Dispatch - a Fat Monster film

NOBELO said:
Then the secret ingredient: PEANUT BUTTER!
Click to expand...

I never would have thought Peanut Butter would work as an ingredient. One thing to note - is to make sure your talent isn't allergic to peanuts. Many people are and react horribly when they are near these delicious little nuts.
 
Sprocketboy said:
I never would have thought Peanut Butter would work as an ingredient. One thing to note - is to make sure your talent isn't allergic to peanuts. Many people are and react horribly when they are near these delicious little nuts.
Click to expand...

yeah but think about how money the reaction would look on film.
 
Michael Anthony Horrigan said:
Vampire actresses face starts to swell and bubble.

Director: Alright guys, we're adding a holy water scene.
Click to expand...

LOL!! Make sure it's your last shot.

Peanut butter gives it the proper consistency and prevents it from being too pinkish and transparent. Good point about the peanuts I have a friend that would need to go to the hospital if she even touches one.
 
I thought the film was great. I still have trouble believing we're at the point where films that look as good as this can be shot on cameras like the GH1. I thought the score in the film was great, really helps bring bring you in.

I really thought it great that you didn't feel the need to drag the film out the full 6 minutes, from what I've been seeing quite a few people seem to think that a 6 minute film is a requirement and their films drag on and in my opinion, suffer for it. ANYWAY, I'm glad you stuck to the time you did, because the pacing is great.

I'm a fan
 
Jason Ramsey said:
I liked the simplicity of this one. I enjoy short films that are clean and don't try to over extend themselves cramming a feature into a short.

This was a "scene" that stood on its own, left me wanting more... but in the right way.

and, it was well shot...

I thought the pacing was fluid and you hit your beats well.

Thanks for sharing.

later,
jason
Click to expand...

Ditto. Everything I wanted to say exactly. Great work and really beautifully lit.
 
Great short NOBELO - very well executed in all areas! The very slow but deliberate camera moves gave it a really nice tension throughout.


NOBELO said:
Someone asked about the blood. It's a home made recipe.

Corn Syrup. Lots of red food coloring and a few drops of BLUE food coloring. Not too much or it will go purple.

Then the secret ingredient: PEANUT BUTTER!

That's it. Mix it in a blender and thin it out w/ water if you need to have it squirting.
Click to expand...

Care to divulge the ratios of corn syrup, coloring and peanut butter? Please?



Again nice job!



: )

dmc
 
Ah! Loved everything in this film. Very well done! It was a complete story, but I totally wanted to see more. Like it felt as if it should be a trailer for a feature film.
 
This film keeps my attention the whole time. Very well done, but it did not get the nobel prize. There was someone else more famous, faster than you :)

All the best

Susanne
 
Last edited:
I was really struck by this film.

Not because of the subject matter or the thought of seeing all of that blood spilling onto carpet while shooting. No, I was struck by the craftsmanship on display.

The film exhibits a very strong appreciation for film language and it was refreshing to see a film that allows itself to breath in the narrow time frame allotted to participants. This is, I think, a triumph for the script, the direction of the camera, and the editing. It didn't involve languid shots that draw out the run-time (something I tend to do in my own works). Each shot was fairly deliberate. Could a few frames be trimmed here and there? Surely. But then we may get into a debate over the effect of cutting out of a shot in front or in back too soon or too late. It changes the dynamic of the film. So, long story-short, the pace is admirable.

As for the actors, I was pleasantly surprised that the anguish and shock of their injuries was believable. Lesser experienced actors tend to either under play or jump way over the line of realism in such situations. There were moments when things were a little stiff, but they're negligible. The actor portraying the officer was surprising natural as well given the kind of dialogue he was required to deliver. That type of reaction is something very different when performed by a trained professional (professional officer, that is).

The cinematography was effective. It never really sunk into the realm of artificiality. The exterior shots were very smooth and clean. There are a few instances when the camera crosses some axis lines that's a little annoying to a trained eye, but general public might not notice (although it may interrupt their orientation). Just something to watch out for on the part of the DP and director in blocking scenes. In no way am I saying "Do things by the book"; not at all. But always be conscious of the set-ups in a scene.

