Best shot on DSLR

Well here goes the not sure if troll or just stupid instinct. Nonetheless this is truly DSLRs at their worst: Moire, depressingly grainy, messy inaccurate focus pulling, terrible sound.

Well, it simply does not live up to its title.
 
no. I'm not a troll. I think the graininess adds to the film, same with the focus. depressing? its supposed to be about a lonely group of people, no? just asking though, what does 'moire' mean or did you mean to type 'noire'? if you did mean noire, then thats the personal choice of the director.
 
The problem with your grain is that it is very digital and the compression of youtube makes this grain looks like huge blocks, I don't understand what that would add to the film in a good manner. I can understand the reason of a quite dancing line of focus, however these effects looks very amateurish when done wrong - and yes, that means this. Moire or Moire pattern is an ugly artifact caused by line skipping which is common in the current DSLR cameras which causes this ugly rainbow pattern on the actors striped clothes that can be seen when he is about to attempt murder in your video. So even though all can be artistic choices by the director, these technical limitations found in the video makes your title of this being some of the best of this forum an incredibly vague statement.
 
Too out of focus for my tastes. Could have used more light so you don't have to shoot wide open, then adjust in post. Out of place camera angles and bad edits. But that's as far as I got as it could not hold my attention.
 
It's a good effort, but the length and really slow pacing makes it a tough sell as an internet video.

Technically, It looks like this was output for a DVD. I would suggest re-uploading another pass at 1280x720 and maybe that will help out with compression artifacts.
 
Sigh...

I'll watch this when I get a minute (an am not on 3G!) but perfect example here of how far downhill we have gone at DVXuser. 4 out of 8 posts deal with strictly technical camera issues. I see one comment on a larger grasp of cinematography (framing) and one on plot/pacing (too slow for the internet) and nothing else about the actual film.

We all know everyone is a master cinematographer here. Lets hear thoughts on storytelling. Specifically what could be done to improve this film? Where does it succeed? Where does it fall short, and how can we as fellow film makers strive to be better? I'll write some down later tonight or tomorrow.
 
William_Robinette said:
Sigh...

I'll watch this when I get a minute (an am not on 3G!) but perfect example here of how far downhill we have gone at DVXuser. 4 out of 8 posts deal with strictly technical camera issues. I see one comment on a larger grasp of cinematography (framing) and one on plot/pacing (too slow for the internet) and nothing else about the actual film.

We all know everyone is a master cinematographer here. Lets hear thoughts on storytelling. Specifically what could be done to improve this film? Where does it succeed? Where does it fall short, and how can we as fellow film makers strive to be better? I'll write some down later tonight or tomorrow.
Click to expand...

Agreed....

But also, was the OP the filmmaker of the piece in question? If so, just come out and say it...
 
Soon as you read the post you know he shot it. Pretty good effort, could have been better, shows potential. Learn about dolly moves maybe. The actors and script did not engage me at all.
 
might be ok for an early student film. seemed to me that it was self-consciously trying to fulfill a hit list of techniques. ADR, fight, foley, etc...

but overall, id say:

bad camera handling
sloppy edit
questionable acting made worse by bad ADR
script was like someone trying unsuccessfully to explain a weird dream

im under the impression that the girl was a ghost all along. but the fact that she cast a shadow on the bathroom counter ruined it for me right out of the gate. should have masked out the shot so she only appeared in and only affected the mirror
 
Hello. No I am not the one who shot this film. I believe it's best time to clear that up and it's certainly time to explain the purpose of my previous posts (My most sincere apologies for 'double posting' in multiple categories.) Firstly, my name is Brian. I am currently a doctoral candidate in the school of psychology at Kansas State University. I came across this film as a result of stumbling upon the Late Night Horror Film Festival of California online. I have always carried a passion for the artistry that is film-particularly germane to auteurship. That being said, I've become uniformly fascinated by the perplexities of bad film. (Having previously earned a rather useless undergraduate degree in media and communications I've been forced to both create and watch student made "bad film") But questions persist. What makes bad film? What are the types of bad film and lastly (Perhaps paramount) can people be persuaded to enjoy bad film? My goal on these boards was to cultivate the vast knowledge of independent film makers with the purposes of masking a bad film as one of the "best shot". I did so primarily with interests in translating subsequent responses into my "pre-notes" for my dissertation on the broadening relationship between audience and "image"; be it for a clinical setting for the administration of aid, or be it applied to the future for the Hollywood industrial complex to implement in the pursuit of profit-- a'la Marshall McLullan's The Medium is The Message. At first (and I must admit this was a bit too foolish of me) I set out to see if this was something that could be enjoyed simply by suggesting it, just maybe people would feel pity for the man who posted it. Clearly I was mistaken. Second, as this film is, in my opinion, uniquely terrible, I wanted to comb the collective minds in an effort to calculate the components that made it so. Again, this was an amateur mistake on my part as it is now apparent to me that this is a film making site with its focus on the technical bits and pieces that hold a film together, where I was more concerned with how narrative structures have evolved, chased aesthetics, or otherwise failed. What are the contributing factors to the "dream" auteurs seek to manifest? Why was this narrative so broken? With no disrespect intended I brought it here- in retrospect more as a clinician. While I have a bit more to go towards the completion of my study, I would like to humbly apologize for any confusion I may have caused in this matter and move to asking for some advice: How do you, independent film makers, believe such a thing should be carried out? Are there other sites aimed towards the narrative components of which the elements of deconstructionism could be applied-- perhaps with a more academic interest? (Not that I believe this community lacks in academia-- I know that is far from the case.) Thank you in advance. I would like to conclude by saying that I have always honored, respected and in some ways feared the independent film community. Though this was a terrible film, I do have respect for the creators as they have done something I never really had the means nor the guts to attempt on my own, let alone acquire admission to a film festival. I feel the more we study the elements of the truly terrible and the more we deconstruct the spirit of failure, we could perhaps some day re-invent genre, aid the mentally ill, and create better narrative. Thank you again for your participation and of course if you choose to participate further by pointing me in the right direction.

