FEATURE: DEUCE OF SPADES - How I made a period full feature film all by myself on ZERO budget

[Deuceofspades]

I love the cars in this film...

Oh YESSSSSSSSS the cars are HOTTTTTTTTTTTT

(and they don't mind you saying so either LOL)

here are a few shots:

This is my hotrod:

 

[Deuceofspades]

I think Faith's use of camera movement is particularly noteworthy. The lack of it, or at least creative implementation of it (handheld/shakycam doesn't get any extra points in my book), is one of the things I notice most often in first-timer indie features.

I recall when she posted about her research into the indie-dolly. It seems she's made quite good use of it. Then there's the car-cam and all the rest of her bag of moving camera tricks. Nice...

Motion pictures should move, they say. I agree...

I've been making a bit of a study into this lately in theatrical-level movies I've been watching, and in almost all of the them the camera is almost always in motion, even if only subtly (and it's usually not so subtle). There's a sense of the film "living and breathing" when the camera moves that tends to goes away when it stops. Sometimes you want that effect of course, but it seems the better filmmakers rarely allow it.

Faith obviously got this point quite well. She appears to largely credit the Hollywood Camerawork DVD set for it (as well as in general). Makes sense, considering what it teaches. Gotta finish watching mine...

I went hand held only when it was impossible to have the tripod, ex: shooting from my car trunk.

I used mostly my tripod and pans, lots of cool pans / reveals. The dolly I used less because of time restraints, but there are quite a few cool dolly shots in the flashbacks and will be a lot more in the modern day section, which I will film starting 11/01/08. Flashbacks are very time consuming to film because of hair, make up, wardrobe, props needed and especially because it takes forever to "clean up" a location to make it period correct. Even the "period correct" locations need at least a few hours of cleaning up each shot cause invariably there are some items that don't belong in 1955 GRRRRR and come back to bite you in the fannies if you are not careful.

I was very anal about the historical accuracy and my moto was: "If I'm not sure about an item, it's gone" So I removed anything that I was not 100% sure was period correct. Sometimes it meant removing everything and starting from sratch. HOURS of work.

In this shot below, we had a cool camera move, I shot it from a car trunk, and had several people walking with us, one holding the boom, one holding a bounce, one holding the car trunk open, one driving etc... Just so we could shoot BETTIE walking in front of the merc (and the merc tailgating her)

 

[Deuceofspades]

I think Faith's use of camera movement is particularly noteworthy. The lack of it, or at least creative implementation of it (handheld/shakycam doesn't get any extra points in my book), is one of the things I notice most often in first-timer indie features.

I recall when she posted about her research into the indie-dolly. It seems she's made quite good use of it. Then there's the car-cam and all the rest of her bag of moving camera tricks. Nice...

Motion pictures should move, they say. I agree...

I've been making a bit of a study into this lately in theatrical-level movies I've been watching, and in almost all of the them the camera is almost always in motion, even if only subtly (and it's usually not so subtle). There's a sense of the film "living and breathing" when the camera moves that tends to goes away when it stops. Sometimes you want that effect of course, but it seems the better filmmakers rarely allow it.

Faith obviously got this point quite well. She appears to largely credit the Hollywood Camerawork DVD set for it (as well as in general). Makes sense, considering what it teaches. Gotta finish watching mine...

I went hand held only when it was impossible to have the tripod, ex: shooting from my car trunk.

I used mostly my tripod and pans, lots of cool pans / reveals. The dolly I used less because of time restraints, but there are quite a few cool dolly shots in the flashbacks and will be a lot more in the modern day section, which I will film starting 11/01/08. Flashbacks are very time consuming to film because of hair, make up, wardrobe, props needed and especially because it takes forever to "clean up" a location to make it period correct. Even the "period correct" locations need at least a few hours of cleaning up each shot cause invariably there are some items that don't belong in 1955 GRRRRR and come back to bite you in the fannies if you are not careful.

