get a 10 from me and
2) Simply, thank you. There are no other words.

[InsightBlue]

msconce: Wow. Thank you, you're too kind. That's the kind of thing I'd stick on the back of a DVD box! I appreciate it.

Blaine: In a way you're both right and wrong. She is technically dead. The point we tried to make was that Tom had recreated his dead wife using the nanite technology. So in a manner of speaking she is alive, which is why she'd be moving. So really, you didn't miss it! Thanks for the comment and, just so you know, I'm naming my first child Baron Wentworth Mahoney.

bc5431: I've thought for a while how to respond to this. I'm not good with "words" or "emotions." But, let me just say that your comment at the end is probably the best thing I will take with me from this contest and the highest compliment we could ever hope to attain. It means a lot.

My girlfriend offered to send you cookies.

The over, over, 2 or 3-shot was by design to keep it simple. This was our first shoot together so to make it as easy as possible and to get through all that dialogue, we just went with some standard stuff. I feel we'll be a little more ambitious with the shot composition on the next one.

The character not understanding seemed convenient and, well, was. We went with the ditzy secretary stereotype for that one.

From your post, it's pretty clear that you get it. Thank you for the comments and critiques. Vote or no vote, I really appreciate everything you wrote.


-Jim

[Blaine]

Blaine: In a way you're both right and wrong. She is technically dead. The point we tried to make was that Tom had recreated his dead wife using the nanite technology. So in a manner of speaking she is alive, which is why she'd be moving. So really, you didn't miss it!
That sounds like an area where you wanted more time to develop that. Shades of Pet Cemetary?


and, just so you know, I'm naming my first child Baron Wentworth Mahoney.
Bwahahaha. I wouldn't do that to ANY child.http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/images/smilies/grin.gifhttp://www.dvxuser.com/V6/images/smilies/grin.gif

[conrad_johnson]

Hi - Nicely done, overall. The sound could use a lot of work and a lot of the cuts are off-putting - some shots are uncomfortably long, some too short, and some of the cuts are in odd places. I'm thinking specifically of the parts where they go to talk to the boss, then are hanging out in the hallway. I really loved the long build-up to the main character entering his house (and the accompanying music) but felt it was lacking in payoff. That last shot could have been longer, to allow the viewer to process what's going on, since this is (I think) the payoff scene, and final scene of the short. Overall, good work! The story was very nice, and acting was good to great (main character - great).

[thartley]

This one had a good story, but fell off at the end because I didnt know exactly what happened to the man's wife/person. And that being the whole point of the story, should have been a greater pay off for the viewer.

The score and acting were solid, edits were all well done. Sound was great. I am really enjoying watching the films with consistent sound.

Thanks for an enjoyable film!!

[Z B Brox]

Heh, it's interesting seeing so many different views on whether the end was satisfying or anti-climactic. We had the exact same discussion several times, about whether we'd givent he audience enough information to put the story together or not. For all you who liked the ending, thanks a lot for vindicating my side of the argument. ;) And major props to Jim for finding what was actually a compromise between the two, because, to be honest, I wrote in less and probably would've left *everyone* confused. For all those who think the ending needed more, you can blame me. Sorry. I'll try harder next time. Just don't hit me again!

On another note, thanks a lot for everyone who complimented the writing. I'm a wannabe writer with not much accomplishment under my belt, and seeing people liking what we did here really means a lot. And thank you equally for the criticism. Okay, maybe not quite equally, but I do genuinely appreciate it. ;)

[Larry Rutledge]

Quick Disclaimer: I am avoiding reading other comments before rating each of the films, so I may repeat comments others have said to death.

I liked the opening shot, through the fish tank - kind of a foreshadowing of the story to come. People whose lives are completely taken care of, they are free from worry or need. Yet, without someone else there to partake with them they have a very lonely existence, floating through life until the day they are found belly-up at the top.

