Final project short film shot exclusively on 5d/7d

I'm not sure I should respond to this, but you asked for opinions so I figure I might as well give you my input.

I'll start with what I liked. The cinematography was nice enough. Good lighting and picture quality. It's obvious you weren't going for anything really artsy, but I couldn't really complain. Also good sound quality. I guess overall the production quality was good.

Also I will say that the acting wasn't bad necessarily. It wasn't really all that great, but it was better than a lot of amateur short films I see.

Unfortunately aside from those things I thought it was pretty terrible. The story and dialogue were disgusting, juvenile, and ultimately not funny at all. I don't think I laughed a single time, but there were many many times I wanted to stop watching. I understand that different people find different things funny, but I have a hard time thinking many people would find this funny. It actually reminded me a lot of Date Movie, which is in my opinion the worst film ever made.

I know that sounds really harsh, but it is my honest opinion. I think you guys are obviously talented on the technical side of filmmaking, but ultimately the story is king, and there was nothing redeemable about this story.

sorry if I come off as mean
 
Hey bud,
hopefully the film didnt come as a surpise to you (the rated R aspect as I did note that above) ...
and no you arent being mean at all..

all i had to do with the film was DP and editing ... I am kinda looking for more feedback on the technical side of things, the Sound, DP, Edit, music etc ...
the story is nothing special, you are right, and it really is a narrow group that would find it funny or entertaining ..

Thanks again for the input.
Matt R.
 
I'd second what Henderson said, though I'd add a few things.

On the Technical side, there's a few shots that were way over-exposed. Nothing you can do about it in post (since they seem pretty far gone, such as the opening car scene), but it's something to bare in mind when shooting - especially with the 5D/7D.

The editing is acceptable, though some more overlapping in the phone scenes would help them appear more fluid. At the moment they feel like two people talking separately, rather than to each other. Other than that the conversations seem quite forced in the way they're shown, there's very little overlap so it's the same issue as with the phone scenes. The sound is alight, though the volume of the dialogue dips on occasion when it shouldn't.

By far the biggest problem is the script and acting, but you said you had nothing to do with that so I won't go into it too much. But yeah, the script is awful and the acting is just as bad. When the script isn't being trashy it's just being plain un-funny, character development etc. is non existant etc. etc.

Another thing, despite the 'R Rating', I don't quite see the point in having the girl's tits in it. There's no other nudity, and they sort of stop the film from just being unfunny and trashy to desperate and trashy. The fact you could cut them out and probably have a better edit suggests they shouldn't really be there.
 
Hey Dave,

I was just curious, and also for you to Henderson,
what age bracket are you two in?? cuz I think anyone over 35/40 will find this film to be savage
and not funny ... even though it is very like "superbad" style comedy where nothing is left out

personaly I think people need to just open up a bit and laugh, shutting down your interest in a film b/c it says something you dont like or shows something you dont like is pretty lame ...

as far as the tech aspect you brought up Dave, the inside the car scene...
unfortunately we did not have inside car lighting of any sort and so in order to expose for the faces of the talent you have to overexpose the outside, but u will notice that you can still see the stuff outside, so even though the whites have been clipped, there is still objects and things that are viewable ... just my two cents .. if we had lighting we could have stopped down the background a little more ..

thanks for the input .
Matt
 
da//media said:
Hey Dave,

I was just curious, and also for you to Henderson,
what age bracket are you two in?? cuz I think anyone over 35/40 will find this film to be savage
and not funny ... even though it is very like "superbad" style comedy where nothing is left out

personaly I think people need to just open up a bit and laugh, shutting down your interest in a film b/c it says something you dont like or shows something you dont like is pretty lame ...

as far as the tech aspect you brought up Dave, the inside the car scene...
unfortunately we did not have inside car lighting of any sort and so in order to expose for the faces of the talent you have to overexpose the outside, but u will notice that you can still see the stuff outside, so even though the whites have been clipped, there is still objects and things that are viewable ... just my two cents .. if we had lighting we could have stopped down the background a little more ..

thanks for the input .
Matt
Click to expand...

First post is going to be a doosy.

