You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

23 (based on tv series 24)

Posted: Sat, 15th Apr 2006, 2:31pm

Post 1 of 38

b4uask30male

Force: 5619 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2002 | Posts: 3497

Windows User

Gold Member

Hi
I mentioned on here a few weeks ago about Channel 5 looking for fanfilms to show on a programme called movie lounge.
They programme makers contacted me back and wanted to come along a film me making a film, so last wednesday while they was filming me I made a short 3 minute fanfilm called 23 (based on 24)

I don't know the air date yet for my part in the Movie Lounge (they turned up with a z1 sony HD camera but switched it to normal dv and they said it's because they don't broadcast in Hidef yet, what a waste I thought sad

Anyway if you want to see the short fanfilm it's here
www.superteam.biz/23.wmv
Posted: Sat, 15th Apr 2006, 2:40pm

Post 2 of 38

SyroVision

Force: 2130 | Joined: 1st Dec 2005 | Posts: 478

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

watching it now
Posted: Sat, 15th Apr 2006, 2:52pm

Post 3 of 38

sk8npirate

Force: 590 | Joined: 28th Feb 2004 | Posts: 757

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

I liked that it was quite enjoyable. The jokes in it were pretty funny. The camera work was good and seemed to be like the show 24(I rarely watch), you kept the erratic zooms which was good, and also seemed to have some cool looking crane type shots. Nice work it looks good.


"Im just one person" "Yeah, thats how it all starts...and then there's two!"
Posted: Sat, 15th Apr 2006, 3:03pm

Post 4 of 38

b4uask30male

Force: 5619 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2002 | Posts: 3497

Windows User

Gold Member

thanks, the crane was 8 foot £310.00 from ebay. they sell them all the time at that price.
Posted: Sat, 15th Apr 2006, 4:32pm

Post 5 of 38

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

£310
There goes the zero budget... wink
Posted: Sat, 15th Apr 2006, 4:35pm

Post 6 of 38

b4uask30male

Force: 5619 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2002 | Posts: 3497

Windows User

Gold Member

hehehe,
I make tutorial dvd's for children with learning problems now and can afford to buy a few bits, I got a steadicam jnr but it's a pain to get the balance right, (anyone got any tips)
Posted: Sat, 15th Apr 2006, 4:38pm

Post 7 of 38

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Sweet. So we can expect a proper film from you sometime in the future then?
Posted: Sat, 15th Apr 2006, 4:46pm

Post 8 of 38

b4uask30male

Force: 5619 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2002 | Posts: 3497

Windows User

Gold Member

soon,although for some strange reason recently loads of people are asking me to make a DOCTOR WHO fanfilm unsure
Posted: Sat, 15th Apr 2006, 8:10pm

Post 9 of 38

CurtinParloe

Force: 841 | Joined: 16th Oct 2001 | Posts: 916

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

b4uask30male wrote:

hehehe,
I make tutorial dvd's for children with learning problems now and can afford to buy a few bits, I got a steadicam jnr but it's a pain to get the balance right, (anyone got any tips)
Depends on the camera. If you use a Canon XM2 you can use the steadicam JR (the one with the monitor). I can give you the exact settings for one of these if you want.

I tried a Sony PD150, a PD170, and an XL1 and they were all too heavy; impossible to balance. I don't know the weight of the Z1, but if it's heavier than the XM2 then that's the reason for balancing trouble.

In that case you should be able to add extra weight to the bottom, but bear in mind that there'll be a point where you can't operate it without hernia insurance...