I was very anal about the historical accuracy and my moto was: "If I'm not sure about an item, it's gone" So I removed anything that I was not 100% sure was period correct. Sometimes it meant removing everything and starting from sratch. HOURS of work.

In this shot below, we had a cool camera move, I shot it from a car trunk, and had several people walking with us, one holding the boom, one holding a bounce, one holding the car trunk open, one driving etc... Just so we could shoot BETTIE walking in front of the merc (and the merc tailgating her)

Here filming the feet of ART running down the track, also from a car trunk, and he kept up with our pace:

Luis, my dear friend from DVXuser forum, helped me with steadycam shots during two of my bigger shoots - I LOVE YOU MAN! Luis kindness and generosity is an inspiration. He goes out of his way to help other filmmakers and we should all learn from him and do more to help each other along the way.

 

[Deuceofspades]

I don't know Ted, that is one of the things that bugs me about modern filmmaking, moving the camera because we can. Being a huge fan of John Ford and Howard Hawks, I am more impressed by painterly composition and clever use of the still frame. Nobody in Hollywood has the balls to shoot in this style anymore, because the executives and marketing guys have told them that audiences expect, want and need to have the camera roaming all of the time.

What I like about what Faith has done is that yes, she is moving the camera a lot but look at her story, it's about people in cars, racing, crashes, etc. In Faith's storyline, it makes sense to move the camera around a lot because the movement is motivated by her subject matter.

What I dislike is when there are too many unmotivated camera moves that tell the audience, "wow, I am the director and I am going to Steadicam, jib/crane and dolly every shot because I am too indecisive to compose a powerful shot and hold it and let the actors do their thing". I also see this in TV as well, an un-named top 10 rating show that I work on, I laugh at a particular director because every setup is two to three cameras and he does waaay too many setups for each scene. What that tells me is that he is not a good director. If you cover every scene from every angle with camera movement on everything with dozens of takes, you don't know what the hell you are doing as a director.

I am working on a piece about John Huston right now and I was interviewing someone the other day about Huston's visual style. Half the time, he was not even looking at the scene, he would turn his head to the side and just listen. If he liked what he heard, he would ask the scripty and DP is it worked visually. If they said yes, he would move to the next scene. Many actors working with him would freak out as well because Huston would often shoot one take and if he liked it, he was moving on to the next. I agree, if you are a good director, you know when you have what you need to cut the film. You are cutting the film as you shoot in your head and if it worked, why shoot more?

I can't wait to see Faith's completed film. She seems like a filmmaker who knows what she wants and it getting it.

Dan

You are right Dan. I think the camera doesn't need to be moving all the time. In many of my shots, the camera is still. Sometimes i simply used rack focus to keep the shot alive, a shift to redirect the audience's attention, so in fact the audience mind is moving, not the camera. I also used the concept of "transforming cameras" in whihc the camera does not move but the actors do, ex: a master shot becomes a close up as an actor walks into the frame in the very foreground, that's a cool reveal too.

 

[Deuceofspades]

Hey Faith,

Man, what great work! I'm nearly finished shooting my own no budge/tiny crew feature, but I cannot begin to imagine how much harder everything would be to shoot for a period film!

When do you estimate you will be done with the film?

Hopefully, i am shooting for Spring 2009, give or take a year or two LOLOL

 

[Deuceofspades]

Great stuff Faith. Are you editing your film or do you have an editor?

Dan

Nops, the idea was (and still is) for me to do everything myself. I am editing teh film as well.

I film on week-ends and edit that footage during the week while it is still fresh in my mind. once everythign is edited, I will go back and TIGHTEN EVERYTHING. right now I edit in a relaxed mode, meaning without time restraints in mind. once the film is done and I see how long it is I will go back and compress scenes as needed, to make it move at the right pace. I already know it is going to be a long film, probably too long by industry standards and I am not sure I amgoing to worry about it because when it comes to hotrodders, the more the merrier, they want to see the cars and as much of it as they can.

