S i m i l o

[David Jimerson]

We took this feedback form, in case you are bored at home and can help us to improve results next time.


CHARACTERS
1. are the emotions drawn out correctly? Is there enough emotional impact?

Honestly, not really.

For example, some places which could have been a little deeper --

The love scene. Let's see some PASSION there! If we're to believe she lost a great love when the robot "died," we need to see it in the scenes where she's remembering him.

The reveal of his smashed body -- she seems disappointed, but she doesn't seem distraught. She's lost something/one she loved deeply, right? Let's see it!

In the car -- she looks at the new robot, and she looks bored. Maybe that can show a lack of passion toward the replacement, who just isn't the same, but I think the moment would be better-served if we can see plainly on her face that she's remembering the original and realizing this new guy just isn't him. A tear, maybe? A sense of loss?

STORY
What is the most remarkable moment?

I'd say the first close-up of her face.

Is it easy to understand the story?

Yes.

is it boring at some point or does the pace slow down?
Is the plot interesting?

It wasn't hard to guess what was going on. The surprise wasn't a surprise. It was about the same as a lot of sci-fi short stories, "Outer Limits" and "Twilight Zone" episodes, etc.. Not a lot of punch, because it's been done quite a few times before.

Now, it could be that you weren't relying on the surprise as your emotional impact, and if so, I'd structure it a little bit differently. Establish earlier that the man is a robot and tailor the story toward the differences between the new robot and the old robot.

What part would you remove?

The reference to Antarctica. It didn't mean anything, and also didn't make much sense, given the scenery.

I'd also not do the whole thing in voiceover. If I'm watching a film, I don't want to be told the story, I want to watch the story.

What part would you add (dont ask for explicit sex scenes here...)?

More about how the robot guy was destroyed. Just being out in the middle of the road didn't have much punch. Was he hit by a truck? Was it a motorcycle accident? Did it happen after she said "see you later tonight" with a wry smile?
Adding context could have helped the impact of the scene. It's not enough that he was destroyed.

MUSIC
Does it play well with the film?
Is it in the same mood?
Do you miss something?

It was fine. It was original. It was better than what a lot of people do -- find canned music (like me!). It wasn't particularly deep or emotional, though. Kind of like the score of "King Kong."

PRODUCTION
how would you rate the recreation of the future?
Do you think the sets/environments are well picked?
Do you think the production element. i,e. set, clothing, design, hairstyle (padawan style, lol) are suited to the time and place?
What do you think of the VFX?

I think this was all great, except the scenery in Antarctica. It doesn't look like that. What's more, no one THINKS it looks like that.

You took a conservative approach to portraying the future, which is good. A common mistake, which you didn't make, is that the future is way too different from the present. You skipped a lot of cliches and created a future that's plausible, maybe even probable . . .

The only quibble I have with the sets and costumes is that there's too much white. I can only hope the future isn't really that bland.

PHOTOGRAPHY
...

Definately it ooks like Mordor... more pics inside...

I'm sure you know that this is where your film really stood out. I wouldn't mind a detailed description of what you used, and even some behind-the-scenes pics of your setups, if you don't mind. What did you use?

 

[zacharias]

What about the Spanish voice over (version) question ?

I wrote the spanish voice over and after was translated. Of course, we are going to use a spanish version to present in many festivals of Spain.

Till now, we've recorded two diferent voices but neither of these work as well as the english voice that you can hear now.

OK, these two spanish voices are greats and really work, but for other types of stories.

And believe me, is hard to say to a professionals and nice girls that their wonderful voices are not good for you!

Now we are looking for another girl voice. Unfortunately, for this short film, english voices sounds better than spanish voices!

Note: thanks Saint Kassana.

 

[g0ldenb0y55]

I haven't read any of the other comments on this thread and I don't think I ever will, but I thought you did a fantastic job on your short! I enjoyed it very much. Keep up the great work!