EDIT:

Nice work. My girlfriend thought it was good, too.
Posted: Sat, 15th Apr 2006, 10:08pm

Post 10 of 38

jotoki

Force: 1855 | Joined: 28th Dec 2001 | Posts: 630

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

Doctor Who fan film, Do it man , it cant be any worse than the Cr*p they churned out this evening lol
Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006, 2:44am

Post 11 of 38

LilCaesars

Force: 480 | Joined: 27th Dec 2004 | Posts: 530

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Ok so a quick critique. First off I didn't really enjoy this film. One thing I didn't like was the intro. The 23 animation didn't look like how it is in the show. The text in the beginning was also very pixely and amateur looking. (I don't know if this is because of compression though.) The girl or little boy talking on the phone was extremely annoying. Also I think you stopped way too many times to show what time it was. (I don't know if that was on purpose to annoy the crap out of me or what, but I didn't like that.) The greenscreening in the car was terrible. Some shots did look like 24, but overall nothing special. I didn't find the jokes very funny, but that depends on your sense of humor. Overall this seemed like a very poor amateur looking film. Maybe you were going for a more silly style with this, but I'm not sure what you were aiming for.
Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006, 9:21am

Post 12 of 38

b4uask30male

Force: 5619 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2002 | Posts: 3497

Windows User

Gold Member

Thanks, as mentioned above we shot the film in one day and had Channel 5 filming us at the same time, made it a little tricky.
I agree I hate bluescreen work, give me your email address and i'll send you the file for you to re-do the bluescreen that would really be great thanks.

I'm glad your willing to help, if you know a woman (not girl) can you get them to do the voice for me.
If you can't do both the above points, don't worry as you now know how hard it is to make a film, if you can do them many thanks your a real nice guy.
Any help always welcome.

p.s.

Doctor Who,
Oily made this quick test for me, I think it's really good
http://hometown.aol.co.uk/Coolfusionart/DocWhoSmall.wmv
Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006, 9:43am

Post 13 of 38

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Just watched it and I pretty much agree with LilCeasers.

The film is a superteam production in every aspect, yeah. Which is why I'm wondering a bit. It doesn't only have the same style as yoour previous work, it also suffers from the same weaknesses.

Apart from the crane, which obviously makes a crane shot and crane shots look cool, it seems a pretty standard work with no real innovation.

Following the superteam work over time shows a certain kind of immunity to improvement to me. The films seem to remain the same over and over again without any visible improvement on any level - at least that's what I see. Or miss, for the lack of a better word.

So I'm basically still hoping for a superteam film that shows something new, has a decent story, good acting, good camerawork, thoughthrough editing and just sums up the learning courve you have made the last years.
That'd be great and I'll be surely in line seeing that one. smile
Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006, 10:04am

Post 14 of 38

Bryce007

Force: 1910 | Joined: 5th Apr 2003 | Posts: 2609

VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Sollthar Pretty much said everything I was going to, But perhaps abit more Eloquently as those swiss have been known to do..
Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006, 10:50am

Post 15 of 38

b4uask30male

Force: 5619 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2002 | Posts: 3497

Windows User

Gold Member

solthar wrote

it seems a pretty standard work with no real innovation.

I don't want to sound rude here, but i've done a few fan films in my time and I don't think you have done any.
My point is (Your smart and I know when you read the next comment you'll agree)

A fan film is a FAN FILM, this means if you do it right then it's the same as the original, Now... if I was to add different bits with real innovation then the fans of the original will AND I should know, They will pick up on it and complain.

It's true, i've had my stargates downloaded over a million times and i've had sooooo many emails picking up on tiny things that wouldn'd be in the original.

So, as you now agree as a fan film I have to keep it as close to the original or I get a backlash, I guess I can't win.

I like it for a days work with a TV company watching my every move and stopping us at times to do interviews etc. it's pretty good in my view and wasn't something I planned to make, infact the story/script was written the day before.
Come on solthar EVEN you know what it's like to make a quicky wink
Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006, 11:03am

Post 16 of 38

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

A fan film is a FAN FILM, this means if you do it right then it's the same as the original
If that was your only objective, then you've failed.

However, I think you've completley misinterpreted what Sollthar meant - he wasn't suggesting innovation in terms of what happens in the plot; but moreover - technical and creative innovation. As it stands, it's a very standard piece of work, no greater in technical and creative merit than any of your earlier work. Other than the crane shot, this could have been produced by you two years ago. If someone looks at the work I was doing two years ago and compared it to what I'm doing now, I'd hope that they would see a massive improvement, which I really can't see in your work.

