T rex Troll and Hero fight
Posted: Sun, 17th Dec 2006, 10:01am
Post 1 of 41
Hope you don't mind me sharing some CGI scenes with you, it's all finsihed so if you notice things that could be improved I can't change them http://www.metacafe.com/watch/336834/ultimate_fight_hero_vs_t_rex_and_troll/
Posted: Sun, 17th Dec 2006, 1:44pm
Post 2 of 41
Super Hero Harry rides again! Oh, and I loved the cameo appearance by Gatso.
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 11:04am
Post 3 of 41
Hehe, the effects lack of quality is surely made up for by the sheer quantity. Dinosaurs, Lightning bolts, Tornados, everything x1000.
I really liked some of the animation of the troll! Especially the shot where he came across the corner, that was neatly animated - congratulations should that be keyframed, that's a really good job!
so if you notice things that could be improved I can't change them
I wouldn't change anything anyways. The dodgy compositing, rudimentary audio design and hilarious acting work made it pretty funny to watch, especially since I personally didn't get anything of what was going on. I'm not sure if it would work that well if the effects would look good, if you know what I mean. I think the overly amateurish look of the film serves it well for it's comedy purpose.
I definately feel the need to see that film once it's finished.
Does the complete film have some sort of narration or is just random scenes?
How is Distribution going for SHH? Could you find someone to distribute it yet?
Fingers crossed for you guy!
Oh, and I loved the cameo appearance by Gatso.
Hehe, I second that!
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 11:43am
Post 4 of 41
Hehehe, this is brilliant. I never really paid attention to the threads when you advertised SHH before, but i see now what i've been missing.
The genius in this clip, is in how astoundingly bad it all is, its a perfect pastiche of amateur film-making mixing with numerous nods to other genres like OTT anime.
Its the little things which make this so hilarious, like the bizarre way SSH appears to fly standing perfectly upright. Its these seemingly ridiculous things you've added which make this movie not so much famous as infamous, but knowingly loving it all the same! You're like the Ed Wood of the amateur movie world!
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 12:26pm
Post 5 of 41
I knew solly would comment, thats why I put swlsr on the first post, (solthar will leave sly remark)
he hasn't failed me yet.
Thanks, as you know it's a comic book style film and that allows me to get away with the bad cgi, ofcourse Industrial light and magic wanted far too much money, so I had to try myself.
The film is finished on DVD.
The whole film is not random infact those that have seen are blown away but the original and I mean original way the story is told through a comic book, you'll have to buy the dvd, I was sending them out free with the hope of getting feedback, but nearly everyone on here that I posted it to free didn't bother with a comment.
Anyway, all good fun.
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 12:31pm
Post 6 of 41
I posted a fair comment your way.
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 1:51pm
Post 7 of 41
thats why I put swlsr on the first post, (solthar will leave sly remark) he hasn't failed me yet.
Hehe, that's really cute. I feel honored.
Odd, I didn't even know the film was finished - must have gone right past me. No one told me and I can't recall seeing a thread here of it. How weird.
I'll definately get hold of the final film and write a comment on it, no worries.
those that have seen it are blown away
I've heard the talk, yes. Can't wait to see it myself.
The film is finished on DVD.
So you got a distributor then? I remember that you were trying to find one.
Didn't they mind the fact you used copyrighted music? How did you clear the rights for selling DVD's with licensed music on it?
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 2:10pm
Post 8 of 41
The music is all copyright free, well not free but with permission, I went to a large music site on the net and listened to loads music, I felt like Simon Cowl going through all the music, anyway the ones I liked I email, told them it was for a zero budget film, showed them the trailer and they all agreed I could use their music, a few even offered to write music for it.
No distribution deal yet, so you don't have worry, there's room for both of us in Hollywood, but between you and me I know the quality or should I same production value is not up to scratch and thus as I've said before I'll always believe my films will be distributed they may not be.
That being said the "Cowboys and Aliens" film i'm shooting next year has a proper budget
and we have Holly from red dwarf interested in a part, He will be paid and a guy from blake 7, i've never watched it so can't tell you who he played, so with the budget and excellent script by me, that film I know will get a distributor.
I didn't start a new thread offering SHH as YOU told me not to make up new threads about my films, so I quiety mentioned it on an older post about SHH.
