Apocalypse Express, A1 - SD - (sorry!)

PaPa

PaPa

Major Contributor
My friend (also the drummer in my band) is applying to the film school I'm currently attending and needed some help with his portfolio.

So basically it meant that all my equipment was used, camera, lights, microphones, dolly, glidecam and myself as the DoP and editor.

Ryan Grassby is his name. He wrote/directed it, as well as created a score for the film with the help of mister piano and cubase!

This was a very very rushed shoot of 2 days, but the results should be enough to get him in without a problem.

Sorry for the fact that its youtube compression, if anyone has a better site where i could host a higher quality version of it, please let me know!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1ojS3tNuFs


Also, after hearing a few reactions, some people have suggested putting it into some festivals, do you guys think thats dooable with something like this?

Feedback, comments, I want it all please!
Cheers!
( wish we could have shot it in HD! )
 
I actually thought it was very good. I didn't get the part where the main character is walking infront of the projector; however, I still feel I understood the movie as a whole and enjoyed it.

Good: Good story. Nice camera work. Nice music. Pretty good lighting. I liked the painting at the end (was that made for this?). I liked the shot at the end with the train.

"Not quite there yet, IMO": The main character, when he was in the church, seemed very plain in his acting. He acted as if he did not believe that this man was God, but then obeyed what he said as if he was God. If he believed then I think he would have acted much differently. Also in that same scene, the camera work got somewhat boring. From the exterior shot of the main character, I expected a cut to the exterior reverse of that, but instead the cut went to a 2-shot. The cutting went back and fourth between those shots for the entire scene, then to a master (which I liked), then to an interior close-up, and the scene was over. I also felt that the reveal of the guy playing God felt a bit awkward and forced. I realize that saying that doesn't really help, so here is what I would do in that scene (not saying this is the correct way at all): External reverse. External reverse. Master. Internal reverse. Internal reverse. Close push on main character. Extreme close up on "God". Back to close push on main character.

My negatives list seems a lot longer, but that is just because I explained myself more on those. I saw much more positives than negatives. Good job. By the way, where's he applying? Keep us updated on his entry because filmschool is about 4 years down the road for me. For submission, along with your normal resumes of course, do you send in a reel and/or a short also? I heard that its not necessary, but it sounds like it is. On the subject, do you know if any scholarships are given for filmschool applicants?
 
bballplaya283 said:
I actually thought it was very good. I didn't get the part where the main character is walking infront of the projector; however, I still feel I understood the movie as a whole and enjoyed it.

Good: Good story. Nice camera work. Nice music. Pretty good lighting. I liked the painting at the end (was that made for this?). I liked the shot at the end with the train.

"Not quite there yet, IMO": The main character, when he was in the church, seemed very plain in his acting. He acted as if he did not believe that this man was God, but then obeyed what he said as if he was God. If he believed then I think he would have acted much differently. Also in that same scene, the camera work got somewhat boring. From the exterior shot of the main character, I expected a cut to the exterior reverse of that, but instead the cut went to a 2-shot. The cutting went back and fourth between those shots for the entire scene, then to a master (which I liked), then to an interior close-up, and the scene was over. I also felt that the reveal of the guy playing God felt a bit awkward and forced. I realize that saying that doesn't really help, so here is what I would do in that scene (not saying this is the correct way at all): External reverse. External reverse. Master. Internal reverse. Internal reverse. Close push on main character. Extreme close up on "God". Back to close push on main character.

My negatives list seems a lot longer, but that is just because I explained myself more on those. I saw much more positives than negatives. Good job. By the way, where's he applying? Keep us updated on his entry because filmschool is about 4 years down the road for me. For submission, along with your normal resumes of course, do you send in a reel and/or a short also? I heard that its not necessary, but it sounds like it is. On the subject, do you know if any scholarships are given for filmschool applicants?
Click to expand...

Definately good comments. These are things that would have worked much better had the director planned it and we had more time.

It got to the point hwere he wasnt quite sure, and we were rushing rushing, we barely had enough time to get through an entire take without errors, which is why there is a random close up insert of the main character between the dialogue. Trust me, i got extremely frustrated while shooting the scene, because there i was donating my time, equipment and other things, while the actors werent prepared, so we got what we got, and thats it. Personally, i would have done things differently, i.e. prepared.

The school is called Mel Hoppenheim school of cinema . Concordia University in montreal.

My portfolio is on youtube.com, just search for jdubsky, and then university portfolio. Nothing that impressive, but i got in because i knew how to make a film, i.e. progression of shots, decent sound, and editing technique.
 
marlontorres said:
why oh why did you shoot sd?
Click to expand...

hey dude, we shot SD because this was simply for his portfolio for uni, and he did not have the ability or programs to edit HD, plus, it would have taken too much time to reconvert it to standard and blah blah, really just for time and simplicity.

i would have loved to shoot in on Hd personally.

:)
 
thats so different. it reminds me when i wanted to pull my hair watching Eternal Sunshine of a spotless mind/Science of sleep.

just weird, i didnt get it but great video.
 