Anyway, a fanfilm doesn't have to be exactly the same as the original - that'd be a pretty pointless venture (for me at least). For example, ls:tv's own 24 spoof, "December 24th". Clearly none of that would have happened in the show itself, BUT it's a fanfilm/parody of the show. This is where you can let your creativity and personality shine through, as Sam Shepherd has done in this film.

I hope you read this with an open mind, and don't just react to it defensively!

Cheers,
Arktic.
Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006, 11:09am

Post 17 of 38

b4uask30male

Force: 5619 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2002 | Posts: 3497

Windows User

Gold Member

Hi,

Just thought i'd show you this I've found it's another 24 parady, before I get flammed, i'm not putting it here to compare to mine, I thought those true fans of 24 might like to see another 24 spoof.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEr-cV9X9vs&search=24%20spoof

oh forgot to mention my plot is only for english people.
we have a hosepipe Ban here and it's a classic joke of Jack going around stopping people using the hosepipe.
Sorry if people outside the UK don't get the plot.
I don't mean to be on defence, I clearly like people to have both points of view, I guess that can be taken wrong same as any other comments made.

No worries I know it has flaws, and i know what the flaws are (even before the comments were aired) although as You all know I take the comments very serious and I try to improve each time, Just wait till you buy "Superhero Harry" You'll love it, although again the jokes are made for the british public sad

God I'm good wink

Last edited Sun, 16th Apr 2006, 11:21am; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006, 11:19am

Post 18 of 38

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I think you misunderstood me.

What I was referring to has primarily nothing to do with it being a fanfilm or not. And you're right, the last fanfilm I've made lies 13 years back and was when I was 13 and thought James Bond was cool, but that's another point best left in oblivion. smile

You are innovative when it comes to incorporating your humour into your fanfilms. And that's a good thing. It's your strongest point! I don't recall seeing that in either stargate nor 24. smile

So your "I have to stick to the original" point is basically redundant, since you're not doing that. Your stories aren't the same, your narrative style isn't the same, your films don't look like the originals...


I was mostly referring to technical terms. I don't see innovation in the sense of, trying something new or, if I shall put it more clearly: Improving.

What I meant was, when I look at your early work and look at the new work, I see hadly any improvement. Your filmmaking style - no matter if fanfilm or nonfanfilm - didn't change, didn't improve. You could tell me, this was done 5 years ago and your first stargate film was done today, because I wouldn't see a difference except for the subject matter.

If I look at many people's work 2 years ago and their work today, I see a difference. I see that the people have learned, improved, tried something new, something fresh. That's what I miss when I watch your films. I don't see changes, except that it's a fanfilm of another film. You seem to be stuck in the same filmmaking routine.


Sure, I've done quickies... (For some odd reason, my afternoon quicky 4 years back is still more successful then some of my closer and more personal work... but that's how it goes...) smile

But that's not what I referred to here, because I don't think this film is worse then any of your other work. Or better. I think it's pretty much the same. That's what I start to miss.
Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006, 11:21am

Post 19 of 38

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Or yeah.. What Arktic said much shorter then me. smile
Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006, 11:22am

Post 20 of 38

b4uask30male

Force: 5619 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2002 | Posts: 3497

Windows User

Gold Member

oh forgot to mention my plot is only for english people.
we have a hosepipe Ban here and it's a classic joke of Jack going around stopping people using the hosepipe. (water shortage)
Sorry if people outside the UK don't get the plot.
Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006, 11:34am

Post 21 of 38

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Sollthar wrote:

What I was referring to has primarily nothing to do with it being a fanfilm or not. And you're right, the last fanfilm I've made lies 13 years back and was when I was 13 and thought James Bond was cool, but that's another point best left in oblivion. smile
What about ROSE? That's a fanfilm if you ask me, of a particular genre and visual style. Fanfilms don't always have to be about lampooning a specific show/movie. ROSE shows how you can be really innovative and create something fresh, while still paying homage to things that have inspired you.
Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006, 11:48am

Post 22 of 38

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

What about ROSE? That's a fanfilm if you ask me, of a particular genre and visual style. Fanfilms don't always have to be about lampooning a specific show/movie. ROSE shows how you can be really innovative and create something fresh, while still paying homage to things that have inspired you.
You're absolutely right Tarn. As usual. wink

I was referring to the concept of a fanfilm b4uask seems to have. If you open up the concept a bit, I've made much more fanfilms. I mean, "Turicon" is based on a videogame I adored. It's basically a fanfilm, that evolved into something that is vastly different from the game, but still a fanfilm.