I'll gladly send you the DVD, remember it's in the same vain as Turicon so try to judge it as you would that film, no budget, made on weekends etc.
Thanks once again for taking the time.
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 2:44pm
Post 9 of 41
Well, as you've posted clips, I assume you want feedback and critqué, right?
To be brutally honest, I see what everyone is saying about how funny this is because it's so bad, but I disagree.
To me, it's so bad that it's just bad.
I don't mean to be offensive here, but personally, I thought that it was really pretty horrible, and I didn't get a sense of postmodern or ironic humour to the poorly done elements (bad CG, poor effects integration etc).
I appreciate that we're all only amateurs, but there were some really poor effects in this that I think could have been resolved with a little effort. The electricity on the telegraph pole, for example - it looked fake. I know you can say that you were going for a 'comic book style', but don't use that as an excuse for poorly integrated effects. Look at Sin City - that had a clear comic book style, but the effects didn't stick out like a sore thumb.
There were other problems and niggles - the editing left a lot to be desired for me, there was no sense of continuity or a storyline to this scene, just lots of shots of dinosaurs and SHH in different locations. Also, the use of narration to act as exposition really didn't work for me, it again struck me as a 'lazy' way of getting the story accross. You should learn to tell a story through actions rather than dialogue (i.e. don't have a narrator say "He's got stuck on the other side of the portal", actually demonstrate what's happened through action).
But as they say, horses for courses and all that. Maybe it's just not my cup of tea.
PS: "but between you and me I know the quality or should I same production value is not up to scratch and thus as I've said before I'll always believe my films will be distributed they may not be." - I actually don't have a clue what on earth you meant by that!
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 2:54pm
Post 10 of 41
The excellent news with all your comments is the cgi, so you know to watch out when I remake the award winning Call me a psycho, that has no effects in it, thus.... I'm god.
Just got a review on DVD reviewer, http://www.dvd.reviewer.co.uk/reviews/review.asp?Index=5524&User=627
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 2:58pm
Post 11 of 41
b4uask30male wrote:Thanks, as you know it's a comic book style film and that allows me to get away with the bad cgi
I'm not really sure what to make of that statement, on so many levels.
For a start, comic book movies and comic book-influenced movies for the last 10 years-or-so have been at the cutting edge of special effects, or at least have featured very high budgets and decent production values - Spiderman, Batman, Blade, Hellboy, Fantastic Four, Superman. So if that's what you meant, your comment simply doesn't make sense.
On the other hand, if you were implying that making it a comic book movie somehow allows for bad quality, then that's also a massive mistake to make.
'Comic book' does not equal shoddy, or cheap, or silly. If you're using that as an excuse, then it's an odd one: People that dislike comic books/comic book movies in general will stay away from SHH for exactly that reason; people that love comic books or comic book movies, however, will simply be insulted by your derogatory attitude.
If the latter is indeed what you were insinuating, then I would suggest you read some decent comics and analyse some comic book movies carefully before making assumptions and passing judgement.
Some amateur filmmakers do seem to be making the assumption that 'comic book' is somehow a license to not bother, which perplexes me, or to throw storytelling cohesion out the window. I suspect that's due to the more lacklustre comic book-style movies such as The Mummy, the aforementioned Fantastic Four, Catwoman et al. Why on earth you'd be wanting to emulate that particular subsection of the genre I have no idea, however.
Perhaps you could clarify what you meant by that statement. As you can probably tell, I'm rather perplexed by it currently.
Regarding the review over at DVD Reviewer, it's a great shame the reviewer finished with random rants about film students and BBC cinematography - both highly unprofessional comments that are utterly irrelevant to SHH and show the reviewer to have something of an agenda beyond giving an honest review. It's a shame, as otherwise it's a really great review of which you should be proud.
Last edited Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 4:24pm; edited 1 times in total.
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 3:09pm
Post 12 of 41
Ok Ian I'm going to be honest with you now. SHH is a really bad production all round and let me explain my reasons why I have come to this conclusion.
First of all the foundation for a good movie, the script. What is the story in SHH all about? Because as an audience member I really don't know and it's all a bit vague. I know he's a hero but why does he want to be one? You never fully explore this and it all becomes a bit random. In fact all the characters are this way making a mish mash of ideas that never seem to come together. Why does the main bad guy's face morph into a troll thing and in fact why does he attack people in the first place
Why do dinosaurs attack the town and why do they come from another universe?