The beginning sequence does a great job to tell us what the story is without boring us through a 3-minute lecture on nano machines and what they mean to humanity. I like that more and more of the information is provided casually through the conversation of the film as it progresses instead of one talking head at the beginning. And I like the unspoken tension between the two male actors, its clear that Danny is a slacker and that Tom prefers not to deal with him any more than is necessary.

When Tom first goes into Zoey's office it looks like her voice is out of sync with her mouth, but when it moves to the closer shot it is back in sync. I like the effect of her opening the door without touching it - again showing what is possible in this world without telling us.

Something kept nagging at me throughout the film and I couldn't figure out what it was until after Tom leaves the office and the score starts. I suddenly realized there hadn't been any score up to that point. I know it is not required to have score through 100% of the film, not to mention that would be equally annoying; but it seems like the office sequence could have used a bit of score throughout to give a little extra polish. When the score started after he left, it suddenly felt like a movie - before that it felt like a video.

The acting seemed decent throughout, the overall story was good. When it ended I felt like it was over...I think that is a good thing, story-wise :)

Good job.

Larry

edited to add: after reading the comments for this film I wanted to add (in case I wasn't clear originally) that I knew exactly what the deal was with Tom's wife. In fact from the conversation between the three before he went into Zoey's office added to his comment that he "...did something this morning...", I knew then what the end of the story was. Then once the whole bit in the hall about needing each other and Tom running out, once I saw the shot in the house I felt vindicated in my assumption as to what he had done. Just my $0.01 9/10

[THX-1138]

Comments

Best fishtank shot of any short. seriously nice way to start.

Acting was hit or mis throught.

"So... we're all going to di?" the secratary's line was cut off Audio issue or windown media player, you'll have to tell us about that one.

I'm so happy the audio faded when the actors walked away from the camera...great audio touch.

I felt during the two shot of secratary and bierd ponytail guy could have been filmed differently or at least some more cut aways of the Woman boss and the guy listening to them...all I'm saying is the initial two shot goes on too long without the introduction of a new camera angle. Introduce them as a two shot and them go to an over her shoulder shot of him talking. Back to the two shot after a while.

Other than that I liked the editing and pacing.

Nice short

Kip Kubin

[Ought2bCommitted]

Hey!

Nice job overall. Some really work in there.

My biggest complaints are the acting and the script in general.
The acting is really off most of the time. When a good line delivery is made it feels out of place.
Scriptwise, I just feel like its very very talking. Not a whole lot happens to move the plot further. The dialogue tells us the plot and tries to move it. As a result, it can get very dull to watch after awhile because its just people talking. You wonder when something is going to actually happen.

Nice effort!

-Robert

[Z B Brox]

Wow. We've gotten about every comment there is about the acting now, from "good to great" to "hit or miss" to "really off." As one of the actors, let me say... anyone who doesn't think our man Mike did a fine job is out of their mind. ;) On the other hand, I have no problem with you criticizing the guy with the beard and glasses. He has no business on film.

To be honest, I'm not an actor, I'm not too fussed on that front, though I wish you all bought into it if only to help you focus on Jim's work. On the other hand, let me reiterate that any all comments ond criticism on the script are welcome, and thanks for all of them. I'm often accused of being too talky in both my writing and my life, and Jim is definitely fixated on dialogue, so I'm interested to see how many people our script annoyed and how many people it entertained. We seem to have a mix so far.

In fact, people seem mixed about the whole bloody thing. Except for the special effects. I have yet to hear one negative comment on the special effects.

Or the tiger.

:)

[InsightBlue]

Larry R: The fish tank shot had that meaning from the very start. Not just now, when you pointed it out. Always. I do enjoy how different people take different meanings out of various elements. I think it's important that people independantly come up with these ideas on their own and aren't hit on the head with them. Astute catch with the out of sync dialogue. It's from another take and was a bit off. That happens twice in the film! A marvelous Marvel no-prize to whomever finds the other instance.

I'm glad that the score/ending had more of a film feel. I had tried some cuts with various royalty free music to fill it out, but nothing was working. Next time we'll try to finish soon enough to hand it off to one of the Chris's that offered up free scoring.

