The moment after - by Cazcam

Michael Anthony Horrigan said:
Crap! :(
live and learn I guess??
Click to expand...

Well this is the third time, so evidently not. Definitely a shame.

Zak Forsman said:
i'm beginning to think their DQs are intentional. have they made it thru a single fest without a DQ?
Click to expand...

You mean intentional on their part? It really is odd that they can't seem to dot the i's and cross the t's. They'd have a pile of firsts by now.

And yeah, they submitted a compliant Adfest entry as far as I know.
 
Last edited:
Drew Ott said:
What happened the other two times?
Click to expand...
actually 3, this would be the 4th time
Copyrighted soundFX for their ADfest entry
Copyrighted soundFX for 18 seconds / not meeting the character name requirement
Off site promotion for S I M I L O.

Yeah it sucks. If they ever enter again they should clear EVERYTHING with me first so I can get them through a contest finally.

I too have wondered if it is some kind of maverick reverse publicity thing. Mac and Zac are great guys but they are enigmas wrapped in riddles to me. Despite having done 4 films with Mac and 2 with Zac I cannot tell you how their talented Spanish minds work except that they love beautiful women, and are masters with light, framing and creating a sense of intimacy between the viewer and the characters.

*sigh*

Hopefully next time.
Maximus said:
...I just hope they keep submitting films, DQ'd or not, their work is inspiring.
Click to expand...

I could not agree with this sentiment more.
 
Damn and I really liked their pre-production style too!

Maybe they just get great projects DQ'd because they can?

I wish I could showoff and get DQd, but Hi8 doesn't look as nice as RED1 :embarasse
 
Susanne G. said:
... The moment after, when he went out of the room, could have more expression, but this is only my personal taste! Lovely work!
Click to expand...

Horncastle said:
... I have to disagree with Susanne on the ending - I thought it fitted perfectly. ... I thought the ending gave the idea of emptiness very well: the girl seemed almost in a slight state of shock.
Click to expand...

First of all, a great pity about the DQ - "The Moment After" is a beautiful film. What follows is neither criticism nor praise, but an observation (and maybe some food for thought) on the relationship between a film and the identity of it's maker.

The above quotes come from our original comments on this film several days ago. Susanne and I disagreed on the ending. Susanne, as a woman, felt that a young woman in this situation would have had more of a sensation of emptiness. I, on the other hand felt this emptiness very strongly. We still hold the same opinions.

The point of this is that, 3 days ago, I was able to say: "It was a woman who directed it. No two women are the same and I feel that her rendering of the reaction is completely valid". Today, however, Susanne was able to return with force to her original comment with: "it makes sense, a woman would have made that final scene stronger".

Films, especially ones on delicate subjects such as sexual identity, race, religion, politics etc. can not be easily separated from the identity of their makers. I am not saying that you can always see whether a film is made by a woman or a man (or a gay as opposed to a heterosexual, a christian as opposed to an atheist...). I am saying that once you know whether a film is made by a man or a woman, your appreciation and understanding of that film are going to change, however minimally.

I would like to think that Mac and Zac's posing as a young female film maker was actually an experiment in this regard. I don't know, but "The Moment After" remains a great film in any case.

Jason (and Susanne).
 
This is one of the best looking films I have seen and not just on here. Your look was beautiful I am suprised to see that you said you did it guerilla style with no lights. It looked great.

As for the sex and nudity I wasn't sure it was needed at first but than I saw where you were going with the story and it worked for me.

Its a shame we can't vote on this film as this is definitely in my Top 3.
 
Last edited:
Anyone know why they tried to hide there identity. I am not aware of any rule on this site the prohibits pros or specific people from working on shorts so why did they choose to be secret?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cazcam
Hi this is my first time directing a shortfilm. I hope i can have my entry ready for sunday.
I´m so happy about this project!


Uh, sounds misleading to me if they've directed four other shorts.That's just plain weird. Not sure why anyone would want to do that.
 
mjjason said:
Anyone know why they tried to hide there identity. I am not aware of any rule on this site the prohibits pros or specific people from working on shorts so why did they choose to be secret?
Click to expand...

jpsheets said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cazcam
Hi this is my first time directing a shortfilm. I hope i can have my entry ready for sunday.
I´m so happy about this project!


Uh, sounds misleading to me if they've directed four other shorts.That's just plain weird. Not sure why anyone would want to do that.
Click to expand...


