Blaine
Mr. Hollywood
Personally, I find it easier to write features than shorts.
Writer's Strike - Affects People Outside WGA?
- Thread starter Quigon007
- Start date
DeSica
Well-known member
Yeah, that's exactly how the math works in this business...
Loki
Veteran
After really.. trying.. and I swear I really did try.. to watch your film... I ended up skimming through to the end..
After sorta watching it... it made Zak's post so much more ironic... to the point where I LOL'd at the irony of it all.
Well played Zak... well played...
I have nothing all that useful to add other than agreeing with most people on here... don't piss off the WGA writers..
and I thought I made long short films (a great oxymoron
).
a title change for your tutorial:
"How to be a filmmaker if you are making a film entitled shadow, which is the film I made. "
:happy::grin::cheesy:
After sorta watching it... it made Zak's post so much more ironic... to the point where I LOL'd at the irony of it all.
Well played Zak... well played...
I have nothing all that useful to add other than agreeing with most people on here... don't piss off the WGA writers..
and I thought I made long short films (a great oxymoron
).a title change for your tutorial:
"How to be a filmmaker if you are making a film entitled shadow, which is the film I made. "
:happy::grin::cheesy:
Mattykins
Cute Member
Apparently you didn't heed my advice at all...or take my advice into consideration at all...doesn't surprise me however.
Okay, this is the way things work, in the real world. I work as a production assistant for hire in the professional industry. With several productions under my belt. I have had sit down meetings with multiple producers in the industry to talk about how things work. I am an independent director and screenwriter on the side. Note how I don't have an agent. I also write scripts on the side too. Entering in competitions, such as big break by Final Draft, and others. So far I have six completed full features under my belt. And numerous shorts, many produced, most not.
I have been searching for an agent for a while. However, I cannot do so as I do not have any reason an agency will pick me up. So I am not wasting my time. Do I think I am a good writer? Yeah. However, I don't think my stuff will be instantly great, since you learn as you write. Honestly, my first screenplay was total garbage. Yes, I have all seven drafts and all three rewrites still logged (and by logged I mean in a pile) in my room. It was unreadable. Well, I mean you could read it, but it wasn't any good. The characters sounded fake, there was too many holes in the script. So I wrapped it as best I could, and moved on. Wrote down a log line and put it on a sticky note and attached to to my wall as a "Write you later" E for effort I suppose.
My third screenplay went into competition against 2500 others....and nothing came of it. Oh well, 60 dollars down the drain, but hey, I tried.
My forth, I put together on my own and went about pre-production. My producer ran off with my money. Unfortunately this producer was (note the use of was) my friend. And it wasn't all that much money. We had a budget of 900 dollars to do a full feature shot digitally. Hey, we tried. We never made it past pre-poduction. So I flagged the script, put it up on my "write you later" wall.
I then started working independently, and started honing my digital compositing skills. Upgraded to new software and tried to enter the industry another way to pull in cash while I wrote. Still am on that step today.
I am working on a new script with a creative team now to enter production in a few months. This will be sent off to a few producers and we will see what happens.
Hmm, this plan of attack sounds terribly like the original writer of SAW. He had an idea, wrote a script, but wait! He never did this before. Okay, so what to do now. Ahhh! Lets shoot a section of it on 16mm and ship that out to a few producers. And then, someone loved the film, loved the concept, and they were off and rolling with the first of a never-ending block of SAW films, thus the SAW franchise.
What did this kid do differently. He filmed his product. Spent the money, came to LA, got as many meetings as he could, farmed it out as best he could and eventually someone saw it, liked it, and told another producer about it who picked it up. And they were off and running.
What do you have to offer an agent? What shows that you can make money. Now, saying you are a director and screen writer doesn't count. Unless you can show us an IMDB resume. Have you made money on your work? Do you have any exposure? Do people know your name? Or your work? Have people read and liked your script? Has your script won any competitions? Hmmm, no's all across the board.
Forget about it. You will not get an agent. If you do on a screenplay alone from an unheard of writer. More power to you. Just an FYI. Scripts aren't actually read by agents...at all.