I'm also happy that you picked up on what happened to Tom's wife with relative ease (or at least had a suspicion). That's what we were going for! Thanks for enjoying it and all the comments.

THX-1138/Kip: Reply to this 8 times so you can vote for us. ;) Er, I mean... I really like your comment on the audio fading. Me and Steve (co-writer, ZB Brox) had a discussion about this the other night. That's what happens when people walk away, right? As for the line being cut off, it plays fine for me so I'm assuming it was a media player problem. Then again, it may seem a little odd because the actress had laryngitis that day and her voice was playing tricks on us.

I understand what you mean about the conversation in the hall. Believe it or not, as it was originally planned, we were going to do exactly what you said. A wide shot or 2-shot, then go over the shoulder. I forget why we didn't do it, but I think it had something to do with the size of the hall and not getting the shot right.

Thanks for the comments! (Editing and pacing, woo!) I appreciate it.

Ought2bCommitted/Robert: It's very much a "talkie" (as I constantly refer to it as that) and not as much a "show me" film. As for your comments on the acting and script issues -- the opinions have definitely run the gamut. Feel free to elaborate on it if you have the chance! We take what we learn and use it to make the next one better. Or we use it to fuel our rage and curse your name. Either way, it helps and makes us feel better. Thanks for the comments!


-Jim

[Ought2bCommitted]

Jim,

As soon as I've gone through all the films and posted, I will PM you with some more detailed examples if you want.

-Robert

[Existentialist]

Excellent work there, crew. I liked the overall project. Very well edited with a good flow to it.

As far as the acting goes, am I the only one that noticed that "Beth" looked straight at the camera right in the beginning? But she did fine, otherwise. The hallway acting was average. And I really liked Zoe, she was firm and delivered her lines excellently.

Great job!!

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

I thought this was funny and interesting. It's in my good folder. I scored everything above average (on my scoring system) except for lighting and sound design which I scored as average.

The ending was 100% clear to me.

thanks guys

Jack

[Daniel Skubal]

I think most of this stuff has already been said. I liked the nanyte concept, but putting it in the office setting with some unexperienced actors just didn't feel like the right move.

The pony tail guy reminded me of kevin smith. haha

I was a bit confused by the ending. His girlfriend died before the nanytes came around and he left her sitting in the chair? or was the girl brought back to life by the nanytes?

The lighting could be worked on. It looked like you used source lighting which made your film dark in some areas. For your next film, definitely allow yourself to play with the lighting a bit more.

Scrolling back up, I see someone mentioned the fish tank. I thought that was a great shot and there's a very strong element of symbolism there.

I enjoyed your film, it was entertaining! I feel that if you experimented with lighting and worked with your actors a bit more to get some solid believable lines out of them, you'll be rockin'! Over all, great job! Can't wait to see what you come up with for the next fest!

[iSTy]

I didn't think much of the acting. And I found this interfered with the story. Or was it just that the story is confusing. I want to know who it was in the room

[Z B Brox]

iSty--

As Jim hasn't for a while, I'll respond. (Note: SPOILERS!!! :) )

I *think* the story is fairly straightforward. Tiny invisible machines, called nanites, have been released into the world, and they will perform virtually any function. Tom has recently lost someone important to him. He comes to work, but seems lost and conflicted. It's revealed that he has been thinking a lot about the person he lost, and how they could have lived forever had they only lived a few more months. He is also concerned by a "mistake" he made that morning. He leaves, and we find that at home he has forcibly brought the person he lost back into his life using the nanites. Is she real? Is she just an image the nanites constructed from his mind? Is she a soulless zombie thing? That's what Tom wonders as he looks at what he's done and considers what he's lost. Fade to black. ;)

[iSTy]

AAAAhaaa that explains its, and having watched the 'film' again it does actually make sense, although I'm still not too keen on the acting.

Was impressed I didn't see the camera in the double doors in the reception area though :)

I always look for camerapeople in glass http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/images/icons/icon6.gif