SHORT: Game Night (Hawk Teflon short)

Hawk Teflon

Hawk Teflon

Veteran
Well, this is the first thing I think I've ever posted for serious review. I must say I learned a TON on this shoot. But without any further disclaimer, I give you Game Night:

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


Please rip apart ... nicely.
 
Rip it apart eh? Nicely! :) I'll try.

Well, let's talk about what you got right.

1. It's funny. I've watched it twice now, and I really laughed.
2. The concept is good and has some potential
3. Foley sound at the beginning is really quite good.
4. I thought the titles were well chosen and the music DEFINITELY sets the tone.


Ok, so what's wrong....

1. Well you've hit most of the points in the "what makes a student film look like a student film thread", so I won't rehash that here.

2. The on-camera mic really, really hurts you.

3. There's just no easy way around this... the lighting is very bad. I'll talk more about this later.

4. The two parents are WAY too young. They look barely 10 years older than their daughter.

5. The lensing is dubious, and I'll talk more about that in just a second.

6. Everyone is as stiff as a board. It looks so forced, and it's unfortunate because it could have been saved somewhat by some good acting.



Ok, since I play cinematographer, let's talk lights and camera.

Some of what is plaguing this piece is what I've talked about in my thread. The only time we have any screen depth at all, is the opening shot. And that's a static at a bad angle. If at all possible, that needs to be a dolly (walk and talk) with the actor walking off screen after finishing his conversation. After that, we probably would want to see him approaching the house in a wide and walking up to that door. After that, everything gets "tight and bright" and that just SCREAMS "beginner".

So what would I change?

When the young gentleman is invited into the house, have him sit down. Playing his awkwardness in a focused 1-shot is going to look a LOT more realistic than having him stand in front of the camera out of focus in a bad 2-shot.

Where does the mom come from? Give her a line off-screen or something early so we know she's there. Even if she announces to the father that she heard a knock at the door, we know the mom is there in the house somewhere but just hasn't been on screen yet.

When the dad goes in to see his daughter, even if we don't see her, we'd like to see him. He's setting the entire tone of the movie at this point and not only can we not see his face, he's out of focus and nearly off-screen.

In the living room when the conversation turns to jazz music and other background and we have the OTS shot, I personally would have gone much wider there. Leave some open space to the right of the frame. Closing the frame in that instance is something I'd do with heated conversation between two people. This is all one way.

At the kitchen table, match eye lines. The eye height on each cut should match. And get that camera moving slowly one direction or the other. Also get wider in that shot.

I liked the bathroom shot, and the shot as the young man comes out of the bathroom. In fact, I like how you proceed for the rest of the film other than it's all a bit too tight.

And I'll preach it again, screen depth, screen depth, screen depth. This film feels absolutely claustrophobic because the entire thing plays out very tight, and there isn't an open curtain or window to be seen. In a space this small, you've got to get wider so it does't feel like everyone is right on top of one another.

Ok, now about that lighting. This has to be the most overlit piece I've seen in a long time. And it's one reason I *HATE* seeing new filmmakers buying lighting kits when they should really be buying practicals. Your key lighting for the entire film is about 2 stops hot. And off-color. He walks up to the house in daylight, and the house doesn't have an ounce of daylight in it. All the curtains are drawn. It's DARK in there. Open it up, and let the scenes breathe...

I'd bet good money that if you walked into that house right now, opened the curtains, and just looked at it, the scene would be lit nearly well enough to shoot. Gel some lights and shine them through the window with diffusion and you'll kick up more light. You show practicals in the scenes. That's excellent. The problem is that if you do that, the practical needs to be the brightest thing in that scene. Even if you augment that practical with a fixture, it should LOOK as though that practical is lighting the scene. Instead the actors are being flooded with a light from somewhere else that is not visible in the wide shot. And it looks completely fake.

The doors in the hallway are all closed. This just removes visual interest. Open those doors even if you leave the rooms dark. But preferably, put enough light in those rooms so that they suggest depth rather than another dark chasm.

I recognized the piano issue from when you posted about it earlier. Now it makes sense to me why you had such a problem with it.

Hopefully, others will chime in on things like the audio, blocking, acting, and other things that could likely be improved.

Hope that wasn't too harsh. :)
 
You think there's something wrong with it?! You're wrong, then!

Ha ha, but seriously...

Thank you a ton! This was really helpful! That's why I wanted to post it here. I've seen some not so great stuff all the way to amazing stuff on this site, and I know that people can always learn from it. This was exactly what I was looking for in a response!

Please don't think I'm trying to make excuses for anything in this. I'm just trying to explain a few things now that you have an untainted view:

Audio was our biggest problem in this. The guy running boom AND the guy running the h4n had never worked on anything before (well, I take that back, the boom guy ran boom for us on one other thing). Somehow the guy on the h4n brought the levels down SOFAR that I had to duplicate the audio layers 3 times (giving 8 tracks), and they all had to be bumped to +12 on ALL 8 TRACKS! On top of that, he didn't record every take. There was a span of 5 missed takes in a row! I couldn't believe it. BUT, he had never done anything on set before, and we're all learning, you know? So almost all of the audio you hear is ADR and foley. The girls lines are mostly on camera audio. I was frustrated for an hour or so, but got over it. You live and learn!