An intern reads the script, they are supposed to read the whole thing, ideally, they then do a one page write-up on the script and basically decide if it is worth even taking a second glance at. Sooo...what does this mean? Basically most scripts, of the thousands of scripts that are brought to agents in LA alone, are trashed, or reduced to a one page writeup. IF THAT. Especially if you are a no name. Most agents come to you if they think you can pull them in money. (They get paid on a percentage. They make money when you make money, and not until then)
AKA. Enter some festivals, competitions, shoot the script, or a part of it. Book meetings with producers. Do the film yourself. Do something. The first script of a novice script writer will go no where logistically speaking. I think I have wasted enough time on this. Keep thinking what you want. We are just here to say there are fundamental differences between your ideal world and the real world.
PS. No agency will pick you up during the strike. Because...they don't want to get blacklisted either....
Matt
Little add here. I did not post this for you. The only reason I am up now, at 2:30 AM, and typing is issues with my ex and I am trying to figure out what to do about it. So basically I am trying to keep my mind off of it. Thus my long response. No other reason than that.
And I did try to watch your film. I was bored after the 1min and 16 seconds of intro credits that rolled on black. Which, if you think about it is roughly 20% of the length of the films that we will be seeing in Love Fest. This is also 4% of your total film and about 7.1% of the film was dedicated to the fact this man needed to fax something over to his company. Which could have been accomplished in a fraction of that time. And And thus fast forwarded to the middle, and then to the end. Don't you think 26 seconds of seeing Indie-View productions is a tad excessive? Not to mention the 28 min run time, in which nothing really happens.
I also found something else in your tutorial. The tripod thing, you actually kinda want to stay away from that. Nothing screams student film louder than locked down shots. Note: Cloverfield, or Borne Ultimatum.
Last edited:
Nice post and it matches what I know. Yep, the ole catch 22 regarding agents: You need one to get your work looked at and you can't get your work looked at without one.
One thing that deserves a mention, the hardest thing isn't getting meetings, getting an agent, getting funding, breaking in to Hollywood or doing blow in the bathroom at Chateau Marmot with Owen Wilson. The hardest thing is writing a great script. If you can do that, the doors to Hollywood will swing open.
Quigon, you're getting heat here partly because of your flippant attitude towards the business. There aren't many Diablo Codys out there, most of us bust our butts trying to get something intelligible on the white space. I think you're getting started on the wrong foot here, it took me several years here for people to start hating me, I think you should slow down...you're way ahead of the curve right now.
Loki
Veteran
And I did try to watch your film. I was bored after the 1min and 16 seconds of intro credits that rolled on black. Which, if you think about it is roughly 20% of the length of the films that we will be seeing in Love Fest. This is also 4% of your total film and about 7.1% of the film was dedicated to the fact this man needed to fax something over to his company. Which could have been accomplished in a fraction of that time. And And thus fast forwarded to the middle, and then to the end. Don't you think 26 seconds of seeing Indie-View productions is a tad excessive? Not to mention the 28 min run time, in which nothing really happens.
I also found something else in your tutorial. The tripod thing, you actually kinda want to stay away from that. Nothing screams student film louder than locked down shots. Note: Cloverfield, or Borne Ultimatum.
perhaps you can explain the framing choice on the woman talking on the phone? I certainly can't.
handheld ain't the answer for everything.. nothing wrong with a camera on sticks.
*cough No Country for Old Men
having vision tends to help also. :evil:
add:
Jesus.... I am trying to raise nearly $5000.00 to finish a short film... how did you plan on doing a feature film with $900??? One that was worth watching let alone making?
disclaimer: not saying money is the answer for everything... but it certainly makes things less stressful at times.
Last edited:
Mattykins
Cute Member
Oh no, I'm not saying locked down is bad at all. Haha. Controlled motion is good.
I should rephrase, I am talking about the general locked down, poor frame shot typical to student films, poorly composed. The camera, in my personal opinion should be one with the scene. Haha, yes Loki, nothing wrong with sticks. I use them all the time, just need to know how to use them, and how to compose.
Just saying handheld can and is used by hollywood and Quigon stated is not the case in the tutorial. Which I watched as well. And I think No country, an ending tends to help as well. But I digress...
Obviously, the lips should always be on the top third of the frame. With the chin at the center. This is how it is done all the time.
And you might want to take a looksie at sound design as well. Adding reverb to voices so they don't sound so fake, especially with the voice overs, as well as with regards to balancing out the levels and with Foley work. That's a cool little thing to.
I should rephrase, I am talking about the general locked down, poor frame shot typical to student films, poorly composed. The camera, in my personal opinion should be one with the scene. Haha, yes Loki, nothing wrong with sticks. I use them all the time, just need to know how to use them, and how to compose.
