Starship Troopers "Smoothnecks" movie
Posted: Mon, 27th Oct 2003, 10:55am
Post 1 of 78
|This film is set 20 years before the "proper movie" we get to see the first team who meet the bugs.|
Our normal style of comedy is here and few fxhome members join in.
The 3D version ( glasses ) will only be on the DVD and has 30 mins extra.
Posted: Mon, 27th Oct 2003, 11:06am
Post 2 of 78
At last! I've never been able to truly appreciate the Stargate films, having never seen anything of Stargate beyond the original movie. I'm a huge Starship Troopers fan, though, so this one worked in all the ways it should.
The first thing to note about Smoothnecks is just how entertaining it is, even at being 26 minutes long. It was very watchable and consistently funny, with very few points where the story lagged at all.
The effects were not really comparable with the movie, of course, but they were good enough to back up the story and the fun characters without being intrusive.
Fun characters and a good sense of humour seemed to be the core of Smoothnecks, resulting in a highly entertaining movie. A big step up from the Stargate films, I would say. Congratulations b4!
• Very funny (the "didn't see that, did you?" moment at the start cracked me up)
• Entertaining story
• Cast were natural and good to watch (not familiar with their names I'm afraid, but the guy with the glasses and earring has great comic timing!)
• Some nice visual ideas
• The effects, though adequate for the purposes, could have had more polish in some shots (mainly the CG blood bits)
• Similarly, some of the camerawork could have been a bit more dynamic (the shot near the end of the two guys firing away at the bugs, with the camera panning from right to left, following their bullets, RULED - could have done with more exciting shots in that vein)
• Music choice was a little unexpected at times; I expected more Starship Troopers-esque scoring
Overall, though, highly entertaining. Which is, of course, the main thing!
Last edited Mon, 27th Oct 2003, 11:19am; edited 1 times in total.
Posted: Mon, 27th Oct 2003, 11:11am
Post 3 of 78
I thought it was great. I can't wait to get it on DVD.
There was no point where I wasn't enjoying it (and that sollthar bit was great
) Only bit that had a slight problem I would say was the blood squirt bits. 2 things wrong with it - 1 it looked fake, 2 blood wouldn't squirt like that. (Believe me, I know )
My favourite bit... ALL OF IT
I really want the 3D version. Really, REALLY.
Good luck with future movies b4,Ex!
Posted: Mon, 27th Oct 2003, 5:20pm
Post 4 of 78
Thanks Tarn and exclamation
I wanted to do more of those shots ( infact i had planned to do hand held shots more, like COPS show, following the actors )
but, because of the 3D version I had to lock the camera down most of the time
The blood was done in alamdv and I can see a need for more blood plugins. ( anyone )
Still I'm glad you liked it.
Posted: Mon, 27th Oct 2003, 6:25pm
Post 5 of 78
Good job. It had some nice effects and was funny, too.
Posted: Mon, 27th Oct 2003, 7:27pm
Post 6 of 78
Great stuff "Superteam" without doubt the best so far.I wanna see the 3d version asap so Ian get back to work again you've had a few hours off today so you should be plenty rested..........LOL
All of the crew were excellent and some were truly outstanding......great fun to watch and the 27mins flew by....the only thing that crawled were the insects.
Some real cool cam work was used (overhead tracking) brilliant.
It must have been difficult to avoid it looking like another "Stargate"but you managed it.
Insects looked fab.....some fantastic interaction cgi......loved it.
There was of course one person who held the whole film together.....but I wont disclose my name in case Marco gets offended.....hehe!
Well done everyone..a great tribute to all of your hard work and to the community spirit of FXHOME.
Take a bow B4
Posted: Mon, 27th Oct 2003, 7:41pm
Post 7 of 78
Ah yes! I meant to mention the interaction of the bugs with the bushes. Very nice, that. Really added to selling the effect.
Posted: Mon, 27th Oct 2003, 8:47pm
Post 8 of 78
for me personally the effects were a mixed bag. But at the end of the day this doesn't really matter, because like others have said it was highly entertaining.
Not much I can say that hasn't already been said. I'm still in two minds about whether to vote for this though, I dunno....
Posted: Mon, 27th Oct 2003, 10:08pm
Post 9 of 78
hey nice movie and hey was that music from turricon legend of solthar
i like that song where can i get it lol
by the wya i am a big fan of star ship troopers so nice work i rate it a 4
great 3d work as well
Posted: Mon, 27th Oct 2003, 10:12pm
Post 10 of 78
**SOLLTHAR, IF YOU WANT ME TO REMOVE THIS THEN JUST PM ME**
The song (entitled "Dark forces") can be found here - http://www.nccinema.ch/darkforces.mp3
Posted: Mon, 27th Oct 2003, 11:31pm
Post 11 of 78
couldn't resist, i downloaded this version, only took all afternoon on my modem
good job you have a nice reliable server.
