Clean Slate Productions Presents: JOHN ABBOTT MITCHELL

[chstick]

Great visuals! Really good story also. But I loved the shots (& lighting).

excellent job!

 

[Ben Sliker]

I want to shoot something for you.

I don't care if you don't want to work with me.

You have no choice in the matter.

HA!
-Joe

lol ... i think there might be enough dvxusers in NC, fat monster east anybody? we need a different name tho. we can be like fight club, except we'd make movies instead of beating the piss out of each other and committing terrorists acts. .... okay ... fine, we can do that too.

 

[Mark Harris]

I echo what everyone else is saying. This is really nice. I am particularly impressed with how you maintain the semi-abstract visuals of his torture chamber. That stuff just has a great contrast and is so crisp.

I still have the same critique as I had in the last one. I still think you can afford to bring his performance down a little. There's nothing wrong with it at all, he's really good, but I think he has enough power on camera that he can just afford to do less with it.

But I think all of the elements are top notch.

It might be cool to make a movie with him and "Carrie" from R.P.D.M., but I think they would end up allies more than enemies

 

[Michael Anthony Horrigan]

It might be cool to make a movie with him and "Carrie" from R.P.D.M., but I think they would end up allies more than enemies

She had a lot of motivation to do what she did, he does this sort of thing for kicks!

I think he would eat her alive.

Nothing against her though. :evil:

 

[Ben Sliker]

She had a lot of motivation to do what she did, he does this sort of thing for kicks!

I think he would eat her alive.

Nothing against her though. :evil:

he has his own little motivations ... :lipsrseal

 

[Michael Anthony Horrigan]

he has his own little motivations ... :lipsrseal

I'm sure he does. Most serial killers have a terrible upbringing, to say the least.

Still waiting on that feature... :beer:

 

[Susanne G.]

I liked that I couldn't see violence in the moments of violence. I loved the play with the lighting: daylight - black and white sequences. There was a good thrill. Framing and music were perfect and your main character was fantastic - I adored the facial expressions.
I heard that you made also a film the last HalooFest and it is necessary to see both. Perhaps I have to see also the other one, because I didn't understand really the time subject in this one.
Lots of compliments.

Susanne

 

[Zoidoid]

Not sure why it's taken me so long to drop by and make a post about your film. Maybe it's because it's particularly difficult for me to come up with any useful criticisms. You've done a great job! The torture sequence is particularly cool. The relief of the imagery is so sharp and crystal clear that it takes on a surreal, dreamlike quality. I remember reading that Hitchcock specifically chose Salvidor Dali for the dream sequence in Spellbound because he wanted those specific qualities.

Anyway. Great short! It's one of my favorites.

 

[Ben Sliker]

I liked that I couldn't see violence in the moments of violence. I loved the play with the lighting: daylight - black and white sequences. There was a good thrill. Framing and music were perfect and your main character was fantastic - I adored the facial expressions.
I heard that you made also a film the last HalooFest and it is necessary to see both. Perhaps I have to see also the other one, because I didn't understand really the time subject in this one.
Lots of compliments.

Susanne

susanne, no need to see the other one to understand this. In fact, In Pieces is sort of a broad overview of John's serial killer adventures in a monologue form.

Here's my official description of the "time" element in JAM from a few pages back.

our concept of time in this piece is a little more abstract. John has obviously been watching this woman for quite some time, waiting for the perfect moment so that he can have his victim the way he wants her. Ian, the guy who slaps her, forces John's hand, so not only does he have to A. get rid of Ian, but B. deal with the mental anguish that comes from not being able to do things on his own timeline, this is what haunts him as he kills Ian. The fear takes over him, to the point where he imagines his conversation with Claire, his imagination has permeated his reality. So he decides at that point, it's the right time to pay her a visit.

Maybe then he can start over.

It's the simple concept of either a. operating on your own timeline, or b. having to deal with someone else's. John doesn't "deal" well.