Saying it's a comic book doesn't mean random things work. The characters are all very weak in personality and seem more like bad actors improvising on the spot.
Next up is locations. Your story is set in a big city like metropolis, but it looks like its been shot in a very small town which is actually one big industrial estate with one shop. You never give the impression that there is a living breathing city, just a ghost town.
Acting is pretty appauling, I don't believe any of the characters in this script, they all seem uncomfortable with the lines and every word that passes their lips seems faulty.
The sound work is very bad as is the camera work, You can actually hear different sound levels on each cut be it wind or traffic to people shouting in the distance. The fight scenes have characters that don't even connect their punches and can clearly be seen missing by at least one foot. I don't know if your serious or making fun out of filmmakers, I'm building this write up on the basis your serious about filmmaking. You reply alot with if you had the money to make a film it would be good, I don't believe this is the case. If you really do maybe you should be a producer and hire filmmakers & scriptwriters to make these movies.
I seriously can't believe that any of these films would ever get distributed, the production just doesn't have the quality it needs to sell. I really hope you don't put your own money into these movies because you could be spending it in much wiser ways. If you continue to make films, which I know you will, you need to start learning techniques. Start small and then move onto features. Remember it's about quality not quantity, I'd much rather watch 2mins of a good quality short than a poorly shot feature.
Please just take some advice instead of ignoring what people say, were here to help if you give us a chance. We can't help those that refuse to listen.
Good Luck with your new project
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 4:35pm
Post 13 of 41
I'll wait for my DVD to arrive and add my comment to this thread once I've seen it.
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 4:46pm
Post 14 of 41
Thanks again, glad you liked it, the cgi is not bad, not compared to other amateur films, but compared to hollywood they are not so great, people that watch my film normaly know it's shot with no budget and thus can be forgiven for any bad cgi (Except on here where I get grilled
and with it being a comic book normal people that read comics expect sort of comic book style effects and because my effects are comic book meaning they look a bit cartoonish then it works well, show me a film on here with no budget and that amount of effects that's better than what I done, now that last comment will upset people and i'll get the normal response that people think i'm the best etc, but i'm serious, i'd like to see films that have done a feature film as I'd glady ask for their help, see i'm not all perfect at cgi, never said I was
Can't remeber who said it, but pound for pound against any other film and this comes out on top.
Always welcome comments, because when I make it big, and I will so no need to worry about that, I need to be able to handle all sort of comments, Thats why I post on here, everywhere people are happy to watch it as film and most people that watch it are none film makers so they give me their views from the heart, but on here I always get comments about cgi as most people on here spend ages doing a 20 second cgi test and perfect it, sadly i don't have that time to do that
but anyway It's great to read or not in some cases the above comments, I used to be all angry when I read negative comments, ofcourse we all want perfect replies but now as time goes on I can read posts and only pick out bits that will help insted of reading it all, most of the time they start with "to be honest" hehehe
While I've got you captive readers, I'm shooting a film in Kent in a cowboy town should be July, it's been pushed back, but anyone interested in helping out in anyway would be paid and very welcome.
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 4:51pm
Post 15 of 41
b4uask, I think you need to use more full stops in your sentences. I could not really understand your last post.
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 4:52pm
Post 16 of 41
What are you on about
I was refering to your filmmaking skills not effects. Your clearly not open to suggestions and reality is very deluded for you.
Because of your unwillingness to accept any help and your big ego gets in the way I will refrain from offering you any advice as it's clear your set up.
Good Luck with your projects
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 4:55pm
Post 17 of 41
I'm sorry Ian, alot of people have tried to give you the criticism you need in order to improve and time and time again you've not reacted in a way which is beneficial. You say that when you 'make it big' you won't need to worry about our commentary but the fact of that matter is simply that you have never listened.
There are countless things wrong with the clip you posted. Problems which range over every aspect of your film making. Watching you reason with each one individually and out of context is painful. There are many better and more experienced film makers than you on this site - perhaps when they give you advice you should listen.