Just saying handheld can and is used by hollywood and Quigon stated is not the case in the tutorial. Which I watched as well. And I think No country, an ending tends to help as well. But I digress...Obviously, the lips should always be on the top third of the frame. With the chin at the center. This is how it is done all the time.
And you might want to take a looksie at sound design as well. Adding reverb to voices so they don't sound so fake, especially with the voice overs, as well as with regards to balancing out the levels and with Foley work. That's a cool little thing to.
Quigon007
Member
And I did try to watch your film. I was bored after the 1min and 16 seconds of intro credits that rolled on black. Which, if you think about it is roughly 20% of the length of the films that we will be seeing in Love Fest. This is also 4% of your total film and about 7.1% of the film was dedicated to the fact this man needed to fax something over to his company. Which could have been accomplished in a fraction of that time. And And thus fast forwarded to the middle, and then to the end. Don't you think 26 seconds of seeing Indie-View productions is a tad excessive? Not to mention the 28 min run time, in which nothing really happens.
I also found something else in your tutorial. The tripod thing, you actually kinda want to stay away from that. Nothing screams student film louder than locked down shots. Note: Cloverfield, or Borne Ultimatum.
Hrmm well, maybe you guys should actually watch my short film all the way through lol I mean, "Oh I was bored about a minute in" doesn't really help when analyzing my work or "Jumping around the film" It is a narrative character study piece. You have to really appreciate film in order to understand. I also DON'T agree on doing all hand held shots, I think it's unprofessional you obviously don't know anything about cinematography.
Also, I don't believe that there is a certain "number of scripts" you have to write an whatnot. It all depends on if you can write GOOD scripts or not. I honestly don't know if my scripts I'm writing are good or not but I'm going to submit them to a few agencies. Mattykins, if your bashing your own work not believing that it's good material, how can you be a confident and successful writer?
No Country For Old Men is a great film! But usually I'm not trying to give my films a "trend" or anything. I try to incorporate my own style to them. The shot for the woman for my film Shadow is just an idea of not showing her face. Why? You would have to see the whole film to understand. And again, sorry if the first two minutes doesn't have some sort of action sequence or isn't s fan film of any kind. I think that's what some indie filmmakers get confused, they make low budget action flicks and fan films and think they're the next Tarinteno or Rodriguez. But in reality they don't realize that most indie films rely on CHARACTER STUDY and not pointless action like most Hollywood films. Because they don't have the budget and they always have a better storyline.
Last edited:
Sure it does. It informs you (or should inform you) that you have created something that doesn't hold your audience's attention for more than about a minute. That's not happy information, but it's useful information.
Well, it's true that if you are looking for people who appreciate film, you have come to the wrong place. Nobody around here appreciates film. Zak doesn't. Brian doesn't. Matty doesn't. I know that *I* don't...
Yeah, the unprofessionalism just oozed out of all those sequences in Saving Private Ryan and Children of Men and all those other lousy no-good handheld-type movies...
It's true; all those established professionals who say so, are just trying to discourage you from writing that seven-figure blockbuster Oscar-sweeping very first script - because they are afraid of the competition.
The idea that one will crank out brilliantly accomplished work on the very first go-round doesn't tell me what line of work you're in...but it suggests to me a bunch of professions you're probably not in.
And of course, increased experience doing something, has no impact upon whether or not it's done well, resulting in good product. Ho, no, nothing at all...
May as well.
FWIW, having watched it...
...credits are too long, front and especially back. When people run credits that slow, I expect they figure me for an illiterate. Please don't figure me for an illiterate.
The basic story works.
The shot of the woman's face should have framed out her eyes and eye-area completely. Her mouth's the subject of the shot, and you can deliver characterization with that kind of shot - but it's too wide on her lower face, and eyes are so strong compositionally that even seeing glimpses of them wrecks the shot, for me.
There are a number of compositions that feel focus-less and without balance, to me. There are some tasty ones, too.
The B&W/color dichotomy between the house-world and the outside-world is functional, but uninspired. Maybe it's a limitation of the tools at hand; if that was the only available way to make the distinction, then it's better than not having made it.
Most everything is cut too long. This could probably be an eighteen-to-twenty minute film with much greater impact.
