Career in Crime
Posted: Wed, 28th Apr 2004, 4:56pm
Post 1 of 61
|Its finally here! Career in Crime is a gritty crime drama set in the life of a respected hitman working for two opposing crime syndicates within a rundown city. Tom Venezio is your average hired assasin with no passion for death,yet no remorse either, and when he accidentally falls into the hands of two groups with a bitter hate for eachother, the results could not only end the friendship and trust Tommy worked so hard to build up, but his life as well. Career in Crime is not meant to be viewed by everyone due to some of the violence and profanity used, and therefore is not recommended to anyone who is easily offended by this sort of thing (runtime: 54 minutes 27 seconds).|
Disclaimer (READ BEFORE VIEWING): There are two files in which you can download from, the medium quality file (141 mb) and the high quality file (340 mb). If downloading the medium quality file, it is recommended that you view it as 100% in the media player. For the high quality file, view it as 200% or full screen. Please enjoy and don't forget to vote.
Posted: Wed, 28th Apr 2004, 7:20pm
Post 2 of 61
yeah, thats great 141 megs... hmmm it says i have to wait 2 hours for it to download. Not the best way to get people to see ur movie is it?
Try to get a smaller file size. go to google: Windows Media Encoder... This makes ur movies real small, with pretty good quality still...
Posted: Wed, 28th Apr 2004, 7:29pm
Post 3 of 61
You should also have a few parts to this movie people can start watching while they finish downloading. Also, it seems the download speed is very slow. I'm not sure if you can do anything about that, but if you can you should
Posted: Wed, 28th Apr 2004, 7:30pm
Post 4 of 61
yes evman the size is larger than your typical movie file, however 140 mb for a 54 minute movie is not bad at all, and believe me, no encoder will get it down past this point. I'm not going to split it into parts because it takes away from the movie.
Save it and let it sit for a while.
Posted: Wed, 28th Apr 2004, 7:47pm
Post 5 of 61
I'm interested to see how this turned out, I remember the trailer and it seemed interesting. Unfortunately I'm busy today, but I'll try to find time to watch it soon.
Posted: Wed, 28th Apr 2004, 7:52pm
Post 6 of 61
All im saying is that ill probably not watch it (sorry) The file will take too long and it will slow down my comp. I have a 30 minute movie that im cutting into two parts so that i can show it in school... I find it builds the suspense and makes ur audience want to see it more and more. Just a thought.
Posted: Wed, 28th Apr 2004, 7:59pm
Post 7 of 61
no problem evman, good luck with your movie.
Posted: Wed, 28th Apr 2004, 8:25pm
Post 8 of 61
I've just downloaded it (phew) and will post a review later when I've watched it. I agree about the file size though, even on broadband it was a bit of a marathon but if the quality's good then that's alright
Just a suggestion regarding the size, maybe split it into smaller chunks (10 mins or something) that way the guys on dial-up can get it in installments and not explode their modems.
Posted: Wed, 28th Apr 2004, 8:47pm
Post 9 of 61
I am downloading the high-quality version, hope this one's worth it.
Posted: Wed, 28th Apr 2004, 8:49pm
Post 10 of 61
I recommend compressing a windows media version. Most people don't like it, but you can get a very small filesize with decent compression.
Posted: Wed, 28th Apr 2004, 11:08pm
Post 11 of 61
140megs didn't seem to bad to me for a 54 minute film. Took about 40 minutes to download I think. I'd rather that that have an overly-compressed movie that looks horrible - especially when watching it for 54 minutes!
Last edited Thu, 29th Apr 2004, 1:14pm; edited 1 times in total.
Posted: Thu, 29th Apr 2004, 12:45am
Post 12 of 61
I understand everyone's concern with the filesize however I really don't want to compress it any further. We have worked so hard on this movie for so long, and we don't want to settle for half a$$ quality. Most people today have broadband connections. As Tarn stated, dloading the 140 mb file on cable really only takes 40 minutes or so. On DSL about an hour. The file itself is not large at all for the length of the movie. Just download it and let it sit, if you don't like it..delete it.