Hell, even NightCast is a fanfilm where I try both imitate the rules of my favorite genre as well as stretch them for new ideas and my own vision.


No worries I know it has flaws, and i know what the flaws are (even before the comments were aired)
You said that before. It starts becoming a bit unbelievable when the flaws adressed, the flaws you know, the flaws you know even before adressed, don't seem to get improved on.


I'll definately watch Superhero Harry once it's out and look forward to seeing it, even though the plot is for UK people only. I'm sure I'll find the one or the other english man to sit down and explain it to me. wink
Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006, 2:20pm

Post 23 of 38

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Well, b4, you know I'm not a huger fan of your work, mainly because I usually get erked by all the excuses you're full of, but this wasn't that bad, in fact, I'd say it's your best thus far, and here's why:

The Editing. In this, unlike your others, there were no strange, off cuts or anything. It was standard editing, not superb, but definitely better than what I've seen from you before.

The Camerawork. Though you did have many a pan and zoom a little "off" of the style in which 24's cameramen do them, the "lingering" camera style worked out okay. Leagues better than anything I've seen framed from anything having to do with that dreadful superhero movie. biggrin

The Grading. I'm not gonna lie, you did have some wonky parts in this. But it wasn't THAT bad. Good to see you've finally tried to go consistent and clear in your grading scheme, rathewr than just randomly coloring crap on the screen. I've seen Phone Box, one of the stargates, and all your stuff surrounding superhero harry, and the grading in this shows a monumental improvement.

On the whole, this movie was above average, and generally good. Nothing THAT special, but considering who it's from, and what I've seen from them in the past, this stands out among the rest. I agree with Sollthar in saying I don't think you've made as much improvement to your technique as you should have, but I believe you and I have had that conversation many a time before; and in this case, you have improved, this is the only thing I've seen from you where I didn't feel embarassed for you when I was watching it (mainly because I find the whiny British men in your movies patheticly embarassing wink )

All-in-all, if I had to vote, I'd give this a solid 3/5, and good luck on future ventures.
Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006, 2:55pm

Post 24 of 38

Xcession

Force: 42802 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 1964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User Windows User

SuperUser

This is far better than everything else you've made, so firstly i wanna dwell on that point: There is a plot to speak of, the acting was better, the camerawork was better, the grading was better and the as a whole the cinematography was better.

There were still numerous issues though, things i would have thought you could have tidied up. Like the driving scene ("yeah, go ahead snowy") which looked terrible, had pauses in dialogue which made me wince and seemed almost completely redundant anyway. Then followed the "freeze!" scene, where there was some hilariously limp-wristed hand slapping as the offender was nicked.

The voice of 'control' could have done with some radio static and a generally better voice actress (aside: although she did remind me of Normal Lovett as Holly in Red Dwarf, which amused me).

Your main actor reminded me quite a bit of Michael Chiklis actually, which i'd have never expected. He seemed to get better as time went on, so kudos where due, although his opening line still made my heart sink - i was sure i was about to witness another of his "i can't watch" performances. For the record though, despite his improvements, his acting falls apart under those lingering camera shots - he can't seem to maintain character in his facial expressions.

I'd have liked to see some better locations. While i appreciate you can't jet off to Orange County and you did go to some effort with the driving scene, i think the offender could have at least lived somewhere better than a bog-standard 'town house' with the standard brick garden.

Its a shame the compression is so horrific. I'd quite like to see a higher quality version though, if you could provide one.

While i generally think this short is rather good, its only left me irritated in the long run - why did we have to sit through those cringeworthily childish movies before this? I appreciate there is a learning curve, but still. Please never make those other kind of movies again. Make ones like this. This was good.