-Brian
 
In my opinion, you cannot divorce the technical aspects of filmmaking from the overall narrative. A good story can be informed by good process and vice-versa. This isn't a 1:1 relationship - Transformers films are competently made but are mediocre narratives. (though they WOULD be way worse if they were produced by novice filmmakers)

Of course I don't think nitpicking over things like types of camera or resolution are really germane to the discussion, but the posted film is a narrative failure on almost every level and I think that has some relation to how poorly it was made.
 
Brian,

What the hell is wrong with you?! You claim to be doing this in the name of science (or as you call yourself a 'clinician') but I can find no reason why you would feel the need to put this ****, which is without a doubt the worst film I have ever seen, on this site. I have frequented this site for years and have never been compelled to post but watching that travesty with its horrible music, grade school camera angles and the WORST lead performer ever made me feel the need to give you some ****. This is serious film site. No one here is interested in you or your bullshit psychology crap. Let me now save you a lot of time and effort: there is no ****ing way you could ever convince anyone to like this film no matter what you suggest. This is why no one commented on the story or acting because they did not want to say anything about something so profoundly awful. You need to find a much better film (there are tons of independent films out there that are horrible and way better than this ****ing garbage) and try your experiment that way.

A final note: You write very well Brian, but I sense that you are holding something back. Is this another mind game? When you say you have respect for the filmmakers are you trying to **** with us? There is no way you can possibly have respect for whatever ****ing, useless, incompetent morons made this piece of ****. Please stop being a 'clinician' and just state your real opinion.
 
my guess is the person who started this thread wrote neither the first nor "brian's" contributions.

not sure what the motivation is. but i'd say some loony trolling is afoot.
 
Hi everybody. First, Hendosan: I couldn't have said it better myself. I agree, technicality in any craft, profession or even behavior can not be severed from the underlying narrative. William James had a theory or two regarding the Stream of Consciousness and how it ties both to life and drama. But that's here nor there. Jonesjohn 83. I'm terribly sorry if I've offended you. I understand that this is a community and it was not my intention to in anyway insult or encroach upon the educational haven set up here. I know a lot of you are hard working film makers and in that regard I do respect you all.

But you are right to point out that I am holding back; and seeing as I haven't been kicked from the community just yet perhaps I should divulge my real opinion sans jargon. There are a lot of films that are horrible. Troll 2 comes immediately to mind. But that film was hilarious. In its failures as a horror it succeeded as a comedy.

This film succeeds at nothing. Except perhaps that it was uploaded to a web site and made it into a film festival. (Upon further review of said film festival, it appears it is of no real consequence.) The acting was terrible. Not funny terrible, cause if I laughed it would have been a success in a unique way. The lead actor seems to require speech therapy of some kind. (I am obligated to say that I am in no way qualified to officially diagnose that disorder and I have no formal education in logopaedics.) His delivery is so flat that it fails to even incite any emotional response. The script was absolutely awful, after reviewing the credits I saw that it was based on a short story by Arnold Miller called "Fightened" [sic?]

But there was more to this film that called out to me. The music. I could tell they were trying so desperately to be better than everybody else as opposed to making a decent film. The music was so terrible I would have prefered if the soundtrack was replaced with the 8-bit melodies of my old Nintendo Entertainment System. I suppose it was so pretentious that it made me angry at the film maker I always wished I could be. As strange as it may sound, I want to go back some eight years and show the me of those days this film and what I could have been: A screw up. A failure. A terrible, terrible writer.