 

[Kholi]

Honestly, not really.

For example, some places which could have been a little deeper --

The love scene. Let's see some PASSION there! If we're to believe she lost a great love when the robot "died," we need to see it in the scenes where she's remembering him.

The reveal of his smashed body -- she seems disappointed, but she doesn't seem distraught. She's lost something/one she loved deeply, right? Let's see it!

In the car -- she looks at the new robot, and she looks bored. Maybe that can show a lack of passion toward the replacement, who just isn't the same, but I think the moment would be better-served if we can see plainly on her face that she's remembering the original and realizing this new guy just isn't him. A tear, maybe? A sense of loss?





I'd say the first close-up of her face.



Yes.



It wasn't hard to guess what was going on. The surprise wasn't a surprise. It was about the same as a lot of sci-fi short stories, "Outer Limits" and "Twilight Zone" episodes, etc.. Not a lot of punch, because it's been done quite a few times before.

Now, it could be that you weren't relying on the surprise as your emotional impact, and if so, I'd structure it a little bit differently. Establish earlier that the man is a robot and tailor the story toward the differences between the new robot and the old robot.




The reference to Antarctica. It didn't mean anything, and also didn't make much sense, given the scenery.

I'd also not do the whole thing in voiceover. If I'm watching a film, I don't want to be told the story, I want to watch the story.




More about how the robot guy was destroyed. Just being out in the middle of the road didn't have much punch. Was he hit by a truck? Was it a motorcycle accident? Did it happen after she said "see you later tonight" with a wry smile?
Adding context could have helped the impact of the scene. It's not enough that he was destroyed.




It was fine. It was original. It was better than what a lot of people do -- find canned music (like me!). It wasn't particularly deep or emotional, though. Kind of like the score of "King Kong."




I think this was all great, except the scenery in Antarctica. It doesn't look like that. What's more, no one THINKS it looks like that.

You took a conservative approach to portraying the future, which is good. A common mistake, which you didn't make, is that the future is way too different from the present. You skipped a lot of cliches and created a future that's plausible, maybe even probable . . .

The only quibble I have with the sets and costumes is that there's too much white. I can only hope the future isn't really that bland.




I'm sure you know that this is where your film really stood out. I wouldn't mind a detailed description of what you used, and even some behind-the-scenes pics of your setups, if you don't mind. What did you use?

Okay, I need to take a lesson from David on how to toss some constructive criticism. =P

On the subject of voiceovers, I thought that this one was fine. However, there was an abundance of voiceovers in the contest, and most didn't work. I can't figure out why? Why was it acceptable here even though it could've worked just as well, maybe better, without one?

Does anyone have an idea?

 

[natdizzle]

Okay..Great Film
To get away from all the comparisions, and defend posts...
have a question about the production....
im shooting a short soon, and there are a bunch of shots in a truck....Dialouge...wondering how you went about shooting your car scenes, i know they were filmed in the garage with a projector, if i could do that and get the same Results, that would be awesome, I thought it was shot on the road no questions....

thnaks

Anyone?

 

[zacharias]

David Jimerson,

thanks a lot for give us your time answering our questionary.

I would like more people answer our questionary too.

It's help us to be better!!

 

[WilderWorks]

However, there was an abundance of voiceovers in the contest, and most didn't work. I can't figure out why? Why was it acceptable here even though it could've worked just as well, maybe better, without one?

I think in general, when something works without the voice over, that's when it's okay to use voice over. It has to enhance, not cover up the lack of visual storytelling.

 

[MojoTrancer]

As one of the voiceover offenders, I would say its kind of a hit or miss thing. On Ava, the original concept was for something more Soderbergh-like. I was inspired by the hotel love scene in Out of Sight between George Clooney and Jennifer Lopez. The problem was that I didn't have a scene with Ava and Zane talking to each other like Clooney and Lopez. So some of the effect was lost.