This is all story stuff. I'm 22 and Superbad is one of my favorite films, and I was pretty offended by the short. Not by language or subject, but more offended by how terribly unfunny the actors were. I think it's more that age wise, the lines and scenarios don't fit the actors in the least. In Superbad, the movie revolves around highschool and growing up, so the younger age worked fine, but in this one it seems like they should've been much, much older. Then again, you're pitting Jonah Hill and Michael Cera vs. fat mexi kid (what the hell is up with his character?) and lip stud. Two get paid the big bucks for it. Yay for student film acting!

Then again, as far as student films go, this is leagues ahead. Some really nice shots, good composition. The sound was a little spotty in parts and the editing could be tightened up in parts, but nothing really to complain about.

In truth, it's better than most student films on the technical side. Looks like you did your part!
 
I'm 21, will be 22 in a few weeks.

Also, why in the world would I not become uninterested in a film if it has content that I don't like? Are we supposed to ignore all content in a film and judge it simply based on other standards? I guess if someone made a movie that was racist to it's core we should just ignore that and "enjoy" it?
 
da//media said:
Hey Dave,

I was just curious, and also for you to Henderson,
what age bracket are you two in?? cuz I think anyone over 35/40 will find this film to be savage
and not funny ... even though it is very like "superbad" style comedy where nothing is left out

personaly I think people need to just open up a bit and laugh, shutting down your interest in a film b/c it says something you dont like or shows something you dont like is pretty lame ...

as far as the tech aspect you brought up Dave, the inside the car scene...
unfortunately we did not have inside car lighting of any sort and so in order to expose for the faces of the talent you have to overexpose the outside, but u will notice that you can still see the stuff outside, so even though the whites have been clipped, there is still objects and things that are viewable ... just my two cents .. if we had lighting we could have stopped down the background a little more ..

thanks for the input .
Matt
Click to expand...


I'm 19. To be honest, I don't like the humour of films like Superbad, but I accept that they are fairly well written, comedy aside. This just has very little to it aside from about 18 minutes of jokes a 13 year old could think of - which might just about work but there's things that drag it down (mostly the acting).

Though I do understand the technical limitation you may have had in the car scene, there are ways you might have got around it (shoot into the car from the outside rather than out of it, for example - though you would need a rig for that). Just one of the scenes that stood out, the exposure is a bit dodgy on the scene where the 'big guy' is wearing an orange top with the girlfriend. Again, very little you can do in post with it.

Though I would just say that I agree with Fidelis, technically the film is very good - I'm just pointing out the (fairly minor to most viewers) issues I saw with it. Most of them wouldn't bother a general audience.
 
To the original poster everything was fine. Im 23 and i thought the content was fine. Its funny how people on here will praise a movie that is probably way worse than this as far as the content in it goes and the come down on you hard when you bring out yours. The funny thing about the naysayers on here is they have everything in the world to critique when it comes to you but if you ask them to put together/show you a 15 min project half of them would look at you like youre stupid. As far as the car scene goes it was fine too. Ive seen plenty of movies, commercials, music videos where the outside is overexposed in order to keep the talent exposed. People on here could tell you to gel the windows and do all that crazy crap but who wants to go through all that lol. In short keep making films and take what these people say on here with a grain of salt. While there sitting back spitting out specs and critiquing how you shot a scene you are out there making an effort to shoot and thats whats most important. As long as you know what your target audience is youre good.
 
I thought for the most part it was quite well shot - yes there were shots with some issues in terms of exposure...but I thought overall composition, lighting, color and focus was *way* beyond average, especially for a student film. I'd not hesitate to work with you - all the problem shots, I'm sure you could have fixed given time/budget but for a student project, visually I thought it was solid.

Script, yeah - issues galore - it's actually too bad that so many times it went so crude for no reason whatsoever, because, conceptually, while certainly "offensive" - the idea for the story was at least something a little bit different and new, but it never really developed, a lot of it didn't make a lot of sense.

Superbad is damn dirty, but it's also funny - dirty does not equal funny on its own, and it's not enough for someone to say something that, in a vacuum is funny in its own right, in film, the premise of the scene must be funny, and this short lacked that - there were a few times where the premise of the scene *could* have been funny, but the crudeness was so overwhelming that (i.e. exorcism scene) it falls flat.

This actually reminds me of the "uncut" Superbad they put on DVD vs the Theatrical release. The uncut version, some of the scenes just keep going and get dirtier and dirtier with some of this style humor and it ultimately ends up being much less funny than the theatrical cut.

