The Raven... uh, ok.

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: The Raven... uh, ok.

    jboffer, quit acting jealous and do something yourself even half as cool as that. that short was very well made and has a shitload of potential. never heard of mirror's edge? huge selling video game. free running in the future. free running itself is a very popular niche activity right now. and the short combines telekinesis with minority report visuals. this short has big budget potential all over it. man i hate complainers.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: The Raven... uh, ok.

      Originally posted by jboffer View Post
      Um, a short film is still a story. All films are stories. But this wasn't a trailer as a teast of the story, it was a trailer of some special effects. It doesn't say, "Hey! Look at the premise and plot of my story!" It says, "Hey! I got this guy running and moving cars and it's pretty and I spent only 5k!"

      So? The *script* was not what attracted buzz, the *short film* attracted the buzz. By this logic, Hollywood should contact every person with a youtube video because "maybe they have a good script."
      I've isolated this portion of your retort to see if I can explain something to you. Calmly.

      I referred to this piece as a "trailer," which is what they are often called. Actually the more correct term is "camera test," which is to shoot one scene that is representative of what the movie will look like, and hopefully tell us something about the premise as well. This is being done a lot nowadays. The camera test cannot tell "the story," as an actual trailer can, simply because the film has not yet been made. It would be too expensive to make a trailer of an unmade film that looks anything like a trailer of a completed feature.

      So this is what the director came up with, and while it may not yet have drawn attention to his script, it certainly will. It is at this time and this time only that judgments will be made as to its "originality," among other things. Just because a story contains elements that are familiar to us does not mean it isn't original. If this were true, there would hardly be any stories at all.

      But the truth is, I haven't read it, and neither have you. What the trailer did was intrigue me and make me want to know more. Which is exactly what it's supposed to do.
      "THIMK." - Amomynous

      Comment


      • #33
        xx
        Last edited by Writerperson12; 04-25-2023, 06:17 PM.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: The Raven... uh, ok.

          Originally posted by jboffer View Post
          God. You guys just don't get it. I'm getting tired of saying the same thing over and over.



          First off, you're completely missing the point. It's pathetic to even respond to. I never said he didn't do the right thing. Obviously, making an unoriginal but pretty short is the right thing given the situation. Because it's working for him. I'm just saying it's awful and there's no reason for its buzz or Hollywood's interest.



          Ok, fine, I'll repeat myself some more. This is not about me or my sucky scripts. The reason my scripts don't get attention is because they suck and almost nobody has read them. His *script* did not get attention: his crappy short did. And you ask "why?" is it getting attention? That's what the whole ****ing thread is about. That it's getting attention for being a pretty object, instead of anything with a remote amount of substance. I don't care that he's being proactive. I encourage being proactive. But his product is ridiculously shallow.



          Um, a short film is still a story. All films are stories. But this wasn't a trailer as a teast of the story, it was a trailer of some special effects. It doesn't say, "Hey! Look at the premise and plot of my story!" It says, "Hey! I got this guy running and moving cars and it's pretty and I spent only 5k!"



          So? The *script* was not what attracted buzz, the *short film* attracted the buzz. By this logic, Hollywood should contact every person with a youtube video because "maybe they have a good script."



          Yes. I've been on several commercial shoots through my job (advertising) and done 48 film fests and personal stuff. I realize it can take a long time. I've seen it take 4 hours to set up for a two second shot in a 30 second commercial. But it's not impressive to me they got that footage in two days, nor do I care at all that they did (you have time constrains, you naturally adjust your rate and takes to fit it). But It has no bearing on the situation. Your final product is your final product, regardless of how much time was spent. And a lot of time overall was spent. From the creator:

          "Yes, it costed $5000. We had a reduced crew and everybody worked for free including the audio mixer and the colorist. 3D artist friend of mine create the robots, and I spent 3 month compositing and creating the visual effects in my imac after work and on the weekends."

          It doesn't matter how hard the crew worked or for how long. I don't care. It has nothing to do with whether this piece should be a feature length movie.

          The shocking point here is that I was on Digg.com today and discovered the Digg community has a better perspective on film than this screenwriting message board. They had this article posted, and 9 out of the 10 comments echo my exact arguments. Check it out:

          http://digg.com/movies/Futuristic_5K...ext_District_9

          Overwhelmingly they get it. Most of these people probably don't know how much goes into making a film, but they get the real point: is the end product anything worth while about. Here are some posts just for fun (yes these are cherry picked).

          "Unoriginal visuals bogged down by a horribly unoriginal story shot on a really nice camera. Well directed for what it was, but I'm also getting tired of seeing the "District 9 effect"... sci-fi ships in modern urban settings. Yawn. Oh, and the LAPD bot shouts, "Deadly force authorized??" Um, okay, then shoot him! Why keep trying to hold him at gunpoint. WTF?"

          "That was pretty bad, actually. It looks like they are using a nice camera and some semi-decent special effects, but the premise is boring. Next!"

          "Great job on a $5K budget, but definitely not "the next District 9"."