It has been a few days since my viewing, so I'm having difficulty pin-pointing more areas to "nitpick." The film does fall into some vagueness as far as the possession of the girl goes, which leaves a viewer with a little bit of a bad taste in their mouth after a strong first half. I may have missed something in my viewing, but I don't remember an indication of when or why the switch came. This is something that tends to happen under pressure in a short short film contest like this, so don't worry too much about it. Like I said, I might have just missed it.

EDIT: As mentioned, I reviewed the film days after viewing and forgot the significance of the WOOD stuck in the girl's chest, implying vampire mythology. Sorry about that.

Overall, a very effective piece of anticipation that is well constructed and interesting to watch. :thumbsup:
 
Last edited:
Sorry for the hit and run, but this is my pick of the fest.

A very simple story, but that meant you had the time to really eek out the details, and that's what made this work and stand out from the rest. Not only that, but it may well be the most technically accomplished short of the fest, which is never a bad thing.

Great film-making, well done.
 
Lawsuit_Boy said:
I was really struck by this film.

Not because of the subject matter or the thought of seeing all of that blood spilling onto carpet while shooting. No, I was struck by the craftsmanship on display.

The film exhibits a very strong appreciation for film language and it was refreshing to see a film that allows itself to breath in the narrow time frame allotted to participants. This is, I think, a triumph for the script, the direction of the camera, and the editing. It didn't involve languid shots that draw out the run-time (something I tend to do in my own works). Each shot was fairly deliberate. Could a few frames be trimmed here and there? Surely. But then we may get into a debate over the effect of cutting out of a shot in front or in back too soon or too late. It changes the dynamic of the film. So, long story-short, the pace is admirable.

As for the actors, I was pleasantly surprised that the anguish and shock of their injuries was believable. Lesser experienced actors tend to either under play or jump way over the line of realism in such situations. There were moments when things were a little stiff, but they're negligible. The actor portraying the officer was surprising natural as well given the kind of dialogue he was required to deliver. That type of reaction is something very different when performed by a trained professional (professional officer, that is).

The cinematography was effective. It never really sunk into the realm of artificiality. The exterior shots were very smooth and clean. There are a few instances when the camera crosses some axis lines that's a little annoying to a trained eye, but general public might not notice (although it may interrupt their orientation). Just something to watch out for on the part of the DP and director in blocking scenes. In no way am I saying "Do things by the book"; not at all. But always be conscious of the set-ups in a scene.

It has been a few days since my viewing, so I'm having difficulty pin-pointing more areas to "nitpick." The film does fall into some vagueness as far as the possession of the girl goes, which leaves a viewer with a little bit of a bad taste in their mouth after a strong first half. I may have missed something in my viewing, but I don't remember an indication of when or why the switch came. This is something that tends to happen under pressure in a short short film contest like this, so don't worry too much about it. Like I said, I might have just missed it.

Overall, a very effective piece of anticipation that is well constructed and interesting to watch. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...


Hmmmm

Where be that line crossing ? I found none worth mentioning ?

What was so vague about the girl ? She's a vampire.

This feels like a review that's looking for something too be wrong, but it just comes down more to someones own idea on how they'd do it I think.

Signed

John; Line Professor
 
J.R. Hudson said:
Where be that line cross Lawsuit Boy ?

I watched and saw zero infractions worth mentioning ?
Click to expand...

Only thing I can think he might be talking about would be the scene where the officer shows up on the scene. At first I thought the officer was in front of them until POV shot of the officer. But after watching it again it did make sense. Not sure why that had me thinking that. I thought it was crossing the line myself until I watched it again. It's right on the line really. If the part where the officer is speaking into his radio was mirrored and he was looking screen left instead of screen right that might have kept me from that little tiny bit of confusion. Maybe that is what he was getting at? Dunno *shrugs* It's still the winner in my eyes.
 
