Dispatch - a Fat Monster film

Nitsuj said:
When magic happens you can't define it but just be amazed. That's what I think anyway.
Click to expand...

An interesting method of viewing. I appreciate it, but it sort of negates the purposes of having a forum-based, viewer response-type festival. If we merely accept a really excellent film like Dispatch as having no foreseeable flaws, how can the filmmakers progress even further? Sure, they can do it on their own, but varying opinions always help. So once again, even though I was hasty in trying to come up with said "flaws," the effort was still worth it, I think. Let's not "rose tint" anything.
 
Lawsuit_Boy said:
An interesting method of viewing. I appreciate it, but it sort of negates the purposes of having a forum-based, viewer response-type festival. If we merely accept a really excellent film like Dispatch as having no foreseeable flaws, how can the filmmakers progress even further? Sure, they can do it on their own, but varying opinions always help. So once again, even though I was hasty in trying to come up with said "flaws," the effort was still worth it, I think. Let's not "rose tint" anything.
Click to expand...

I suppose part of the point of a fest on the forums is detailed feedback, but I think some people might find your reviews a little strange. Personally I have only read them on three of the films, arguably better than 99% of anything user generated we see on these forums, and you've managed to find technical flaws to talk about in each one.

That may be a healthy thing, but are you an established Cinematographer, or a professor of some sort? Were these reviews requested? (I ask these questions genuinely.) To the uninformed, it seems a bit as though you're treating yourself as a technical authority in reviewing the films.

Also, the comment about enjoying the magic is interesting. I am an illusionist by profession, and this is the response that creates the most joyful experience for both the performer and the audience. Filmmaking draws many parallels, and while study of the craft is important, much enjoyment will be had by those that suspend their disbelief or awareness of the craft and enjoy the sensation of magic.

When critiquing their peers, fellow magicians will often get overly lost in the craft and lose sight of the effect that a show had on an audience.

This does not, however, mean that craft should not be critiqued or improved! It's simply that the short films such as Dispatch in this festival had an impact on the views, and perhaps, in your eagerness to help the auteurs with areas of their craft where they may improve, you give the impression of glossing over the overwhelming achievement inherent in their creation.

Then again, you start your reviews quite complimentary. It's a delicate line, and may just be a feeling which crops up when one comes to your review in a thread.
 
Kellar42 said:
I suppose part of the point of a fest on the forums is detailed feedback, but I think some people might find your reviews a little strange. Personally I have only read them on three of the films, arguably better than 99% of anything user generated we see on these forums, and you've managed to find technical flaws to talk about in each one.

That may be a healthy thing, but are you an established Cinematographer, or a professor of some sort? Were these reviews requested? (I ask these questions genuinely.) To the uninformed, it seems a bit as though you're treating yourself as a technical authority in reviewing the films.

Also, the comment about enjoying the magic is interesting. I am an illusionist by profession, and this is the response that creates the most joyful experience for both the performer and the audience. Filmmaking draws many parallels, and while study of the craft is important, much enjoyment will be had by those that suspend their disbelief or awareness of the craft and enjoy the sensation of magic.

When critiquing their peers, fellow magicians will often get overly lost in the craft and lose sight of the effect that a show had on an audience.

This does not, however, mean that craft should not be critiqued or improved! It's simply that the short films such as Dispatch in this festival had an impact on the views, and perhaps, in your eagerness to help the auteurs with areas of their craft where they may improve, you give the impression of glossing over the overwhelming achievement inherent in their creation.

Then again, you start your reviews quite complimentary. It's a delicate line, and may just be a feeling which crops up when one comes to your review in a thread.
Click to expand...

I'd like to respond by not defending myself, but all of the filmmakers in this festival who deserve the feedback that I try to provide. I'll add more to this response soon when I have time, but what I feel like you're saying is that unless we're all established professionals, we don't have the credentials to add feedback. For a film festival of this "openness," I think it's necessary to have people who have studied film for many years to comment. Even though I only have a certain amount of films under my own belt, I still have the necessary film education (as well as English and sociological education) to add to the pot of feedback.

I'm just a little lost about your opinion because you seem to be conflicted about whether my reviews are good or bad.

Thanks for responding, though. I really appreciate people giving me feedback on my reviews. As said before, I just try to add more perspective. It's all about growth for the filmmakers.

Jon
 
I'd love to see some BTS photos...or a list of the actors...or hear a bit about the making of the film. That actress was great, but we have no idea who she is?

I guess I'm confused as to why the anonymous entry when there's so much to be learned from this film?

Any additional information would be most appreciated.
 
Last edited:
And in no way do I ever attempt to condescend or detract in my reviews. If my reviews could be conducted in video/audio format like Mr. Lawrie Brewster's, I think people would be able to gauge my tone more accurately. Trying to remain objective in text does come off cold at times. I try to portray the opposite. I truly admire each of the filmmakers who come to these festivals and put their hard work in the spot light to be scrutinized by others. But it has always been my opinion that we shouldn't scrutinize but provide good, honest, constructive criticism while also highlighting the film's attributes. To my recollection, I have done this in every review of mine. It's about letting the filmmakers know where you think their strengths are and where, if at all, improvements could be made (or just simply different approaches for the heck of it) in future projects.