Unfortunately for you however, your attitude and ego is quickly killing off people who are willing to help you. I'm joining Ashman on this one. And whilst I wish you luck - I can no longer offer my support.
Last edited Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 5:04pm; edited 1 times in total.
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 5:04pm
Post 18 of 41
You do realise none of these comments will have any effect, right?
If b4 admits to skimming and only looking at the bits which tell him what he wants to hear, he's going to skip the bits which tell it like it really is every time. He'll never make it "big" as such, so its just not worth the effort.
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 5:11pm
Post 19 of 41
I wouldn't go as far as to call this an "amateur" or "independant" movie as it doesn't have the quality, skill and commitment to technique required to reach that level in my book.
That being said, in the context of "home movies" Super Hero Harry looks pretty good to me!
There has been lots of effort spent putting together some fairly complex 3D animation and compositing and I'm sure it took all of B4s spare time to film and edit. More importantly, I'm sure his team had a lot of fun making it which I'm sure is the main point in the end.
I hope the film does well for you B4 and you continue to move forward. Lets try and keep it nice round here guys.
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 5:20pm
Post 20 of 41
Honestly I think the best thing would be to leave b4 alone. It's not fair what happens here.
Quite obviously to everyone, Ian has a somewhat unique perspective of how the world works and on how his films are and this should be respected.
To Ian's defense: Not everyone can have talent for filmmaking. Some people just like doing it, even if they don't get the basics right no matter how hard they try. B4 loves doing what he's doing and keeps doing it. And that's a good thing! Many "filmmakers" only talk about filmmaking and never actually make films...
I don't think he doesn't want to improve, I believe he just doesn't get how and where judging from his responsed in this or most other threads.
I think xcession is right: Nothing anyone says will make any difference.
I withdraw from commenting on superteam movies from now on because I just see no point in it.
But I do want to commend Ian on his enthusiasm in filmmaking and wish him all the best for his future, no matter where it leads him. At the end of day, he makes films. And that's the most important thing!
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 5:43pm
Post 21 of 41
show me a film on here with no budget and that amount of effects that's better than what I doneDark Resurrection
Here's a no-budget film (none of the actors or crew got paid, and the only money spent was on costume/props, as with SHH). And it's also very effects heavy. And it's amazing.
It is, indeed, a film with no budget and more than that ammount of effects, which is better than 'what you done' [sic].
I agree with much that has been said by other people, so I don't think I need to say anything else.
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 5:47pm
Post 22 of 41
many thanks schwar, if you want a free dvd let me know, I'll be more than happy to send it.
Buttom line is I know what you guys are saying, what lets me down is not stories as they in my view very good, it's not the actors as we all know they are just friends, it's the cgi in my films that let me down, I know it but for some reason the kinda films I want to make at this point are with CGI, since 85 to 2002 (when i found alamdv) all my films were normal films, mostly comedies and one won an award in 1992.
I like cgi, think it's a great tool for adding an extra bit to a story, but the problem it's soooo hard to get cgi right, even superman returns has a few dodgy bits.
I'll extend the free offer of the DVD of SHH, the only thing I ask is not to watch it for review reasons, but to watch it as entertainment then you should enjoy it.
Those wanting a DVD please send me a pm with your address.
Thanks once again, I still love you guys. (blame alamdv for getting me into effects)
Dark Resurrection. wow, that was good, was it done by guys on the net like other of those types or done by one guy? either way very impressive
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 10:20pm
Post 23 of 41
b4uask30male wrote:but on here I always get comments about cgi as most people on here spend ages doing a 20 second cgi test and perfect it, sadly i don't have that time to do that
I think you need to spend a little more time paying attention to detail. Perfect the basic skills you already know, THEN put them to use. I have to say this is a very ambitious project, I just recommend putting a little more time and effort into it. You're exactly right about the 20 second CGI tests. They do spend lots of time perfecting it. THATS exactly why it's done right. There's no reason to sit back and explain exactly why certain aspects of the film aren't perfect. The truth is no one cares. If you're going to post something that isn't perfect, be prepared for a critique! End of story.
Posted: Mon, 18th Dec 2006, 10:43pm
Post 24 of 41
I know CGI isn't a simple task, certainly not when it comes to compositing into the film YOU had to direct/edit/write etc...
