OTHER: Trailer for our love story narrative

Patryk_Rebisz said:
You mean like, for instance, John Cage's "4'33""?
Click to expand...


4'33" was a one time experimental idea, and I would say a successful one being as how famous it is. The point Cage was trying to make was incredibly simple, yet profound. That being said, I don't think anyone would claim 4'33" itself is a piece of music, nor do I think 4'33" really changed anyones mind on what music is. It is an interesting philosophical exercise, nothing more.

I would also venture to guess that if he had attempted to make 54'32", no one would even know about it because the entire audience would have walked out.

The problem with your film in my eyes, is that the point you are trying to make is neither simple, nor short. In fact, I don't even know what you are trying to say with the film (whereas what Cage was trying to say with 4'33" is obvious to anyone).
 
Last edited:
jghenderson said:
4'33" was a one time experimental idea, and I would say a successful one. The point Cage was trying to make was incredibly simple, yet profound.

However, I would venture to guess that if he had attempted to make 54'32", no one would even know about it because the entire audience would have walked out.

The problem with your film in my eyes, is that the point you are trying to make is neither simple, nor short. In fact, I don't even know what you are trying to say with the film (whereas what Cage was trying to say with 4'33" is obvious to anyone).
Click to expand...

If the point he was trying to make was obvious to anyone then why even make the point in the first place?
You mentioned that noise maker can't make up his own rules and my answer is that there were people who didn't even make noise AND made their own rules to call it music.
 
Patryk_Rebisz said:
If the point he was trying to make was obvious to anyone then why even make the point in the first place?
You mentioned that noise maker can't make up his own rules and my answer is that there were people who didn't even make noise AND made their own rules to call it music.
Click to expand...


When I said the point was obvious, I meant that it's the type of idea that when it's presented to someone, they are like "ah, I see what he's trying to say". Upon being told about 4'33", I don't think anyone would be confused as to the point Cage was trying to make.

And that's nice if he tried to make his own rules and call it music, but I still say it doesn't matter, because almost no one else would agree with him. 4'33" was first introduced to me by my high school band instructor, and even he thought it was just an interesting idea to contemplate for 5 minutes, and then move on. He didn't think it was interesting music, he thought it was an interesting IDEA. It's the same way a lot of experimental films are interesting to think about briefly, but they don't move you and stay with you like a narrative does.
 
jghenderson said:
When I said the point was obvious, I meant that it's the type of idea that when it's presented to someone, they are like "ah, I see what he's trying to say". Upon being told about 4'33", I don't think anyone would be confused as to the point Cage was trying to make.

And that's nice if he tried to make his own rules and call it music, but I still say it doesn't matter, because almost no one else would agree with him. 4'33" was first introduced to me by my high school band instructor, and even he thought it was just an interesting idea to contemplate for 5 minutes, and then move on. He didn't think it was interesting music, he thought it was an interesting IDEA. It's the same way a lot of experimental films are interesting to think about briefly, but they don't move you and stay with you like a narrative does.
Click to expand...

Again, if the idea was so obvious then it should be put in Hallmark card rather then history books about Avant-Gard e composers. I think you area failing to notice how profound it might have been in its time. And thus he has all the right to call it whatever he wants. The same way the first time jump-cut was used or hand-held camera footage intermixed with studio footage, or available light instead of just staged lighting or for that matter when still photography film was moved by hand to create movement.

Moreover you are making a presumptions that narratives are more memorable then experimental films - what do you based it on? I can name many experimental films out of of hundreds that i've seen and name much smaller percentage of narratives out of thousands that i saw. And repeting me earlier point, by now the patterns and formulas of narratives are so well known i would venture to say that narratives in general are much LESS memorable.
 
I've watched the trailer about five times now because I think you're on to something good, but I can also understand some of the negative reactions. I agree with the positive feedback given. I do enjoy this type of subject matter and probably fit on the outer ends of your niche. But here's what I think could be improved:

-There's something slightly off about how clean everything is. The visuals sort of, but mainly the audio. I want some grittiness and some reality to it. I don't hear much ambience for the VOs and that sort of thing. I think this is making the acting seem contrived-- it just doesn't sound real.

