SAINT ANTHONY - John LaBonney

Ok John,

Here are my thoughts... the lead guy was miscast... he just wasn't believable for me. I know it's supposed to be a farce but you still need a "straight man" and he was nearly cracking up half the film.

That having been said, I thought the concept was quite clever... and had the potential to be very funny. I had semi-high expectations after really liking Barn Dance, and this short to me didn't really move up from there :(

However, you did get something shot, and that my friend is hard enough as it is! Congrats on that, and looking forward to seeing your next short!
 
First I liked your concept, not all loss is bad. Like how your thinking outside the box to mix it up.

I just couldnt get into the main character. Sure he was messy and looked like he had been through a rough time, but I didnt fully buy it in performance.

Overall liked the story and enjoyed watching.
 
Brandon Rice said:
...I had semi-high expectations after really liking Barn Dance, and this short to me didn't really move up from there :(

However, you did get something shot, and that my friend is hard enough as it is! Congrats on that, and looking forward to seeing your next short!
Click to expand...

Hi Brandon, thanks for the honest comments, they are appreciated. I agree that I may have taken a step back from Barn Dance with this film, but believe me I learned a lot from making it and about how things didn't really click in to place in some spots, and so it was definitely worthwhile doing. I'll keep on making films and continue to struggle to get better.

Noel Evans said:
First I liked your concept, not all loss is bad. Like how your thinking outside the box to mix it up.

I just couldnt get into the main character. Sure he was messy and looked like he had been through a rough time, but I didnt fully buy it in performance.

Overall liked the story and enjoyed watching.
Click to expand...

Thank you for watching, your comments are appreciated!
 
John, here we are again, different fests, different themes, and once again similar characters. It's like we're looking into the same pool from different perspectives and choosing the same tasty looking rainbow trout.

Next fest, why don't we compare script ideas and make an agreement to not drink from the same lemonade jar?

Okay, enough with the anaolgies: on with the review.

I went into this one really wanting to like it mainly because of my own Saint Anthony character and because I've seen your past work and know what you were entirely capable of. The following review is my reaction from scene to scene as the movie plays (this is the 4th viewing)

My first thought was that the acting wasn't over the top: it was just bad acting. This of course is for the very first scenes with no dialog and the lead actors reactions were all saying the wrong things and the main thing was that this wasn't real for him. That he just didn;t believe it. So as a result, I didn't believe him. Instead of going over the top reaction, he went directly into disbelief and that is a bad setup for the rest of the film.

Great moves and some nice shots, especially with the steadicam shots, but there wasn't enough coverage to build the scene properly. When he's looking at the girl in the door there is only the one angle. While it's a good one, there are glaring errors in the shot that I'm surprised you made. The reflection of the gear, I can look around that... what gets me is the lighing INSIDE the door and the lack of set decoration to establish. RIght now it's just an empty room and this woman asking this dude to come inside.

The lack of set design is glaringly obvious once he enters, and here's the thing that kills the entire movie for me. No pictures, no art, no anything, just a desk and some flowers. It's beyond minamalist and doesn;t look intentional. it just looks like there was either no design or no budget. And then to place the characters flat against the wall like that... dude what happened?

It's one big room with St Anthony at the other end of the room on the phone...ur characters doesn't even notice him. Instead he stays fixated on the secretary until she tells him to look. Evan a brief looking around, confusion, some kind of emotion on your actor would have been nice to see. Right now you've got no straight man in a comedic sketch, so nothing to really play off of, no contrast, which is what helps drive comedy.


You've got some solid writing here but some major inconsistensies with set design and cinematography, and your lead actor does nothing for me. He never ever sold the character and his delivery... argh. Biggest thing for me was that you had a script where your protagonist did nothing. He coasted along and had to be guided onto his path of enlightenment. There was no action from him. He merely reacted to what was going on and took no active part in the resolution of the story. Essentially he was just a prop and the story was about him. Yes Saint Anthony found the solution to his problems, but the protaganist fails to resonate because we cannot connect with him and see that he actually deserves a second chance. Sanit Anthony just hands a solution to him on a silver platter.

I wanted to like this movie and I went in expecting a lot, but I'm puzzled by this. The story was John Labonney, but the execution... man, coming from Barn Dance to this, is night and day. This was essentially a talking heads script, and more of Saint Anthony talking at the dude than anything else.

The cutaways could have been established more, a better punchline to keep everything moving. It could have been more stylistic and used to drive the story, but we had 1 major cutaway, that showed us... and the rest of them... the girlfriend summary could have been HILARIOUS with a cutaway.