And I've always figured that if I have the necessary film vocabulary and understanding of the craft to give detailed analysis, I should try to find the time to give that information to the filmmakers. I am just as busy as everyone else and have a lot of work to be doing, but since I'm so heavily invested in the world of filmmaking, I really want to add as much as I can in any way possible. So if my reviews are disturbing people, I will politely back down. But since I was met with lots of appreciation and thanks for my reviews in LossFest, as well as some who have sent me DVDs to give a review for (I still have one I need to get to). This is not to gloat, but to show that people seemed to be genuinely interested in receiving lengthy analysis.

I already admitted that Dispatch had very few elements that I could actually critique, so I was really just "fishing" for things. The filmmaker and I have already had a discussion about my review and no offense was taken.

So what I think we're really getting to is the fact that this board hasn't come far enough in the evolution of its review process. The "fine line" that Kellar spoke of is the line where we want to give purely objective critiques without hurting anyone's feelings. And that makes sense, because none of us wants to offend our film peers. We all want to see our talents flourish as much as possible. So that is what I attempt to do in my reviews. I point out what I think the film's strong areas are while also noting things that might have stuck out a little. I think that this approach works very well. None of us should "sugar-coat" or use "rose-tinted filters" when viewing or reviewing other films, but we should all be respectful and courteous. I feel like I might have stepped over this line with my bit about the "axis" comments, but as I said, it was really just silly nitpicking and I don't remember where I was trying to go with it.

Anyway, that is my stance on the matter and I hope that stating it helps ease the stress in this thread. And once again, my apologies. And I also apologize about hijacking the thread.

Jon
 
Lawsuit_Boy said:
Anyway, that is my stance on the matter and I hope that stating it helps ease the stress in this thread. And once again, my apologies. And I also apologize about hijacking the thread.
Jon
Click to expand...

Not sure why you are apologizing? I think maybe the words "trained eye" may have come off a little bit pedantic, and rubbed a well-respected Mr. Hudson the wrong way, but I really found nothing wrong in the approach of your review. I think a detailed review of the craft of the film, ESPECIALLY when it's geared toward a director, can only be helpful.

I find that this forum is very technical oriented in the subject of gear. A good chunk of reviews always seem to talk about "color grading" or "frame rates" or "lighting" or other such things which I feel fall under the category of cinematography. When somebody puts in the time to CRITIQUE a film and it's direction, that can only be a good thing for the filmmaker.

Now, whether one agrees or disagrees with the critique is another matter. But healthy discussion never hurts in an artistic forum.

Just my two cents. Peace.
 
Hey Lawsuit

No condescending tone meant; you're a native around here as far as I'm concerned. -

My post was short and maybe not so sweet; so no harm meant.

Just was not picking up what you were putting down. I think this film is solid in all areas; my own subjectivity and when a film brings me in like this one, I find no need to fish for something wrong.

John !
 
It's all good J.R. I understand. I think what I mentioned about tone and demeanor not transcending the boundaries of internet text applies here. Your response just caught me so off-guard because I completely forgot what I had written in my review. Just mis-communication, which seems to be the root of most problems on forums.

I agree that this film is pretty darn terrific. One of the best efforts I've seen in a while. I guess I just couldn't pull anything out to play with (especially not after such a foggy recollection of the elements).
 
Hey guys,
I have been out of town for the weekend and won't be back until tomorrow. I've got some bts stuff for ya this week, promise! There were some vey interesting things regarding the stake and the lighting and various other things that I think you'll find interesting.
 
NOBELO said:
Hey guys,
I have been out of town for the weekend and won't be back until tomorrow. I've got some bts stuff for ya this week, promise! There were some vey interesting things regarding the stake and the lighting and various other things that I think you'll find interesting.
Click to expand...

Looking forward to it! The effects were pretty fantastic.
 
Lawsuit Boy, I wasn't suggesting that we have to have credentials to post a review, just that some might not be out of place for reviews with the level of detail and slightly authoritative tone yours seem to have.

However, it seems you have a track record with these, which in a sense is the sort of 'credentials' I mean, and neither filmmaker nor forum members have a problem with your reviews, in fact it looks like they are welcomed, so I certainly have no complaint!

Great film, once again! Looking forward to the making of details.
 
Kellar42 said:
Lawsuit Boy, I wasn't suggesting that we have to have credentials to post a review, just that some might not be out of place for reviews with the level of detail and slightly authoritative tone yours seem to have.

However, it seems you have a track record with these, which in a sense is the sort of 'credentials' I mean, and neither filmmaker nor forum members have a problem with your reviews, in fact it looks like they are welcomed, so I certainly have no complaint!

Great film, once again! Looking forward to the making of details.
Click to expand...

I certainly don't mean for the authoritative tone. I'm really baffled by how my review for this film came across. That's not how I usually write and it was a bit shocking to go back and read it. Maybe I've been hanging around too many film elitists over at Rotten Tomatoes and it rubbed off on me. :undecided
 
Again, if I'm the only one who thought that, you probably shouldn't worry!

Giving Dispatch back the thread now...
 
My feeling is that this is really strong work.
All of the moments were so nicely detailed.
Rehashing what's already been said I guess mostly so not going into too much detail but:
Killer shots.
Tight editing.
Immediate, visceral story telling.
Music worked well.
Likewise, the sound design was very effective too.
Understood the story overall, but not sure why a vamp would call 911.
Is it because she's foggyheaded when she first comes to?
She forgot at first that she was a vamp due to the shock or something?
Never mind though, it still really worked well for me.
It still came together well by the end.
Could she? / should she lunge for the camera more for the very final shot - attack us?
Excellent end though nonetheless.
Just a few thoughts.
Overall great story telling.
Be back later with more if I have time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top