The pistol in the office shooting doesn't read as a .357; that's primarily a revolver load and the self-loaders that chamber it look distinctive. It's usually good to avoid specific technical terms for most anything, unless that technical information is itself a story point - and then do your research to make that point correct.
It doesn't really have anything objectionable about it, that a great many other early creations don't have to a much worse degree.
Last edited:
DeSica
Well-known member
Well, at least you have completed a watchable short...congrats on that.
I'd give this thing a 6 out of 10...
Who directed the parts with 'Gail' on the phone?
She was talking way too fast, had no real inflection in her voice to indicate she was actually thinking about or meaning what she was saying, and it sort of looked like she was reading her lines.
The lighting was also lacking in much of the black and white footage that I saw.
The jump cuts of him taking pills with his coffee were too similar....that can disorient the audience briefly and take them out of the moment. You want jump cuts to be sufficiently different and ahead in time where the viewer automatically makes the logical connection of time and space in a filmic sense without wondering if there was a bad cut or some missing frames before they figure out what is going on.
The delivery guy needed better direction...his delivery was pretty bad.
The lighting in some of the colour scenes wasn't exactly great.
The cut to close up of his alter ego laughing on the couch from a medium shot was just bad.
A few other cuts felt wrong to me.
Why don't we see Gail's face? What is the purpose behind that?
The pacing was a bit slow...I know it was to add to the whole feel of the film, but it did seem a bit drawn out at points.
Why almost 29 minutes? If you shortened the credits and paced it a bit better, you could get it down to around 24 minutes, which makes it a better length to try and sell to television. 22 or 23 minutes is ideal.
The outdoor stuff was nice.
The music was okay.
MCC Film Festival....is that a community college or something?
So was the point of the film that the guy had been shot, passed out, and dreamed everything until he awoke to find himself back in the present, only to be finished off by the shooter?
I'd give this thing a 6 out of 10...
Who directed the parts with 'Gail' on the phone?
She was talking way too fast, had no real inflection in her voice to indicate she was actually thinking about or meaning what she was saying, and it sort of looked like she was reading her lines.
The lighting was also lacking in much of the black and white footage that I saw.
The jump cuts of him taking pills with his coffee were too similar....that can disorient the audience briefly and take them out of the moment. You want jump cuts to be sufficiently different and ahead in time where the viewer automatically makes the logical connection of time and space in a filmic sense without wondering if there was a bad cut or some missing frames before they figure out what is going on.
The delivery guy needed better direction...his delivery was pretty bad.
The lighting in some of the colour scenes wasn't exactly great.
The cut to close up of his alter ego laughing on the couch from a medium shot was just bad.
A few other cuts felt wrong to me.
Why don't we see Gail's face? What is the purpose behind that?
The pacing was a bit slow...I know it was to add to the whole feel of the film, but it did seem a bit drawn out at points.
Why almost 29 minutes? If you shortened the credits and paced it a bit better, you could get it down to around 24 minutes, which makes it a better length to try and sell to television. 22 or 23 minutes is ideal.
The outdoor stuff was nice.
The music was okay.
MCC Film Festival....is that a community college or something?
So was the point of the film that the guy had been shot, passed out, and dreamed everything until he awoke to find himself back in the present, only to be finished off by the shooter?
Loki
Veteran
well no actually.. I just think your film is excessively boring... the acting is horrid... and that caused me not to watch the film.
Had I been in a theatre environment would I have sat and watched this? Yes I would have... but 28 min is a long time to spend watching a short on the net.
I prefer indie shorts / features when they are interesting character studies. This is not. Shadow is a lot of exposition. snorefest.
And the framing on the woman.. is still bad.. it looks like you didn't know what you were doing.. regardless of if it was a concious decision or not.
We a good portion of her face.. and it looks like the camera man was just 'lazy' with the type of framing you have. Why not spotlight a part of her face... like her lips or something... something more motivated.. it just seems sloppy is what I am saying.
I wouldn't call this film terrible, as I have seen many many horrid films before. But it certainly doesn't hold my attention.
Blaine
Mr. Hollywood
After watching your film, I have to agree with Sad Max and DeSica. Pacing is VERY important and some tightening up the editing would definitely help. Many scenes just ran TOO long. Perhaps next time have someone else (with fresh eyes) edit for you. The girl from human resources sounded unconnected to anything (re: reading her lines). And she must have an AMAZING memory to come up with that number so quickly off the top of her head. The delivery boy's delivery of lines was awful. I believe I know what you were trying to do, but the jump cut DID feel somewhat like a "mistake." The VO was Stephen Wrightesque without the humor to make it interesting. You could have gotten away without 90% of it.