I think what's really missing here is a sense of style. you brought that to the Barn Dance production, and brought it in spades. Here it just seemed to dependant on the steadicam shots and you never got to really work your magic and cinematic style. A blend of the steadicam and traditional shots would have worked out nicely. but right now the film just falls flat for me.
 
Puck, I think you hit the nail on the head in describing many of the shortcomings of this film. And thanks for the frank appraisal--you know I can take it. I appreciate everything you said and agree with you in many places. I won't go through each item point-by-point, but the comments are appreciated and I take them to heart. But I will say that the cast and crew did everything I asked them to do; the responsibility for the final film lays entirely with me.

And stop stealing my ideas! Every time I think I come up with some clever twist on the festival theme there you are outdoing me.
 
We shoudl just exchange scripts next time around :grin: I'll do yours and you'll do mine and it will be like working on the same project, just with a different perspective. Althoughh my perspective is definitely skewed...
 
Hi John, I thought you had a great script here, but the acting and photography were big distractions for me. I think Rodney put it best when he said there was a lack of style - I remember Barn Dance and I definitely didn't get the same impression from that one.

I think I have the opposite problem: I developed a good style but my story doesn't seem to make sense to a lot of viewers. Hopefully we'll both strike a better balance next fest. :)

I still enjoyed your entry and I look forward to your next film.
 
A good script and it looked like you were starting to get an idea with the cutaways but then didn't utilize them fully, only one, why not one for each explanation the lead goes into. Maybe mix in a little music.

The lead, he seemed too nonchalant, laid-back. Like others have said, there's just no straight man to play off of.

St. Anthony was funny in a used-car dealer sort of way.

Good work, enjoyed your entry.
 
Got a good film here John. Nice concept. The lead actor was kind of shaky but St. Anthony was good and Lois was great...she had the whole Janine Melnitz from Ghostbusters thing going which definately worked. Technically there was a little bit of muffled audio at some points.

I think you took a good concept, good script, and good actors and made a really good film. I really enjoted it.
 
Hey, John!

When You showed me this script in the early stages I really thought you were on the right track, still do. It was quite a twist on the theme.

I grew up with my Mom always telling me to pray to Saint Anthony whenever I had lost something. Always seemed to work too!

I think you did pretty well with this and definitely got your message across. Location was a little bland and I think that hurt a bit. Loved the outfits and such though, the secretary was also great! Get some more variety in your coverage and maybe some grading as well.

I think this is your third Fest? Keep 'em coming!

Good luck in the Fest.

MAH
 
This one started off slow for me but definitely came around close to the end. I got a good feeling when Max realized that all the things that he had lost were negative parts of his life, which I think is what you were going for so good job! Also, I liked how the religious figure of Saint Anthony was shown in a more modern light, kind of reminds me of "Dogma". Again, a job well done.

:thumbup:
 
I have been so dang busy I just found some time to read this thread. I am gonna start by saying thank you to everyone for the comments and i would especially like to thank you all for the honest feedback. I assure you all that the locationally we just could not get some of the pick up shots required to sell this one to the fullest. And despite the technical issues I sincerely hope John goes ahead and gets those extra shots and adds some music, and gives this story another shot. I really believe in this movie as a whole and think if we are able to finish it with some of the other elements you guys would see how great a story it really is. OK enough back to the Bat cave for me.

John great job, I look forward to working with you again in the future.
Pauly
 
This was a surprise! Very entertained film. I like the intended overacting of the Saint Anthony and his secretary. The ironic humor gave your film a light hearted mood. Very nice work. Compliments :)

Susanne :bath:
 
O.K.

So I thought I'd wait a bit before posting my reply. The wait is over now.
I can frankly say that the production, as a whole, was extremely well executed.

As an actor, however, I believe that...Direction is key!
When you deliver the same action 4-10 times without Directorial Comments or Notes, you must assume that your characterization and delivery is on key.

Those of us who act know not to question the Director. Yes, we may suggest different approaches to the character's portrayal, but never second guess the Director's viewpoint.

As actors we are accustomed to accepting harsh comments and criticism from those who simply look at the final project being delivered.

It's always easy to sit back and critique others' productions.

As an actor I will deliver whatever the director expects, and from there will begin my performance. If I get no comments on my portrayal/characterization, I have to assume I should continue delivering accordingly.

I have been on both sides of the Camera, and have won awards in both capacities.

I can therefor say that most who simply comment on an actor's performance as not being believable or strong enough, haven't taken the role of an actor before.

It's easy to point out- what you may think are flaws - in others, yet you should walk in their shoes before you do so.

There's a reason why actors become directors, and NOT SO MUCH, vice versa.