Anyways - overall I thought your editing was good and I was impressed by it visually. Not artsy, but well shot, clean and sharp overall.

Is there a chance you can make this available for download on vimeo? I would like to take a closer look at some of this 5d/7d footage, if not I understand.
 
dtjohns1 said:
To the original poster everything was fine. Im 23 and i thought the content was fine. Its funny how people on here will praise a movie that is probably way worse than this as far as the content in it goes and the come down on you hard when you bring out yours. The funny thing about the naysayers on here is they have everything in the world to critique when it comes to you but if you ask them to put together/show you a 15 min project half of them would look at you like youre stupid. As far as the car scene goes it was fine too. Ive seen plenty of movies, commercials, music videos where the outside is overexposed in order to keep the talent exposed. People on here could tell you to gel the windows and do all that crazy crap but who wants to go through all that lol. In short keep making films and take what these people say on here with a grain of salt. While there sitting back spitting out specs and critiquing how you shot a scene you are out there making an effort to shoot and thats whats most important. As long as you know what your target audience is youre good.
Click to expand...

Yo bud,
thanks for the notes,
I completely agree with you 100%, as there is a lot of hard working professional and amatuer filmmakers/dp's/writers, etc on this site that really do go out and do the work and make their dreams come true, there is also a ton of people that dont do anything but sit back and critique others people work when they have nothing on their reel or have never learned anything in the industry other than on a website...

thanks for giving the story a chance, lets face it, it is dirty, over the top and very in your face every second, most of the humor I beleive is directed towards a younger audience.. like I said before in a earlier post, just open your eyes a little bit and laugh, not every movie is not a french neo-bla blah blah something or other that doesnt have a real storyline but it was artsy and thats why people praise it ... I feel like thats what you see from a lot of student and amateur film makers , stories that didnt make any sense at all but hey it was artsy ...

what most people might not notice about this story, (and yes it does need to be re-worked and have better flow to it) is that it follows a script writing structure and story structure that is used in Hollywood on almost every movie .... some may have heard of it or have been taught about it, but its called the 12 column story structure..
every screenplay has a certain runtime (most comedies and romantic com. are 120min long) .. throughout this 120min, there is 12 different parts of the story...
we could sit here and talk for hours about the columns and what happens, but Im not gonna tell people on here about that, that is your job to go and talk to and interact and learn how to make the films! but look it up , its interesting and makes sense

also thanks for the props on the technical side of things, if there was one thing I wanted this film not to struggle with it was the tech side of things, I think we did realy F*** good for a 1500.00 budget , 4 person crew, and 1 month to do it, and it was 22page script ... so many things we learned and will do differently next time, but I think we did well with the tech side of making the story come alive inside the camera.

Thanks
Matt
 
da//media said:
what most people might not notice about this story, (and yes it does need to be re-worked and have better flow to it) is that it follows a script writing structure and story structure that is used in Hollywood on almost every movie .... some may have heard of it or have been taught about it, but its called the 12 column story structure..
every screenplay has a certain runtime (most comedies and romantic com. are 120min long) .. throughout this 120min, there is 12 different parts of the story...
we could sit here and talk for hours about the columns and what happens, but Im not gonna tell people on here about that, that is your job to go and talk to and interact and learn how to make the films! but look it up , its interesting and makes sense

Thanks
Matt
Click to expand...

It's good that there were a number of parts to this story, the problem with this script is that it was very poorly developed and lacks in overall writing quality, so while, techincally you may have achieved 12 column structure in the screenplay, it really doesn't matter if those columns don't work well together (or individually) - it's a good device for planning out a storyline, but it's a guideline, following or not following it neither guarantees success or failure. Some of these scenes could have been genuine/interesting...but then we get "now come over here and let me put my meat on your grill?" The problem is that these jokes really don't match the tones of the scenes, they come out of nowhere and go way too far. I'm not at all opposed to dirty/crass humor, but it must be well placed, delivered correctly and match the tone of the scene. It's the difference between American Pie 1, and American Pie 2/3 .

Story issues, 12 columns or not:

Apparently this guy is a video game developer, great, we hear about it for one minute and it's never touched on again.

Pre-sold 15 MILLION copies? Okay, so why is he buying a fixer-upper as a home?