Having said that I obviously don't want to get too far out there time wise, or maybe I would consider two versions. One at 130 minutes (long film but acceptable for a drama / epic/ period type film, per my research) and the other one as long as I want it to be, migh be as long as 165 minutes hehehehe. that version would be best to sell to car people. IMHO, the story is compelling enough that people will not get bored by any means, but I know that a long film can be harder to get into festivals and distribute so I will have to make two versions probably.

 

[Michele Seidman]

That was a great post, well said from a woman's perspective.

I can't believe how positive the feedback has been, I didn't expect it. Now you have me scratching my head, because I'm like: " Boy oh boy, my film better be good now or all these people are going to be very disappointed". LOL.

For some reason I am unable to think of myself as a filmmaker that is going to go very far or a very talented filmmaker etc etc... I have seen the work of many people here and they took my breath away and I guess I am critical and feel I could always do better. I'm just a little rookie. I do know however that some pros have watched me work on the set and their reaction was when I asked them: "so, how did I do? did I do OK?" they were like: " OK is not the word, amazing comes to mind".

???? OK, so maybe I am better at it than I think... Who knows.

As far as being hot, no I am not hot. Trust me I am an old gal now and it shows (sigh)...

Faith...us mature women are in vogue it seems. might as well enjoy it while we can.

I love that your leading man was someone you had worked with before. It is so much easier to work with a director you trust. His performance in the trailers looks spot on too. I loved his acting and got a crush... and I seldom get both reactions to an actor.

As for 'better than you think'...yes mam I think you must be because your project does NOT look like a 1st feature film from anyone I ever met....and I am older than you!

You must be one of those rare naturals. I can't speak from the behind camera perspective as well as I can from on camera or simply as an audience...and as an audience your trailer pulls you in and makes you want more. The colors and lines are clean and vibrant...the angles (as mentioned before) work for you and the acting is top notch.

Just don't let all these folks get you puffed up and you wil do an excellent job as you have so far.

I really do wish I was on your coast. You have so much talent it is almost scary...but in a good way!

 

[Michele Seidman]

That was a great post, well said from a woman's perspective.

I can't believe how positive the feedback has been, I didn't expect it. Now you have me scratching my head, because I'm like: " Boy oh boy, my film better be good now or all these people are going to be very disappointed". LOL.

For some reason I am unable to think of myself as a filmmaker that is going to go very far or a very talented filmmaker etc etc... I have seen the work of many people here and they took my breath away and I guess I am critical and feel I could always do better. I'm just a little rookie. I do know however that some pros have watched me work on the set and their reaction was when I asked them: "so, how did I do? did I do OK?" they were like: " OK is not the word, amazing comes to mind".

???? OK, so maybe I am better at it than I think... Who knows.

As far as being hot, no I am not hot. Trust me I am an old gal now and it shows (sigh)...

Faith...us mature women are in vogue it seems. might as well enjoy it while we can.

I love that your leading man was someone you had worked with before. It is so much easier to work with a director you trust. His performance in the trailers looks spot on too. I loved his acting and got a crush... and I seldom get both reactions to an actor.

As for 'better than you think'...yes mam I think you must be because your project does NOT look like a 1st feature film from anyone I ever met....and I am older than you!

You must be one of those rare naturals. I can't speak from the behind camera perspective as well as I can from on camera or simply as an audience...and as an audience your trailer pulls you in and makes you want more. The colors and lines are clean and vibrant...the angles (as mentioned before) work for you and the acting is top notch.

Just don't let all these folks get you puffed up and you wil do an excellent job as you have so far.

I really do wish I was on your coast. You have so much talent it is almost scary...but in a good way!

 

[Deuceofspades]

I love that your leading man was someone you had worked with before. It is so much easier to work with a director you trust. His performance in the trailers looks spot on too. I loved his acting and got a crush... and I seldom get both reactions to an actor.
up and you wil do an excellent job as you have so far.

Hey I found some great shots of Tim for you! Hard to not have a huge crush on that boy, all the ladies that have seen the footage pretty much reacted the same way. :thumbup:

This is Alexandra Holder, who plays BETTIE, Johnny's girl. Great 50's vintage looks. And an AMAZING actress.

 

[ESTEBEVERDE]

Faith...us mature women are in vogue it seems. might as well enjoy it while we can.

Very Nice!

I prefer to think of it as you two being in your prime! ;-)

 

[Michele Seidman]

Hey I found some great shots of Tim for you! Hard to not have a huge crush on that boy, all the ladies that have seen the footage pretty much reacted the same way. :thumbup:

tell Tim I am first in line for an autographed photo! the other women will have to wait!

Very Nice! I prefer to think of it as you two being in your prime! ;-)

ty...so says the man who is probably 25? lol....sorry, had to tease you!


Faith...when do you think you will have some more footage to share? Do you have any time line for completion? I have heard some ideas being bantered about distribution....seems you may be able to get some without having to sell off any rights.

What are you being told? I will call a feature film producer buddy and ask a few pointed questions. He is a guru when it comes to this stuff..and the best on watching the bottom line I have ever seen.

 

[ESTEBEVERDE]

...


ty...so says the man who is probably 25? lol....sorry, had to tease you!


....

Nice!

Flattery will get you everywhere!


Let me see... Hmmmm.... if I were 25 that would mean I was 4 when I fathered my first child. :beer:

 

[Ted Spencer]

I don't know Ted, that is one of the things that bugs me about modern filmmaking, moving the camera because we can. Being a huge fan of John Ford and Howard Hawks, I am more impressed by painterly composition and clever use of the still frame. Nobody in Hollywood has the balls to shoot in this style anymore, because the executives and marketing guys have told them that audiences expect, want and need to have the camera roaming all of the time.

What I like about what Faith has done is that yes, she is moving the camera a lot but look at her story, it's about people in cars, racing, crashes, etc. In Faith's storyline, it makes sense to move the camera around a lot because the movement is motivated by her subject matter.

What I dislike is when there are too many unmotivated camera moves that tell the audience, "wow, I am the director and I am going to Steadicam, jib/crane and dolly every shot because I am too indecisive to compose a powerful shot and hold it and let the actors do their thing". I also see this in TV as well, an un-named top 10 rating show that I work on, I laugh at a particular director because every setup is two to three cameras and he does waaay too many setups for each scene. What that tells me is that he is not a good director. If you cover every scene from every angle with camera movement on everything with dozens of takes, you don't know what the hell you are doing as a director.
Dan

I completely, 100% agree with you on this.

I was noting Faith's use of camera movement in comparison to other *first-time indie* filmmakers, not anything out of Hollywood. Unmotivated, excessive camera movement, especially shakycam stuff, drives me nuts. But I've seen (and acted in) was too many newbie-indie films where there was almost no camera movement. The directors DPs simply didn't seem to have thought of it. Faith thought of it...

My observation on near-constant camera movement in the previous post should probably also be clarified. What's been interesting to me to note as I quantify this in films by the 'big boys' (and girls) is that much of this constant movement is *extremely subtle*. It's often almost undetectable unless you look at the frame edges. Yet it can lend a certain living, breathing quality to the image even though it isn't moving enough for the viewer to register it consciously as such. I see that a lot in good films.

Otherwise, again by way of agreeing with you, camera movement, like any other technique, should only be used...well...when it should be. And yes, great shot composition is deeply, vitally important, and is one of those things that is almost impossible to teach. The lack of it is another hallmark of indie/newbies.

But when these things are done well, and in good measure, the film is made so much more interesting to watch. I really like how Faith has handled both.

The lighting looks nice too, especially considering her bare-bones lighting gear.

