"The Morning After" A sexy new horror film by Jeremy Poindexter

Again, we see here how well you can do with just one actor (or actress) in a single location.

The images were great. Cinematography/editing was solid and thought through and that made me relax while watching it in a good way. I loved the answering machine concept but still I didnt really get the story. Does she kill him coz he slept with her and she lost her virginity? That's not so bad, I mean, if she just turned psycho on him I'd want to see that and not just crush his skull with her heels. However the end where it plays her message ('i m doing something important ...') and we see her looking away after the kill was GREAT.
The blood looked fake but that's a minor thing in the overall feel to it.
Very well delivered! Great stuff!
 
VersuS said:
...However the end where it plays her message ('i m doing something important ...') and we see her looking away after the kill was GREAT.
Click to expand...

Absolutely!! That shot/setup is brilliant. I love it; best example of how to tell people something in a film but not tell people all at the same time. It's kind of like show, don't tell...they're hard to explain but once you see it, it all makes sense. The ending beat is such a perfect closer.

BTW, my gf and co-producer on my film really loves your short. I was trying to watch these things in order and she called me up and told me I had to watch it. She was right!
 
thanks. that means a lot that it stood out to your gf/co-producer as being something worth watching.

you put so much hard work into these things not knowing if anyone is going to care, but once you get at least one person to take notice it seems to make it all the worth it.

i think showing not telling is really the hardest thing to do in a short film - but it's also one of the most important things because it makes it feel complete instead of like it's a trailer or a watered down version of a feature.

i'm flattered that you got that sense from this piece.
 
The sound was good, the images great! but i just didint get the story. I thnk i missed it something some where.ive watched it twice. I dont get it. she kills guy for fun? was she raped? why was there blood trickling form between her legs? was she Roofied? i dont get it. But the at thesame time this is also why it stuck in my mind. i read alot in to it. Its criticism, but not bad either. so dont take it the wrong way. I like the questions it raised.

Super beautiful though. you catually got a high hscore on the technichal merits :)
 
SPOILER ALERT
PLEASE DON'T READ UNTIL AFTER WATCHING THE MOVIE.

many people aren't exactly sure what happens in the movie.

here is my quick response:
i definitely wanted to leave some details of what happened the night before ambiguous - that's really the whole point of the story.

i was trying to explore the traditional killer/victim roles in this piece. most would probably assume from the outset that this girl is the victim in this story, but is she?

first we see the girl, and we know it's a horror, so most probably think that she is going to be the victim.

then we hear these answering machine messages that lead us to believe that this guy, bobby jenkins, is probably the bad guy.

then we find out that bobby was there the night before, and that the main character has blood on her legs and in her bed. most would assume that bobby jenkins is the bad guy and he probably raped her or at least that something bad happened to her.

then when we find out that bobby is still at her place, and we get an unexpected reaction from the main character. she's not scared. she seems calm and she seems calculated in her killing.

so what happened the night before?? it's up to the viewer to decide.
 
luster said:
SPOILER ALERT
PLEASE DON'T READ UNTIL AFTER WATCHING THE MOVIE.

...i was trying to explore the traditional killer/victim roles in this piece. most would probably assume from the outset that this girl is the victim in this story, but is she?

...so what happened the night before?? it's up to the viewer to decide.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I like about it. I always wanted to do a little piece with two guys, similar in appearance, one is chasing the other through the woods with a gun. He catches him and kills him. And that's it. This leaves the question: who was the good guy and who was the bad guy? What unconscious clues can the viewer pick up to determine for one's self who is who?


John G.
 
They did something like that in a CSI Las Vegas episode season 5 i think...two kids took some drugs, episode starts with one of them running naked and scared...than they find him dead...he was with his friend...they are led to believe it was a killer of some sort...then Grishom works his geekness around a bit and BAM...the 2nd guy killed his friend coz they got spooked enough with the drugs....never saw it coming....never....
 
VersuS: i based the blood splatters on some forensic analysis photos, but i know that sometimes real doesn't look real in a movie. what do you think would make the blood look more real? any suggestions?
 
fake in terms of color..not the way you splattered it across the sheets and her legs...the color was off...
 
Just watched this the second time. I see what you were going for, but in my view, it was just too long and the beats just not specific enough. I felt like at about 2 min MAX this would have kicked ass. However, I thank you for letting me look at your actress for 4 :)

Also, your shooting is really, really great, though I am not a huge fan of the BSG zooms.
 
thanks for watching.

every one of these i've seen without frenetic editing gets the comment that it's too slow. damn mtv for killing our attention spans.
 
Well, not sure if that's the case. It's pretty subjective too.

I thought the actor was really great, and I do NOT like frenetic editing. All I'm saying is it felt like not ENOUGH story to fill the time. But I know you didn't like aspects of what we did, so like I said there is a lot of subjectivity to it all. The work is all there though.

Dude, you are a kick-assed shooter. I like the work on Cinealma's movie too. It's a great range between this and that.
 
thanks man.
and just to clear things up I really liked "Bloody Mary" i just wanted to give you guys some honest criticsm so your next movie can be even better. in my mind it's the honest criticsm, not the "nice reviews" that ultimatley make you a better filmmaker.
 
No no, of course. And same here. That's why I said what I did, like to me a 2 min version would knock this out of the park, and leave the audience going: "Yikes!"

BTW, is the title any reference to RU-486? Like she prevents unwanted pregnancy by KILLING the guy before he gets in there? :)
 
yeah, i was definitely going for the double meaning with the title.
when you have a chance, i'd love to hear what parts of the film you would cut to make a tighter version. thanks.
 
That might be easier in person. Maybe you could fly your actress to NYC, and I can meet with her to discuss it...:)

I'll post some more later tonight, or tomorrow, heading out to the Coney Island Film Fest in a bit.

Actually, this would be stupid of me to suggest edits. I think I get caught up sometimes in how I would make a movie. Personally, I do think it was too long, but that may just be because I would have made it shorter. I think it just boils down to personal taste.
 
Last edited:
Mark Harris is naughty.

I liked the slow pace of this movie. It really set it apart from the others, and it made it feel like a lazy, hung-over morning. Good choice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top