Thanks again and enjoy!
Posted: Thu, 29th Apr 2004, 1:50am
Post 13 of 61
yeah, this movie is cool, though it is often amateurish, I was into the story. You are Martin Scorsrese and part of Akira Kurosawa's Yojimbo and Sergio Leone's For a Handfull of Dollars, I really liked it. You've got talent. Only concern for me is your editing. Some times it seems very distracting and not well editet, especially the action sequences.
But hey, the effort you put into this kinda crime-saga is incredible. Not seen it often here or anywhere else, good job.
Posted: Thu, 29th Apr 2004, 3:16pm
Post 14 of 61
I am a filmmaker as well, and I understand the pain in finding actors other than friends or relatives. The problem we've all had is having a character that is cool, but the actor not fitting the age perception of the character. There is a certain amount of "suspension of belief" when watching a movie that can help overcome this. Try lowering the framerate to 24 fps in After Effects or the like. Normal DV, is 30 fps, which is too similar to the human eye. Or just get college students who want acting experience; )
Posted: Thu, 29th Apr 2004, 3:21pm
Post 15 of 61
Good audio or no audio. seriously. you guys should invest in a good mic when doing a movie with so much dialogue. The movie it self was pretty good but like most of the other films on this site the camera was shaky. Get a tripod or better yet get a stabilizer. i made one for like $30 and it works great. When making a movie you need to think about the basics, Good lighting, Good audio and Good camera work. The movie could have been great. But I dont want to rip you to shreds just giving you some tips for next time. Could use some work but good job!
President of Blurred Image Media
Posted: Thu, 29th Apr 2004, 6:57pm
Post 16 of 61
therenegade- Thank you for your feedback. I definitley agree on the sound issue, especially the mic. The mic we used was your standard microsoft microphone that came with a DELL computer, but in the long run, got the job done. On a sidenote, we actually did use our tripod at certain points in the movie, however decided we were better off not using it for most scenes, yet in certain conversations we do in fact use one. I do not agree with you however on the lighting and camera work. In terms of shakiness or whatnote, yes to a degree you are right, but I believe this movie has awesome camera work, and some really unique shots as well.
Also to all who commented on issues like the acting and equipment, please keep in mind we are a group of teenage friends who made this movie for fun. We do not have the money to spend on expensive equipment just to make each and every detail just that much better. We filmed this using one standard JVC mini-dv camcorder, Sony Vegas 4.0 and Alamdv2, along with a massive array of music and sfx. Besides all this, i honestly believe this came out great considering the limitations we had. But I agree with all of you on some of the more technical issues.
Other than that, thanks for watching, glad you enjoyed it and don't forget to vote.
Posted: Thu, 29th Apr 2004, 9:18pm
Post 17 of 61
movie was good, lighting was very cool on the last scene when tommy dies.. i thought some of the actors were good, yet some of them were bad. kelly did a great job with his part, very good, tommy was also done very well, dee fitted the part perfectly.. capolina studdered a few times but wasnt bad.. overall movie was very well done... good job
Posted: Thu, 29th Apr 2004, 9:26pm
Post 18 of 61
thunderbolt wrote:the last scene when tommy dies
Way to ruin the ending, pal.
Haven't had the chance to download this yet, since my computer doesn't work anymore (just using McMurph's at the moment), but I'll do it once it's working again. I look forward to watching tommy die in the last scene with the nice lighting.
Posted: Thu, 29th Apr 2004, 9:34pm
Post 19 of 61
AHAHAHAHHA, he doesnt..uhh...die......lol just watch it.
Posted: Thu, 29th Apr 2004, 11:08pm
Post 20 of 61
I think having parts to a movies makes me want to finish it more. I can watch one part and then pick it up later when I have time. I haven't downloaded it yet because it is so big. I think you can get more quality for the space if you use a .wmv file. Just some ideas
Posted: Thu, 29th Apr 2004, 11:37pm
Post 21 of 61
What divx codec was this in? i can play every movie but this one...