Tarn has already covered most of the things I would have commented on so I won't repeat.
Another excellent achievement, and a nice unexpected ending
Posted: Mon, 27th Oct 2003, 11:45pm
Post 12 of 78
Congrats b4 very nice work.
I liked the directing, its not just your stories that work but your directing has a little nice touch to it, for instance the part towards the end where he rolls down the hill out of shot camera turns and he pops back up into view and of them walking and its panning down to the floor, just nice little directional things that i enjoy seeing, the film itself i think was very nice, i personally hope you do another, you can follow that on quite nicely the effect in general were nice, although some scenes some things just seemed out of place, and a few sound effect seemed to cackle a bit in places but that might just of been my download due to and un expected interuption, all in all i enjoyed it well done.
Posted: Tue, 28th Oct 2003, 12:47pm
Post 13 of 78
I have watched a couple of your films and they fall down, for me, at the same level.
1)Too much wind in the mic. It pulls you out of the story and reminds you that you are watching something filmed on a home movie camera.
2)The acting is always very flat, except for the small guy with the glasses.
3)Your shots don't seem to be planned, they are just dashed together.
4)You film from the side of the actors on close up, which flattens the image and looks amateurish.
5)All your films seem to be filmed in the same locations. Just like Backyard movies but Jessy is a child.
Sorry to be the downer after all the Great re-views and I know I'm not a member, but i just can't sit back and not say anything, because i think you need to hear the truth, to evolve as a film maker.
You can't cover up bad film making with comedy.
I do commend your enthusiasm and know how hard it is to make a film over 5 mins but evolve, adapt and don't take the "No will notice that." attitude and you will be a great film maker.
Don't lock your edit until every anomaly is gone. ADR if you have to.
Im only saying all this because i did like it, but it was like having a girl who was mind blowing in bed, but pig ugly.
Posted: Tue, 28th Oct 2003, 1:03pm
Post 14 of 78
:- mrk1 -: wrote:
it was like having a girl who was mind blowing in bed, but pig ugly.
Posted: Tue, 28th Oct 2003, 1:39pm
Post 15 of 78
Thanks guest, i've now made £50 from you
I bet a few people on here that a guest will come on and knock the film down.
But also your right about the mic, I was just on the phone to peter saying we need to get a professional wind shield " hang on, wouldn't that mean spending money
Posted: Tue, 28th Oct 2003, 3:26pm
Post 16 of 78
I haven't watched the movie yet, but it seems to me the "guest" wasn't knocking down the movie but tried to be constructive (although his choice of metaphor maybe poor). Looks more to me like he was pointing out elements he felt detrimental to the film - although I disagree with some of them (I actually like the side close-ups) but the sound problem is recurrent as you know, and he's got a point as far as locations goes - although I wouldn't say it's as bad as what goes on with backyard home movies. At least the setting is somewhat coherent with the story. There is a big difference between a suburban house living room disguised as a "Master of Evil" lair and a field supposed to be another planet...
And "guest", to do this amount of effects, notwithstanding quality, the film HAS to be planned... I don't think b4 doesn't plan his films...
But I do agree that you shouldn't lock your film until you have tried to fix every single problems you think may bog it down.
Posted: Tue, 28th Oct 2003, 4:11pm
Post 17 of 78
Thanks John. ( I only started the bet with the guys when you got your "guest" saying about your trailer
I must mention that things in this version are different in the longer 3D version, although this can be viewed on it's own, "the other side of the story is told" in the 3D version ( once again making a worlds first for a home movie )
While I agree it's not perfect because of locations, I did hope that people would think, £87 spent and this film was made, I've always said i'm not a cgi guy, ( same as you john ) but sometimes I can't get people to do all the cgi so I have to muddle through, but people that know me and have seen all my films should know that I do LISTEN to all constructive comments and they should see that "smoothnecks" is better than my first Stargate.
But it's funny how the only person ( so far ) to give comments did it under cover of "guest" I would prefer say for sake of this post "The member" just turn around and say " good effort, here is a list of good and bad things" what's with the degrading remarks.
To close, THIS IS A HOME MADE MOVIE, no different from jessy except mine is longer, more actors and a little more time spent on it, apart from that my film is NO DIFFERENT from all the other home made films on here.
( coff up lads still waiting for my £50 )
Posted: Tue, 28th Oct 2003, 4:24pm
Post 18 of 78
B4, to be honest that bet would not be fair... as YOU could have posted that. (even though i don't think you would
Sorry, had to say that. Anyway, as tarn had said previously (his last post) the interaction between the bugs and the bushes was good. I should have metioned that in my post too.