If you can cut/trim the cell-phone scene a bit, that might be good - the actor hitting on the blonde, and the blonde herself who already has a pitcher really did not perform well, their performances don't match your other talent's. This part is a good character reveal for Pierre, however, Pierre's character is really inconsistent - he's supposed to be the good, sensitive guy who cares...so why is he defending a girl from a guy trying to buy her a beer, and then ask if "we can go halves on a baby?" or calling Erica a "raging *****?"

The Erica/Pierre relationship develops straight out of nowhere, we don't see any relationship development - we go from "i hate you fat boy" to "You're totally right" "it's alright beautiful"

Ghosts were the first thing to come to Pierre's mind? And he's able to sell the idea of ghosts to Erica...like...instantly?

The gay ghosts were well done... hyper-caricatures...but, okay - visually well done and even the performances were good.

I think what's frustrating and what makes your project interesting is that technically, it was good, from a set and artistic design perspective, also quite good, I actually think that this is one of those shorts that could have been good - maybe it still can be with editing, it'll still be a love it or hate it thing, given the subject matter, gay jokes, portrayals of homosexuals, etc., but I think to say that this kind of humor is just meant for a young crowd is a dodge - thing is, this film doesn't play like a comedy, the overall premise of the film may be *almost* funny, but the sex content borders on violent and that pretty much kills anything funny going on.

Overall premise: Guy who makes gay bashing video game buys house haunted by gay ghosts who turn him gay as payback and his wife/friend try to exorcise the gay out of him, can't do it, friend and wife run off together.

If the story had just been about the first half of that premise, that could be funny - but the second half gets pretty serious/dark/violent.

This feels like a more serious dramatic short with a really crass jokes tacked on top (out of place nearly every time in each scene and it hurts the momentum.
I do think a few of the jokes were at least semi-amusing and properly placed (for a dark comedy) but many are way out of place and too crass/harsh/violent and just don't suit the tone you've got. Out of place jokes seem to be used very often instead of really writing - "How did you convince me to marry you?" is serious/genuine, and he responds with "the baby arm in my pants," - the screenplay shot itself in the foot (needlessly) almost once per scene by resorting to this instead of really telling the story.

I actually think the shower/deliverance scene is one of the better in the short, it's disturbing, but genuine, maybe - but mucked up a bit by the first line using "cornhole."

I think the problem is that nobody can tell what you guys are trying to accomplish with this short - it has some good elements, some bad ones, but I don't know if I'm watching something that's meant to be funny or serious or dark or disturbing or what - or is it just a bunch of people who think gay jokes are funny... it's nowhere near as bad as "Date Movie" though :) Nothing's worse than that...maybe "Freddie Got Fingered"?
 
thisisapocalypse said:
It's good that there were a number of parts to this story, the problem with this script is that it was very poorly developed and lacks in overall writing quality, so while, techincally you may have achieved 12 column structure in the screenplay, it really doesn't matter if those columns don't work well together (or individually) - it's a good device for planning out a storyline, but it's a guideline, following or not following it neither guarantees success or failure. Some of these scenes could have been genuine/interesting...but then we get "now come over here and let me put my meat on your grill?" The problem is that these jokes really don't match the tones of the scenes, they come out of nowhere and go way too far. I'm not at all opposed to dirty/crass humor, but it must be well placed, delivered correctly and match the tone of the scene. It's the difference between American Pie 1, and American Pie 2/3 .

Story issues, 12 columns or not:

Apparently this guy is a video game developer, great, we hear about it for one minute and it's never touched on again.

Pre-sold 15 MILLION copies? Okay, so why is he buying a fixer-upper as a home?

If you can cut/trim the cell-phone scene a bit, that might be good - the actor hitting on the blonde, and the blonde herself who already has a pitcher really did not perform well, their performances don't match your other talent's. This part is a good character reveal for Pierre, however, Pierre's character is really inconsistent - he's supposed to be the good, sensitive guy who cares...so why is he defending a girl from a guy trying to buy her a beer, and then ask if "we can go halves on a baby?" or calling Erica a "raging *****?"

The Erica/Pierre relationship develops straight out of nowhere, we don't see any relationship development - we go from "i hate you fat boy" to "You're totally right" "it's alright beautiful"

Ghosts were the first thing to come to Pierre's mind? And he's able to sell the idea of ghosts to Erica...like...instantly?

