Will content be king? Or will pretty pictures reign supreme?

[smashedburrito]

and takes a big dump on the idea of trying to emulate mainstream, hollywood conventions --

Crap, it looks like our shot for shot remake of The Notebook is screwed then.

I would hope good story is what reigns king. During the production it is always the film with the prettiest grabs that get the most attention, but ultimately once the films are screened the ones with the best story usually take the cake. My favorite from last fest, Meat, wasn't the prettiest, but it had a fun, entertaining story, and won second.

Then again complimenting your story with good images is always a plus.

Oh and SOUND indeed. I'd rather listen to a crappy looking movie then watch a crappy sounding movie.

 

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Tell a story - A film has gotta have a point for me or there is no point at all. It needs to tell a story that I or someone else will care about.

Interesting characters - The film needs to have engaging characters that we understand their motivation and care about. In a short this can be a really rough task.

Consistency - The piece needs to make sense. Motives, actions, props, characters and settings need to fit the story. The end result should be a natural consequences/organic feel. Mood fits in here, too.

If it does all the above, then I better be able to hear it well and be visually appealing.

I might be in trouble, because some of my favorite films don't do these things at all...

Mark I would say no country and your Love Fest entry both do all of the above to a "T".

Telling a story, having a point, and making sense do not mean it has to be a grand argument story. No Country is a moral contemplation, that's it's point, where the characters do things for very grounded reasons, and the sense it makes or again maybe it's point is that we're in much the same place that we began.

Maybe you're talking about some other movies we haven't discussed, but I don't think the movies you like are truly pointless and have characters doing nothing.

Even Lost in Translation (which I don't know if you like or not) fulfills all of the above points very well. It and No Country just both happen to have challenging endings for an audience, IMHO.

 

[Michael Anthony Horrigan]

Mark I would say no country and your Love Fest entry both do all of the above to a "T".

Telling a story, having a point, and making sense do not mean it has to be a grand argument story. No Country is a moral contemplation, that's it's point, where the characters do things for very grounded reasons, and the sense it makes or again maybe it's point is that we're in much the same place that we began.

Maybe you're talking about some other movies we haven't discussed, but I don't think the movies you like are truly pointless and have characters doing nothing.

Even Lost in Translation (which I don't know if you like or not) fulfills all of the above points very well. It and No Country just both happen to have challenging endings for an audience, IMHO.

This is exactly the movie I was thinking of when I wrote this...

I couldn't agree with this more.

I also think that we need more movies that are not always wrapped up in a pretty little bow.
I personally love movies that leave you wondering and asking questions. Movies that leave you to fill in the gaps.

Thankfully... we're seeing a few of those on occasion lately.

Currently discussing just that in another part of the forum.

Cheers,

Mike

 

[Mark Harris]

Jack, why you trying to ruin my indie-cred?

 

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

heh heh, right sorry ... no story, no point = awesome :grin::beer:

 

[Blaine]

As a partial answer to the question, how about looking at the winners of the last four fests. Do you think those were primarily won on frame or story? Don't cop out and say "both" unless you really mean it. I'm truly interested in what people think has been the recipe for success up til now.

While most of the winners had both good stories AND pretty pictures, I feel there were a couple of entries that ended up where they did ENTIRELY on looking good. (NTTAWWT)

 

[Kholi]

With Blaine. It's not always the content that wins the fests. But, story IS recognized here, which is good.

Considering the lot of us do take the image seriously, the most filmlike or pretty one always gets a lot of attention. Nothin' wrong with that.

 

[Gohanto]

Personally, I'm a larger fan of content, but I think the biggest reason to have pretty pictures and good sound IS NOT to show off, but rather focus the audience's attention on the story. I've seen and reviewed shorts that are well written and shot on Handicam, and honestly most of the time all I can ever focus on is the technical problems.

I think thats why a lot of non-filmmaking people prefer watching bad Hollywood movies over independent films. It's usually most people's choice to get wrapped into a bad story easily, than to have to constantly ignore technical problems just to follow the story.

Shooting on a GS500 personally, I'm really hoping content rules.