In any capacity, I think it's very difficult to pull off a good voice over. In most films where I've seen it done well (I liked Terminator IIs way of doing it, and Soderberghs stuff, like Solaris and Out of Sight) there was plenty of regular dialogue scenes to tie it together. Don't know if a VO can carry a whole film, not matter how long or short it is.

Just my two hundreths of a dollar...

 

[Yas Kassana]

I wrote the spanish voice over and after was translated. Of course, we are going to use a spanish version to present in many festivals of Spain.

Till now, we've recorded two diferent voices but neither of these work as well as the english voice that you can hear now.

OK, these two spanish voices are greats and really work, but for other types of stories.

And believe me, is hard to say to a professionals and nice girls that their wonderful voices are not good for you!

Now we are looking for another girl voice. Unfortunately, for this short film, english voices sounds better than spanish voices!

Note: thanks Saint Kassana.

Dude I'm not any saint, trust me. But for you guys, anything.

Sorry if my spanish is bad.

 

[Tainted]

Macgregor, you asked if 'she' could have been a Similo as well? I like thinking that she is definitely not - because it strengthens the theme that I take from this. Of course, if she was, it would make for another interesting set of questions...

Oh boy, here we go...

The obvious next question would be was Deckard a replicant?

Heh... And with all of this VO debate, I might add:

Did you like the VO on the Theatrical Release or the removal of the VO in the Director's Cut...

Double heh...

 

[zacharias]

Please be patient, there are a lot of words of bad english.

I think there are some concepts to keep in mind when someone use a voice over:
1. look if the V.O. inform too much about the action.
2. look if the V.O. inform too much less about the action.
3. Where the dramatic tension is going down because we only hear the thoughts of the characters, instead of we deduce it by the actions.
4. If the V.O. keeps you on warning of what will happen the next.
5. If the V.O. speaks about something that already happened.
6. If there is too much or too much less V.O.

SIMILO’s Voice Over.
> Is along 1 minute, 32 seconds. More or less 45 seconds at the beginning and 45 at the end. I’m not going to compare with other short film of this fest. But for us, 1’ 32” per 6’ of a short film is a good ratio. 4 minutes and 30 seconds without V.O. of a short film of 6 minutes.

> I’m going to analyze a bit the SIMILO’s voice over. Only a few words per sentence, but step by step. I hope this will be enough to other people when asked me about our goals and approach to the story and subject matter. Maybe in a next post I’ll talk about the ‘mise en scene’ of SIMILO.


1. I miss you, and you? Do you remember me? We inspired for this watching the beginning of Solaris (Steven Sorderbergh, 2002). We like a lot this because this sentence and the sensual voice of Sarah Jarman put in your mind a feeling about what happen the next.

3. Can you miss someone you don’t remember? Can one moment or experience ever disappear completely, or does it exist always somewhere, waiting to be discovered. In this moment we try to explain a complex concept. This type of concepts is hard to explain only with images.

5. I need to know what happened did not erase everything. Here we wanted put an alert in the mind of the audience: What happened to him??

6. I need to know that there is still something of me inside of him. I need to feel that there is something inside of him of both of us. These sentences speaks about her desires. And we like a lot because for this we know she really feel desperate.

8. The moment that I laid eyes on him, I knew he was made for me.He will never fail me,never shout at me, never leave me alone, he will always be there, by my side. Ambiguity. We want to said these things that lovers tell each other. Pretty things about the future, promises etc. But by the other side, we are talking about of a robot who has been programmed to do this.

10. You will always be there, he is still here, always was, always will be..at my side. That’s why I bought you. I explained this to Gumonstro in other post. Now, I copy again: “She was living in a bubble of love, saying pretty words like “You will always be there, he is still here, always was, always will be..at my side”.
Too much wonderful to be real...
We wanted to make a high contrast between the love fantasy world in where she lived and the reality... the cruel and material reality. And then, we used that "ugly" sentence: “That’s why I bought you”.
Literally her love was “broken”. Because at the end, she was in love with a wash machine!

