OTHER: Web Series from SXSW Winner (Trailer)

C

cyclonebill

Active member
Hey all,

I produced this series directed by Blaine Thurier. He's in the band New Pornographers and he made a film a while back called LOW SELF ESTEEM GIRL that won the best narrative feature prize at SXSW.

The series is called EVERYDAY IS LIKE SUNDAY and you can check out the trailer via:

http://www.everydayislikesunday.tv

Appreciate your interest!
 
Last edited:
This web series is now a feature film AND a web series. Crazy, huh?

I've started blogging the progress of the project. If anyone has any questions about the project, please don't hesitate to ask via the site and maybe I can answer a bunch in future posts. This is the first project I've produced that was actually funded with someone else's money and that's definitely made this an unbelievable learning experience.

You can check out the latest blog here: http://www.everydayislikesunday.tv/main/?p=242
 
Last edited:
I have a serious question, and please don't take this the wrong way. This is all in the spirit of understanding.

I really like the acting fromt the trailer. It seems natural and funny. I could see myself liking the show.

One thing that confused me, however, was the low production value. Image quality, sound quality, lighting, etc., were all subpar to modern standards.

My question is, was this a conscious decision? Was it due to lack of funding? The need to work quickly? I only ask because I would have assumed something directed by a SXSW Award Winning director would have a higher production quality. Obviously since this is a web series it doesn't matter nearly as much, but it's still something I would like to know more about.

Thanks and good luck with the production!
 
Hey, definitely a valid question! The answer is kind of complicated but I'll explain as best I can.

I hired the director after I saw his film that won SXSW. We had a mutual friend that connected us, but more importantly what I liked about his film was that it was very naturalistic, honest – very much about the characters, and I thought that suited the material for our series. His film was basically a 'mumblecore' film a couple years before 'mumblecore' became a thing. You can see a trailer for his film that won SXSW here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRinHmmzB7Q You'll notice it places almost no emphasis on production value whatsoever.

When the production company that funded our series saw his film and the production value, they were a little concerned and I made the mistake of mentioning that to the director. For the first two days of shooting, I think he took that to heart and was really intent on delivering something that looked 'broadcast quality'. Despite our budget, we had some really good equipment available to us so it was definitely possible to get a really slick-looking result. The problem we were running into was time. The only way we were able to stay on schedule those first two days was by prioritizing the 'look' and the lighting, over the acting. So we'd spend an hour or two lighting a scene, and only have time for three or four takes. This was especially problematic because our lead actor was re-cast literally at the last minute and had no time to prepare for the role.

So after day two, we watched some of the footage and though it looked pretty slick, we felt like the emphasis on production value was really hindering the performances, but also that a super-slick presentation didn't really suit the material. So at that point we made a conscious decision to more-or-less throw everything out the window and start again – this time prioritizing performance and adherence to the script over everything. It meant we needed to shoot about 95 pages in 8-9 days, but because we were now using a lot more handheld, having the camera op just follow the action instead of composing everything neatly on tripods, and using mainly china balls for lighting (and for a scene or two only practical lighting) we had time for more takes, more rehearsal and were generally much more satisfied with the content and the look. I should mention though, that in addition to all the handheld, verite stuff, there are several visually intensive sequences that we held onto (you can see pieces of some of them in the trailer). So we really ended up splitting the difference between the 'mumblecore' aesthetic and something more slick/'professional'.

Short answer: yes, it was a conscious decision, but shooting this way (quick and dirty) or delivering something that looks like this wasn't a particularly risky move as the types of films we expect to get compared to, have similar (and often worse) production values and we think our audience is understanding of that. Here's another trailer for a great little film that screened at SXSW a few years back: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLps55DmJj0
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top