felliniesque film

Here is a frame from The Red Queen, shot with the Sony Z1U 1080i 60i.
l_64609db6c1a249468694552ec92e83bc.jpg
 
I have seen the various trailers for your 'film'.. the single quotes being used with purpose.

Nothing I have seen says I am watching a trailer for a film, it looks like you went and shot a Cosplay party then threw in a couple scripted shots..

Your trailers are not really trailers.. they tell you nothing about what this project is actually about..

I still have no idea what 'The Red Queen' is about.. other than one of the characters must in fact be the title..

Feel Free to enlighten me, the trailer certainly did not.

I am as confused as I was the fist time..
 
thank you, Loki. I appreciate your coming back and offering suggestions.

you're a serious filmmaker; I followed some of the threads you commented on.

it takes tough comments to help someone see the blind spots in their work.

I work alone (when I do no-budget movies) and I often don't see the obvious.

The Red Queen (felliniesque players) is a movie that came together miraculously. It's the best movie I've created. I just love the movie. I wish I had been able to achieve this level of filmmaking 40 years ago when I graduated from the San Francisco State University film department.

But it takes a lot of detours to find out what you really like as a filmmaker. It isn't easy finding out where your style and sensibilities are, so I needed to learn from scratch. When the Red Queen came together after two years of compiling sequences, I was amazed at how the process of discovery had come about.

This has been my film journey. I found what I wanted to make. Now that the movie is on Amazon VOD at $1.99, I'm not compelled to do a better trailer. In fact, you're right, I don't have any trailer that satisfies me either; but then it's hard to make trailers for certain types of movies.

Nate has helped me the most by suggesting editing and shots. I appreciate the fact that you might also be able to help me with some suggestions.

thank you, Loki.
 
I still think that a trailer does not have to tell what a movie is about. Like I quoted someone from another website, "[A trailer] should NOT tell the plot of the film" (http://www.fanpop.com/spots/upcoming...s/articles/271). Recently, Ebert said about a movie itself, "a film is not what it's about but how it's about it" (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091202/REVIEWS/912029998). These words, I believe, are pregnant with meaning. Ultimately, what determines whether the average movie watchers want to watch your movie is probably not whether they know what it's about but that the way (the how of it) it is about itself, is something that piques their desire. Knowing what the film is about may contribue to that desired result, but I don't think it is necessarily required to a full extent. But, to each his or her own.
 
thanks, Gilbert, for reminding me of that. I agree.
There are trailers that cheat the audience into coming to the theater.
Take for example the big movies with major theatrical releases. Their trailers are full of black fade outs and fade ins; they don't let you see a single shot well enough for you to decide whether you like it or not. They snatch it away and the only thing that holds the trailers together is a thundering and pounding sound track that gives these disjointed shots their cohesion. There is no story, rhyme or reason to these trailers, yet they attract millions of viewers and make billions of dollars (two percent of them.LOL)
And I don't go for beautiful photography anymore -- not in my no-budget movies anyway. I have learned the hardway, a movie is not photographed theater, a movie is not a motion picture novel, a movie is not an opera, a movie is not a ballet. A movie is another art form, a unique art form that utilizes all the arts and literary genres but remains a movie.

Of course, there is no rule that says one cannot take a successful Broadway play or musical and photograph it on location and call it a movie.

So I like the way you have concluded that a movie is different also.

As for a trailer, I think it should be honest. It doesn't have to tell a story (because sometimes there is no story; a movie can be a slice of life and still be meaningful). A trailer should attempt to find the natural audience for the long version of the movie. How it does it, I don't think, is the same for all movies.

Your movie, for example, is one of my favorite genres: the creative documentary. There are festivals that cater to these types of films. I saw a few mention this as a category in their lists of movies they accept. I think THE RED QUEEN can also be classified as a creative documentary. It's a hybrid, really, because I did use a script in a few parts of it.