FWIW, i'd give this a 4/5.
Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006, 6:54pm

Post 25 of 38

LilCaesars

Force: 480 | Joined: 27th Dec 2004 | Posts: 530

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

b4uask30male wrote:


I agree I hate bluescreen work, give me your email address and i'll send you the file for you to re-do the bluescreen that would really be great thanks.

I'm glad your willing to help, if you know a woman (not girl) can you get them to do the voice for me.
I'm not sure if this is where you are coming from, but don't try this "Oh well let's see you do it better" stuff. I am currently editing and shooting two films and don't have the time to help you, sorry.
Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006, 7:15pm

Post 26 of 38

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

I agree with bits and bobs of what's been posted here. I think the overall direction of the posts criticising lack of improvement is a bit harsh, considering that the camerawork and style is a step away from b4uask's usual stuff, & apart from the car bluescreening there are no cheesy effects in sight.

I thought it was pretty good apart from what have already been mentioned by e.g. Ben & Xcession. My main two cents is that you make a certain kind of film, always with an injection of your own humour, & maybe you could try something different by trying your hand at something with no humour at all, & with effects that stand out less. An actioner with no drama & believable, toned down effects, or a drama, for example. The films I've liked the most of yours are your 2 Epic films. I don't agree so much with Sollthar's technical points, but I do agree with this:
I don't see changes, except that it's a fanfilm of another film. You seem to be stuck in the same filmmaking routine.
With this one, I think it's the bad bluescreening that was the main impetus for the (what you may perceive to be) negative comments. It looks cheesy, & most importantly you can tell it's bluescreening. Your past films haven't had the best of effects, they are what they are & look amateur, & the unrealistic bluescreen basically reminds us of those. I'm not really dissing those effects, & don't pretend that I'd do them any better. That's probably why I'm avoiding personally doing any films that are going to lack realism, but it would have been more in the dynamic flow of 24 to actually shoot inside the car on the road.

Overall though, I enjoyed it, capturing the style of 24 well with good camerawork to boot
Posted: Mon, 17th Apr 2006, 8:20am

Post 27 of 38

b4uask30male

Force: 5619 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2002 | Posts: 3497

Windows User

Gold Member

Thanks guys, I was limited on time and to save the other film crew following me around to different locations I thought i'd use the bluescreen, it made there filming of me look better but as you can see it lets my film down.
I've taken your points onboard (like i did last time with the colour grading and i've tried to improve it on this film)

I think the next time I want to use bluescreen I'll have a long hard think and i'll see if there is anyway i can do without it, I guess it can be a bit too easy to say "oh, i'll stick a bluescreen shot here" so i'll make more of an effort to avoid it. i'm not very good a keying out and it shows.

Once again I honestly do listen to your views.
Posted: Mon, 17th Apr 2006, 9:54am

Post 28 of 38

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Is there any chance for us outside of the UK to see this docu about you guys? I'd be surely interested in that!


On another note, what ever happened to superhero harry? Is it finished? Have you found a distributor? Haven't heard of it in a long time - hope you're doing alright with it!
Posted: Mon, 17th Apr 2006, 12:05pm

Post 29 of 38

ashman

Force: 4913 | Joined: 10th Sep 2005 | Posts: 904

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Well I hate to say it but I didn't like this at all, everything was done, well, pretty badly actually. It looked sloppy and rushed, but as you said, you only had one day to film it. The only thing I kinda liked was the idea of the hosepipe ban and CUTE trying to stop everyone wasting water. The sound was so bad, It may have been compression but some parts clipped leaving the sound to distort. I'm not saying your a bad filmmaker, I'm saying you definitely needed more time in pre production, and seeing you only had a script ready the day before, thats very harsh on you, the director. Remember you reap what you sow, planning is the key, but I really think it won't be long before you bring some thing out that will surprise everyone. I fully understand the technical difficulties of making a film, I'm positive you'll have these sorted on the next production.
Posted: Mon, 17th Apr 2006, 4:03pm

Post 30 of 38

b4uask30male

Force: 5619 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2002 | Posts: 3497

Windows User

Gold Member

Sollthar wrote:

Is there any chance for us outside of the UK to see this docu about you guys? I'd be surely interested in that!