Posted: Thu, 29th Apr 2004, 11:53pm
Post 22 of 61
guys, stop complaining about file size. Get a download manager and you can download this movie step by step. It took me less than 1 1/2 hour to download the high-quality version. In the meantime I went out and did some work, when I came back, I had the movie.
Posted: Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 12:09am
Post 23 of 61
The file size is not bad! Especially considering the length of the movie. Stop complaining and delete it after you watch it. It wont kill you. As for me, Ill download tomorrow.
Posted: Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 12:21am
Post 24 of 61
christ everyone stop complaining about the filesize, its actually considerably small considering the length. If you really don't wanna pollute your harddrive with the HUGE 141 mb file, than don't download it. Please don't waste time and energy on the forums about it, for thats not what they're there for.
Posted: Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 12:22am
Post 25 of 61
oh, and the div x codec is Divx pro 5.1.1.
basically the standard
Posted: Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 12:24am
Post 26 of 61
OH MAN! THIS MOVIE KICKED ASS!
Wait...i havent watched it yet, since none of my newly updated divx codecs work...so, which one ya using?
Posted: Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 12:25am
Post 27 of 61
He just said in the reply right before yours.
Posted: Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 12:29am
Post 28 of 61
bryce u must not have the codec or something, or it got deleted or something, cuz everyone else can watch it. All u need is the free divx codec with ads from http://divx.com
and windows media player....gl
Posted: Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 12:30am
Post 29 of 61
aw, i hate it when i write stuff at the same time as other people...
anyways, got the k-lite codec pack, so im set now. give you a rundown in 54 min
well, i watched the preview finally, and that was alright aside from whatever you had on the lense that resembled a thumbprint. Now, time for the maincourse..
Posted: Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 1:58am
Post 30 of 61
Alright, now THAT had effort put into it for sure ("certain" people, take note). Surprising you got actor who were (for the most part) convincing, the exception being the scenes with that guy getting beaten up. First, i'll start with the stuff that was good. the main mcdonahue guy sounded like adam sandler.
1. Very good props. (mini, bmw x3, guns..)
2. decent acting.
3. locations were unnoticeably good.
4. the outifts were (most of the time) quite good.
5. the music was effectively placed and timed.
6. script was decent (although seemed ad-libbed occasionally)
7. good length, not very many boring scenes.
Things that were bad.
1. The opening scene. the beating looking vicious, but was almost comical because of the intensity (not sure why..)
2. the voice over. It sometimes would come in choppily (this can be fixed easily though)
3. the camera work. a few things with this werent good. smudge on lense was incredibly distracting. the shots in the dark were impossible to see, especially during the last scene. alot of the pivotal scenes REALLLY need a tripod. if you are going to pan, try to use something with wheels, including a wheelchair, a car or a cart. zooms arent good for production value.
4. The sound. far off shots with no sound except windboom. you should really try to cut down the wind next time. and there was an impressive edit between angles with continued talking, good job.
5. the editing. there was quite a few issues with this throughout. many cuts in this were realllly awkward looking and distracting.
6. the shooting. i know you guys probably havent shot a gun before, but the scene were tommy is shooting in the camera with the silenced berreta was really bad looking, pistols kick ALOT more than that. Also, real, professional hitmen would never randomly shoot from the hip at multiple targets while taking no cover at all (this happened during the big, crazy shootout). and, i know cocking a gun on camera is cool looking and all, but this happened in every scene where guns were featured.
7. the halfhearted punching. no sound effect at all for this made it seem fake.
So, i have to say, great job in general, but take into mind these suggestions for your next project.
Posted: Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 2:44pm
Post 31 of 61
Hey all i have just seen this movie and it is awesome. i am not a a registered user so my vote doesnt count. but if i were to vote on this right now i would give it a 4. 4 only because somethings arent that good but overall awesome movie good job guys
Posted: Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 2:52pm
Post 32 of 61
Oh yea one more thing the acting was good althought at some parts it seemed kinda wierd and unatural looking..for example in that warehouse place when Dee got a little ewxcited about the squad coming. but once again other than that it was a good movie and kept my attention
Posted: Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 3:11pm
Post 33 of 61
Please stop posting as Guests, movieguy5. I've already had to remove the first post where you did this. If you keep pretending to be Guests I'll have no option but to remove the film from the archive.