The gay ghosts were well done... hyper-caricatures...but, okay - visually well done and even the performances were good.

I think what's frustrating and what makes your project interesting is that technically, it was good, from a set and artistic design perspective, also quite good, I actually think that this is one of those shorts that could have been good - maybe it still can be with editing, it'll still be a love it or hate it thing, given the subject matter, gay jokes, portrayals of homosexuals, etc., but I think to say that this kind of humor is just meant for a young crowd is a dodge - thing is, this film doesn't play like a comedy, the overall premise of the film may be *almost* funny, but the sex content borders on violent and that pretty much kills anything funny going on.

Overall premise: Guy who makes gay bashing video game buys house haunted by gay ghosts who turn him gay as payback and his wife/friend try to exorcise the gay out of him, can't do it, friend and wife run off together.

If the story had just been about the first half of that premise, that could be funny - but the second half gets pretty serious/dark/violent.

This feels like a more serious dramatic short with a really crass jokes tacked on top (out of place nearly every time in each scene and it hurts the momentum.
I do think a few of the jokes were at least semi-amusing and properly placed (for a dark comedy) but many are way out of place and too crass/harsh/violent and just don't suit the tone you've got. Out of place jokes seem to be used very often instead of really writing - "How did you convince me to marry you?" is serious/genuine, and he responds with "the baby arm in my pants," - the screenplay shot itself in the foot (needlessly) almost once per scene by resorting to this instead of really telling the story.

I actually think the shower/deliverance scene is one of the better in the short, it's disturbing, but genuine, maybe - but mucked up a bit by the first line using "cornhole."

I think the problem is that nobody can tell what you guys are trying to accomplish with this short - it has some good elements, some bad ones, but I don't know if I'm watching something that's meant to be funny or serious or dark or disturbing or what - or is it just a bunch of people who think gay jokes are funny... it's nowhere near as bad as "Date Movie" though :) Nothing's worse than that...maybe "Freddie Got Fingered"?
Click to expand...

great points! and I agree, the story moves extremely fast and does not connect well from scene to scene, i guess this is why short films are hard to create and tell a full 12 column screenplay in 12 minutes or so lol ... but then again thats where a good writer makes his mark...
 
da//media said:
great points! and I agree, the story moves extremely fast and does not connect well from scene to scene, i guess this is why short films are hard to create and tell a full 12 column screenplay in 12 minutes or so lol ... but then again thats where a good writer makes his mark...
Click to expand...

I don't know how much footage you've got or if there's more to work with, but I think this is one that would benefit from some additional length and slightly slower pacing at times and cut a joke or two, it does move *very* fast - usually I can't get through a 15 minute short, most people can't create 15 compelling minutes - this feels like it should have been more like 20-25, maybe extend the shower scene :)
 
"Let me put my meat on your grill" I'm using that TONIGHT!!!! LOL
Thnx for sharing, I think you're dealing with enough critics so I'll just say it was a great effort, keep pushing and thnx for the classic one-liner :)

PS the lead female is hot and has the sexiest raspy voice. Good casting!
 
thisisapocalypse said:
I don't know how much footage you've got or if there's more to work with, but I think this is one that would benefit from some additional length and slightly slower pacing at times and cut a joke or two, it does move *very* fast - usually I can't get through a 15 minute short, most people can't create 15 compelling minutes - this feels like it should have been more like 20-25, maybe extend the shower scene :)
Click to expand...

you are definately right, and I felt the same way, unfortunately going into festivals i guess you have a better chance if your film is under 20min ... this peice should have def. went on a longer length of more like 30min minimum to help build up the scenes and fill in the information missing that we dont cover ... and actually the shower scene was longer lol ..

originaly this film after the first edit was 22min ... and still felt fast.
so after trimming some heads and tails and pauses we took out an additional 3-4 min and got it to 18 ... with no loss of information

thanks for the response
Matt
 
Rakesh Jacob said:
"Let me put my meat on your grill" I'm using that TONIGHT!!!! LOL
Thnx for sharing, I think you're dealing with enough critics so I'll just say it was a great effort, keep pushing and thnx for the classic one-liner :)

PS the lead female is hot and has the sexiest raspy voice. Good casting!
Click to expand...

hahaha im guessing you were joking about the female lol ..
and no problem with the one liners, thats all this writer is good at lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top