I did this for Spy Fest. Entered as a user named Keystoned with a short called Schittekatter and I was also disqualified for the same thing before it was even a fest explicit rule. (this was pre-mod)

If you've been making films for a while here and doing somewhat well, you get some extra following and you get some extra backlash. Sometimes it's nice to set the counter back to zero and enter as Joe Blo.

I can't say for certain that's why they did it, but that's why I did it. I was DQ'ed for it and the rule was officially put in place after I did it. While I feel like I had the best intentions as Mac and Zac may have, there is a concern that you could be up to some funny business IF the mods don't know about it before hand so they can watch it. For example. You get to vote even if you don't have 50 posts in place if you have entered a film. Not saying Mac and Zac were doing this at all, but one could vote for or rank one's film as the psuedo username and as your usual username as well. Again not saying that's what's going on here but that's just one example of why the rule is in place among many other reasons that can make your head spin.
 
Holy nudity!

I was really pleased with this short. Short, concise and to the point. It was literally what the title said. Nothing much more.. nothing much less. Great characters, easy on the eyes and the music at the end stood out as I thought.. damn.. this sounds like Aaron marshal’s music. Booom. It was Aaron's. Kudos!

I’m sure everything has already been said about this film so there’s no need to say more.

the stomach twitch rocked. gave me shivers.



Thank you for the inspiration and congrats on entering the fest. Too bad it's non compete. (which for some of us is a good thing) :)
 
The acting in the movie is very, very good, and the lighting is pretty nice for such a small scene.

But the camera direction is jarring and distracting. We're very intimate with the couple (as we should be) then suddenly we're looking at a third person POV. I felt that someone was about to jump into the room (making it a very different sort of movie). But that never happened, it was just a spastic shot. The constant buzzing of focus was distracting. Granted I see they were shooting WFO but still, does that mean the AC has to do that? Also I love camera movement, but this seemed over the top. Hmmm, perhaps the operator was trying to pull his/her own focus?

Again, loved the gut wrenching emotion and superb acting, but I feel the camera direction could have better served the story.
 
For me, the camera movement also took me somewhat out of the film.

I loved the lighting, and the subtleness in the sound design.

The music (or I could call it sound design) at the ending worked really well - Great stuff, Aaron!
 
Whoa, the girl has nice body. The sex is great. The lighting, directing and music are perfect. However, I'd like to see a more straight to face closeup at the end rather than the sideway shot. Yours is definitely one of the best.
 
..a wonderfully shot and acted short. Im always a fan of mac's shooting/editing , ect. .

..now heres the part when i just speak softly my opinion and hope that the words land as softly as ive spoken them. unfortunately i have to agree that personally i didnt see much of a story or a relative theme of time either though. i definitely understood what you were going for though, although it felt a little contrived that the impression im supposed to have is one of relating to this woman who was just used by the guy.. although in my opinion the actress was exploited for the sake of the film. i suppose im not of the persuasion that there really had to be any nudity in this piece for it to have the exact same impact, but i realize thats sort of a signature thing in your films. i just thought that in this case it works more against the story than for it by any means. it was just contra to the statement that the film was trying to make. i mean, if your making a film about the horrors of slavery, you wouldnt use slaves to shoot it. ..so in the case of exploiting/using women.. ect.
..just my opinion though. im not saying the film was bad, but just saying that as an artistic statement ..for me ..it sticks its foot in its mouth.

..anyway as always you guys give me something to aspire to in the aesthetic appearance and genuine humanity within your work, and im still in awe of your skills behind the lense.
 
Interesting point Neil.

There seems to be a lot of different opinions on that topic. Usually you hear it discussed about violence.

As much as I see Neil's point (and it is a valid one), I personally think that a film that's against using women sexually can have the sort of nudity that is in The Moment After. To show the realism in those moments, it wouldn't be right to somehow avoid nudity.
 
...remember that realism can be shown from any chosen camera angle. we have complete creative control over what we show or partially show .. how we show it , ect to reach our audiences and get the exact same reaction. .. in this case i think its simply oversight because i dont think they view nudity as exploitation. ..however, i just have this hunch that most women disagree regardles of how much society tries to make it appear as the norm for them to accept and embrace. how does one paint a picture of something as a sexual object, and then say that its not ok to use it like one in the same breath? its not a paradox. ..its simply a matter of choosing what you actually believe and will act on. but it doesnt matter. it is what it is. its only my opionion as an individual. ill agree to disagree and digress on the matter. closing with the statement that thier production work is yet again awsome.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top