Erased - feature trailer

M

Mike@AF

Veteran
Erased, my directorial debut, was just completed last month. It was shot last summer with the HVX200. I wrote, directed, executive produced, mixed, and did all the color correction and visual effects. I used Final Cut Studio and Shake.

For more information and to view the trailer: http://www.ascentiafilms.com/Erased

edit 3/31/07 - I've removed the trailer from the website until the new one is finished with the right coloring. I'll update again when the new one is online.

Erased_one-sheet.jpg
 
Last edited:
Some of the shots looked great (the one where they're fighting in the dark beside the stairwell especially), but yeah it looked kind of flat. And near the beginning you break the 180 rule very badly.
 
The shots with them fighting by the stairs was a day-for-night shot. I'm very pleased with how that turned out. In fact, all the night shots (except for 2) in the movie are day-for-night.

Not sure what you really mean by "flat". If you're referring to the lighting, we didn't have a lot of lights and a lot of it was shot outdoors or with a lot of natural light. Personally, I like the way it turned out and have received a lot of compliments on how it looks. There's a lot of highly regarded films (and even high grossing) that use flat cinematography, so that's not exactly a bad thing. If you're referring to the framing of shots, there's some really cool low-angle and glidecam/fig rig shots in the movie that aren't in the trailer. I didn't include them because I don't want to give away too much of what happens in the movie. Keep in mind this is 90 seconds of a feature film. I've had many people view the trailer and you're the first ones to say it's "flat".... kind of surprising and confusing since that's a pretty "flat" description of what you think is wrong with it, so please be more detailed.

As far as the 180-line, yes we crossed it twice at that location and on purpose for 2 reasons. 1) I wanted to add more discomfort for those scenes so things seemed a little more out of place, and 2) it was a tight area and the shots on the other side of each actor for either angle just didn't look good anyways. In the actual movie there's wider shots in those scenes that show both actors and their relation to each other, so we're constantly sort of "re-establishing" the line without actual moving it. Most don't notice the line being crossed and I'm okay with it for those that do notice. We also cross the line later in the movie by accident... actually the actor is directly in front of the camera, but shifted his body so it looks like he crossed. Didn't realize until I got to the editing and it was too late to shoot there again.

And thanks for taking the time to view the trailer.
 
Last edited:
What I meant by "flat" was that you really don't separate the actors from the background. You can use lights to do this sometimes or you can shoot it certain ways to bring them away from the background.

I'm not trying to knock your feature and I think its a big accomplishment to do something like this. But a lot of the shots in it just kind of bothered me with how they are presented. I know its a trailer and everything...but still it should be some of the best shots that you have in your feature, that's doesn't give your story away.

Also on another note are you guys trained in weapons or do you go out shooting because some of it looked like it you guys don't know much about firearms. Just my opinion.
 
Drew599 said:
What I meant by "flat" was that you really don't separate the actors from the background. You can use lights to do this sometimes or you can shoot it certain ways to bring them away from the background.

I'm not trying to knock your feature and I think its a big accomplishment to do something like this. But a lot of the shots in it just kind of bothered me with how they are presented. I know its a trailer and everything...but still it should be some of the best shots that you have in your feature, that's doesn't give your story away.

Also on another note are you guys trained in weapons or do you go out shooting because some of it looked like it you guys don't know much about firearms. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying about "flat" now. What you mean is the depth of field in the shots. Basically what we did to get the most amount of detail was softer lights, and that probably did result in a more "flat" look than some would desire. It's basically how I wanted it though.

I can look at adding some additional shots from the movie that may look better.

As far as weapons, the actor with the gun in the trailer is former military and highly trained in firearms.

Thanks for checking out the trailer and giving feedback.
 
my opinion would be to cut the trailer down some. i think for something like this, shorter is better. i feel like i know what your entire movie is about even if i really don't. i felt like all the reference to 'the disk' was kinda referenced too much. i got the point the first time somebody mentioned it. also try playing around with some better text fonts. this is your movie's selling point so the more creative eye candy people see the better. i always check out joblo trailers to see similar genre trailers to a film i'm working on. also........