Posted: Tue, 28th Oct 2003, 4:29pm
Post 19 of 78
You are right about that annoying habit of people not willing to sign their nasty comments... It's pretty lame.
As for the location, I was making a similar point. Locations are important, but also you have to shoot with what you have when you have no money and you write the story around it, which you did. It is still believable as another planet that would support human life.
There is a definite improvement between your first Stargate film and this one. I believe this one is amongst your best achievement so far.
One thing I would suggest you do: Use a white cardboard to reflect sunlight when your actors are backlit, in order to remove the shadows from their face. I thappened a few times in this film and it bothered me somewhat. Just bounce light on to their face to kill the dark shadows which prevents us from seeing them.
Posted: Tue, 28th Oct 2003, 4:38pm
Post 20 of 78
Excellent point, i will do that in future, and now we have more people helping on set I can get them to hold that and another the mic.
*goes looking for a white board*
Posted: Tue, 28th Oct 2003, 5:12pm
Post 21 of 78
that was good....in the first half of the movie i didnt like the muzzle flashes..they didnt look good..but then half way through they started to get alot better and that shot with the guys running from the bug while shooting at it looks really good....and you should of spent more time worrying about sound..but its alrite....alot of the bug shots wear they interact with the humans look good....good job i thought this movie wouldnt be that great after seein the trailer but its alot better than i thought it would be
Posted: Tue, 28th Oct 2003, 5:50pm
Post 22 of 78
Thanks for all you comments...i'm the guy with the glasses..and as some people have said about the sound...that is one thing that we do have a problem with at times...so we will invest in a mic and a wind sock (is that the right term) to solve this problem
the other problem we have is that we live so near heathrow airport and the planes are such a pain (one every 30 seconds)..we can go further afield but it just getting all the actors to follow...anyway i'm glad you have enjoyed it and hopefully we can take all your comments on board and make the next film we do better than this one.....Cheers All...Pete..
Posted: Tue, 28th Oct 2003, 6:09pm
Post 23 of 78
this is the second Superteam film I have seen and I have to say that I enjoyed both very much. Just curious as to how you did the moving crane shots as I thought they were extremely effective.
The aliens looked great and despite some shadowed faces I thought it was nicely shot. Looks like it was a hell of a lot of hard work. Fantastic to see Marcos in there.
Look forward to the next one.
Posted: Tue, 28th Oct 2003, 7:23pm
Post 24 of 78
Thanks Big ChiPowSki, your the 2nd person to ask how the 12foot camera chasing the guys was done.
I put the camera on the tripod fully extended and held it high, i'm 6foot 3 and the tripod is about 6 foot, i just ran with it.
Posted: Tue, 28th Oct 2003, 9:36pm
Post 25 of 78
1. Are you in the movie?
2. I didn't think :- mrk1 -:'s comments were uncalled for or harsh. Did you?
Posted: Tue, 28th Oct 2003, 9:53pm
Post 26 of 78
Well I didn't think so
Posted: Tue, 28th Oct 2003, 10:06pm
Post 27 of 78
sidewinder wrote:Are you in the movie?
He is. He's one of the smoothnecks who... disapears while they are getting changed into their outfits and (I'm not sure) but I think b4 is the news reporter (it didn't look like him, but it could have been... maybe)
Posted: Tue, 28th Oct 2003, 10:08pm
Post 28 of 78
I'm in this film only for a few scenes, but i'm in the 3D version more.
And these are the comments i found disheartening
Your shots don't seem to be planned, they are just dashed together.
( no way anyone could tell if anyone had dashed shots together, that's impossible to say unless they was there, I could say Jurassic Park look dashed, they wasn't but I could say that )
"You can't cover up bad film making with comedy"
See the person didn't say "bad comedy" which means the film is good as the film is a comedy and the comedy only works if you plan and film it good, I think i've only seen 2 "home made" films that have made me laugh, I feel you need a little skill to make a comedy
and don't take the "No will notice that." attitude,
Trying to say here that I didn't bother to make it the best I could, So they are making a comment about me that is untrue, the shots in the trailer were nearly all redone after hearing people comments and this may surprise you but I haven't had a job since joining Alamdv over a year ago, just so I can improve my film making, I've spent 4 months SOLID on "Smoothnecks" 8am till 8pm every single day and i've still got another month doing the 3D version, living on my wifes money, and leaving what i have in the bank. so his "No-one will notice" comment is totally untrue.
edit - Davlin was the President behind the desk.
Posted: Tue, 28th Oct 2003, 10:12pm
Post 29 of 78
b4uask30male wrote:edit - Davlin was the President behind the desk.
Ah, thought it didnt sound like you.
Posted: Tue, 28th Oct 2003, 10:19pm
Post 30 of 78
pooky wrote "Well I didn't think so"
Sorry pooky but it's like me saying.