The dialogue and VO felt like spoon-fed exposition.
Bottom line, this was a snoozefest.
The dialogue and VO felt like spoon-fed exposition.
Bottom line, this was a snoozefest.
I, too, found this ending odd and confusing. It tended to negate everything other than the first shot of the shooting leading up to it.
Last edited:
Quigon007
Member
Well I do admit the pacing of the film could of been faster. Also the delivery boy's acting sucked cause I couldn't find anyone else to do the role. It's hard to find actors that do this stuff for free. As far as the end, to pint is, it's all a dream. In reality he passes out when he is shot in the shoulder and never escapes WCRB (where he works). Everything you see in the film is a dream, there are little hints for that too, like how the 911 number didn't work, etc. I appreciate that you sat down and watched the whole film instead of just jumping to conclusions after the first few minutes.
Quigon007
Member
Apparently some independent production companies don't accept unsolicited material as well. A few weeks back I submitted my "Leadbone" full length script for the hell of it to this small production company in Vermont. Here's what the letter said:
Re: "Leadbone"
Dear Matthew,
Thank you for sending us your letter and offering us your material. Unfortunately, we cannot consider it at this time.
As a matter of company policy, Edgewood Studios does not accept unsolicited material. Only material previously requested and submitted through either a recognized agent or an attorney with whom we have a buisness relationship, can be considered.
Therefore we have immediately destroyed or, if attached herewith, are returning one copy of the material that you submitted unread. We have neither made copies of the material nor have we had the material reviewed or covered by our creative department.
Thank you very much for thinking of Edgewood Studios and please understand that we do not intend this to in any way discourage your efforts, we do wish you the best of luck with the project.
Sincerely,
David Giancola
Edgewood Studios
- They didn't send back the script, just the letter. So they threw out my script!! I don't mind because is was my first script and I didn't really care.
Guess I need an agent after all lol
Re: "Leadbone"
Dear Matthew,
Thank you for sending us your letter and offering us your material. Unfortunately, we cannot consider it at this time.
As a matter of company policy, Edgewood Studios does not accept unsolicited material. Only material previously requested and submitted through either a recognized agent or an attorney with whom we have a buisness relationship, can be considered.
Therefore we have immediately destroyed or, if attached herewith, are returning one copy of the material that you submitted unread. We have neither made copies of the material nor have we had the material reviewed or covered by our creative department.
Thank you very much for thinking of Edgewood Studios and please understand that we do not intend this to in any way discourage your efforts, we do wish you the best of luck with the project.
Sincerely,
David Giancola
Edgewood Studios
- They didn't send back the script, just the letter. So they threw out my script!! I don't mind because is was my first script and I didn't really care.
Guess I need an agent after all lol
Try making a series of 3 to 5 minute short films. My friend and I do one every year and it's great practice. But hold yourself to it - can you tell a COMPLETE story in 3 minutes? We call up friends, write and shoot it, then spend hours editing it, trying to compress it in 3 minutes. And I don't mean 3 minutes and 12 seconds, I mean 3 minutes.
Try tightening the amount of time you have with which to tell your story and you'll figure out the places where you can toss pointless story. It's shaped up my features, too, because I taught myself to skip over useless scenes and focus on story advancement.
Try tightening the amount of time you have with which to tell your story and you'll figure out the places where you can toss pointless story. It's shaped up my features, too, because I taught myself to skip over useless scenes and focus on story advancement.
Naw, they destroyed it.
Mattykins
Cute Member
Yep, you are right, I have no idea how to compose anything, and I know nothing about cinematography or film making....that aside....
Lets give another real world example. I love these, they are so much fun!
Let us say that you submitted Shadow to a film fest. With thousands or entries....or a few hundred at the minimum. (Inner High School fests don't count). Do you think that the viewers actually watch every film all the way through? No. Because it would take months if not years...and no one has that time.
Guess how much of your film is viewed to see if it is even worth considering for the fest? About 5 - 6min. So let me do a break down for you here....6min is 360 seconds right? So this is where my math comes into play. (I hate math)....This is percentage wise, what the film viewer will see....I tackle watching Internet Films as a film fest screener. Because I don't have all the time in the world.