Thanks again, Gilbert, for coming to my rescue:)
 
I'm preparing THE RED QUEEN for the international film markets. I will be distributing this movie to all media in 2010. If you have features that you need distributed, here is the link to my film releasing website: http://www.releasing.net
 
This is considered the best trailer ever.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later.
I AGREE
 
The Red Queen is the story of a felliniesque style movie made by me alone behind the camera without any help whatsoever and no money invested on my part. In fact, some of my expenses were paid by actors who wanted some shots for their reels so they invited me to some of the locations and paid for my expenses and tickets. So it's a real no-budget movie. Because of all the contributions and sacrifices of my cast, The Red Queen is the most valuable feature I have ever made. The first chance I get I'm going to blow it up to 35mm so it will be available for worldwide distribution. If you're following this thread, you'll learn about real indie filmmaking as you'll never learn anywhere else. Because of my experience and expertise as a felliniesque filmmaker, I estimate the budget of this movie at $10 million. Ironically you can watch it on Amazon for $1.99!
Here is the link:
http://www.amazon.com/The-RED-QUEEN...ie=UTF8&s=digital-video&qid=1261118600&sr=8-2
 
LOL. It can't be done under $10 million, Nate. You're better off shooting your new martial arts movie for $5,000. You have the locations and you have the talent. The only thing you need is a filmmaker like me who can shoot the movie for you and edit it and let you do the acting and the fighting. I've done it before. Someday I'll upload the martial arts movies I've shot and edited. Now I'm planning for the big international markets. That's where the big money is.
 
IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later.
I AGREE
does anybody know how I can make a movie like this for no budget? LOL Merry Christmas and Happy Hanukah!
 
I am most curious as to what you are working on next.. you seem to have been working on this film for ages now..

whats in the pipeline for you?
 
Thank you for asking, Loki. You're right, I have to close this thread, because I have the film out now. The only reason I'm leaving it open for another two or three months is that I'm probably going to sell some rights to this movie at the upcoming Berlin Market. (I'm also selling rights to BUTTERFLIES IN THE WIND & THE CHASE -- both of these films I did their threads here before, but they did not attract much comment.)

I set up www.felliniesque.com so I can develop and shoot a few felliniesque movies, about one a year. I'm somewhat behind schedule. Of course, I'm modifying felliniesque to some extent as technology is coming to my rescue. The whole essence of felliniesque is the combining of dreams and reality into one vision.

What it all means to me is shooting creatively but documentary style. To me it's not about "photography" but simply getting the coverage on unusual events and occurrences. I know your stuff looks like very nice photographically. It's more like the early Ingmar Bergman movies; nice photography, surrealistic, etc. But I'm shooting alone and I'd rather concentrate on just getting the shots like a war time photographer. So my movies are going to look rough; that I accept going in.

I think digital technology lends itself to creativity. There is less discipline needed to make a movie. Of course, many will disagree with that, because they are trying to imitate 35mm production styles. I think it's a wasted effort; digital photography doesn't have the longevity of 35mm filmmaking. Unfortunately that's the case because the technology is in constant flux. There are no fixed standards and the playback equipment is changing all the time; it's a consumer oriented technology. It is very exciting, but it's going to take some time (several years perhaps) before it becomes an art form (if it ever will; I don't think this is guaranteed).

Aside from doing felliniesque movies, I'm waiting on some investors to put up some more money in a project that is already on the way. It's a project I was asked to work on early in 2010. It's going to be a $3 million budget. It's going to be a SAG project, of course, and I've already contacted several agents for the actors who are slated to be in this movie. I can't go into details on this project because there are some sensitive issues as the cast is still not all committed. I'm shooting it in April.

I hope to shoot another felliniesque project before then, even if I have to wait until next year to start editing it. It will be a compilation project like THE RED QUEEN. I just can't sit still; I need to shoot film all the time, and shooting no budget movies ala Fellini keeps me in my creative element.

I encourage you to continue working on your superb style of films as well, and thanks again for inquiring regarding my movie making efforts. My motto is never let an opportunity go by you not making another movie.

______________
http://www.releasing.net/filmmaker
 
Without selling an indie movie in the foreign market, a movie has not been distributed. An indie movie by definition is a movie that will not be picked up by domestic distribution. Everybody starting out in the movie business thinks they have a chance to be "picked up" by a major studio. What they don't know is that it is nearly impossible. If a major studio picks up an indie movie, they have to pay back the dues due to the unions -- all of them. The movie has to be "rated" (several thousand dollars more), the movie has to be blown up to 35mm (if you shot it digitally), etc. An indie movie picked up by a major gets millions of dollars in advertising and advertising spent on it. If it's shot for $100k, it better be worth the millions of dollars that the major must sink into it. So for all practical reasons, the only way an indie movie makes some decent money is by being distributed in the foreign market. So no matter how popular a movie is on this thread, until it's out in the foreign market, most likely it's not a financial success. It may win awards at festivals and get picked up by an agent or a rep, but so what? That doesn't mean that the filmmaker and the investors will get their money back. Just my two cents worth. You're free to think what you will.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top