" you didn't bother on your film, no effort, you should have spent more time and made it better"
I shouldn't say that as I have no idea what you put into your films.
When you proberly have given your heart to the film,
see my point, ?
Posted: Tue, 28th Oct 2003, 11:24pm
Post 31 of 78
I'm not much into these types of movies with all the effects and what not, but it is comedic and made me chuckle a few times...But I must say that the only things in these movies that have improved are the effects, and little at that.. I would say the acting, camerawork and the basic technical parts have remained the same...Just an opinion...
Posted: Wed, 29th Oct 2003, 1:56am
Post 32 of 78
Now I'm in real trouble...oooooooo!
The boss said I looked more like a newsreader on TV than a President and you guys have just confirmed it.......oooooooooo!
Ian said he had a hell of a time editing my bit......took longer than the animation cgi's....hehe.
It looks like I'll have to have more lessons from Marco ...I mean to say who's gonna buy these T shirts now?......5000 of them....ooooooo!
Seriously though its great fun making a plonker out of oneself....stops me taking myself too serious......maybe more of us members should get involved and brighten our days a bit.....
Posted: Wed, 29th Oct 2003, 8:46am
Post 33 of 78
Alright, Here goes, im gonna break it down simply and effectively.
1. The already mentioned windy mike: Its gotta go! just try to put some heavy foam around it.
2. the fact that the previous efforts where all filmed in fields, that dont resemble anything that would be in movies of this nature.
3. The actors all seemed capable and effective, with the exception of the drill sergant.
4. The props were quite excellent, and congrats on figuring out the fatigues, as costumes added a huge amount of depth. i can barely stand to see the movie where the actors are all wearing t-shirts and jeans.
5. The CGI..well..its good, but from what i saw, it seems that the same animated Spider was used multiple times, and the flying things werent animated at all? or maybe they were, couldnt tell. good job with the interaction with actors and tree's. The spaceship CGI was excellent.
6. The Action scenes made it seem like they were running around randomly and just shooting anywhere they felt like. The Tracers looked great, and the props were good as well.
7. The computer GUI took some of the inmmersion to the story.
8. during the big action sequence, i lost track of who was doing what, and who was dead.
To sum it up
Location, location, location
Grandscale combat should only be attempted with more actors, unless some sort of heavy artillery is shown. It would work somewhat easier if they had been a small team of new recruit special ops sent after bugs in a underground tunnel, warehouse or something smaller and less country looking.
Great job on followthrough and most of the camera work!
Posted: Wed, 29th Oct 2003, 10:10am
Post 34 of 78
Well said and you have stayed away from any personal comments thankyou.
While hard to get actors to travel any distance we have all argreed all films from now on we will travel ( away from heathrow, bloody planes
We are addressing the mic problem.
Not sure about the 1 bug being used over and over, did you mean they should have all looked different ? I thought the proper film only had one bug and used that over and over
The reason you were lost on who is dead and why they are randomly running around is because the 1 hour 3D version covers that, ( a marketing ply i'm affriad to get people to want to see more )
Once again thanks for the helpfull comments.
Posted: Wed, 29th Oct 2003, 10:20am
Post 35 of 78
I actually didn't have a problem with the location. The original film was set in nondescript rocky/desert landscapes, and this was set in a nondescript scrubland/field landscape. Seemed reasonable to me!
However, that doesn't change the fact that the next movie needs to be filmed somewhere else.
Posted: Wed, 29th Oct 2003, 11:15am
Post 36 of 78
I just wanted to say how much I love this movie ! Grrrrrreat.
The humor was incredible and I can`t see how someone would not find "Smoothnecks" funny - okay, it`s the matter of taste probably, but for me this was a excellent comedy !
CGI was great. Sure it could`ve been better, but we could find something that "could`ve been better" for any movie. To sum it up, CGI was great and served the purpose.
Sound - to bollocks with wind, I haven`t even noticed it - not even the third time while watching the movie. But yeah, when I read it was there I started to notice it so address that before doing other projects.
Story... What`s more to say about a movie I watched three times and which has became a superhit at my workplace ?! Excellent.
The last but not least... Acting. As my fiancee said "They are so adorable"
I expect more from you in the near future. Cheers.
Posted: Wed, 29th Oct 2003, 12:31pm
Post 37 of 78
I don't know why b4u is taking my comments so personally. If you want to work in the industry, you must listen to all your critics and remember it’s just difference of opinion.
Critics show us our mistakes.
I have been working in film and T.V as an editor for nearly ten years and there is one thing that I have learnt, YOU CAN FIX ALMOST ANYTHING IN POST, just be creative.
And as for having no money, I have worked on films made on a packets of fags. They made nearly all there own equipment and showed that if you have the knowledge, determination and will, you can do anything.