-I don't think the first song works. It sort of sounds like those Honda "wish list" commercials and too happy. It's feel-good without any depth. Particularly mixed with the dialogue about "where should we go?" and such. From :39-1:00 the music and trailer sort of have that "fun and games" (from Save The Cat) vibe to it, but it feels undeserved. Like, the transition in the music seems to imply the trailer is going somewhere new, but we're seeing basically more of the same. Particularly from :39-1:00 it feels like a montage of the happy moments in the film, but we still haven't seen anything conflicting to balance with it. I see how there certainly is thematic conflict in the trailer, but it just hasn't been introduced yet. Which leads to...

-Introduce the b-roll universe footage toward the end earlier. Also perhaps bring in the line with "she took away the possibility of that fantasy" as early as possible. That's sort of the most obvious mention of conflict. So then while we watch all their romance, we think "this won't last" and there's conflict. In the trailer right now, there's so much happy romance without mention of it not working that it probably makes most people groan.
 
Look Patryk, you don't seem to actually care all that much what other people think, so I say just go and make the work you want. In the end, you really have to ask yourself what you want. If you want to be a financially successful filmmaker, then I can tell you straight up that the direction you are headed is a bad one. But if you don't care about money, then perhaps you can find a niche audience with work like this.
 
jghenderson said:
The visuals of the piece are gorgeous. Unfortunately the content didn't work for me. It came off as pretentious. And I know you say you tried to go more for "story", but I didn't see it anywhere to be found. For me, two people being in love is not a story. Something needs to happen, and I didn't get a sense of that with this trailer.
Click to expand...

I thought the photography was beautiful, it really is, but like some of the others, It didn't sell me on anything. I think for me, the male lead, was unconvincing in his delivery. Although i'm only seeing a few minutes of a trailer. It just feels like it's missing something, I also didn't care for the scoring, it really didn't motivate any emotion. Which being a musician, it really has to for me.

So to break it down, I was able to gather, they might spontaneously take a road trip, and this seems to be more infatuation than love. That was about it. I got no sense of a story, no backstory, no character developement, or who they are, what they do, nothing about their lives other than they like to kiss a lot. And no sense of where it was going. Almost seemed like a really high end wedding video.

Being a fan of your work, just wanted to be honest. I know it may not be what you want to hear. But I figure it can only help the situation. So please dont take offense to my critique.

In the end, good cinematography can only go so far, for people who enjoy and love the art, we can get something from the picture alone, but an audience, that has no interest in it, will surely be dissapointed, unless the actual film is better than the trailer,
 
Last edited:
jghenderson said:
Look Patryk, you don't seem to actually care all that much what other people think, so I say just go and make the work you want.
Click to expand...

I agree. If you're personally satisfied by this project, then that's all that matters. However, I think the variety of different people here, all with somewhat unison vision of of opinions is telling as far as reaching a wider audience goes. The fact that you want to argue why we should appreciate this trailer tells me you may think you have something that is more approachable than it actually is.
 
Drew Ott said:
I've watched the trailer about five times now because I think you're on to something good, but I can also understand some of the negative reactions. I agree with the positive feedback given. I do enjoy this type of subject matter and probably fit on the outer ends of your niche. But here's what I think could be improved:

-There's something slightly off about how clean everything is. The visuals sort of, but mainly the audio. I want some grittiness and some reality to it. I don't hear much ambience for the VOs and that sort of thing. I think this is making the acting seem contrived-- it just doesn't sound real.

-I don't think the first song works. It sort of sounds like those Honda "wish list" commercials and too happy. It's feel-good without any depth. Particularly mixed with the dialogue about "where should we go?" and such. From :39-1:00 the music and trailer sort of have that "fun and games" (from Save The Cat) vibe to it, but it feels undeserved. Like, the transition in the music seems to imply the trailer is going somewhere new, but we're seeing basically more of the same. Particularly from :39-1:00 it feels like a montage of the happy moments in the film, but we still haven't seen anything conflicting to balance with it. I see how there certainly is thematic conflict in the trailer, but it just hasn't been introduced yet. Which leads to...

-Introduce the b-roll universe footage toward the end earlier. Also perhaps bring in the line with "she took away the possibility of that fantasy" as early as possible. That's sort of the most obvious mention of conflict. So then while we watch all their romance, we think "this won't last" and there's conflict. In the trailer right now, there's so much happy romance without mention of it not working that it probably makes most people groan.
Click to expand...