PaPa, you do realize that you can shoot in HD, and downconvert as you import in-camera, right? This way, you could always just go back and re-edit if you wanted in high def. Your NLE will treat the down-converted footage the exact same as it would a SD only camera. Knowing this, I cannot think of any reason one would ever want to record to tape in HD. Actually maybe if you didn't have editing software for HD, and you were recording to Firestore it's possible that's what you would want to do.
 
Nice shot at the end with the train. You guys composited that on there right? I can't imagine an actor risking arrest and actually sit on a train track. If so, good compositing work except for some edge flickering.
 
You guys mentioned camera, light, composition, etc. etc.
But what I really like here, is sound. The voices are recorded crisp and clear.
 
well that was me too :) thanks!
the AT4073 shotgun was golden for audio, and the voice over stuff was done with the hyper 4053. Great mics, kudos to AT.
 
bballplaya283 said:
PaPa, you do realize that you can shoot in HD, and downconvert as you import in-camera, right? This way, you could always just go back and re-edit if you wanted in high def. Your NLE will treat the down-converted footage the exact same as it would a SD only camera. Knowing this, I cannot think of any reason one would ever want to record to tape in HD. Actually maybe if you didn't have editing software for HD, and you were recording to Firestore it's possible that's what you would want to do.
Click to expand...

lol, i wish i had known this.... ****.
 
dcrin3 said:
thats so different. it reminds me when i wanted to pull my hair watching Eternal Sunshine of a spotless mind/Science of sleep.
Click to expand...

lol, glad you enjoyed it!
 
OK I watched again and saw in the credits that the art was done by Amanda Pechousek. On a second viewing I noticed a lot more in the beginning, like how the doors swing upon by themselves. Pretty interesting touch.

I still don't understand why the main character is walking infront of the projector. Can you explain?
 
i cant, cause i didnt write it

but me thinks its him in his own imagination, watching his ideas.
 
I was more along the train of thought that the whole piece was a play on the story, in that the director (your friend) was assuming the role of the main character to have a weird 1st+3rd person story going on.

What was the final art piece that saved the world? Was it the painting? Despite, ending the movie on the painting, no because that was framed within the story of the guy writing on the type writer to save the world.

I am one to think that what was being written on the typewriter was the script to this movie. The director (in the terms of the story, not in reality) was watching back his work showing a story (painting) inside a story (typewriter) inside a story (movie).

Think interms of tenacious d's 'tribute song' - 'this is not the greatest song in the world, this is just a tribute'

Sorry my school University of the Arts in philly, makes us concentrate too much on theories haha.

Good job overall.
 
lol no its kewl man, i love your analogy, im sure the writer would love ot hear thi stuff.
 
bballplaya283 said:
PaPa, you do realize that you can shoot in HD, and downconvert as you import in-camera, right? This way, you could always just go back and re-edit if you wanted in high def. Your NLE will treat the down-converted footage the exact same as it would a SD only camera. Knowing this, I cannot think of any reason one would ever want to record to tape in HD. Actually maybe if you didn't have editing software for HD, and you were recording to Firestore it's possible that's what you would want to do.
Click to expand...
Bball, would you please clarify something for me? I'm strongly considering buying the XHA1, but I do not have the money right now to upgrade my computer or software to edit HDV. (I've got a laptop with 1 G Hz and 1 G RAM, and Premiere 1.5, which doesn't do HD.) Are you saying I can shoot in hidef and edit in standard, then later re-edit in hidef (HDV) when I've got a more powerful editing setup? I'm trying to decide between the DVX100b and XHA1, love the idea of hidef, but am concerned I won't be able to edit what I've shot. Maybe the Mac Pro and FCP in the future, but for now, the camera itself will max out my budget. Thanks in advance, to you or anyone else who wants to chime in.
 
Yes you can certainly do that. Shoot everything you do in 16:9 1440x1080. When you have the camera turned on it is a menu option that says "Down-convert," and when you capture this it will import just like 16:9 SD. Only thing is, if you shoot 24f, it imports as 60i (I think). I'm pretty sure if you will need to edit on a 60i timeline regardless of your original framerate. My computer is pretty bad, so this is what I am doing. I would definitely go with the XHA1 over the DVX because it will last for much longer. If I went with a DVX, I'd try to get a DVX100 (original) for around $1600. You just can't justify spending $3000 for a DVX when for $500 more you can get an HD DVX.

edit: disregard what I said about editing on a 60i timeline. I'm pretty sure you just edit it normally.
 
Last edited:
Very powerful concept / scary ....
Sound recording is great ....
I loved camera work inside film but not opening 'it was too shaky ...'
Closing image was wow 'it has alot to do with how we live not knowing when is the real end .....'
Color matching was good too .....
Piano is damn cool guys ...
Great stuff .... i was not watching A1 i was watching a movie :)
 
Thanks for the kind comments Amr :)

and for the whole editing project thing, we shot at 24F 16x9 SD, and my timeline was a 23.798 fps, progressive, and it worked fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top