But If you really wanted to "Make it Big", Then I can't see why you wouldn't invest all your time into something more feasible on such a tiny budget.
If you do indeed agree that your Effects are your biggest weakness, Then It's only logic that you'd step away from them at least a LITTLE in order to make a more well rounded professional project.
I've always been a student in this school of thought "Figure out what DOES and DOESN"T work, Then go with what DOES"
Really simple. I think it's fairly clear your CGI is outright laughable, but not in a good way persay. So if your goal is making it in the industry, Then you'll either
A. just keep trying until your as good as ILM.
B. Avoid using excessive FX.
Although, I do admit It's impressive you've made such a long film. I've only been able to keep my length's to short film levels.
Posted: Tue, 19th Dec 2006, 8:00am
Post 25 of 41
B4 I've been around for a while, and I was always impressed with your work, your ways of being extremely helpful to beginners and how you're friendly to everyone.
I thought I would give you a tip though. You're saying that the people you show it to excuse the bad cgi and say that it's still great. That's all fine and good, but you will only rise to that level. It's like my Dad says, if you let yourself, you will only rise to the level of those around you. So don't just meet their expectations and call it a day. BLOW THEM OUT OF THE WATER.
Effects Artists take MONTHS on a single shot. Start by taking a shot and spending a complete week on it, studying the best aspects of how to shoot, and composite it. Watch all of the Bonus Features on dvds and see how the pros do it. That stuff ALWAYS gets me excited and go sprinting for the computer to research their techniques. Whatever you do, don't say you settle for bad quality now and when you make it big, you can give high quality later. Because I guarantee any producer you pitch to will not want to hear that.
Change is good my friend. Good luck with your visual effects work.
Posted: Tue, 19th Dec 2006, 9:02am
Post 26 of 41
I liked this!I bet that got your attention, didn't it?
b4uask30male wrote:Buttom line is I know what you guys are saying, what lets me down is not stories as they in my view very good, it's not the actors as we all know they are just friends, it's the cgi in my films that let me down,
If even one part of your film is bad, you have to strengthen every single other part to balance that out. Wanna know why I never finished Splinter Cell- something that had no budget, a number of effects shots, and actors that were just my friends (one of whom I got into
acting in doing so)? Because I cared about the quality
of it, no matter how long it took to complete a part of it.
Yes, you've finished a movie and it's feature length. Good job, that's dedication. But it take more than that: it takes care and skill and precision, all of which you seem to have thrown out the window. I'm all for a few technical hiccups like handycam or an editing mistake here or there; but when every single second
of the movie is painful to watch, you know there's something wrong.
You need to fix your directing, my man. The cinematography and editing is all a sham, so perhaps find someone else to do that, I honestl just don't think you've got any talent in that area whatsoever. It's not the end of the world, I'm a sucky editor too. Live with it, find someone else. Play towards your strengths. I'm pretty good with a camera and even better with planning movies and directing people's actions and acting, so that's what I do most of the time. It's obvious that you're good at getting people to act and commit to a movie for you, and that you can get a movie done; so play towards that. Be more of a director that is more of a 'people person' and less of a technical director.
People have told me this countless times: don't defend something which has no defense. Sloppy, lazy, uninspired camerawork and editing has an excuse to an extent, but not when it's full-on crap. The technicals of any movie of anybody
who has responded to this thread just completely blow yours out of the water, so don't bother arguing here. Quit the technicals, and stick to old-fashioned directing.
I think I'll leave it at that.
Last edited Tue, 19th Dec 2006, 9:22am; edited 2 times in total.
Posted: Tue, 19th Dec 2006, 9:11am
Post 27 of 41
Great post ben3308! (not so keen on the new bits you edited in)
You're right on the money about making the most of the talents you have. I'm all for people trying out different areas of film making but most people won't excel in more than 1 or 2 areas.
Find what you're good at and stick with it!
Last edited Tue, 19th Dec 2006, 9:17am; edited 1 times in total.
Posted: Tue, 19th Dec 2006, 9:17am
Post 28 of 41
They're gone now.
Posted: Tue, 19th Dec 2006, 9:22am
Post 29 of 41
Some good posts here - excellent advice for everyone, not just b4.
It's important to always push the limits of your skills, as that's the only way to improve and progress. But at the same time it has to be done in a realistic way, otherwise you'll try to run before you can walk and everything will fall apart.