But also in a way, it made me glad I never followed up on it. This was a deeply offensive film to me, in a unique way.

The Plot makes absolutely no sense. The lead character has a relationship with a ghost. (Which reads like "Look at me! I 'm creative) It is evident that the writer/director needs to take writing classes or stop writing all together. So in a nutshell, this film did make me as angry as it made you, Jones. It made me hate independent film for various reasons. And it is my belief that anything that could do that, deserves to be examined thoroughly-- from the disgusting lead performance to the ridiculous non-climax. (Why were there no sound effects for the man's fists?) But I'll toss it back to the community here. Now that you know how I feel and how I've reacted, do you agree, disagree? Can the narrative be deconstructed on this site?
 
Hmmmm.....

I am NO-ONE. Just a new guy myself. My "imaging" skills are not good, but they are MUCH better than my story telling skills. I really need to work on that part of film making. As such, I am immersing myself in film making/story telling by creating 6-8 narrative short films this year. I feel like that is the only way that I'm going to get better. So, my story telling journey begins....

With all of that said, I watched this film and here's what I thought:

1. Concept: I think that the concept has merit. There were times that it almost reeled me in (my attention), but mostly, my attention was driven by watching another new film maker's effort. You may consider (the film maker may consider) a re-make, ...not to make it "successful"...but for learning purposes. It think the concept *might* work if told properly.

2. Imaging: I'm not going to delve into this at all. Bottom line here....I just chose to ignore it and focus on the story because the focus of this film CLEARLY was not the imaging. You might consider getting a few "assistants" or wannabe DP types....(there are countless members of this forum that would happily show up on set and help if given an invite.) Room to improve. No biggie. It will be better next time.

3. Acting: I like the look of your actors. I'd happily shoot my next short with them. They need to improve, but how else will they improve with more experience? IN FACT: The actors are probably PERFECT for the level of film making here. That really is a good thing. This way, you can all learn together. I think that if you had GREAT actors, it'll be a short ride, because they'll leave the project as soon as things look like they're not going to "look right". Use this as a building block, start over, and make another movie. Don't be afraid to use the same actors. You might find that you build some chemistry as time/project move on.

4. Music/Sound: I think the music matched the theme of the story. It was probably the best thing you had going in this film...(as far as matching the theme of the story). The sound its self wasn't addressed, but it wasn't the worst thing going either.

5. Advice on this film: If I wanted to make this film *better* without much effort, I'd cut the last "fight scene". That one was extremely distracting. Particularly the "multiple punch" scene. It really should be cut. I would have given this film more forgiveness after watching it if I had not watched that scene. Either re-edit, or re-shoot, or whatever you can to get rid of it.

6. Advice moving forward: Good for you! You made a film and have some actors who are game to shoot with you. NICE! Do it again and have fun!!! Some specifics to consider for next time:

- Keep the camera in focus. There is a time to shoot out of focus. Too much of it is physically nauseating. Keep the shot in focus.
- Get someone who is passionate about imaging/lighting/cinematography on set. It is a full time job. It's fine to shoot without one, but it puts more pressure on your actors and your story telling. Not a problem, but it's nice to have someone focused on the look of the images.
- Edit aggressively. If there is a scene that doesn't look "right/real"....cut that sucker. Better to cut it out then leave it in and "ruin the effect". I always wonder why movies allow scenes where you see the "support wires" for stunt men. GEEZ!!! No matter how bad or good a film is....it distracting when something UNREAL presents its self in a film. (Those punches in that fight scene for example)....no biggie....CUT them out of the final cut.
- Rinse and repeat! Go make another film man!!! I'll be right behind you!!! Next time enter the DVXFest that is currently running so you don't have to take the "FULL BRUNT" of criticism like you have here.

...segue... (pronounced "segway" for those who don't know)

Ahem....those of you who posted on this thread might want to be mindful of the message you are sending when folks post their work. Try to be constructive and specific. If I had posted my first film here and been demeaned the way some of you have on this thread, I would not be a committed member of this community. I see that at least half of you are new here. One of my favorite thing about this community is their commitment to respect and decorum. Please don't take that from our community. If you don't like what you see, watch something else. It's totally fine to say:

"Hey, I didn't like this - why don't you try that."

or

"Hey, I couldn't get into this, but keep trying."

Some of the comments seem to be trying to discourage and belittle this guy. Film making is hard. Audiences and viewer are difficult to please. (A cold reality for us all...)

But I don't walk up to my 2 year old son and slam him into the ground and say "You'll have to take hits like that when you plan football, son!!!" He'll take hits soon enough....for now I try to encourage, guide, and inspire. One day, who knows...he'll likely hit harder than I EVER have!!!

Keep it positive.
Cheers!
Mad love to DVXUsers, everywhere!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top