When I shot this, I used a lens with no IS on it. That was a mistake on my part. Well, that OR not putting it on sticks. I should have done one or the other. Because half the shots were handheld, I had to stabilize the footage in after effects. When stabilizing in AE, it creates a black part on one of the sides due to no footage on that spot. So, I pushed in. That hurt me too. Lesson learned.

The dad actually is 40 something, I think. The mom is 26. We tried to make her look older with make up.

I understand what you're saying about the lighting. It makes complete sense. Thanks for pointing that out!

I really do appreciate you taking the time to watch it! I'm going to take note of these and when we shoot our next short, I'll be paying attention to those details as well. If I get one more thing right on the next one, it's another step in the right direction!
 
If you do two things on the next one, you'll be an order of magnitude better:

1. Boom or lav the talent.
2. Use as many sources of natural light or practicals as possible. Limit yourself to ONE movie light and flag it so that it doesn't reach any wall.



If you can do that, your next short will be 10 times better. I guess I am somewhat surprised at the age of the dad. He looks much younger.
 
Yeah, we already have the next short in pre production. We'll be doing our best to do better than our last. I think that's what we'll always strive for.
 
I literally spit up when I saw his scrabble hand. Bravo. But I was disappointed it took so long to get to the game. I mean that's a joke you can play over and over, if the kid just keeps getting hands like that? Putting him in worse and worse situations leads to better comedy. Like maybe his first hand is "color," and the dad kind of looks out of the corner of his eye. Then the next hand is like "watermelon." Then the next one "chicken." The next one "negro," the next one "lynching."

Also, I think you want to really focus on making the characters sharper. I seem to be saying this a lot. I think it's because I am writing a web series now, and it's a comedy, so it's on my mind. But take a look at "Something about Mary" for a similar comedy situation. Keith David BAM! The very second you see him, sharply drawn character right out of the gate.

By contrast, I felt like the characters were all kind of limp in this. They didn't have strong enough points of view. And the mother and the daughter kind of vanished into the background. They were the weakest characters. Part of this might have been your actors. Like they didn't make strong enough choices about the characters themselves...

Anyway, that's the feedback...
 
Ill comment more on this, and i think you could edit it up a lot tighter, but oh man the end really gave me a big laugh so overall id say success!

Ill go into more detail tommorow.
 
I thought the tight shots and claustrophobic feeling helped tell the story from the perspective of the young suitor. Whether consciously done or not, it struck me as useful.

The acting was limp. Sorry, no other way of putting it.

A secondary, very minor plot could have been useful. Maybe something to help break the mold of cliché.

Overall, this was enjoyable to watch. Thanks for posting it.
 
Wow! Thanks guys! I really appreciate you taking time out to watch it! The feedback I receive from this forum is WAY more useful than anything else I could receive.

@Mark. I agree about having more than one unfortunate hand. The more I think about it now, the more I wish I had done that. I like that idea a lot.

@Mark & Jordan. I definitely agree on the acting. I'm hoping to be able to actualy PAY people soon, and not just use "people we know." It makes a ton of difference, I know.
 
Hawk Teflon said:
[...]
@Mark. I agree about having more than one unfortunate hand. The more I think about it now, the more I wish I had done that. I like that idea a lot.[...]
Click to expand...

...with the last time being stuck with the letters n, i, g, g, e, and r. At the last second, he contributes "ginger".
 
PerroneFord said:
Subtlety can be everything. Don't insult the intelligence of the audience (too much).
Click to expand...

Good point. It always amazes me how Larry David, in Seinfeld and especially Curb, manages to weave stories together into the most fitting and hilarious ending, which one thinks one can predict but usually cannot.
 
Excellent film. I thought you really had a nice, refreshing and funny story. This was a very professional piece that was well executed. A few things to work on, but way more things to keep-keepin' on. I have no doubt your films will continue to get better and I'm excited that you're ready to keep knockin' 'em out the box. Having said that, you do know there will be no turning back. Muhwahahahahahahaha!!!!
 
Hey man, thanks for checking it out!

I'm hoping to shoot some more stuff soon, but I'm working on this other feature length movie that the director is making me ... shoot ... every ... weekend ...

oh, this is awkward...

:grin:
 
Hawk Teflon said:
Hey man, thanks for checking it out!

I'm hoping to shoot some more stuff soon, but I'm working on this other feature length movie that the director is making me ... shoot ... every ... weekend ...

oh, this is awkward...

:grin:
Click to expand...
Why do I hear a bunch of babies crying. . .?? HA!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top