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

All By Himself

Posted: Fri, 4th Aug 2006, 11:30am

Post 1 of 22

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

It's vintage Atomic!

Made way back in the days of "The Friendship" (if you can even remember that!), this movie chronicles the harsh day-to-day struggle of a lonely teen. It was shot on an XL1 and edited in the following 10 hours or so.

Yes, the titles are horribly tracked. Yeah, we know, and we can do better titles now. Don't you worry 'bout that.

This comedy should prove to be more substantial than "The Baby" or "The PB&J", so get ready to sink your teeth into this one.

Enjoy.


More Info
Posted: Fri, 4th Aug 2006, 1:37pm

Post 2 of 22

Jazzmanian

Force: 765 | Joined: 3rd May 2006 | Posts: 719

CompositeLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

I'm sensing a pattern developing here. And I don't know if this is some sort of regional difference kind of thing, or maybe a generational age gap / cultural climate situation, but you and I have very different visions of "comedy" as such. wink

First of all, though, the film was very well edited in post and you kep the story line moving in a consistent direction throughout. I had no trouble follwing it and it was very cohesive in that respect. Nice job on that. Also, the film quality was nice and crisp throughout the majority of the film and movement of the actors in frame kept to the rules nicely and was easy on the eye. Good work.

I'm reviewing this film as a comedy because that's how you classified it in the description. (Unless I misunderstood you.) Is it funnier than the PB&J? Yes. But to allow me to get a bit further inside your head for purposes of understanding your future productions, could you share with us your intent, speaking as the filmmaker, as to at what point the film left the "setup" for the joke, if you will, and begins delivering the comedic value? (Before you get all up in arms, let me continue. I know that might have come off harsh sounding, but it's not.) Here's my issue on that score... I watched the first, oh... I'd have to say 70% of the film and I wasn't seeing anything that looked like it was intending to be funny. I thought it was more of a "set up for the joke" if you will. Then I think I finally started to see the humorous portions of it during.... 1.) the ping pong scene, and 2.) the dog attack, obviously. That got some laughs out of me. So, if that's what you intended, then I get it and well done on the comedy angle. If the whole thing was supposed to be funny, however, then I once again failed to get most of the humor. It looked more like trying to depict the protagonist as being really pathetic and sad, where nobody would play with him, talk to him, no friends, etc.

There were the two scenes of playing instruments, piano and later drums, where I'll confess I thought I knew where the film was going. I was kind of waiting for this to turn into a spoof music video where the actor was going to show up on stage lip synching the song. That would have been a hilarious spoof, with a younger male belting out that classic tune, perhaps with some fake tears rolling down his face or something. But then the music video aspect of it just sort of disappeared and I saw I was on the wrong track with where you were going.

On to the technical aspects. Good framing throughout most of it. I was shocked to see that, unlike your later work, the grading on this one was not only *not* massively contrasted to the point of being dark, but in fact some of the outdoor scenes in particular looked a little on the "washed out" side and almost undergraded. It's kind of the opposite of most of what I've seen you do. Then again, you point out that this was one of your earlier pieces and maybe your preferences and choices in post edit grading, etc. have changed over time.

As to the camera work, focus, etc. it was pretty solid throughout, but a couple shots in particular threw me off which I wanted to ask about. The first was the short scene in the park where the actor is pushing the swing. The camera focus jumps back and forth twice between focusing on the actor's face and then on the swing in extreme closeup as it swings in and out of the frame. Was that intentional or was the camera on autofocus and just trying to keep up with the shifting center of field? If it was intentional, I definitely didn't like it. Rather than some sort of "artsy" effect I found it disorienting.

The second one was the piano shot. It starts out low, but it's very dark and up so close that I had no idea it was a piano until the angle of view reached up over the top. Then the focus seemed to stay for an uncomfortable period on the wood ofthe piano lid, with the actor way back beyond the focus zone, well back in the depth of field. Then it finally shifted to focus on the actor. That one threw me off a bit.

The fades on the music where it disappers to allow for some dialogue and background noise, then cutting back into the song were kind of abrupt and put me off a bit. But obviously the choice of music (not getting into any copyright issues here) was perfect for the theme and you timed the action to it really well. I especially liked the cut to the drum set when the percussion in the song kicks in.

Given that, as you say, this was one of your earliest works, I gave it a three. I think I'd have needed to laugh a lot more to bump it all the way to a four. Still a nice job overall, though.
Posted: Fri, 4th Aug 2006, 4:24pm

Post 3 of 22

ben3308

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

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

The difference between the setup and the execution of the comedy is subtle. It sets up that he's lonely and unappreciated in the first half (little bro ignoring him) and that he keeps to himself (playing piano), The smaller comedic thing then come into play (one man foosball, ping pong) which ultimately lead to the overall 'joke', if you will, which is of course the dog attack.

This is more or less a comedic story than a sketch comedy which has a distinct setup and punchline. This is different from "The Baby" and "The PB&J" in that respect.

As for the focus, the swing set shot is merely a rack focus between the coming-into-frame swing and the actor. Racked bak and forth, twice. Intentional, not auto focus. With the piano, same thing, focus just wasn't racked fast enough. (Keep in mind this is using a different, new camera for the first time)
Posted: Sat, 5th Aug 2006, 1:39pm

Post 4 of 22

madhammy

Force: 2600 | Joined: 19th Sep 2005 | Posts: 6

VisionLab User VideoWrap User

Gold Member

lol! mate! that film was pretty good, i really really felt an awwwww moment when the shot of the gamecube playing...the look on his face! Not too bad with the dog shot, well done!
Posted: Sat, 5th Aug 2006, 7:06pm

Post 5 of 22

Limey

Force: 547 | Joined: 11th Sep 2005 | Posts: 752

Gold Member

This film was great. His face was one of the funniest things I've seen. The story was good and it had a good mix of sandness and comedy. The swing shot was very good.
So
5/5
Posted: Sat, 5th Aug 2006, 7:33pm

Post 6 of 22

ben3308

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

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

You know, they actually threw the dog through the air. Just thought I'd get that out in the open.

