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

J.R. Hudson said:
...

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

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

J.R. Hudson said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.

J.R. Hudson said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.

J.R. Hudson said:
The score, EPIC. Awesome. Creepy.

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

J
Click to expand...

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



Dmitry Yun said:
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.
Click to expand...


heheh :thumbsup: don't worry the bathroom was only dirty with dirt from barry's yard and spraypaint :D
 
Last edited:
Billy Pilgrim said:
I think you guys should give away the prop fetus as a prize...to me.
Click to expand...

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.


mentatDUKE said:
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?
Click to expand...
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




mentatDUKE said:
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.
Click to expand...

(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). 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.

mentatDUKE said:
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.
Click to expand...

Hopefully a larger percentage of this team will be able to put that together. :beer:
 
Last edited:
Luis Caffesse said:
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).
Click to expand...

Yea i kinda ment that sarcastically, but its true. You need light to make an image.
 
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. :)
 
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 [SIZE=-1]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)
[/SIZE]
 
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. :)
 
StefanHaynes said:
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 [SIZE=-1]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)
[/SIZE]
Click to expand...


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?
 
Last edited:
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.
 
Last edited:
StefanHaynes said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Beat Takeshi said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Edgen said:
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
Click to expand...

Thanks Justin! I'll have to check out your scores too :-)
 
StefanHaynes said:
... [SIZE=-1]
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.
[/SIZE]
Click to expand...

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

Michele Seidman said:
Thank you!

Sincerely

Flora Barren

:)
Click to expand...

Hey Flora ! Jezebel !

StefanHaynes said:
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 [SIZE=-1]Château Latour... let's just say Henry the VIII might have gotten a little more 'stump happy.'[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]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.*[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]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.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]*(Charles Mee, Elaine May)[/SIZE]
Click to expand...

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.
 
Brandon Rice said:
Regarding the "JDS feature"

Any news? :):)
Click to expand...
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top