There's lots of points I'd like to reply to directly in b4's last few posts, but instead I'll just say: don't worry about your CGI, it's not a major problem really. The most crucial element of your filmmaking that you really, really need to improve is editing.
Speaking generally, in filmmaking you can often get away with dropping the quality on one or two elements. Acting, cinematography, sound, visual effects, dialogue, plot - all of these can be sub-par (not ALL at the same time, but one or two) and you can still have a highly entertaining film, as shown many times in the FXhome.com cinema. There's a crucial element that holds such films together - editing.
Editing is the binding glue. If you have good editing, you can get away with other areas not being top-notch. Editing dictates the pacing, the story, the style and the cohesiveness of the movie. Without good editing you'll have a non-sensical mess.
Take a look at Waser's movies, or Art of the Saber, or Aculag's early work. They all have a lot of rough edges, but are held together by at least a basic knowledge of editing. If you look at some of the top-rated movies - Lucky Strike, Get Lost, Project One, No!, Light etc - what really makes them all so watchable is the editing. The good editing also makes all the other elements seem even better, as everything just works together. Get Lost, Project One and Light were all zero budget productions, but through good editing they achieve a natural flow that is easy to watch.
I'd highly recommend getting hold of a serious theory book on editing, such as Film Art by Bordwell Thompson. It'll be a dry read, but the most important thing you'll ever research in your filmmaking career. I'd also highly recommend listening to the DVD commentaries on Robert Rodriguez's early movies, particularly El Mariachi and Desperado.
Posted: Tue, 19th Dec 2006, 1:52pm
Post 30 of 41
Thanks for your comments guys, as always we are all learning.
Good news and bad though.
The good news is that the cowboy film won't have any cgi
and has a budget £20,000
The bad news is a film that was shot last year and won't be released til end of 2007 is live action with CGI, trailer will be up 1st Jan.
Posted: Tue, 19th Dec 2006, 2:04pm
Post 31 of 41
The good news is that the cowboy film won't have any cgi and has a budget £20,000
The bad news is a film that was shot last year and won't be released til end of 2007 is live action with CGI, trailer will be up 1st Jan.
I'm confused. You say it doesn't have any CGI but the trailer does. And I don't know what the obsession is with CGI.
Posted: Tue, 19th Dec 2006, 2:40pm
Post 32 of 41
Two different things, ashman. And the cgi thing ias from earlier in the thread.
Posted: Tue, 19th Dec 2006, 5:10pm
Post 33 of 41
b4uask30male wrote:The good news is that the cowboy film won't have any cgi and has a budget £20,000
I can't tell if you're lying, or just plain crazy. Who'd you get to give you that much money? And what kind of example video did you show them?
Posted: Tue, 19th Dec 2006, 5:50pm
Post 34 of 41
Thanks for being so kind with your words, I don't recall ever calling you a liar, but hay your that type of person I guess.
Now, shall I say how I'm getting funding or should I be branded a liar for not telling, even though I think i've mentioned it on another post.
purely by the way you said your comments suggest to me that whatever reply I give you will gladly try either to:, make me look stupid by such means as calling me a liar or call the people who are prepared to invest stupid, either way in your eyes you feel I'm not worthy of such funding.
So after writing this I frankly can be bothered to explain how the funding has been offered.
Hope you understand.
Posted: Tue, 19th Dec 2006, 6:02pm
Post 35 of 41
I frankly can be bothered to explain how the funding has been offered.
Great! Go ahead and explain.
Posted: Tue, 19th Dec 2006, 6:05pm
Post 36 of 41
Seriously though, b4 - even with a decent ammount of money, unless you take on board what everyone here is saying (ben3308, especially), then you'll end up with an end product that you might be happy with, but your 'investors' certainly won't be.
I know you keep saying "Everyone who watches is blown away!" and stuff like that - but if that everyone is your mates from down the pub, and family, of course they're going to be impressed. But there are serious techincal flaws that make your productions seem amateurish. Regardless of CGI, from what I've seen of your editing, it's reasonably accomplished, but it does get incoherant at times. Your cinematography isn't innovative or new, and I really think that in both these areas (as well as CGI) you'd do well to work with other people.
