Short Film - Shot on HMC-150

Another way to think of the 180 rule (for two people) is draw a line between the two people talking. After establishing the initial camera on one side of that line, don't cross it and you'll be safe. People mostly break the 180 rule in order to disorient the audience (Taxi Driver -> gun in mirror scene).

The short was entertaining, but I personally found the 180 jumps very distracting as well. The framing bothered me as well. Backs of heads taking up half the screen (sometimes even covers the opposing actor's face. Rules of thirds: 1/3 back of head -> 2/3 talking actor.
 
Rules are great, but why didn't the composition bother me at first? For some reason I was drawn quickly into the characters and ignored the technical issues.
When I watched it a 2nd time I noticed it.

I guess if you break the rules intentionally people don't get as bothered. Maybe next time get radical. Have 80% of the frame be the back of the head, but only occasionally. That way people can read all kinds of extra "meaning" into the script. Instant directorial genius !
Just my $.02

Regardless, I loved this movie.
 
At the first couple cuts the crossing the line bothered me. almost to the point that i was going to stop watching. But like others - the more i watched the less i noticed. The male lead was great. One of those performers that just has it. I think if he would have sucked the whole thing would have been down the tubes. And he does have that whole Bill Paxton thing going on. Also good job on sound design. In my opinion sound is one of the more important issues when making a film( and the part i know least about). Just one little hiccup in the sound and it totally destroys the illusion you are trying to create for an audience.

Im and trying to understand the experimenting with crossing the line in a scene like this and i really don't. But to be honest i have more respect for someone who will try and execute new ideas alot more than someone who always plays it safe. I think that is the point of being an artist. As long as you don't take advantage of your audience then anything is game. That is of coarse if the line jump was intentional. but who will ever know if it was or not. I can understand that the natural light probably looked better from angle you used. The sunlight coming in from the windows would have been a little to much if the camera was placed in the correct position. But i just don't see a need for a line jump here. Not when there are so many other options on how to properly shoot him from that same position.

*have one ots establishing shot of the camera in the correct position on him, them dolly to the position you used in the film, having the back of the girls head crossing from cam left to cam right. It will change the position needed for the girl ots, but you still get to use the same wide of the couple with the bar in the bg, and you still get to take advantage of the great natural lighting.

*You could flip (or flop - i always get those confused) the shot i post but then you will/may have lighting continuity issues.

One other little thing that bothered me a little is i though there was too much head taking up the frame in some of the ots. especially when your not using an adapter and have such a deep DOP i think that the less of the back of the head showing the better.
This is all meant to be constructive criticism. The most useless thing i could say is "great job".

In the end I really liked this short. I thought the casting was perfect, the script was fun and simple, and directing was good. GREAT JOB! : )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top