Beg, borrow and steal if you have to.
“Wind on the Mic while we were filming….no problem. Get the actors back in and we’ll ADR the scenes.” You can do this by watching the film on T.V and then getting the actors to sync there voices, one line at a time, on to a dat tape or back onto the camera through an external mic. Do takes and let the actors make the call when they think it’s in sync. Then sync them in your NLE. it’s hard work but it shows passion.
There are cretin rules to filmmaking that have been developed over the last hundred years that need to be adhered to (unless you want to deliberately confuse) you must establish the action or it becomes incoherent.
I talk you like this because unlike most people on this site you are or want to make money on these films, so your attention to detail must be of a level that doesn’t make the buyer feel cheated. Storyboarding and planning of shots i.e where you place the camera in the action, will not be noticed if done properly. If not done properly it can be noticed, the audience becomes confused.
You said that you worked for four months 8 til 8 for four months. Herein lies your problem, if you work on the set of a film and are the editor, you know in your head where all the actors were on the set and that clouds your judgment when you edit, as you know where the actors are and when you cut it, it seems logical to you that they are established properly, when they are not. This is the problem that anyone whom directs and edits faces.
Solution: Do the first cut of your film and then leave it for a month or so. Sound like hell I know but you will look at you work with fresh eyes and the clouding should be gone.
So put the icing on the cake, colour in that pencil drawing and complete the thing properly. You have the time and the talent so there is no excuse.
Posted: Wed, 29th Oct 2003, 2:14pm
Post 38 of 78
thanks :- mrk1 -: and one more guest
I have stargate films on fxhome if you wanted to see more my films.
I don't really want to make money on these films, really the truth is I want people the see them in it's fully glory with 5.1, I used to give away the dvd's ( yeah posted them out free of charge ) It was costing me a fortune, so my wife put her foot down and said if people want to see these on dvd then let them pay for postage and the disc.
But what I do hope is that someone notices me, that being said I think ( fingers crossed ) that we have a distributor for a film they want us to remake, (call me a psycho ) with that film being our own copyright we can spend money on it and go that extra mile.
Thanks I do take all comments serious and hope to use them to get better.
Posted: Wed, 29th Oct 2003, 3:23pm
Post 39 of 78
I thought Smoothnecks was a pretty fun film. I found it much funnier then the Stargate films, maybe cause I'm not all too familiar with the Stargate universe but all too familiar with the one from Starship Troopers.
"the guy with the glasses" really did a cool job, he had some funny lines and good appearance, as well as many of the others.
The FX we're great at some places, seemed very rushed at other places (you still have a lot of problems with shadows I see)
Having read this thread now with a lot of interest I must agree, that there are many parts that could have been improved easily (and without money) and I do agree with pretty much all the negative as well as with all the the positive points that people posted.
In total, I for myself had a fun time watching it and it didn't feel like almost 30 minutes, wich is always a good thing!
Posted: Wed, 29th Oct 2003, 4:47pm
Post 40 of 78
Being an avid fan of Starship Troopers, I was very open to seeing this. I had some doubts when I saw the trailer as to whether this would be enjoyable. I didn't really like your other stargate films nor did I find them funny, and this was looking to be the same, except Starship Troopers.
Unfortunatly, I was let down by the film overall. All of the pro/cons I thought have been said so not going to repeat. It's not my type of comedy and I laughed maybe twice.
One thing I did enjoy was the nod at Klendathu. That was a pretty good idea. The trees shaking was cool.
The thing you need to work on the most is the sound. The gunfire is alright, but everything else sounds really "fneh" to put it simply. I did not believe that the sounds were coming from what was occuring on screen.
Posted: Thu, 30th Oct 2003, 1:20am
Post 41 of 78
Good piece of Work, I can say one thing about all of your movies on this site. They are consistently well put together. If there is one thing I have learned about making movies or working on other peoples projects, is production value, production value, production value, production value. And this movie has it. There are always going to be things that one can improve in all of our works. I believe that is why we all keep doing what we do. We all want to get better at what we do. So keep plugging away and keep improving and keep making movies. You will only get better and better.
"We are only as good, As our last effort"
Posted: Sat, 1st Nov 2003, 9:36pm
Post 42 of 78
Good show! I always enjoy your flicks. I can only imagine at the amount of time you put in animating the creatures. Keep em coming!
Posted: Sun, 2nd Nov 2003, 6:54pm
Post 43 of 78
Like most people I agree with the pros and cons of the film.
I don't often make that many comments because I don't get a lot of time to check the forums out and comment on peoples obvious mistakes, so i won't here, but there is one thing that I would like to say that I have found useful while filming and I think it will help you.