I mean, I know that if I tried to make a feature (or even a short) by myself, I wouldn't get anywhere. But that's why I'm part of a larger organisation of people who make programmes and films, because in the areas where I am weak, there will be people who can help me. Maybe that's something for you to take on board.
Feel free to ignore the advice everyone's giving you. I mean, what does it matter to us if you don't manage to make a decent film? But you might want to consider what it will do for your reputation in the industry if your first budgeted production bombs because you've not listened to the advice of a very experienced and tallented bunch of people.
Posted: Tue, 19th Dec 2006, 6:08pm
Post 37 of 41
When you're an adult- which means you should know better- and you overbrag about yourself to the point where you claim to have huge funding and critical acclaim, and essentially the 'best movie ever'; then what you're preaching doesn't come of as mere pride, it comes off as blind arrogance, which is the usual case with you that has long needed remedy.
What adds extreme insult to injury is that this is perhaps one of the worst overall amateur productions I have ever seen in my entire life, and yet you either defend the comments you're okay with or just flat out ignore any criticism, constructive or otherwise.
The stuff you're producing now is, in essence, crap compared to pretty much everyone else here (with the exception of ten year olds like jgtrox2, who is still learning), and the fact that you think this kind of stuff will let you "make it big" is far beyond delusion.
In attempting to be "the better man" by rising above childish argument, you've ended up only proving my point that you're arrogant, ignorant, and, to be frank, stupid.
You've yet take heed of anything anyone has said in any of the numerous SHH threads; and now I believe you only make them so that you can get the intermittent ego boost.
Well good luck with that, because I'm done trying to reason with you, and I'm sure others can concur.
Posted: Tue, 19th Dec 2006, 6:17pm
Post 38 of 41
I don't overbrag.. I say the truth, sorry if that upsets you ben, saying it's got a budget is not bragging, you feel threatened by that then hay tough, when John Carter or Sollthar said they got funding were they bragging.
I have guts and i'm confident in my conviction, again if that upsets people.. tough.
Enough about me, please move on to subject more worthy of your time.
Posted: Tue, 19th Dec 2006, 6:35pm
Post 39 of 41
dvd.reviewer.co.uk wrote:...I was really impressed. I like guerilla filmmaking, and I’ve seen some examples which have been terrific and some that have been terrible. SuperHero Harry is definitely in the former category and should be shown to some of these bloody film-course students at University about how to shoot a coherent story.
Either you yourself write these "reviews", or they've got Roger Ebert on crack over at DVD.Reviewer (which looks incredibly dodgy from the get-go). People wonder why film school does so many people wrong these days, when it's idiots like this who preach stuff like SHH as a "terrific" work with a "coherent story".
I'm sorry man, but from everything I've ever seen in SHH, this takes the cake. I know it's harsh, but you can't simply go out making excuses, then backhand boasting the greatness of something, then relate back to "zero-budget" and expect more than stellar reviews.
If this is what you do to support yourself, and you think your biggest issue is always budget, (which, trust me, there are so many obvious ways around managing things only a so-called 'budget' could offer) then I suggest delving into another field of work that gives a more frequent and steady income so that you can build
a budget for your next work.
Every filmmaker does it. You whine about zero-budget, yet you're an adult without school or any other job (as far as I can see) to tie you down. The world is yours to make money off of. Heck, Robert Rodriguez stayed in a controlled environment study that paralyzed him temporarily for a month just to get $2000 (I think) to add to the 'El Mariachi' budget. And that was 12 years ago. There's plenty more opportunity nowadays and plenty cheaper ways to make movies, too.
But hey, if you don't believe me, that's fine. I'll see you in Hollywood in 5 years, man.
Posted: Tue, 19th Dec 2006, 6:40pm
Post 40 of 41
Ok guys, can we keep it clean please. I think everything that needed to be said, has. I don't think there's much more that can be added to the thread. At this point I think b4 should be left alone to get on and we all should all get back to making movies. I think everyone has had enough.
Posted: Tue, 19th Dec 2006, 7:16pm
Post 41 of 41
Thanks Ash, been trying to say that for a while before it went personal.
I'm happy if this topic is locked or deleted, I don't feel any futher comments would be in line with the original post.
Many thanks, as always I still love you guys.