On the off-chance that it was somebody else posting who just happened to be using the same computer as you, encourage them to sign up for a web account so that it looks a little less dubious.
Posted: Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 4:06pm
Post 34 of 61
the plot thickens...
I didn't really think much of the film, in terms of plot & style. I will tell you why.
Technically, the camera was nearly always shakey. Zooming in & out in a scene isn't good, except when you want to highlight something which contributes to the dramatic storyline. Lots of the shots are similar & not much variation.
You didn't get close enough to the characters to make me care (e.g. in the first conversation in the car, you shoot entirely from the backseat, without any variation in angle). You shot the actors in mainly 3 quarter shots, & didn't do any close ups. The majority of shots in films are actually medium shots (from a little above the waist), shoulder shots & close ups.
You didn't establish characters well. Throughout, I had no idea who anyone was, except the hero. That's why close ups are a good idea.
The film had a distinct lack of editing. In some places the scenes go on for way too long (e.g. long shot, shakey, waiting about a minute before a car comes into shot). There was a weird bit where the screen went black for a couple of seconds. In another instance, you held black for about 30 seconds to come to the end of a piece of music. You could have faded the music here because this pause didn't really do anything.
The action scenes were not really done well. They didn't have any pace to them, e.g. Tommy runs slowly across room. Tighter editing would have made it a lot more successful. With the fights, people seemed to be randomly shooting each other, without hitting targets, & hardly anybody seemed to get killed.
The best scenes for me was the fight in the trailer park & carrying the body. Visually, they both looked good, actors included. In the carrying black bag scene, the cutting to different angles was very good, & the shot at the end when they shove the bag in the bin (with low angle), showed a bit of style the rest of the film lacks.
This kind of story has been done quite a few times now, & it's easy to fall into the stereotypes that the genre has, & associations it has with 1930s USA. It felt too much of a Mafia PC game ripoff.
Last edited Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 5:10pm; edited 2 times in total.
Posted: Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 4:56pm
Post 35 of 61
Listen tarn, I am sorry these guests post and seem suspicous, but I have NO idea who they are. I admit our very first movie we ever posted, one of us voted on the trailer, and typed in the forums, but as to these guests...I have no idea. These guests are not me.
Posted: Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 5:15pm
Post 36 of 61
I also forgot to mention, if tommy was such a well known and expert hitman, he could have hit a dude about 10 feet away from a high postion (while in that cement truck hanger) with a AR15. easily. even i could do that. when i saw the black screen , i thought the divx had messed up again.
Last edited Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 5:17pm; edited 1 times in total.
Posted: Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 5:16pm
Post 37 of 61
lol Mellifluous, first of all thanks for your feedback, i'm still laughing about your opinion towards the begining car conversation.
theres a specific reason why we filmed from the back.....you try filming from the front in a mini coupe...lol theres 2-3 feet max in the front, we really had no choice. Oh, and the black pause with the music, that was there not only to sort of finish off the song, but also to relieve the tension. Other than that, thank you for your post.
Posted: Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 5:20pm
Post 38 of 61
Shoot through the front window.
Also, have the guy with the camera sit on one seat, record actor's dialogue looking at camera, & then sit on the opposite seat & do the same with the other actor.
Simple, Mini or not.
For christ's sake...
Posted: Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 5:22pm
Post 39 of 61
lol bryce thats probably true, but if tommy could kill everyone that easily, the movie would be a lot shorter now, wouldnt it? lol would you mind voting on the movie though?
Posted: Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 5:27pm
Post 40 of 61
oh yeah and bryce, tommy gets the guy in the hangar...takes him a full clip, but he gets him lol.