Don't think of your camera as a little dv piece of magic, start to think of it as a proper 35m camera. Think handheld is out of the question and that stedicam, shouldercam and tripod are the only options for quick setups. Remember the 180% rule at all times and the rule of thirds while composing your shots. It's the start for making your films look more movie like and less like it was shot on a home movie camera.
At the moment I am working with ND filters on my camera and f stops to reduce depth of field, de-interlacing and gamma correction in post for an even better result.
The best thing is, is that you can make nearly all the hardware for very little money and de-interlacing and Gamma correction come free with most editing software.
Don't let peoples comments get you down and remember you are in the top 10% of filmmakers on this web site by my reckoning.
Posted: Mon, 10th Nov 2003, 8:44am
Post 44 of 78
I enjoyed this film quite a lot, to be honest. But i doubt it was for the right reasons.
- the comedy at the beginning, prior to it getting repetitive
- explained below
Your film-making appears to have reached the boundary where your scripts, camera work, and to an extent effects are those of something which could really be good. But the acting, 3d itself, locations and poor production values bring it down.
The result is one of those films that we all like, because we laugh *at* it all the way through, but you mistake the good vibe for being an indicator of an actually good film, which sadly it is not. I basically can't work out if you intended this to be cool, funny, serious, action, or any permutation of the above. Being incapable of determining the genre of your film, can't be great thing.
I guess you're probably waiting for the new fxhome products as much as we are; so i probably only have to suggest that it could do with a bit of DigiGrade action. The close-up camera shots would also be ok, if it weren't for the absurd shaking that normally acompanied them. The interaction with the bushes at one point, which someone else mentionned, was a nice touch; but whats the use when the aliens kinda floated across the landscape, had little/no texture and rarely interacted with the cast?
The jokes, which started out amusing with the coffee thing, rapidly plummeted too, with the smoothneck recruits' "high japes" a few minutes later already being poorly delivered and really quite embarassing to be honest.
I guess what i want is a clear-cut film. So no disrespect to your talents, but it just didn't do it for me. It was a mishmash of a film, unspecific in its possibly "ironic" poor quality, and scatty in its delivery. I hope i've at least given you some kinda pointers to make this post anything less than an outright rant.
Posted: Mon, 10th Nov 2003, 11:16am
Post 45 of 78
Would have thought you would have gave it more than 2, just for the effort put into it, I can't see any films you have made so I guess your not aware of what goes into them.
It was made for fun and for the 100th time, I suck a cgi, i admit it.
But I can tell you two things,
NO-ONE will ever make a Starship Troopers fan film and no amatuer will ever make a 3D film, they are just too hard for people to do with zero money.
Honeslty though I will take your comments on board and will try to improve next time.
It might help you if you watch the full hour version, but I doubt you would want to
Posted: Mon, 10th Nov 2003, 11:21am
Post 46 of 78
Yes sorry about that, its probably a rather poor consolation, but i *did* intent to give it 3 stars. Having not voted on that many films, the star system confused me, and i thought that the first blob (the dark one) was 1 star, not 0 star. As a result i clicked on what i thought was 3 stars (which was in fact 2) then was rather confused when it showed only 2 - i automatically skipped through the 'are you sure?' stuff, unfortunately.
Posted: Mon, 10th Nov 2003, 11:29am
Post 47 of 78
You have a good point there though, I wonder if the csb guys could just add a 1 - 5 at either end, It still confusses me
Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2003, 6:28pm
Post 48 of 78
to be honest i was a little disappointed with this after reading posts about it. i think it is a pretty ambitious idea to attempt, and i feel it lacked the chaotic nature that made the scenes in starship troopers memorable. the comedy didnt really work for me, using repeated gags that i felt never were initially funny. the acting was poor, it seemed your mates were more interested in having a laugh than helping you create a film which i found annoying. i liked the location near the end of the film, but the beginning was pretty unconvincing ( near to the houses ). your work and thought seems to have gone mostly into the federal internet thing from the film, which was very impressive and true to the film.
i'm sorry to have negative things to say, but after watching it and hearing about how much work you put into it, it looked like it could have been shot in a day. I'm sorry to have to comment so harshly on something you have put a lot of time into, you have some good ideas that i think would come across better in a less ambitious project. if you edited this down a bit, increasing the pace of the action i think it could be much improved.
Posted: Sat, 15th Nov 2003, 2:55pm
Post 49 of 78
Hey.. That was a great film. I'm just starting out and I was wondering:
How did u make the head fly off and
when it did, how did u make the blood fly up
Thats all, thanks gj
Posted: Sat, 15th Nov 2003, 3:01pm
Post 50 of 78
Thanks Chuter, not sure if your aware that the film is made as 1 hour, not just the 27 mins.