          "This comes off like it was directed by an FX guy. Decent FX, bad pretty much everything else. It's just like when stuntmen try to direct. Great fight choreography but lacking in everything else that make a film good. This is no District 9."

          "Nice special effects don't make for a compelling movie, no matter how much it cost, $5k or $100 million."

          "Lame, just a bunch of stuff ripped off other well worn movies, District 9 rocked because there was lots of ORIGINAL elements."

          "I'm friends with one of the writer of the short, Antonio Perez (the dude in the car in the short), so naturally I'm a fan of the short. I went to film school with him, and made a couple shorts with him, and I can say the guy is pretty talented. I actually thought that he had directed the short. But I gotta say, I'm also a bit tired of futuristic spaceships in urban environments. One of the thing I kinda dislike about the short is that there are a lot of ideas about the settings and story, but it is missing a human element. 6 minutes is enough time to create a character we can relate to and care for... and it would doubly enhance the effect of the great action scenes in the short. As it is, it is neat but it's hard to drum up any kind of excitement for a full feature. The plot is a little too juvenile, and although it is gritty, it's still cheese."

          "This is totally unoriginal. Good special effects, but, otherwise there's nothing original. Everything is ripped from another source."

          "Indie filmmakers touting small budgets is ridiculous. Of course if everyone works for free and you get favors pulled left and right, and spend a ***** load of your personal time you can produce films for cheap. But that's beside the point. The director who made the movie ultimately wants to get paid as well and work for a studio that will pay him and his coworkers / crew for his craft."

          "It's like Akira meets Robocop.

          What about a short film that's actually a _film_? Enough with the fake movie trailers and "five minutes ripped from the middle of a movie that doesn't exist", it feels more like a portfolio submission than an attempt at a real creative venture.

          Good job on the budget though."

          "It was ok.....I enjoyed it until he started using the force with his hand. Then it just became lame and uncreative."

          "Great special effects. I like the music. Camera work and directing are good. The story needs more depth though. "

          "The "dude with special effects" plot has been overdone in every medium, but there really was no plot except for "dude running away from robo-popos." The special effects were impressive for such a low-budget film, but that was the only thing going for it."

          "***** sucked. Some seemingly average Joe renegade running around a city from the police--that's a really novel idea! AND WHAT!? He has super powers!! And the government wants him dead!! I've totally never seen that before... maybe he's some government experiment gone wrong (Borne Identity, Wolverine), or maybe the government wants his powers (The Hulk), or he's a superhero mutant (Wolverine, The Hulk, District 9), or an evolutionary miracle--the future of mankind--that the government finds dangerous (X-Men). The possibilities are endless!

          Also, retarded, overdone "government wants you dead cuz you're different" plot aside, it's still ***** stupid. They authorize deadly force and then keep telling him to come out with his hands up, and wait a ***** hour as he just stands there... but they'll kill the homeless guy. Also, big ***** District 9-esque ships in the air? What, the LAPD needs ***** Star Destroyers? We can lift giant ***** ships in the air but we still drive around cars? Or is it just an excuse to use cool CGI that distracts from how ***** your film actually is?"

          That last guy is even more angry than I am.
          Why on earth would this short make anyone angry? Did the dude steal your girlfriend or something? And what's this nonsense about substance? Plenty of flimsy ideas have been turned into movies. He got lucky. It happens. Move on.
          "I was dreamin' when I wrote this, forgive me if it goes astray." - Prince

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: The Raven... uh, ok.

            Originally posted by jboffer View Post
            The shocking point here is that I was on Digg.com today and discovered the Digg community has a better perspective on film than this screenwriting message board. They had this article posted, and 9 out of the 10 comments echo my exact arguments. Check it out:

            http://digg.com/movies/Futuristic_5K...ext_District_9

            Overwhelmingly they get it. Most of these people probably don't know how much goes into making a film, but they get the real point: is the end product anything worth while about. Here are some posts just for fun (yes these are cherry picked).
            Digg is also comprised of a bunch of horny fapaholic teenagers who enjoy hating on anything and everything (including each other) that comes their way, so I tend to take their collective opinions and ignore them completely. The users of that site don't exactly have a track record of intelligence or coherence, or even basic common sense -- which is surprising given that Digg is comprised mostly of self-proclaimed nerds.

            INT. PINEAPPLE - DAY


            Comment


            • #36
              Re: The Raven... uh, ok.

              I think when something like this gets attention - it's also because it clearly displays the director’s talent, passion and ability to make a movie. That's what also gets studios excited. The story itself may be a throwback to a ton of previous sci-fi films, but if that's the genre this guy wants to work in, then he's just showed he can do it, and do it relatively cheaply. Again, enough to get studios excited.

              As an aspiring director myself, I think some of those shot compositions, as well as the grade on the film look gorgeous - especially at the beginning when escaping his apartment. I read where he used a combo of After Effects, Lightwave, Maya, Shake and Final Cut Pro 2.

              Still doesn't beat this though - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1eFd...h_response_rev

              And never will.
              @TerranceMulloy

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: The Raven... uh, ok.