Posted: Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 10:34pm
Post 41 of 61
Nice job on the movie, with all the FX and stuff. The soundtrack was superb, especially the song for the last scene.
I give it a 5!
The only thing i could suggest for your next endevur... endever.... your next whatever, is a tripod. some shots were a lil shakey, but i think some of the shots were ment to be that way.
Also, I would like to point out that Matt Britton looks like max Payne.
Posted: Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 11:01pm
Post 42 of 61
lol thanks a lot foxikus, yeah i see where your coming from, his clothes remind me to of max payne. We were actually going for his character to be somewhat like max payne, so in terms of clothes yeah..his face no way. he doesnt have that permenant grin max payne has haha.
Posted: Fri, 30th Apr 2004, 11:37pm
Post 43 of 61
movieguy5 wrote:Listen tarn, I am sorry these guests post and seem suspicous, but I have NO idea who they are. I admit our very first movie we ever posted, one of us voted on the trailer, and typed in the forums, but as to these guests...I have no idea. These guests are not me.
Er..... well actually he can see the IP of the guests... and it is the same as yours....... busted
Posted: Sat, 1st May 2004, 12:05am
Post 44 of 61
er....no pooky im sorry. I spoke with Tarn and he now understands the full situation. I post from a network at my school that is all connected to the same router. When I told the kids in the class about it, a lot went there. Although I don't know who posted it in the room, it wasn't me.
nice try though
Posted: Sat, 1st May 2004, 12:09am
Post 45 of 61
movieguy5 wrote:er....no pooky im sorry. I spoke with Tarn and he now understands the full situation. I post from a network at my school that is all connected to the same router. When I told the kids in the class about it, a lot went there. Although I don't know who posted it in the room, it wasn't me.
nice try though
Ah, sorry for the confusion then.
Posted: Sat, 1st May 2004, 1:29am
Post 46 of 61
I just finished it, and I can feel no better way to explain what I thought than in a list.
1. Very nice story. The main reason I was able to sit through the whole thing was because of the story. It really sucked me in, and I could tell who the people were and everything.
2. Good music. It fit pretty much the whole way through.
3. Good acting.
1. Shaky camera. Definitely need work on this and camera movements.
2. Editing. Lots of poor cuts, and the long periods of black were annoying.
3. Sound. Camera sounds totally destroyed the mood. Also, when someone would beat another guy up, it looked pathetic because there was no sound, not even an "oomph!" from the person.
4. Effects. The muzzle flashes were decent, but they could have been better, especially since they were a big part of the movie. And the bullet ricochets didn't look very good either.
Also, some other comments. I thought some of the dialogue scenes were too long. It was good that you had normal conversation, and not canned lines, but I think they could have been cut with a little less chit-chat, which would have made it a little less boring.
Finally, there were a few things I didn't understand. Like when Tommy wanted to kill Murphy, I had no idea why. Oh, and you used the f word like it's going out of style. I think you could have contributed to the emotion in better ways.
Overall, though, good job with taking a project this big on. I would recommend for the future, though, that you try other shorter projects to work on the problematic areas myself and others have posted before you do another big project like this.
Posted: Sat, 1st May 2004, 2:23am
Post 47 of 61
Thanks a lot for your post lloyd. This movie was actually my first project I have ever edited, so I guess I am rather new to the whole thing, however our next project is not going to be as long. The thing I was really trying to make stand out the most was the music, and I think I did a good job with that. I agree the camera is to shaky for some of the movie, and we will incorporate the tripod more when we create more movies. Also, Tommy goes to kill Murphy because he is the reason the italians are always on Dee's lead. Even though we don't go right out and say it, he's basically that "messy" guy in all those movies thats always screwing things over for the main characters. But yeah, I guess we should of went into more detail with Murphy's character. Overall though, thanks for watching and we'll definitley take your suggestions to count for our upcoming movies.
Posted: Sat, 1st May 2004, 3:40am
Post 48 of 61
ufbasser and that other guy who voted a 0, A 0
??? For the effort alone it should be points, not to mention the costumes and things. I had a busy day today, Ill watch it when I get a chance.