12. He is not himself anymore, you look like him a lot. The same features, the same eyes, anyone can say you are the same,but there is something missing, something you cannot give me, because in the end, you are not him. You are new. Ambiguity again. Have you ever had a problem with a girl that was your girlfriend? She could tell you things like: I don’t love you anymore, you’ve changed, you are not the same that when we started together, etc.
BTW, we also wanted explain the difficult point that in fact, there are two SIMILOS but she at the end...

15. Why am I doing this? Sometimes a spark from your eyes looks familiar, a hint or a fragment of you is in there. like you recognise me. ... At the end she hope that this new SIMILO already keeps something of the old SIMILO. Can you still someone who isn’t the same? I am talking about a serious and a real problem: alzheimer.

17. And do you? Do you remember me? This is not V.O. We wanted to shock a bit to the audience. Because we use the same type of voice to this dialogue than the V.O. Nothing changes, and the audience is a bit surprised when finally say something using the same style of voice that the “voice of her thoughts”. (Is dificult to me explain this in english, sorry)

18. I miss you. And the screen turns black. At the end we hope this short film will express to the audience a feeling of melancholy... maybe we hope too much... in any case, we tried.

 

[jamestmather]

Did you like the VO on the Theatrical Release or the removal of the VO in the Director's Cut...


I thought that the original film used VO to get plot points over that would have been missing from the directors cut -Deckard was married, cityspeak, why he had quit the blade runner unit etc. In other words already knowing what the Vo said it was impossible to un-learn those details - also it was a nice nod to raymond chandler detective fiction which the film evokes throughout.

In short I quite liked it.

 

[jamestmather]

Did you like the VO on the Theatrical Release or the removal of the VO in the Director's Cut...

I thought that the original film used VO to get plot points over that would have been missing from the directors cut -Deckard was married, cityspeak, why he had quit the blade runner unit etc. In other words already knowing what the Vo said it was impossible to un-learn those details - also it was a nice nod to raymond chandler detective fiction which the film evokes throughout.

In short I quite liked it.
and also in similo.


apols for off topic but i guess voice over is on trial here

 

[EJ Pennypacker]

zacharias & macgregor

I will be keeping a very keen eye out in the future for your material.

What I'd love to see in your next project, is something that allows the actors to act more, rather than almost letting the *camera* act for them.

I think then you will be able to produce something that not only is technical excellent, but will challenge the audience more on an emotional level.

Keep up the good work! And G-luck with the contest!

EJ

 

[Yas Kassana]

I personally have an antagonistic relationship with VO in any film. I think VO is an easy way out to explain something, however at the same time if it done properly it is often the best thing about the movie. It can make it haunting. Question? Why was VO used in American Beauty? To further the plot because the actors were crap? Anyway, Mallick and voiceover=orgasm.

The similo VO was necessary for a 6min plot.

 

[MojoTrancer]

I actually missed the voiceover in the Directors cut of Blade Runner. You guys are right. There are details that you don't get otherwise.

 

[jamestmather]

I also felt that Nutty Professor 2: The Klumps would have benefitted from a voiceover and revealed subtle plot details.

 

[Jared Meyer]

HA! That's awesome.

 

[iSTy]

I liked the storyline of this film, and, although I liked what I saw, could not understand the need for the over exposure in the bed scene. I feel this was just a way in which to keep the interest in.
I hope the judges realise the implications in this.
This is definitely one of my top 3 films.

 

[macgregor]

I liked the storyline of this film, and, although I liked what I saw, could not understand the need for the over exposure in the bed scene. I feel this was just a way in which to keep the interest in.
I hope the judges realise the implications in this.
This is definitely one of my top 3 films.

Why dont you understand it?

She is making love to a 6 feet long dildo! Isn´t that important?