                Originally posted by 12916studios View Post
                Digg is also comprised of a bunch of horny fapaholic teenagers who enjoy hating on anything and everything (including each other) that comes their way, so I tend to take their collective opinions and ignore them completely. The users of that site don't exactly have a track record of intelligence or coherence, or even basic common sense -- which is surprising given that Digg is comprised mostly of self-proclaimed nerds.
                Say what you want about them but their comments make sense.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: The Raven... uh, ok.

                  Originally posted by Furious Anjel View Post
                  He got lucky. It happens. Move on.
                  In reality I have moved on, this was not a life changing event. But I wanted to back up my opinion. Anyway, you're right, he got lucky. Absolutely correct.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: The Raven... uh, ok.

                    Originally posted by lordmanji View Post
                    jboffer, quit acting jealous and do something yourself even half as cool as that.
                    That makes no sense to me.

                    This is really cool...as a demonstration of a skillset that has been misidentified.

                    Why should any writer be compelled to show off his talent at digital effects?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: The Raven... uh, ok.

                      Originally posted by Terrance Mulloy View Post
                      I think when something like this gets attention - it's also because it clearly displays the director's talent, passion and ability to make a movie. That's what also gets studios excited. The story itself may be a throwback to a ton of previous sci-fi films, but if that's the genre this guy wants to work in, then he's just showed he can do it, and do it relatively cheaply. Again, enough to get studios excited.

                      As an aspiring director myself, I think some of those shot compositions, as well as the grade on the film look gorgeous - especially at the beginning when escaping his apartment. I read where he used a combo of After Effects, Lightwave, Maya, Shake and Final Cut Pro 2.

                      Still doesn't beat this though - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1eFd...h_response_rev

                      And never will.
                      Did you hear about this one? I really dig this guy's style. (Sorry if it's already been brought up)

                      http://www.collider.com/2010/04/08/c...lm-adaptation/

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: The Raven... uh, ok.

                        Originally posted by gravitas View Post
                        Did you hear about this one? I really dig this guy's style. (Sorry if it's already been brought up)

                        http://www.collider.com/2010/04/08/c...lm-adaptation/
                        Yeah, The Gift was cool.
                        @TerranceMulloy

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: The Raven... uh, ok.

                          Another thing - I doubt this cost $5000 to make as reported.

                          The RED one camera he used to shoot itself costs $17,500, and the prime lenses cost another $19,000. All U.S. dollars, btw. And I'm assuming he never borrowed the camera off a very trustworthy friend. Or he could have rented/leased one, which would have cost far less, but still expensive.

                          Plus the 3D modelling, rendering and compositing software cost around $3000 a piece for a commercial license or maybe even more. Also the shoot might have taken just 2 days, but the visual effects would have taken much longer. At industry rates the crew alone would have cost more than $5000. Again, I'm assuming he had legit software and not pirated versions, and he did not do all the VFX himself. If he did, then he's one talented mofo. Edit: Looking at the credits there's quite a few people who worked on this.

                          And don't forget the film score.

                          I'll take a wild guess and say the real number is probably more like $50,000. Still very impressive though. I hear he's already had some solid offers thrown at him.
                          Last edited by Terrance Mulloy; 04-25-2010, 07:56 PM.
                          @TerranceMulloy

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: The Raven... uh, ok.

                            Originally posted by Terrance Mulloy
                            Another thing - I doubt this cost $5000 to make as reported.

                            The RED one camera he used to shoot itself costs $17,500, and the prime lenses cost another $19,000. All U.S. dollars, btw. And I'm assuming he never borrowed the camera off a very trustworthy friend.

                            Plus the 3D modelling, rendering and compositing software cost around $3000 a piece for a commercial license or maybe even more. Also the shoot might have taken just 2 days, but the visual effects would have taken much longer. At industry rates the crew alone would have cost more than $5000. Again, I'm assuming he had legit software and not pirated versions.

                            I'll take a wild guess and say the real number is probably more like $50,000. Still very impressive though. I hear he's already had some solid offers thrown at him.
                            That's what we were talking about earlier. It's $5000 with a bunch of cut corners that couldn't actually translate to a major production.

                            You can say that you made something for X dollars if you call in favors and don't factor in the cost of borrowed equipment and fill the cast and crew with friends working for free and do all of the many hours of post-production work in your basement with an effective dollar value of $0 and shoot guerrilla style and don't get permits and on and on and on, but none of that translates to being able to make a studio feature on a tight budget because you won't be able to cut a single one of those corners on a legit film production.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: The Raven... uh, ok.

                              Originally posted by Sinnycal View Post
                              That makes no sense to me.

                              This is really cool...as a demonstration of a skillset that has been misidentified.

                              Why should any writer be compelled to show off his talent at digital effects?
                              jboffer's criticism was that the short lacked substance and featured poor storytelling. What exactly is stopping him from making a well-told short of "substance" (zero effects) and uploading it to youtube? Absolutely nothing.
                              "I was dreamin' when I wrote this, forgive me if it goes astray." - Prince

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                xx
                                Last edited by Writerperson12; 04-25-2023, 06:18 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X