Posted: Sat, 1st May 2004, 3:44am
Post 49 of 61
thanks a lot brettsta, its one thing to not like a movie, but i know for afact, and im not just saying this because its my movie..that this project deserves a 0..whatever
Posted: Sat, 1st May 2004, 3:48am
Post 50 of 61
Anonymous wrote:thanks a lot brettsta, its one thing to not like a movie, but i know for afact, and im not just saying this because its my movie..that this project deserves a 0..whatever
Er, I think you got it wrong lol, "Im not just saying this because its my movie..that this project deserves
Posted: Sat, 1st May 2004, 3:52am
Post 51 of 61
lol whoops, oh well u know what I mean.
Posted: Sat, 1st May 2004, 6:00am
Post 52 of 61
im downloading your medium version, and man this is going to take awhile. lol. mabey that is why not that maney people have voted, because it takes so long to download. my speed is going at 93.2 KB per second. which is normal for me. any way it looks really cool to me, so this better be worth it.
ill post on what i think about it when Im done.
Posted: Sat, 1st May 2004, 12:23pm
Post 53 of 61
hey ufbasser, i know all those guests giving my movie a 0 is you. How do i know?Well for starters both guests joined this morning at nearly the same times, and one of the names is very similiar to yours..ultrabeiser.By the way those votes don't count
Oh and ssjaron I think it comes down to your internet connection. I've got DSL and it took me like 55 mins to dload the medium quality version, which isn't to bad. I don't think its the download speed, its just that people haven't voted. There have been like 150 downloads, only 8 people have voted.
Posted: Sat, 1st May 2004, 12:27pm
Post 54 of 61
Anonymous wrote:hey ufbasser, i know all those guests giving my movie a 0 is you. How do i know?Well for starters both guests joined this morning at nearly the same times, and one of the names is very similiar to yours..ultrabeiser.By the way those votes don't count
Oh and ssjaron I think it comes down to your internet connection. I've got DSL and it took me like 55 mins to dload the medium quality version, which isn't to bad. I don't think its the download speed, its just that people haven't voted. There have been like 150 downloads, only 8 people have voted.
Yeah, thats pretty lame.
Took me only like a half hour to dload this and I have to say I was hooked in it the whole time. You got a story down, and then used it well. The only thing I can fault is a little editing(which is tough for such a big project like this anyways) and a little camera shake. It was really good though and the effort was clear! Keep it up.
Posted: Sat, 1st May 2004, 4:54pm
Post 55 of 61
Im downloading the movie right now, and I have been wanting to see this since the trailer. Im glad to see some more long movies on the site. Ill be back in like 2 hours with a review
Posted: Sat, 1st May 2004, 5:09pm
Post 56 of 61
Dang it you all, I have Road Runner and it took me over 3 hours to download the high quality version.
But one thing I was thinking of the other night. This movie is proof that a good story and good acting are two of the most important things in a movie. Despite all the technical problems, which would have doomed any other movie, I still greatly enjoyed this, and I've thought about it a lot. Even though the fights were not that good, it was still interesting to watch. I hope this inspires more thought out movies in the future.
Posted: Sun, 2nd May 2004, 12:34am
Post 57 of 61
I have to say i was able to sit through the movie. The good....
-story was decent
-good theme music
-acting was pretty pathetic
-camera was SOOOO shaky
-audio was purly from the camera which was crap
-to much dialouge that rambled on and on and on and on and on....
-moive didnt really go anywhere half the time
-OVERALL GRADE: C-
Posted: Sun, 2nd May 2004, 9:53am
Post 58 of 61
Hm, I see you did put a lot of effort in your film wich is good to see. The story was nicely told and I'd guess most of the effort went into that.
What I'd recommend to you for your next movie is to put more thought into cinematic aspects of your movie because I feel from that point of view, your film is not too good.
I never had the impression that the camera angles were in any way dramatically planned. It seemed more like "right, lets shoot from there and just point at what happens". And use a tripod or get your camerman not to shake all the time.