So, again, as I pointed out. That is 20% of your film that is credits only, on black, that will be seen to decide if it is good enough to even consider watching the rest. And 6% of that time was dedicated to your fake production company. Note I say fake...unless you are an LLC, pay taxes, have a real source of income from it, registered it...it's not real...Another 3% is dedicated to your name. But how could I not watch the film and give you correct percentages of time spent on shots? Hmm, psychic I guess?
So that leaves 7.1% of the total film or a whopping 33.4% of the film that will be viewed by an average watcher....or a festival screener, as a terribly composed, fully expositive "character study" in which some woman tells this man to fax something over...
Do you see what I am getting at here? I am trying to make this as simple as possible.
We all told you the same thing, you said we were wrong. But guess what? We aren't. And by the way...do not make this personal. I do know what I am doing, thank you very much. I am a confident writer, and I love to do what I do. Bash me all you want....all we are doing is trying to help your headstong personality type understand that there are rules to the film industry.
Oh yeah....Watch and BTS video on a real film. I am talking hollywood film. They all use Stedicams, Motion control Rigs, Handheld or shoulder mounted support, dollies, jibs...all the things that you say are not professional. You're right, what are those DoPs thinking....They know nothing about cinematography. I don't think Mikko would be too happy that you said his line of work is unprofessional...
Here is a little bit more to chew on. Did you have any lights what-so--ever? Everything was high key, low contrast, boring lighting. The Black and White sequences looked like they were added with a plugin...and not actually thought-out and colour corrected. Your pistol shot? Looked lame. At least you can composite a little into it. Or if not, send it to someone who does compositing work. Some people would do that sequence for free. A muzzle flash, some blood, it would take me all of 2min to composite that...shows you have an attention to detail...
Technically speaking, the film screams student film. Poor sound design...like I said, watch your levels and try something called Foley work for additional sound. Also reverb to V.O. work.
Lets give another real world example. I love these, they are so much fun!
Let us say that you submitted Shadow to a film fest. With thousands or entries....or a few hundred at the minimum. (Inner High School fests don't count). Do you think that the viewers actually watch every film all the way through? No. Because it would take months if not years...and no one has that time.
Guess how much of your film is viewed to see if it is even worth considering for the fest? About 5 - 6min. So let me do a break down for you here....6min is 360 seconds right? So this is where my math comes into play. (I hate math)....This is percentage wise, what the film viewer will see....I tackle watching Internet Films as a film fest screener. Because I don't have all the time in the world.
So, again, as I pointed out. That is 20% of your film that is credits only, on black, that will be seen to decide if it is good enough to even consider watching the rest. And 6% of that time was dedicated to your fake production company. Note I say fake...unless you are an LLC, pay taxes, have a real source of income from it, registered it...it's not real...Another 3% is dedicated to your name. But how could I not watch the film and give you correct percentages of time spent on shots? Hmm, psychic I guess?
So that leaves 7.1% of the total film or a whopping 33.4% of the film that will be viewed by an average watcher....or a festival screener, as a terribly composed, fully expositive "character study" in which some woman tells this man to fax something over...
Do you see what I am getting at here? I am trying to make this as simple as possible.
We all told you the same thing, you said we were wrong. But guess what? We aren't. And by the way...do not make this personal. I do know what I am doing, thank you very much. I am a confident writer, and I love to do what I do. Bash me all you want....all we are doing is trying to help your headstong personality type understand that there are rules to the film industry.
Oh yeah....Watch and BTS video on a real film. I am talking hollywood film. They all use Stedicams, Motion control Rigs, Handheld or shoulder mounted support, dollies, jibs...all the things that you say are not professional. You're right, what are those DoPs thinking....They know nothing about cinematography. I don't think Mikko would be too happy that you said his line of work is unprofessional...
Here is a little bit more to chew on. Did you have any lights what-so--ever? Everything was high key, low contrast, boring lighting. The Black and White sequences looked like they were added with a plugin...and not actually thought-out and colour corrected. Your pistol shot? Looked lame. At least you can composite a little into it. Or if not, send it to someone who does compositing work. Some people would do that sequence for free. A muzzle flash, some blood, it would take me all of 2min to composite that...shows you have an attention to detail...
Technically speaking, the film screams student film. Poor sound design...like I said, watch your levels and try something called Foley work for additional sound. Also reverb to V.O. work.
Last edited: