Brandon Rice
Distributed Producer
I like the line... "back to the ol' salt mine... got a quota to make"
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Wow!!!
Totaly professional!!!
I watch it several times, and I like it completely the way it was done!
Good acting, and very beautiful actress..
One of the top movies of this fest, on my opinion!
:beer:
Loved it, read the script from the previous scriptfest and this was well executed.
wow, really good cinematography. One of the best shorts, good luck!!
Jack, once again, you come around these parts to show us all how a movie is made. I must have watched CC ten times. Such great subtle camera moves and foley. The actors were amazing. Great fusion of suspense and comedy. There is also no surprise coming from you that the art direction was perfect.
When you catch things only after multiple viewings, I'd say you've succeeded in making an experience, not just a film. Watching CC, my normal movie watching technical critique mechanism is bypassed and delivered straight to the film fan in the back of my brain. That's when I know I've seen a good film. I experience it on a subconcious level.
Timur did an amazing job with the cinematography. Sound was perfect. Everything was no less than I would expect from a JDS film. Thanks for the free film school. Hopefully, I can steal something from you for my next movie.![]()
I'm enjoying the discussion as well. Seems like Jack's threads always get elevated to nuanced commentary on filmmaking (while ours, in contrast, seem to devolve into boob shots, comic strips and examinations of Matt Gettemeier's neuroses.)
One thing I would be interested in hearing would be Jack's comments on shooting someone else's script. I.e.,: 1) is this the first time you've shot someone else's script? 2) To what extent did you adapt/revise the script for its shooting version? 3) If you did make substantial revisions, was John Whalen involved? 4) Are you more or less inclined to shoot someone else's script after this?
interesting, how much was planned ahead or were you just creating on the set? I don't think I remember seeing story boards, but you might of had them or maybe you had a shot list.
I honestly didn't quite get why he was in her closet. I know it was explained (outsourcing) but it didn't seem convincing enough.
Thanks for the inside info. :thumbup:Hey Geoff
The closet was 3 lights. 2 prolites w/ 216, and one 1k openface with tuff spun. nothing fancy, one light bounced off the ceiling as a toplight, one light bounced off the wall to the right as a rear edge, and the backlight/shaft of light coming out of the door on the wall behind her. the trick is to stage the lights behind her so the side of her body towrds camera stay dark, and it sells the effect that the closet isnt as bright as it is. the smoke helped soften it a bit, and gave a touch of diffusion as well.
That scene was shot with a 20mm a 35mm, 50mm and an 85mm...
:grin: :beer:Mark Johnson said:I'm enjoying the discussion as well. Seems like Jack's threads always get elevated to nuanced commentary on filmmaking (while ours, in contrast, seem to devolve into boob shots, comic strips and examinations of Matt Gettemeier's neuroses.)
Yes. But of the 35 or so productions I've directed for the stage only 2 or 3 were my own plays, the rest: some Shakespeare, some other classical, lots of non-premiere contemporary, and lots of New Plays developing the text wit the author. So my work is rooted in text analysis as I'm used to working with a 60 point checklist in grad school where we had to do 30 page documents on every play we directed and a 60 page thesis. So really looking at a text and breaking it down is an area where I have lots of formal training and experience. Eventually this would be applied to my work/writing on the front end, followed by a more intuitive middle, then applied again when I directed my own work. It's a very different process in theatre and film. In one form the playwright is t the top of the foodchain, in the other the director. In theater you could never say "we need a joke here, I'd like a montage sequence instead of this scene, lets get to the point sooner". No no. You can only say things like "what is it you were going for when you wrote .....? Ok, does that make sense with this? This part worked best for me. Here's where my interest lagged. Oh great playwright sir, or madam." So yes this is the first time I've directed another's screenplay, but I took the approach to the text as simmilar to the New Plays I've directed, and the note giving process was a combination of the way notes are given in my UCLA screenwriting classes and in my current online writer's group coupled with the way I would give notes to anyone I'm working with as a director: fairly directly.Mark Johnson said:One thing I would be interested in hearing would be Jack's comments on shooting someone else's script. I.e.,: 1) is this the first time you've shot someone else's script?
I don't know if I would say substantial, and yes John was certainly involved. I'd only take the text out of a writer's hands as a last resort. I think John alludes to most of this below but I think the revisions were something like:Mark Johnson said:2) To what extent did you adapt/revise the script for its shooting version? 3) If you did make substantial revisions, was John Whalen involved?
About the same. It's easier to do my own stuff. Barry as producer steps in as leading the development process as I have with Matt, only Barry is less hands on since I'm the director. Barry's quite good at development, BTW. But for now I prefer to do my own stuff because it's easier to get what I want so to speak - to clarify, John was super easy to work with, just I don't have to worry about offending myself if I want something ripped out and replaced. If I could find a feature script that blew me away and wasn't too expensive to produce, however, Barry and I would be shooting in right now. But we haven't found that yet so we are developing our own.Mark Johnson said:4) Are you more or less inclined to shoot someone else's script after this?
Initially it was a struggle for me to figure out the initial tone of the piece. I knew that it took a hard turn, I think the script says, after "The calls are coming from inside the house", that when Dana runs into the hallway, that "We are suddenly in a slasher movie." So one could, theoretically do something completely different up to that point. But the more I thought about how some of the mundane things would play in thriller-drag the more I liked it. Since there was no indication of that in the script for the first three phone calls, I called John to discuss this and see if it was way off. My concern was stepping on any comedy, or taking away from the dry absurd dialogue that drove the screenplay so well on the page. As John mentioned, that had been what he was thinking all along. So beginning as a thriller would unify the piece some and give it a consistent style. The application of which would be basically to establish "thriller" with the opening music, and then maintain the camera style but back off on the music until we were in true thriller mode with the arrival of the detective. So after the opening music - thank goodness for the 9 second DVXuser leader, we had no underscoring for the first three phone calls that were more ordinary life, stasis not totally upset yet, phone calls, but maintained a smooth floating camera style of a slick thriller.As the writer of the "Cold Calls" script, I figured I'd chime in here about some of the questions that have come up.
.... about my involvement in the development of the final shooting script....
The script I wrote was pretty bare bones -- not a lot of description about mood, look and tone. Part of the reason for this was that when I wrote the the script earlier this year, I had intended to shoot it myself. Since I had a pretty good idea of how I wanted the short to look and feel, I kept the script description to a minimum. (In fact, I actually shot some test footage on a DVX100 with my wife as Dana, trying my best to emulate the slick look and fluid camera of the "When a Stranger Calls" remake trailer.) When Jack agreed to produce the script, he very kindly called me to grill me about what I had in mind in the way of style and tone. It turned out, we both had the same basic idea about the look and feel of the piece. Jack, of course, came up with all of the specific and clever ways to pull that off, which he's talked about elsewhere in this thread.
I did which one?Jack also rightly decided that my dialog-heavy script needed a little visual massaging, and so he came up with the idea for a montage sequence, a series of short scenes showing Dana fielding increasingly absurd sales calls while doing stage business in various parts of the house (in the bathtub, in the garden, etc.). The idea was to show Dana's increasing frustration in a more cinematic fashion, one that would build up comic tension through quick cuts. Jack asked me to come up with a bunch of goofy sales pitch lines for that sequence. I sent him a batch and he picked his favorites. And then he added one of his own.
Here mostly I'd given the note about punching up some of the funny in the detective scene, had gone to bed and the next morning had an idea. Since we were moving close to needing to lock the script at that point, needing to get actors lines to memorize, I dashed it off to John with the clear instructions that he was under no obligation to use the tweaks I scripted in the Detective scene. But he liked them and didn't care where they came from so we ran with them. He was great to work with throughout the whole thing. A few things like tightening up the top etc, were improvements that John would have gotten to eventually. The rest of the notes I would say were more finding a place where his sensibilities and mine would more perfectly mesh in order to fully realize the material for this director, with these actors, and these resources, making this production at this time.There were some other nice touches that Jack and company added to the mix, bits that weren't in the script: The little dog running across the kitchen floor, the vibrating doorknob (in the script I just described the heartbeat sound as getting louder when Dana passed the closet door), the ball hitting Tim in the head, and the detective's "flatulent bastard" line. That exchange between Dana and the detective in which the cop misconstrues Dana's comment about "exploding gas" to mean something else was the only major change of dialog that Jack made. And he was cool enough to run it by me first. I thought it funny, so I said go ahead and incorporate it into the short.
I think it was "shoes for penguins" or something, and if I'm right, yes that was one that Ben improvised.I did which one?Maybe Ben improvised it.