On another note, what ever happened to superhero harry? Is it finished? Have you found a distributor? Haven't heard of it in a long time - hope you're doing alright with it!
Hi
Yes as soon as I know the air date, they said if it's aired it will be within 3 weeks, they shot a starwars fanfilm before they shot me so in order they have to make sure that's in the show first.
I filmed them filming me, just incase it doesn't get shown on tv as a little reminder for that day.
I'll grab the show and upload it (it's 45 minutes long) so i'll just upload the parts about fanfilms.

Superhero Harry is still going fine, I stopped over Christmas as the weather was bad and I wanted the film to be bright and chearful.
I've edited everything i've shot and i've just got about 2 more days worth of filming left, so release should be June.
(Speaking of distributors I thought this might interest some of you guys, I sent my feature film 2 EPIC into Cannes this year, I knew in my heart nothing would happen but I just wanted to see what the deal was with it, anyway the good news is they watched it smile the bad news was they sent me an email saying it's not be accepted due to the quailty.)
What this means is: the first 20 minutes of 2 EPIC was shot on a 1CDD camera then the rest on a 3CCD DV camera, they require the film to have at least been shot on HD 2k (this according to their website is so that if selected it can be shown on their cinema screen)
Since then I've got 2 EPIC on propeller TV (sky) although i've sent them the film and they agreed to show it, i've yet to return their copyright forms (a hell of a lot, really, they want to know each time the music changes at what timecode and who done the music, 2 EPIC music is ok to use a guy called phil close done it, but they want to know the title and recorded date, way lot of work)
Anyway I've also contacted some cinema's that screen independant films aswell as mainstream and one cinema so far has said they would screen 2 EPIC, (I doubt I'll get money but it's the thought that other people can see it in a cinema)
Sorry to waffle on. sad
Posted: Mon, 17th Apr 2006, 6:25pm

Post 31 of 38

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

they sent me an email saying it's not be accepted due to the quailty
They said that? That's unusual, they tend to send emails that just say "Sorry, your film has not made the official selection of the Festival de Cannes" rather than giving any reasons (fom what I've seen of other people's replies etc). Odd that they should specifically mention the quality then.

Cheers,
Arktic.
Posted: Mon, 17th Apr 2006, 9:01pm

Post 32 of 38

b4uask30male

Force: 5619 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2002 | Posts: 3497

Windows User

Gold Member

I guess if you think about it from there point of view, If they didn't say that i would proberly have sent in about 100 of my home made films.

So, it makes sense to nip it in the bud before they spend WEEKS going through home made crap, so I'm not upset at all by what they said.
Posted: Mon, 17th Apr 2006, 9:20pm

Post 33 of 38

er-no

Force: 9531 | Joined: 24th Sep 2002 | Posts: 3964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I really don't think Cannes would turn away a fantastic submission based on what it was shot on. A good film is a good film.

You shouldn't be so wrapped up in what medium something was shot on, especially as you try and delivery comedy in most of your pieces, comedy is something that is funny - doesnt matter of the quality in relation to 3CCD to film.

I guess I could fire the main example of 28 Days Later, but thats a dirty track because I didn't like the film that much, anyways, I hope to read that SuperHeroHarry has made it into Cannes for next year wink

Good luck Ian.
Posted: Mon, 17th Apr 2006, 11:14pm

Post 34 of 38

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Yeah, I know if films that were shot with a simple DV cam and shown at cannes.
When they mention "quality", they most likely don't refer to the resolution of the image, and if, it's an excuse - because they do show the occasional DV shot film.