I understand what you're saying about "flat" now. What you mean is the depth of field in the shots. Basically what we did to get the most amount of detail was softer lights, and that probably did result in a more "flat" look than some would desire. It's basically how I wanted it though.
Click to expand...

for some reason i get the feeling they aren't talking about the lighting or depth of field. i interpreted what they said more as in the cinematography. a lot of your shots were shot straight on. i'll admit though, i didn't realize that until i read the two posts commenting on it above though.

i hope i dont sound harsh. not trying to be. just my opinion, please take what u usueful advice get from it and disregard the rest. or disregard it all, lol. good luck man.
 
FilmBoy77 said:
for some reason i get the feeling they aren't talking about the lighting or depth of field. i interpreted what they said more as in the cinematography. a lot of your shots were shot straight on. i'll admit though, i didn't realize that until i read the two posts commenting on it above though.
Click to expand...

In that regard, I'll have to disagree. Perhaps that may be how it appears in the trailer, but the complete movie isn't. I don't really think the trailer is either. What you may be seeing is too much dialog in the trailer and maybe too much text and I can fix that.


FilmBoy77 said:
my opinion would be to cut the trailer down some. i think for something like this, shorter is better. i feel like i know what your entire movie is about even if i really don't. i felt like all the reference to 'the disk' was kinda referenced too much. i got the point the first time somebody mentioned it. also try playing around with some better text fonts. this is your movie's selling point so the more creative eye candy people see the better. i always check out joblo trailers to see similar genre trailers to a film i'm working on. also........
Click to expand...

I guarantee you don't know what the movie is about just from watching the trailer. I purposely left out the main themes and all the subplots of the movie. However, it's bad that you think you do, which means you may not care to see the movie if that's the case. I understand that.

I will look at cutting the trailer down. I can take out some of the dialog shots and the dialog itself. I can also look at adding some more interesting shots from the movie.

As far as the fonts, I have an idea for that. I was thinking of changing to the font that's used for the ERASED logo in the one-sheet anyways. I also have an idea for a transition from the text to the next shots.


FilmBoy77 said:
i hope i dont sound harsh. not trying to be. just my opinion, please take what u usueful advice get from it and disregard the rest. or disregard it all, lol. good luck man.
Click to expand...

Not at all. This is constructive criticism and I appreciate anyone that takes the time. What I don't like is blatant statements of opinions without an explanation. Whenever I criticize something or give my opinion on something I always explain myself and give advice... so thanks for doing that.
 
Some bad set decoration was what i noticed. You have blank white walls. And that's TOTALLY flat as drew said. Looks like miminal set dressing and use of spaces. Stilted would be the word I'd say for your action, acting and shots. Should be some impact.


If that sounded rude.. didn't mean it to be. I had to take a lot of suggestive criticism on my first feature.... You should take what people are saying and learn from it.. if it's intended to be constructive.


Now.. when was the last time you saw a movie shot up agaisnt FLat white walls.. with no set dressing... no chiruscaru (sp) lighting and shadows and spill.. Also looks like your into the merkyness of the HVX.. where is' under exposed on the faces.


Good to get something going but where's the panache.. Canned sound effects and in titles are really also very trite...
 
Justyn said:
no chiruscaru (sp) lighting and shadows and spill.. Also looks like your into the merkyness of the HVX.. where is' under exposed on the faces.
Click to expand...
Please go in depth on this, Justyn. I'd like to know what you're talking about as I'm not all that savvy on lighting.
 
Firstly Mike congratulations on your accomplishment. It looks like you put in a lot of effort to get the movie made and a you did a great job for your first film.
After looking at the credits I can see why it falls "flat" in a few areas. You were wearing many hats. As there was no set dresser and you were production designer along with trying to direct, do sound and operate camera, unfortunately in that sort of situation none of those jobs gets done as good as they could be, they all end up suffering somewhat. I know this from my own experience of wearing about 12 hats on a short film. It is the nature of low budget independent film making though. Maybe on your next film you will be able to delegate a few of those positions to qualified people so you can concentrate on directing. Keep up the good work!
 
oz.. is so right! On my first film, I was writer, director, producer, production designer, costumer, set decorator... first aide nurse and everything else...


KHOLI... What i mean by my misspelled word is that lighting requires things to be broken up a bit.. To have patterns and shapes and interesting contors and just look natural. In a lot of ways, you use light modifiers and light controls to create these effects. You can use hard cutters (flags and floppies) and then you could use nets and scrims and half and halfs.. Another favorite is to use a cookie (cocoloris) to create patterns that the light shines through... creating interesting patterns on walls. Often, and quite often overused, are blinds and verticle patterns to simulate light coming in through a window.