Of course the *most* important things in any film are script and acting, but that's another topic : )

 

[Deuceofspades]

Some of you have asked me how I got the vibrant colors. If it was done in post etc... The teaser on line is RAW footage. Nothing yet has been done with it.

Many of the actors that saw dailies and other people who came by my house and saw footage have commented: "I love the colors".

I had never thought about it but when I started looking for it, I started to realize that my colors were in deed pretty vibrant. All of it was done in camera, with the choice of lens and also choice of exposure. I avoid using the built in ND filters whenever possible. They seem to muddy the shots.

Recently Luis and I teamed up for my big drasgtrip scene. His footage looked quite different than mine, despite the fact we used the same camera and more than likely very identical lenses. I started to think that my Letus Extreme was also a contributing factor to the crispy, more contrasty, colorful look of my film.

Whatever the recipe may be it seems to work so I am not fixing it HAHA!

The funny part is that I think I only white balanced my camera TWICE during my 70 shoots. I usually use presets or I press on the white balance button, but without pointing to a white sheet. I'll randomly point here and there and see what it gives me, until I find a look/coloration I like. Then I stick to that. I know I am probably crazy, but hey, it worked.

:huh:

Go figure. Probably beginners luck LOL.

 

[Michele Seidman]

Nice!

Flattery will get you everywhere!


Let me see... Hmmmm.... if I were 25 that would mean I was 4 when I fathered my first child. :beer:

lol..an old fart like me then! tee hee

Some of you have asked me how I got the vibrant colors. If it was done in post etc... The teaser on line is RAW footage. Nothing yet has been done with it.

Whatever the recipe may be it seems to work so I am not fixing it HAHA! Go figure. Probably beginners luck LOL.

Faith

Beginner or not your luck is holding strong and I think you are right to live by the motto "if it aint broke don't fix it".

What you are doing, if on purpose or by mistake...is ALL working. The colors do pop and now I am thinking I should try NOT doing my white balance the next time I do a short! You are giving me ideas.

Send me a private message if you have an email list for this project. I would love to be kept up to date. I will reply with my email or what ever you need to include me in your list.

 

[Kholi]

Daaaang. Looks great, man. Nice production values and everything.

Edit: I really feel there's some seriously strong and motivated Camera work in the first teaser. Very nice!

PFFT. I praised her on Camera Movement WEEKS AGO. Get with the program, kiddies. Hehehe.

 

[Ted Spencer]

Guilty as charged!

 

[Deuceofspades]

hi guys!

Spent my week-end building a set inside my garage. :thumbup: It's looking pretty darn good. It's a 1955 jail cell. the cool thing is that I bought my supplies at Home depot and they had a deal that day - if you apply for a credit card you get $100 gift certificat. So I applied for 3 LOL and was approved 3 times in a row.

I walked away with all my lumber and pipes and paint for FREE.

Jail cell courtesy of Home Depot :dankk2:
I walked out of the store saying THANK YOU GOD ). Providence was smiling upon me.

hehehehehehehe...

FAITH

 

[puredrifting]

I walked away with all my lumber and pipes and paint for FREE.

Spoken like a true indie filmmaker! You are so resourceful. I built a new track for my new tabletop dolly with Home Depot stuff but I had to pay $22.00 ;-(

Me and a Home Depot credit card could get dangerous, I will have to abstain.

Post some pictures of your jail cell when you have a chance, we would all like to see it.

D

 

[Deuceofspades]

Spoken like a true indie filmmaker! You are so resourceful. I built a new track for my new tabletop dolly with Home Depot stuff but I had to pay $22.00 ;-(

Me and a Home Depot credit card could get dangerous, I will have to abstain.

Post some pictures of your jail cell when you have a chance, we would all like to see it.

D

I was debating whether I should keep it around and rent it out to local indie filmmakers / filmstudents etc... We built it so solid / well, it would be a pity to turn it into firewood...

Do you guys think there might be a demand for a jail cell and if so what kind of price range do you think I could rent it for?

It's just an idea but worth investigating, no?