Some of the hetic action you describe was left out ( for the sole perpose of people buying the DVD) Also it may look like a days filming but please remember it's dobly digital 5.1 ( I haven't seen anyone one's else films with that and it's also shot as a 3D film ) so when you take all that into account, there is a lot of work.
But as always i'm greatfull for any comments.
Brettsta, I used after effects and made 2 layers of the same scene, one with the guy and one without, I then masked his head out so it shows the clear background, the blood was done in alamdv i think it was the one called "blood side" and just angled it pointing up.
No control cinema ( sollthar ) on his site has a full tutorial on it.
i don't have his web address to hand sorry )
Posted: Sat, 15th Nov 2003, 7:52pm
Post 51 of 78
what program(s) did u use to make the movie
thanks for the quick response before
Posted: Sat, 15th Nov 2003, 8:03pm
Post 52 of 78
I used Studio 7 to edit,
vegas video to make the 5.1 surround DVD
Alamdv for all sfx
Poser for the the bugs.
Bryce was the space scenes.
Posted: Fri, 13th Feb 2004, 2:25am
Post 53 of 78
Well Done! I enjoyed watching that! I'll be using Poser 5 for a Lord of the Rings style film, so it's encouraging to see what can be done using Poser. I love your flicks, so keep em coming!!
Posted: Tue, 16th Mar 2004, 2:32am
Post 54 of 78
awsome !!! I liked every bit of it
I just have onw question.
where plugin or program did you use to create the bugs?
I've seen the plugins for the bugs I think a while back I can't find them anymore.
so could you please tell me where I could download them at?
BTW: great film again. I liked it. and the effects were killer
Posted: Tue, 16th Mar 2004, 2:49am
Post 55 of 78
The bugs were made with Poser, and the models are from the free section on www.renderosity.com
Posted: Tue, 16th Mar 2004, 4:07pm
Post 56 of 78
awsome movie again. I really liked the mech hand too. that was kool
Posted: Tue, 16th Mar 2004, 4:14pm
Post 57 of 78
Not sure if your aware but there is a full 1 hour version of smoothnecks and it's in 3D. ( glasses needed )http://fxhome.com/cinema/info_cache/movieinfo995.html
Posted: Mon, 22nd Mar 2004, 5:51am
Post 58 of 78
i must say again your strong point is character animation. But the lighting and texturing still needs to be still worked on, i know the lighting and texturing in poser is very basic, what you need to do is apply your character animation skills to a full featured app like 3dsmax. 3dsmax because the character studio enviorment is very similar to poser, plus you can even animate in poser, export it as a bvh motion cap file and apply it to a biped.
Anyways it was a really nice funny movie. The story was awsome.
Posted: Mon, 22nd Mar 2004, 7:52am
Post 59 of 78
I didn't now that
Thanks billy that's just made me choose 3ds over lightwave
Posted: Mon, 22nd Mar 2004, 1:28pm
Post 60 of 78
lightwave sucks, its old and lame. Plus the different module thing is a pain in the behind.
Posted: Mon, 30th Aug 2004, 5:12pm
Post 61 of 78
can you import poser animations in maya, you mentioned that you can in 3dsmax ?
Posted: Mon, 30th Aug 2004, 5:29pm
Post 62 of 78
yup you can get poser stuff into maya Click_Here
Posted: Fri, 10th Dec 2004, 12:58pm
Post 63 of 78
Nice movie b4, loved it. Not all that funny, but yet it was. 4/5
And did you ever learn to cg better?
Posted: Fri, 10th Dec 2004, 1:51pm
Post 64 of 78
Hmmm... well, this movie looks like it obviously took a very long time to do, and I'm sure you worked hard on it. It just seemed kind of... corny, I guess. Some scenes were very well done, like when the guys are running down the path and shooting back at the camera. The bullets flying past looked really nice.
If all the people on the colony were getting killed off, and it was a serious threat, wouldn't they send more men? Stuff like that. Or when the giant beetle destroyed the ship, but the men were simple able to shoot it a few times and kill it.
Overall, the movie was funny [Loved the part about the coffee, and the part where the guy accidentally drops his grenade and has to run] but seemed pretty corny. [The guys were on the planet for five miniutes, and they're already screaming to get back to the dropship?]
But, it made me laugh, and the battles were pretty good, so I give it a 3/5.
No hard feelings?
Posted: Sat, 11th Dec 2004, 8:10pm
Post 65 of 78
A lot of effort went into this BUT ...
Sound is an issue. Looping it IS effort, but would make a huge difference.
The shots need to be graded. There's some horribly backlit shots in this and exposures vary wildly in the same scene.
There are some okay performances, but everything is flat with (with one or two exceptions) pauses you could drive a bus between. Pacing is non-existent.
Maybe if you desaturated the CGi slightly it wuld merge better with the video. The shadows used had precisely the opposite effect as intended - they made it look less real, not more.
