Friends of "IFHY", Lend Me Your Ears!!!

Zak Forsman said:
rook, i appreciate your thoughts but I don't think anyone ever got anywhere in life by sitting back and letting the chips fall where they may. the artist has to go away for a little while so the businessman can push things forward. that's the reality of this game. you've got to stand up, stake your claim, define your voice, get people to notice and "take it". no one is going to drop by dvxuser to start handing out distribution deals.

"dude. it's a review?" indie films live and die by the buzz generated around them. Ain't It Cool News aside, this is the most high-profile review I've gotten. i was hoping to offset the damage done to the heat this film had generated since LoveFest with an onslaught of support posted in the comments section of this two star review. the link to the review is on their front page with a big picture of John's face, so people are reading it and forming a low opinion of something that wasn't given a fair shake.

i wouldn't be surprised if the agents, festivals and distributors that have been in touch with me would be swayed by this review, considering it "cold" now. people in the film industry are not noted for their social courage. they blow with the prevailing wind.

am I crazy for being pro-active on this? is it a waste of time? the artist side says it is, business side thinks stopping to consider the question is time that could have been spent pushing this project forward.

onward and upward!!!!
Click to expand...


Okay, sorry.

I was just trying to give it some perspective to make you feel better.

But your right. It is terrible. It's a disaster. I hope this one review doesn't destroy all the other good reviews you've gotten, sink your film and ruin your career.

Maybe it's time for that business man in you to ask if obsessing over one bad review is the best use of your time and energy.

You might also want to tell that business man that if he wants something to go away bringing more attention to it might not be the smartest thing.

Now a google search for "IFHY review" brings up this as number one:

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=IFHY+review&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

A link to your post talking about the bad review your film just got.

I never felt that you should "just sit back", I agree that hard work and dedication are key elements to success but I also think that work needs to be focused on the right places.

Good luck with this. I watched your trailer (not really a trailer) but the clips from the film looked really cool.

-rook
 
Thanks for the continued thoughts on this, rook. I am well aware of how high dvxuser threads rank on google and yahoo... well aware. :)
 
closing in on a final version... added a new quote to the center black strip that target a slightly more broad appeal.

ifhyposterkx2.jpg
 
I like it. Although I still think you should have "Witty" -Nick Lane, Conspiracy Penguin Productions. Just kidding of course (kind of) It looks great all around.

:beer: Cheers,
 
I'll be honest . . . I think that poster sells the film as something other than what it is. It's a short, light(er) ironic comedy, and that depicts it as some kind of big drama, which it isn't.
 
David Jimerson said:
I'll be honest . . . I think that poster sells the film as something other than what it is. It's a short, light(er) ironic comedy, and that depicts it as some kind of big drama, which it isn't.
Click to expand...
Really!??

I saw it as more of a drama with comedic moments.
The male lead seemed lost without her. He came off as a very sad individual who was grasping at straws in some meager attempt to reclaim his lost love.

She seemed very disinterested in him and only after the song did he seem to find some closure. She also seemed to connect with him at that moment as well, but it didn't change her overall view of him.

Sad actually.

But that's just me. :thumbsup:

I'm sure Zak will come in here and tell me that I missed the boat completely. :grin:

Cheers,

Mike
 
I'm with you Mike. There were some funny moments but its an intense drama that really draws on real human emotions to me. "Ironic Comedy" doesnt describe it at all to me.
 
OK, fine. :) Call it what you will; that's how I saw it.

But the underlying point was that I think the poster represents it as something other than what it is -- whatever you want to say IT is.

As someone who's been in a position for a long time to give people money in one way or another -- as a hirer, as a producer -- I can tell you it's pretty important to give an accurate representation of yourself if you expect to get anything. If you misrepresent yourself on your resume, it'll bite you. If you make yourself look different in your headshots from how you actually look, it'll bite you. In this case, if you make your movie look like something it isn't (and there's no good or bad here, just different), it'll bite you.

It'll bite you in two ways -- someone in a position to give money might not be very thrilled with what could be taken (and I'm not saying that is IS, just that it could be taken that way) as an intentional misrepresentation, and that door is then shut to you forever. At the very least, he/she will be annoyed at the wasted time.

Or, perhaps even worse, if someone's looking for a specific thing, and you happen to BE that thing, but your representation is something different from what you are, you may miss that opportunity because X person doesn't think you have what he/she needs.

That's all I'm saying -- I look at that poster, and I think it's going to be something it's not. If I were a distributor or a developer or whatever, I might not even watch it if I don't think it's what I'm looking for. Or, I might watch it, see that it's not quite as represented, and poof -- that avenue is closed for this and very likely for future products.

It's not a knock of the film. It's a statement of my opinion about how the film is being presented in the poster.

And I say it only to be helpful.
 
Sorry David I didnt mean to come off so blunt. Its apparently a movie that can be looked at several different ways. And thats a fantastic point about selling a movie. Or anything for that matter. I'm still bothered by "No Country for Old Men" Every time I hear the title alone I think "Grumpy Old Men" and think of Jack Palance and forget that NCFOM is a tad bit different movie. With a title like IFHY I like the dark intense look of the poster. I just have trouble seeing IFHY with a comedic poster. Probably for the exact same reasons you see it the other way I guess. So as a producer then David - what do you do with a product that could be sold two ways? Seriously, I'm curious on this one. Seems like a bit of a problem...
 
David, that's cool.

I just hope that movies are judged by more than just their poster.
I get your point though. If the poster sends the wrong message it could surely sway your impression while viewing the movie.