Maybe something to think about before jumping the gun on the next comment and/or review you submit........
 
Ty Izquierdo said:
O.K.

So I thought I'd wait a bit before posting my reply. The wait is over now.
I can frankly say that the production, as a whole, was extremely well executed.

As an actor, however, I believe that...Direction is key!
When you deliver the same action 4-10 times without Directorial Comments or Notes, you must assume that your characterization and delivery is on key.

Those of us who act know not to question the Director. Yes, we may suggest different approaches to the character's portrayal, but never second guess the Director's viewpoint.

As actors we are accustomed to accepting harsh comments and criticism from those who simply look at the final project being delivered.

It's always easy to sit back and critique others' productions.

As an actor I will deliver whatever the director expects, and from there will begin my performance. If I get no comments on my portrayal/characterization, I have to assume I should continue delivering accordingly.

I have been on both sides of the Camera, and have won awards in both capacities.

I can therefor say that most who simply comment on an actor's performance as not being believable or strong enough, haven't taken the role of an actor before.

It's easy to point out- what you may think are flaws - in others, yet you should walk in their shoes before you do so.

There's a reason why actors become directors, and NOT SO MUCH, vice versa.

Maybe something to think about before jumping the gun on the next comment and/or review you submit........
Click to expand...


Ty, I don't quite understnd what you're trying to say.
 
puckthemad said:
Ty, I don't quite understnd what you're trying to say.
Click to expand...
Sounds to me like he's saying that if you haven't acted, don't presuppose you can critique HIS acting because it's not bad acting, it's bad direction. Hmmmmmmm, I think some tougher skin is in order...:huh:
 
Last edited:
In a nutshell, I personally think that too many people jumped to comment on Max's performance without attributing the director's vision. John posted that he got "exactly" what he expected from his cast and crew.
I'm just saying that pointing out a problem, without offering a solution, is pretty lame.







i
 
Tougher skin? LOL I've done plenty of local CHEESY commercials. Trust me I've developed a very thick skin.
BTW, You can respond to me directly without having to use the 3rd person tangent, (In all CAPS none the less).
Yet, Thank You....
By not only implying that I had bad direction, but that I'm attempting to justify my performance by blaming someone else, examplifies my point exactly.
Everyone's a critique....when
They really should be supporters.
 
Dude, John already accepted the burden of responsibility for the actions of the actors. He said it very clearly that he got exactly what he was looking for. Don't you think you're kind of undermining his statements by bringing up this issue in a public forum?
 
Ty Izquierdo said:
O.K.

So I thought I'd wait a bit before posting my reply. The wait is over now.
I can frankly say that the production, as a whole, was extremely well executed.

As an actor, however, I believe that...Direction is key!
When you deliver the same action 4-10 times without Directorial Comments or Notes, you must assume that your characterization and delivery is on key.

Those of us who act know not to question the Director. Yes, we may suggest different approaches to the character's portrayal, but never second guess the Director's viewpoint.

As actors we are accustomed to accepting harsh comments and criticism from those who simply look at the final project being delivered.

It's always easy to sit back and critique others' productions.

As an actor I will deliver whatever the director expects, and from there will begin my performance. If I get no comments on my portrayal/characterization, I have to assume I should continue delivering accordingly.

I have been on both sides of the Camera, and have won awards in both capacities.

I can therefor say that most who simply comment on an actor's performance as not being believable or strong enough, haven't taken the role of an actor before.

It's easy to point out- what you may think are flaws - in others, yet you should walk in their shoes before you do so.

There's a reason why actors become directors, and NOT SO MUCH, vice versa.

Maybe something to think about before jumping the gun on the next comment and/or review you submit........
Click to expand...
Having reread your post, I stand by my statement. Perhaps you didn't intend to come off as defensive but you did.

Specifically this statement:
I can therefor say that most who simply comment on an actor's performance as not being believable or strong enough, haven't taken the role of an actor before.

It's easy to point out- what you may think are flaws - in others, yet you should walk in their shoes before you do so.
Click to expand...
appears to be an attempt to short circuit any criticism. In other words, don't point out flaws until you've walked in their shoes. The whole point of this exercise is to help the participants get better at their craft. This is one of the few shorts I didn't comment on because I was having a diffucult time coming up with positives to balance the negatives (which were almost entirely a result of the acting and production value) in my review, so I chose not to post a review. If several people are saying the same thing, it might be worthwhile to listen to what they have to say. I thought John was quite gracious in his responses.

Ty Izquierdo said:
Everyone's a critique....when
They really should be supporters.
Click to expand...
Everyone's a critic OR everyone has a critique...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top