But, of course, In Pieces is necessary watching regardless.

Right Click here and save a copy of In Pieces for yourself to watch.

 

[Ben Sliker]

Not sure why it's taken me so long to drop by and make a post about your film. Maybe it's because it's particularly difficult for me to come up with any useful criticisms. You've done a great job! The torture sequence is particularly cool. The relief of the imagery is so sharp and crystal clear that it takes on a surreal, dreamlike quality. I remember reading that Hitchcock specifically chose Salvidor Dali for the dream sequence in Spellbound because he wanted those specific qualities.

Anyway. Great short! It's one of my favorites.

Thanks for the comments man! I promise I'll get to yours!

And it's about time I got this up, Zoidoid, you motivated me.

Here's a comparison of the raw footage to final product and why you have to shoot something that looks kinda gross to get some good high contrast black and white.

FIRST FRAME - RAW GRAB - As you can see, we went with a disgustingly orange look for this one, it's very hot in a lot of places, the oranges and yellows are particularly ... yucky.

SECOND FRAME - PUSH THE WHITES, CRUSH THE BLACKS (make moderate little changes to the mids) - we shot a fairly high contrast shot in the first place, but this technique adds a little detail in the face, and highlights some of the cool brighter features, like the glint in his eye.

THIRD FRAME - FINAL LOOK - Oh thank god, there's no color. I was about to set on fire with how hot that last one was. You simply can't get away with this in color! Plus the thing that draws you in are the bright whites ... making the glint in his eyes particularly more creepy.

 

[DavisOsborne]

Can't wait to take this in to an audition as my new head-shot).....Questions will arise.........

 

[Ben Sliker]

i don't know ... i think this one will work better.

Excuse me, sir, can you please stare the paint off that wall ... great ... you got the part.

 

[Rodney V. Smith]

Can't wait to take this in to an audition as my new head-shot).....Questions will arise.........

The won't dare turn you down for the role now...

 

[Rodney V. Smith]

freaking awesome

 

[DavisOsborne]

LMAO)....My Mom would be so proud)

 

[Danielleus]

Hey guys,

Just caught the piece. I liked it. The cinematography is just great. Love your editing, love your pacing, the music, the locales, the blood and guts.
The surrealist stuff doesn't work for me. It's hard for me to tell how insane this guy is. Like, does he just imagine stuff randomly, or does he have some other twisted way of looking at life.




SPOLIER (?????) Alert

Which brings me to the point of the girl walking up to him in his imagination. I don't get a good feel on his character in a number of ways. Does he love her? Hate her? Mix of both? Does he freak out cause he's been caught? I thought he loved her.

And is he so insane that he just imagines stuff?
Which, for my money, all needs to be explained in the film (or shown) to make it top notch. I think they're neat little story elements and I think, if you brought them out BEFORE we saw the important ones (i.e. the girl walking up to him) it would have made it much, much better for me.

Otherwise, I thought this was a, dare I say, classy piece with top quality stuff all the way through. Good work. Can't wait to see more of what you guys do.

 

[DavisOsborne]

Love...Hate....Mix of Both.....it's such a thin line......is it not what everyone faces everyday in all relationships...

 

[Ben Sliker]

Daniellus, thanks for the watch and review, here's some notes for ya. But, as a disclaimer, these are my thoughts on the film, which a lot of viewers have taken away the same thing after viewing, but of course, other interpretations can be perfectly right as well. As a director, I can only produce the film, what you take away from it, is something entirely different.

Hey guys,
It's hard for me to tell how insane this guy is. Like, does he just imagine stuff randomly, or does he have some other twisted way of looking at life.

he has varying control over his own mind. but no, he doesn't imagine stuff ALL the time.

Which brings me to the point of the girl walking up to him in his imagination. I don't get a good feel on his character in a number of ways.

Does he love her?

in the conventional sense, no

Hate her?

probably not

Mix of both?

to tell you the truth, i can't answers these questions for you. It's really up for the audience to decide how they feel about John and Claire's relationship. He's obviously intrigued by her.