Same goes for the editing. The editing needs to be more fluent and coherent to the drama of the scene, currently it seemed a bit random sometimes.
The choice of music was mostly pretty good. You seem to have a gripe there as well as for storytelling. If you can increase your filmtechnical level, you'll surely be able to do a great film.
Posted: Sun, 2nd May 2004, 12:35pm
Post 59 of 61
Thanks Sollthar, your definitley right. We really just were like "ok, film here and than we'll see what happens," however those are mainly for the dialogue shots. For some other scenes, i believe we have many very nice shots, such as Tommy walking into the big garage and you can only see his figure, paulie opening the cabinet in his kitchen, the skyhigh type view of paulie and the masked drugdealer walking through the parking lot and basically the whole last scene is very well shot. In terms of all the other technical problems, this was our first actual big project ever made, and we are not use to editing and all that, but we will definitley take these issues into account for our next film. Thanks again.
Posted: Sun, 9th May 2004, 10:09pm
Post 60 of 61
lotta effort on this thing-how long did it take you guys to make this?-anyway a friend told me to check out some movie called pharmicide which was good and i checked out this one afterwards and i liked it-however, you guys shake the camera so much it almost takes away from the seriousness of the movie-the head italian and the head irish guy saved the movie while tommy was also well played i wasn't really feeling the other characters too much though- why are there so many positive posts along with so many negatives? this thing is really contraversial i guess-the best gunfight was by far was in that warehouse complex/office that was impressive- i loved how simple the end was and how tommy didn't even fight back well overall i guess i liked it
Posted: Mon, 14th Jun 2004, 12:23pm
Post 61 of 61
Bravo, I'm impressed, you got this film made in around a month right? That alone is worth one star.
The film itself was incredibly rough, dodgy moments of camera work and editing, lighting problems too. The sound of the camera when it turns was really grating as where the shots when we're looking at a doorway or something for what seems like an age before anything happens and someone walks through it. The acting was mostly below average, save for one or two guys.
What I think you should have done, is made some of the interior locations up a bit more, make them look a little more appropriate, (they weren't that bad really but a bit more work'd be cool, to make them more mobsterish) do something with the lighting, maybe to create a bit more mood or at least to make the shot a bit more solid and some of those ext. night shots were much too dark. (I have that same problem with the film I'm shooting right now it's a beehatch but it'll all look much better by blasting a big light on the area just the right amount in just the right place. )
Work on the script a bit more, quite alot of gangster cliche lines, which isn't really a bad thing I like a good cliche, but something to give it more energy and spark. Spend more time getting better performances from the actors and camera operator, use tripods, and plan out each shot before hand rather than when you go to the edit.
That's what I mean when I say rough, the action scenes were surprisingly good, lots of energy and good use of sound effects to make them more intense, you opted to have the camera much further back and the cutting a little slower, much kudos for that something that many directors just don't have the courage for anymore. Some of the costumes were also really good and there was the occasional moment of visual panache with the camera or editing that there really needs to be more of. The use of voice-over was really good, made it feel more as a whole and that last bit before he goes and takes out all those guys in that building with the music was great.
The best thing the film had going for it, is that it felt like a film, scenes followed on and it had a great feeling of whole. It just worked and played like a full-on professional gangster movie even if the actual images were often lacking.
Also the fact that you made this so fast, I know it's only a short film but it's a long short film, if that makes sense. But my film's only gonna be around twice the length and I've been making mine for two years now. While you still have time and have loads of guys willing to turn up and work, learn as much as you can to get way better as soon as. The same thing happened to me, I was just learning and we had loads of guys turn up, then I got way better and it's hard enough getting one person to do it. How I wish to have a load of actors ready to work like you have now. Although there was a lack of female actors I noticed in this film, but hey these guys are gangsters and it's a man's world
keep learning and you'll be making fantastic films in a little while.
3 stars for the film +1 for the fact that you made it so fast and you could with a bit of re-editing and reshooting make that so much better. 4.