I personally don't see this poster being all that distracting to the vision of the movie but we are all different.

I get your point though.

Cheers,

Mike
 
jdajda said:
Sorry David I didnt mean to come off so blunt. Its apparently a movie that can be looked at several different ways. And thats a fantastic point about selling a movie. Or anything for that matter. I'm still bothered by "No Country for Old Men" Every time I hear the title alone I think "Grumpy Old Men" and think of Jack Palance and forget that NCFOM is a tad bit different movie. With a title like IFHY I like the dark intense look of the poster. I just have trouble seeing IFHY with a comedic poster. Probably for the exact same reasons you see it the other way I guess. So as a producer then David - what do you do with a product that could be sold two ways? Seriously, I'm curious on this one. Seems like a bit of a problem...
Click to expand...

I see this poster, if it were a movie trailer, as being one with a low, big, timpanic score, with text fading in and moving at you, with slo-mo, etc. . . . you know, BIGNESS. Big drama, big consequences, etc.. It's just not what the film is. More than that, it's not what it should be sold as, even if there are several ways you COULD sell it.
 
Michael Anthony Horrigan said:
I'm sure Zak will come in here and tell me that I missed the boat completely. :grin:
Click to expand...

there are no wrong interpretations. in many ways the character of Ron is like a coatrack for guys to hang their own frustrations and anger onto, as well as their longing for "the one that got away". and because every guy's experience in that department has been unique, so will the emotions they experience watching the film. i think a lot of men get a kick out of "scapegoating" Ron, meaning they get a thrill out of seeing him say some of the mean, horrible things they wished they'd had the balls to say without having to suffer the real world consequences.

dealing with a project's inherent duality is something i'm running into on White Knuckles. kevin, the writer and director, has crafted a story that has two major demographics... you have the elderly who must be starved for stories about themselves ever since Murder She Wrote and Matlock went off the air (kidding), and the indie/art house/festival crowd who hasn't seen a picture centered around old people in a long time.

our challenge is how to appeal to both. and frankly I think the answer is to do two campaigns. even with something as simple as the newsletter, the indie crowd will get theirs electronically, while we will mail printed versions to our friends at retirement communities who have signed up for the mailing list.

the tone of the picture will be represented differently to each crowd, easy enough because the picture itself shifts in tone. we are self-distributing so we don't have to worry about what distributors think. it's just about selling tickets, DVDs & BluRay discs to individual customers and wholesalers, and other related items... for example, I am currently designing an "illustrated screenplay" for Heart of Now to sell along with the posters and everything else.

thanks for the dialogue guys.
 
Last edited:
Opinions on short films are even more divisive than opinions on movies (yes, I love Spielberg's A.I. along with A.O. Scott of the New York Times and I know most people hated it...and, hey, a great film like 2001 A Space Odyssey got some bad reviews when it was released too).

But short films are such small, condensed experiences, that if they don't appeal to an individual in a fundamental way, the whole point gets lost. They're different experiences than movies, and actually require some experience in fully appreciating the form. They don't have to be as literal, since a 2 hour movie usually has to make more sense and appeal to a broader audience to justify the investment of time (and money) the audience makes in the film. Shorts, in contrast, can bend the rules more, unsettle you, confuse you, offend you...as long as the over all experience makes you appreciate the five to 10 minutes you just spent with it.

Most of us see something really powerful, unique and creative in I F**ing Hate You. But you can't please everyone. And like I said, short films are even LESS likely to please everyone. The good ones require that you go out on a limb to do something noticeable in that tiny time frame--and by going out on a limb, you will alienate some audience members.

I think the good reviews you have received should tell you everything you need to know.
 
sean90291 said:
I think the good reviews you have received should tell you everything you need to know.
Click to expand...

you're right. of six reviews floating around out there, there is only one bad (i.e. lazy) one. and by bad i don't mean the fact he didn't like the picture, i mean bad because he evidently didn't put forth the energy necessary to engage with it. he thought the song was "weird", that there was no perceivable change in the characters from beginning to end. these statements suggest to me that he only paid enough attention to it, so he could spit out another review.

more bad reviews are coming, i'm sure. and I welcome them. the hope is that they will be intelligently written and reflect the key question that all film criticism strives to answer, were the filmmakers successful in accomplishing what they set out to do?

hell, he didn't even spell Marion's name right.
 
I guess he wouldn't like Cassavetes "Faces" either, since "Faces" doesn't have a clear ending and is more about the emotional moments rather than a single, clear third act reveal. I loved the ambiguous ending of "Faces." And I loved the ambiguous ending of your film. I knew something had changed--there was some possibility still left between them. The history they had wasn't totally erased. That's very different than the impression I had of them from the outset of your film. So I think there is an interesting evolution in the story there. It's just more experimental in the delivery, which is what I really appreciated.
 
David Jimerson said:
I see this poster, if it were a movie trailer, as being one with a low, big, timpanic score, with text fading in and moving at you, with slo-mo, etc. . . . you know, BIGNESS. Big drama, big consequences, etc.. It's just not what the film is. More than that, it's not what it should be sold as, even if there are several ways you COULD sell it.
Click to expand...


Hmm yeah the way you describe the poster I would definitely agree. I can see it as big and dramatic - nice touch relating the accompanying score. I definitely know the feel you are talking about there.

I see it as a raw intense show of human emotions. And to me thats what the movie is so it works. It would be interested to see the poster before seeing the movie. I'm bad at seperating myself like that once I've seen something though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top