Personally.. and I'm giving away one of my major lighting secrets here.. LOL. I like to bring a fake plant(s) with me... OR bring my c-stands and rip off a branch from a nearbye tree. Nothing breaks up a light and creates a pattern nearly as well as nature does... Then you can use some hard cuts or whatever you want to make it more interesting... Another thing that I like to do is get some blackwrap and snoot out a light for eye lights or accent lights...
 
Mike,
congrats on making your first feature... that is pretty damn cool...
NOW LISTEN and LISTEN CAREFULLY (this is my experience):
I actually thought that my first film was GOD's gift on earth and that I was truly talented. I honestly saw my film at sundance and everywhere, as if I was blinded by some weird spirit... shortly after shooting my second film I discovered I was wrong... I saw my BLATANT mistakes with EYES WIDE OPEN and I WAS TRULY SHOCKED... to say the least...
The morale to the story is that I saw my mistakes and corrected them for my second effort... of course I am more aware of myself, and I am planning to correct my new mistakes on the next one and so on...

MY POINT is to LISTEN to the invaluable suggestions of everyone here... We've all made mistakes, but the important thing is to LEARN from each other so that we may grow together and make ourselves better....

NOW, it is not that your trailer is bad... ON THE CONTRARY... it has a lot of great elements... ESPECIALLY in the sound department... I really liked the sound it sounds very cool...
I liked the font and the graphics in the trailer... very cool...
ALSO I liked the poster... ALOT!

One of the mistakes I corrected for my second film was my shortcomings.
I am not a good musician, so I had some friends play music, If I was not good in lighting, I would get a friend to help me out and so on...

I think that your camera skills could need improving or at least in composing the shots... I think that's where the notion of being "flat" comes from... they look uninteresting... I would suggest trying different angles (low, high, ceiling shots, crazy closeups, etc) anything that would "stand out"... maybe someone can elaborate on this...

Honestly, I think that the camera placement is where this trailer comes short... because everything else is quite balanced... the acting isn't bad, the graphics and the editing is good... I would just REALLY suggest some different camera placements...

Thanks for sharing!
Ricardo Mendoza
 
Thanks for your comments. Just so you and everyone else knows, I don't think my film is "God's gift" or anything like that. I know it's not perfect, and I never expected it to be. I had an ultra-low budget, unestablished actors, and the entire crew was inexperienced. the sound recorder backed out on the first day of shooting, didn't even show up at all. We shot the movie in 2 weeks because that's all the time I could get off for vacation and it's difficult to ask people to commit even that much time on such a low budget. There's things I would have done differently, but that's 20/20 hindsight. I think it came out well with what we had to work with.

Did I learn a lot? Hell yes! More than I learned in film school. And I will be able to take that with me for my next movies. If I had the choice to make all over again I would have forgone film school and just made films on my own to learn the craft.

I respect everyone's opinion... well, at least though that try to put value behind their opinion and explain things, which most have done.

I am working on a new cut of the trailer. I'm taking out some of those less "interesting" shots and adding some of the more "interesting shots". We started doing some running dolly shots and shots with moving the Fig Rig around and on a Glidecam. There's also some very low angles shots, one of which is at the end of the current cut of the trailer. The new trailer will also be a little shorter. I'll try to have it done soon to see what you all think.
 
I agree wit the flat feeling, don't take it as negative but rather constructive criticism it will help your next project be that much better. Overall not bad per se just not intriguing it was "flat". From the actors performances to the lighting and camera work.

Chiaroscuro as Justyn eluded is a painting term that was applied to early paintings in the 15th-16th centuries, essentially it was the technique of using both light and shadow to create and model, adding planes of depth to a painting which is essentially a two dimensional medium. Negative fill or the lack of light, or shadow, can enhance depth and it is in fact this variation of light and dark that adds depth to video or film as well, creating depth in a medium that would otherwise be very two dimensional.
 
Criticism is the best tool in the artist tool box never be happy with anything critique it until your sick of i, then have some one else shred it down to the core of what is good and bad, then learn from it and apply what you learn to the next project and it will be that much better. Not being open to honest criticism only ever fools yourself. Its a painful but very necessary process....IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top