The VO i was always a bit unhappy with - i couldn't put my finger on it so yes, the lack of ambiance - thus "clinical" sound -might be it.

The music change that "goes nowhere" was something that at first i was opposed to just like the suppers overlapping the footage and touching the edges of the frame (cutting beyond the safety zone) - then i realized that my opposition to it was because of the "proper" way of doing things and this is not a great argument for change so i kept it.

The happy music under "where are we going" was to take the edge off from potentially ponderous line.

Ultimately the trailer also being the exploration of the textures of the film has elements that probably shouldn't be in a stand-alone trailer. For instance the whole opening montage of dollying in to various windows is probably more suited for "mood trailer" then typical trailer.

Thanks for taking time to analyze it.
 
jghenderson said:
If you want to be a financially successful filmmaker, then I can tell you straight up that the direction you are headed is a bad one. But if you don't care about money, then perhaps you can find a niche audience with work like this.
Click to expand...

I keep on asking where you statements are coming from or how you can back those up and you keep on coming back empty. Where are those financially successful filmmakers you speak of? Between the films i DPed and a number produced, DPed or directed by my fellow filmmaker friends none of the "by-the-numbers" films were financially successful despite the fact that they seemed to have it all. The only "success" story i know of is a director friend who put down $60k of his own money to make personal "out there" film and that is bringing him accolades (2 awards and investor for his next film because the guy likes the art).
 
Patryk_Rebisz said:
I keep on asking where you statements are coming from or how you can back those up and you keep on coming back empty. Where are those financially successful filmmakers you speak of? Between the films i DPed and a number produced, DPed or directed by my fellow filmmaker friends none of the "by-the-numbers" films were financially successful despite the fact that they seemed to have it all. The only "success" story i know of is a director friend who put down $60k of his own money to make personal "out there" film and that is bringing him accolades (2 awards and investor for his next film because the guy likes the art).
Click to expand...


Once again, you are comparing apples and oranges. I am in no way saying that you have to make a cliched, formulaic movie. In fact I would personally suggest not to because following a typical formula is boring (thought it does tend to bring in a lot of money).

BUT, there is a huge difference between making a film that doesn't fall to every cliche in the book, and throwing out plot all together. I would turn the question back on you, and show me ONE film that throws away formula to the extent you are trying to that has been even remotely financially successful.
 
maranfilms said:
I thought the photography was beautiful, it really is, but like some of the others, It didn't sell me on anything. I think for me, the male lead, was unconvincing in his delivery. Although i'm only seeing a few minutes of a trailer. It just feels like it's missing something, I also didn't care for the scoring, it really didn't motivate any emotion. Which being a musician, it really has to for me.

So to break it down, I was able to gather, they might spontaneously take a road trip, and this seems to be more infatuation than love. That was about it. I got no sense of a story, no backstory, no character developement, or who they are, what they do, nothing about their lives other than they like to kiss a lot. And no sense of where it was going. Almost seemed like a really high end wedding video.

Being a fan of your work, just wanted to be honest. I know it may not be what you want to hear. But I figure it can only help the situation. So please dont take offense to my critique.

In the end, good cinematography can only go so far, for people who enjoy and love the art, we can get something from the picture alone, but an audience, that has no interest in it, will surely be dissapointed, unless the actual film is better than the trailer,
Click to expand...

I guess ultimately we have to ask ourselves what is it that attracts us to any work and tell us, "yeah i would see it."
Two cases in point, Todd Solondz trailer for "Dark Horse":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsB2NyqQZr4

You do get the story (some looser finally falls in love and decides to get married), but you don't get any of the flavors of Todd's films. So if not for the fact that i know his other films and thus know that the film will be super funny with its awkward humor i would never otherwise have seen this film because the trailer simply has no flavor. In other words telling a story is not enough.

Second example, Tarantino's "Django Unchained":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUdM9vrCbow

Again the only reason any attention is paid because of the director's fame but even that fame doesn't convince me to go and see the film because ultimately i'm not seeing anything i haven't seen before or, and here is an important point, any new way of presenting the familiar content (the 70s campy bravado was done many times before).

And finally we go to my trailer... Can i say something that hasn't been said before about love? Probably not. Then because so much has been said can i say something about "that"?... Simplifying the concept of love to its most basic elements (the film, him, her, kiss) and thus create something that by its form might shine a new light.
 