Still, it's a a modern problem that everyone can afford a camera now and everyone does homemovies. So they need to somehow make sure, they don't have to watch through hours of crap, so many festivals have "35mm only" rules now.
Posted: Tue, 18th Apr 2006, 12:06am

Post 35 of 38

Alex Reeve

Force: 470 | Joined: 3rd Oct 2005 | Posts: 364

MacOS User

Member

b4uask30male wrote:

the bad news was they sent me an email saying it's not be accepted due to the quailty.)
What this means is: the first 20 minutes of 2 EPIC was shot on a 1CDD camera then the rest on a 3CCD DV camera, they require the film to have at least been shot on HD 2k (this according to their website is so that if selected it can be shown on their cinema screen)(
Thomas Vinterberg won the Jury prize at the 1998 Cannes festival for Festen. That film was shot on standard definition video. Lars Von Triers Idioterne (The Idiots) was also nominated the same year, again shot standard def. The definition/quality of camera clearly wasn't the only issue.
I'm pretty sure, had you been picked, that you would have been required to provide a 35mm print, which would have cost you around £160 a minute.

Getting back on topic, 23 is probably the most enjoyable thing I've seen you do; I'm not going to critique, as all the points have been covered now.
Posted: Tue, 18th Apr 2006, 1:36am

Post 36 of 38

Steeb

Force: 1650 | Joined: 14th Nov 2004 | Posts: 217

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

b4uask30male wrote:


(Speaking of distributors I thought this might interest some of you guys, I sent my feature film 2 EPIC into Cannes this year, I knew in my heart nothing would happen but I just wanted to see what the deal was with it, anyway the good news is they watched it smile the bad news was they sent me an email saying it's not be accepted due to the quailty.)
What this means is: the first 20 minutes of 2 EPIC was shot on a 1CDD camera then the rest on a 3CCD DV camera, they require the film to have at least been shot on HD 2k (this according to their website is so that if selected it can be shown on their cinema screen)
I don't mean to be a ball-buster here, but this is the e-mail from Cannes you posted on your own site's forum:

Dear Ian PATERSON

We regret to inform you that your film has not been selected by the Selection Committee of the Festival de Cannes for its Official Selection (Competition, Out of Competition, Un Certain Regard).

Yours sincerely,
Christian Jeune



Here's the direct link.

I didn't see any mention of quality in there...
Posted: Tue, 18th Apr 2006, 3:47am

Post 37 of 38

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Steeb wrote:

b4uask30male wrote:


(Speaking of distributors I thought this might interest some of you guys, I sent my feature film 2 EPIC into Cannes this year, I knew in my heart nothing would happen but I just wanted to see what the deal was with it, anyway the good news is they watched it smile the bad news was they sent me an email saying it's not be accepted due to the quailty.)
What this means is: the first 20 minutes of 2 EPIC was shot on a 1CDD camera then the rest on a 3CCD DV camera, they require the film to have at least been shot on HD 2k (this according to their website is so that if selected it can be shown on their cinema screen)
I don't mean to be a ball-buster here, but this is the e-mail from Cannes you posted on your own site's forum:

Dear Ian PATERSON

We regret to inform you that your film has not been selected by the Selection Committee of the Festival de Cannes for its Official Selection (Competition, Out of Competition, Un Certain Regard).

Yours sincerely,
Christian Jeune



Here's the direct link.

I didn't see any mention of quality in there...
Oooh, he served you!

But seriously, they want something with audio mastered to 5.1 and above par picture, but I foubt they wouldn't accept something shot on a 3CCD. Sundowning went to Cannes, I believe, and that was shot on a GL2.[
Posted: Tue, 18th Apr 2006, 11:27am

Post 38 of 38

davlin

Force: 1572 | Joined: 21st Jan 2002 | Posts: 1088

EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I think that this little movie is "Superteams" best effort so far .
You can see improvements in all areas of the production and considering they were being filmed as they were filming must not have helped.
This ,if i'm reading posts correctly, was an "off the top the head" production to please C5 crew and in that context it is rather an incredible piece of work.

I found this to be thoroughly enjoyable and full of fun plus it looked rather cool with some of the 24 style cam work.
I hope Ian will continue doing this type of movie (shorts) and if he can find time possibly get some more varied locations to work in.

My family watched this gem and all agreed it was really good at lampooning our favourite tv series 24 with an added plus of sideswiping our political leaders.....well done ...... biggrin

Keep up the good work "Superteam"....your improvements are very
noticeable and worthwhile.

O'L Dav