J.R. Hudson said:
Hmmmm

Where be that line crossing ? I found none worth mentioning ?

What was so vague about the girl ? She's a vampire.

This feels like a review that's looking for something too be wrong, but it just comes down more to someones own idea on how they'd do it I think.
Click to expand...

I can't find anything wrong either, Hudson. No director line broken.
 
Wow! I felt like I was watching a scene from a theatrical film. Very well done! The camera movement and editing were exceptional in this film. Beautiful images and lighting.

The acting was amazing! I was engrossed the entire time and was emotionally vested in the wounded, dying? character.

I really liked how you slowly set up the story and revealed the twist.

There were so many great shots in this film, it's hard to name a few, but I really like the shot at around TC 2;04 with the slow push in, when she's turning to look behind her, with the brick wall in the background.

I couldn't tell if the 'monster' was practical make up or special effects? Either way, it was realistic, scary and not over the top. Nice. :)

This was a really great film with great camera work, acting, and pacing to the end. Great job! :thumbsup:
 
J.R. Hudson said:
Hmmmm

Where be that line crossing ? I found none worth mentioning ?

What was so vague about the girl ? She's a vampire.

This feels like a review that's looking for something too be wrong, but it just comes down more to someones own idea on how they'd do it I think.

Signed

John; Line Professor
Click to expand...

Just proves that attempting to review a film a few days after watching it isn't the best idea. And I don't appreciate this condescending attitude. When I review a film that is really strong, it becomes difficult to find things to critique. I do it merely as a form of note-taking for the filmmakers. They put in hard work on their films and deserve any perspective that can be given. I think this makes sense considering how many of the voters don't comment/review the film.



I'm not sure if I mentioned it here or elsewhere, but I'm going to go back and re-watch some of the films I saw early on so that I don't forget things. I completely forgot that she wasn't only injured, but had a piece of WOOD in her chest.

Also, do you want to get into a semantic debate on the foundations of objective criticism of a project? Where does the line blur between something being "wrong" and the intentions a reviewer has in a hypothetical "redo" situation? And what criteria is all of this measured against? Why is it that when someone attempts to find elements that a filmmaker might have missed, no matter how small or insignificant, they are nearly ostracized? Would these festivals be better if everyone simply said, "Yeah, I thought it was pretty good"?

Here's the bottom line: I was just trying to draw as much out as I could so that the filmmakers could have another perspective. Sometimes I have to pry and "nitpick" for this, and I usually mention that in my reviews; that I'm merely "nitpicking" little things. If I failed to do that this time, I apologize. But I thought I did. I really did enjoy the film and thought it was one of the best I've seen so far in the fest.

EDIT: I did mention that I was merely "nitpicking" in my review. I'm going to rewatch the film to figure out why I thought there were some axis lines crossed. And as I mentioned in the review, I myself am not a firm believer in holding to strict axis conduct in a film. And I realize I said something along the lines of "it could be annoying to an un-trained eye" and I'm not really sure what my thought process was or where I was going with it. I think that's proof that I was fishing for things to critique. Anyway, I think I've explained myself more than I needed to.
 
Last edited:
Okay, after re-watching the film, the minor "axis" problem I had wasn't really there. It was three shots when she pulls out the stake that flipped sides a little, but really, the one over the shoulder finds a good line with the one before, and the one after is a nice break. It did not throw off the viewing in any way; it wasn't jarring, grating, or irritating. I just remembered it and threw it out there as a way to think about the scene. Sort of a "what if the scene used a moving shot to cross the line, cut to CU over shoulder of stake, and then back to moving shot?" hypothetical. It meant nothing, really. Just something I always like to consider because I'm really fascinated by the ways formalists like to promulgate following the strict code of axis lines while others break them in the most intriguing ways. We're all filmmakers here who have, I hope, seen many, many films on both the stylistic side and the formalistic side, so I think we can successfully debate about these topics.

Moral of the story: I shouldn't have reviewed the film without the viewing being fresh in my mind.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top