^^^(sarcasm)^^^

Last edited Sat, 5th Aug 2006, 9:09pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Sat, 5th Aug 2006, 7:42pm

Post 7 of 22

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Limey12345 wrote:

it had a good mix of sandness and comedy
That's how we like to keep things here at Atomic Productions.


A good mix of sandness and comedy.
Posted: Sat, 5th Aug 2006, 9:01pm

Post 8 of 22

Jazzmanian

Force: 765 | Joined: 3rd May 2006 | Posts: 719

CompositeLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

You know, they actually threw the dog through the air.
If your purpose, as it so often seems to be, is just to get a negative response, then it worked. Consider mine dropped to a rating of one.
Posted: Sat, 5th Aug 2006, 9:08pm

Post 9 of 22

ben3308

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

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

What? Hey man, what I said was so ludicrous I thought it was obviously a joke. Who would/could throw a dog that far, and why? It was a joke, my man.

Why would I want a negative response? The post has been fixed, so now we're clear.

Last edited Sat, 5th Aug 2006, 9:14pm; edited 2 times in total.

Posted: Sat, 5th Aug 2006, 9:11pm

Post 10 of 22

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

That's absolutely ridiculous. Why would you lower a rating because of a users comments who had no work on the movie, nor submitted it?
Posted: Sat, 5th Aug 2006, 9:14pm

Post 11 of 22

Jazzmanian

Force: 765 | Joined: 3rd May 2006 | Posts: 719

CompositeLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

ben3308 wrote:

What? Hey man, what I said was so ludicrous I thought it was obviously a joke. Who would/could throw a dog that far, and why? It was a joke, my man.

Why would I want a negative response? The post has been fixed, so now we're clear.
Then consider my rating back up to a three, but that's not even remotely close to being funny and it wasn't obvious at all. Animal abuse is no joke. We work at a shelter and house a number of rescue animals, and I've seen some sick crap done in the name of entertainment... like people who think cock fighting is a sport or tying cats tails together, etc.
Posted: Sat, 5th Aug 2006, 9:16pm

Post 12 of 22

ben3308

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

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I guess it's cause you work at a shelter that you know the reality of animal abuse, but to me its something unfathomable. It seemed ludicrous to me that you'd even insinuate it because it's so......unreal. Maybe you'll see what I mean, I dunno.

People tie cats' tails together? How? Why?

Last edited Sat, 5th Aug 2006, 9:27pm; edited 2 times in total.

Posted: Sat, 5th Aug 2006, 9:25pm

Post 13 of 22

Joshua Davies

Force: 25400 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 3029

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

FXhome Team Member

I'm 100% against animal cruelty but I admit that the dog section was the bit I found most funny. This was partly because it was so obvious where the stuffed toy was used rather than the very cute dog, and partly because you edited it together really well so that the final throwing bit really worked (in a comedy manner). Reminded me of Sollthars use of the toy truck in "The Test".

I didn't find the rest of it laugh-out-loud funny (but then comedy is subjective), but I still wanted to watch the whole thing. The production elements all seems solid enough which helped to keep me interested as well.

Good stuff.

Last edited Sat, 5th Aug 2006, 9:35pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Sat, 5th Aug 2006, 9:31pm

Post 14 of 22

ben3308

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

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Hey guys, quick question here:

Is it just me, or is my server running a little slow? Were your downloads form it unecessarily slow?

Get back to me on it if you can.

Thanks, Ben
Posted: Sat, 5th Aug 2006, 9:34pm

Post 15 of 22

Joshua Davies

Force: 25400 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 3029

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

FXhome Team Member

I did find it really slow, but I put it down to my other network traffic. Might be worth checking on it.
Posted: Sun, 6th Aug 2006, 3:46am

Post 16 of 22

ben3308

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

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I'm gonna check my bandwith stats now, I think someone's leeching off it or something.
Posted: Sun, 6th Aug 2006, 7:55am

Post 17 of 22

SlothPaladin

Force: 2900 | Joined: 30th Nov 2004 | Posts: 637

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

campy
Posted: Sun, 6th Aug 2006, 8:01am

Post 18 of 22

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Just like Batman!
Posted: Mon, 7th Aug 2006, 12:40pm

Post 19 of 22

ssj john

Force: 563 | Joined: 4th Nov 2003 | Posts: 795

Windows User MacOS User

Member

I can't help but laugh everytime I see your face in that frown. Entertaining for sure guys. But I will be honest, A little pointless in my opinion. We're you guys really bored when you thought this up or is this months and months of idea gathering and study?

I would like to see a big production from you guys soon *cough* splinter cell*cough* Atomic productions has got a certain style. Similar to ours in some ways. But very unique, which we all can agree is very good.

4/5 for me!
Posted: Wed, 9th Aug 2006, 10:01pm

Post 20 of 22

Jrad

Force: 230 | Joined: 30th Apr 2005 | Posts: 478

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

haha...this movie is pretty much my whole summer
Posted: Sat, 12th Aug 2006, 1:32am

Post 21 of 22

MC Turtl3n3ck

Force: 218 | Joined: 5th Jun 2006 | Posts: 111

Windows User

Member

Big Kahuna wrote:

Hamburgers. The cornerstone of any nutritious breakfast.

Nice name.

August 18th, everyone go see Snakes on A mother#$%^*& Plane
Posted: Fri, 10th Nov 2006, 11:14pm

Post 22 of 22

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

neat job