The CGI was slightly ropey and at its best in the opening sequence.
Everything is shot in a muddy flat on style. I think one bug POV was as exotic as it got ... Shots do not appear to have been selected for any particular emphasis and it consequenly looks quite workmanlike.
I'm defering to vote as the director is a very, very nice man, but it would have been quite low, I'm afraid.
Posted: Sun, 12th Dec 2004, 8:52am
Post 66 of 78
thanks for your comments,
please rememver "I'M NOT A CGI GUY" never said i was.
I've learned color correcting since that was made way over a year ago.
and I hope you took into account when mentioning the flat shots that it was also shoot in 3D ( no easy feat with moving camera shoots ) thus the flat shots.
so maybe, just maybe your score might have been higher. ...
Posted: Sun, 12th Dec 2004, 5:01pm
Post 67 of 78
The fact you used 3d is impressive, but that wasn't what I meant by flat. It's the general composition which is at fault - The shots all looked the same, basically, whether they were close, mid or long. The camera simply seemed to be there as a flat recorder.
An example - when the drill seargant was being menacing at the beginning, you could have gained a great deal of effect simply by raising and lowering the camera above the eyelines to get a feeling of dominance/subservience in the shots.
Posted: Sun, 12th Dec 2004, 5:21pm
Post 68 of 78
Good point there.
We are all learning
I personally would have liked to see more high shots in Jurrasic Park, from the t'rex POV, it didn't happen but I still liked the film, i'm just trying to say, we can all suggest idea's after we have made something, i'm just wondering but does those types of shots i didn't do make you feel the film was less entertaining ?
Posted: Sun, 12th Dec 2004, 5:41pm
Post 69 of 78
Well, the short answer would have to be yes, I'm afraid ...
The (genrally) weak performances could have ameliorated through editing if the camera had been used more creatively. There were no real cutaways, for instance.
Posted: Sun, 12th Dec 2004, 10:03pm
Post 70 of 78
thanks, i'll take those comments and will try to add those in future films.
I know doing a fan film of Starship Troopers is a HUGE undertaking and thus no other has attempted it, I still have to say i'm an amateur like you and everyone on here, i fear sometimes that because i took the challenge on of making such a film and in 3D ) people think i'm better than i am, i'm not, i'm just a guy with a camera and don't have friends within the acting community like yourself so i'm stuck with weak performances
The cutaways were kept to a very few, the reason... and i think you may not be aware of this but the whole film ( there is a longer version made, 1 hour ) the whole film is 3D, not just bits like most other 3D films, every scene is in 3D, yep even the shot of the drill sergent.
It took me about 1 week to turn 10 secounds into 3D, it was killing my eyes, i can tell you
and so to limit the amount of scenes i choose to not have so many cutaways.
With this in mind and the fact i'm a one man amateur film maker I kinda feel the need to defend it somewhat, but I still take you point and will use that, as i've taken points before from people and they know i've listened and learned.
Once again i'm truely glad of the comments good or bad ( as long as they are contrustive and yours was )
Posted: Sun, 12th Dec 2004, 11:44pm
Post 71 of 78
Good. I'm glad I haven't given offence - Your sheer dedication is admirable and I personally wouldn't even DREAM of attempting 3d ...
You know what I can do and if you ever want anything, just ask.
Did you see Only The Good Diet Young, by the way?
Posted: Mon, 13th Dec 2004, 8:38am
Post 72 of 78
No, i wnet to your site but struggled to find downloads, i was clicking on the doctor who's, proberly just me being stupid,
is it on fxhome and is it yours ?
p.s. i might just hold you to the help thingy, where are you, dorest or that way ?
Posted: Mon, 13th Dec 2004, 9:58am
Post 73 of 78
Go to www.inthesuitcase.co.uk.
There's a film and media download page - http://www.inthesuitcase.co.uk/media.html
I'm in Portsmouth. I'm about as far south as you can get without getting your feet wet.
Posted: Mon, 13th Dec 2004, 9:11pm
Post 74 of 78
b4, this film was awesome. i loved the story and the character animation. Brilliant job, I know it's hard to get that many people to come together to shoot. 5/5
Posted: Thu, 2nd Jun 2005, 5:33pm
Post 75 of 78
I am unable to see this, it must have been taken off its host site! Anyone know where I can see it?
E-mail me: email@example.com
Posted: Tue, 7th Jun 2005, 10:00pm
Post 76 of 78
that was halarious =)
Posted: Wed, 15th Jun 2005, 8:30pm
Post 77 of 78
Nice, I enjoyed watching it. I know, short and sweet.
Posted: Mon, 1st Jan 2007, 3:32pm
Post 78 of 78
gilebuch, it's back online.