Patryk_Rebisz said:
And finally we go to my trailer... Can i say something that hasn't been said before about love? Probably not. Then because so much has been said can i say something about "that"?... Simplifying the concept of love to its most basic elements (the film, him, her, kiss) and thus create something that by its form might shine a new light.
Click to expand...

What is the new light that you think you film brings to love? Something specific.
 
jghenderson said:
Once again, you are comparing apples and oranges. I am in no way saying that you have to make a cliched, formulaic movie. In fact I would personally suggest not to because following a typical formula is boring (thought it does tend to bring in a lot of money).

BUT, there is a huge difference between making a film that doesn't fall to every cliche in the book, and throwing out plot all together. I would turn the question back on you, and show me ONE film that throws away formula to the extent you are trying to that has been even remotely financially successful.
Click to expand...

Matthew Barney Cremaster series? Bill Viola's work?

William Kentridge (South African fine artist and animator) is probably one of our most financially successful artists and his animations are wonderful (although I'll admit that my favorite ones of his do contain a plot...).

If you go into the realm of fine art and video installations you can find quite a lot...

But then, they have a really unique original compelling voice and / or something to say.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
 
I just had a reaction to the phrase "out there," seemingly used in defense of this film.

To me, from what I've seen in the trailer, it's the opposite of "out there." This is out there, and this, and I want to see them both.

The other film doesn't seem like a film. It lacks a compelling hook. When Shakespeare did love, he surrounded them by characters who hate (Romeo and Juliet). Strong lesson there.
 
jghenderson said:
BUT, there is a huge difference between making a film that doesn't fall to every cliche in the book, and throwing out plot all together. I would turn the question back on you, and show me ONE film that throws away formula to the extent you are trying to that has been even remotely financially successful.
Click to expand...

"Napoleon Dynamite" definitely is out there with its rudimentary "boy meets girl" plot. But as long as we only think in terms of basic economics then we are bound to miss a point here. Think of "Wings of Desire" and its paltry box office take of just $3.8m (on re-release) and then think of the film inspired by it, "City of Angels" that made $198m. If someone called Wim Wenders and said all you have to do is ditch that poetic nonsense voice over, shoot the film in color, recast adding some American house-hold names, simplify the plot so it only tells the story of the angel falling in love... then your film will make this mountain of money. What would be his answer? And in a way we all have to answer that questions. Do we do what feels right in our heart or what makes the most economic sense. Even at this stage i would question the popular wisdom of going after quick buck because ultimately the artsy version is still talked about and i don't know too many people who still remembers the Hollywood remake.
 
mail4joeg said:
I just had a reaction to the phrase "out there," seemingly used in defense of this film.

To me, from what I've seen in the trailer, it's the opposite of "out there." This is out there, and this, and I want to see them both.

The other film doesn't seem like a film. It lacks a compelling hook. When Shakespeare did love, he surrounded them by characters who hate (Romeo and Juliet). Strong lesson there.
Click to expand...

Care to explain what the "hook" of the second link in your post is? Because all i see is a mix of fast cars and some love affair - hardy a hook to me and hardly "out there.".
 
Here's my 2 cents, for what it's worth...

I liked some of the imagery in the first half, but found a lot of the imagery in the latter part of your trailer to be very random, as if the editor threw together a bunch of very graphic looking images that really had no common thread.

As for the love-story/relationship, it came across as very self-absorbed and pretentious, like a couple of young kids who had no real world experiences of their own, but are proclaiming to the world how wise and important they are when really they are just stumbling around clueless in the dark.

I would love to see another version of your trailer with all of the dialog cut, with all of the self-important but incongruent random footage from the second half cut, and with a good voice-over of the woman or the man ( or perhaps both from their own perspectives ) telling their story in very very simple language, just like the Tree of Life trailer that you posted a link to.
 
I enjoyed this and the discussion it birthed. In a way, the film is already successful if you think about it. I view this as more of a short film than a trailer. It reminds me of "The Science of Sleep". Gorgeous photography of course. If this were a full length feature, I'd pay to watch it. Personally I enjoy narrative primarily, but there's a lot to be said for powerful character arcs, and commentary on emotional perception.

What's the next step with this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top