Does he freak out cause he's been caught? I thought he loved her.

He freaks out because his mind has taken control over his life. He imagines this first close encounter (seriously ... who would want to come up and talk to this guy?) because he's been there waiting for so long that his imagination permeates his reality. That, and he's had the jarring experience of killing a man, just cause he thinks Ian might kill/hurt her first. And that would ruin John and Claire's "perfect time" together. What are they going to do with that time? Well, to be continued I guess they say. (Another part where we've left it up to the audience to decide EXACTLY what John is going to do from behind that wall.)

And is he so insane that he just imagines stuff?

yes.

Which, for my money, all needs to be explained in the film (or shown) to make it top notch. I think they're neat little story elements and I think, if you brought them out BEFORE we saw the important ones (i.e. the girl walking up to him) it would have made it much, much better for me.

Well, I'm not to particular about spelling everything out for my audience, when he starts talking to Claire on the bench and it switched to the man, i figured the reaction would be something like "Oh, f*ck, this guy's gone crazy. He just made that all up in his head." Did you need something more? We played it more as a reveal than a character trait. John doesn't imagine things all the time, he's just soo obsessive over Claire that his brain takes over.

Otherwise, I thought this was a, dare I say, classy piece with top quality stuff all the way through. Good work. Can't wait to see more of what you guys do.

Thanks!!! We appreciate the view and all the comments. Hope my ramblings make sense to you/make your viewing experience a little more enjoyable. :thumbsup:

 

[xpac84]

As Ben said, i dont think it's our place to tell you what you should take away from the film. But, I'll give you some of my explanation for john.

I think you have to trust the director in what he wants you to see in a film. The film can't lie or that viewer/filmaker relationship is ruined. The example of this is how much of what you are seeing is real vs. john's imagination. the only thing that is a given to you that is imaginary is the convo with claire. there's not really anything else in the film to suggest that the rest of it is imaginary. So while John is losing touch with reality, he is not completely out of reality. As far as i see it, yes, he is sitting on a bench, killing someone, and in claire's apartment at the end. i see it this way because the camera work is mostly objective (discounting some of the b&w) so it seems safe to assume that that is the world view and not john's. while this is how i viewed it, it certainly doesnt have to be how you take the final shot (or the rest of the film for that matter) as thats a little more ambigious now that you've seen that he's not always within the realm of reality.

the question of his feelings for claire i feel are a mute point. I think what you should take more away from it is that he wants control. In "IN PIECES" his point of control was "the perfect kill." In this film the control element is seen in two elements. the first is his "gaze." for those of you who dont remember freshman english the gazer has a sort of power over the...gazee. you see this with the encounter with the girl on the bench. you see it fail with the man. you see his insecurities in his imagination of someone like claire, who he had complete control over in the beginning of the film with his gaze, actually confronting him. this leadds to the issue of time. he feels like this other man who hits claire has forced his hand. maybe its becaues this man is inflicting violence to this girl who he likes, or who he himself wants to inflict damage to, or because after this incident she wont show up again and he wont have her to gaze at. its really up to the viewer. regardless, the argument forces john to change his schedule as he feels their time watching and being watched has come to an end and he must finally act.

Danielleus, I guess i kinda feel like Ben, that the statement you made about "bringing said elements out before important moments" (paraphrasing) sounds kinda like "spell things out." i'm sure thats not exactly what you meant so if you could clarify i think we appreciate understanding your point better.

Anyways, thanks for your detailed notes and for your praise as well as your criticisms. i hope neither ben nor i have come off as defensive. we just like arguing about what we get out of any film, not just the ones we made

 

[Ben Sliker]

ok ... you win brad, mr. master's degree in english. lol. congrats on 19 posts.

starting to cut out a longer version of JAM. submitting to a new contest that has a 7 min minimum requirement. I'm at about 6:57 already. wish me luck!