Tarn wrote:I have to say that I've never understood the "it's just a test, so can't be highly regarded" attitude. Sure, if you went to your local cinema and paid to see a film and it turned out to be 'just a test' it would be a bit jarring, but in a free-to-watch cinema on a visual effects-focused website, it seems like perfectly valid content to me.
I think it's a rather obvious why people come to the conclusion that something that's 'just a test, so it can't be highly regarded'. It's because, well, it has no narrative. No plot, no value past technical/visual/audio. If these fail, there's nothing left. Hopefully that's clear. I'm really not trying to be a prick on this point, obviously I've highly-rated other seemingly comparable 'test', but I'll get into that point in a minute.
How do you define 'a test'? Simply by an absence of plot? Because a 10 second crappy lightsaber test compared to, say, the Beach Landing sequence, seems to provide two quite different experiences.
Yes, it absolutely does. And had I not typed on my iPhone late at night, I probably would've gone into further detail on this point. There's a rather unremarkable set of reasons that some tests, while equally executed, are much better and more entertaining than others. One extreme reason, for instance, 'Art of the Saber' works so phenomenally well is because it not only displays an effects 'test' (or scene/sequence/preferred nomenclature), but is able to do so with technical class and evoke emotions in a mini-narrative. The story isn't anything spectacular, but it's there. But, then again, a 'scene/sequence/test' doesn't necessarily have to have this element. Once again, I'll get to that in a minute.
Regardless, I don't think this is in any way 'a test'. It might not be a strong narrative short, edited out of sequence and full of portentous voiceover dialogue and containing a Deep(ly Obvious) Moral Answer at the end, but it still has a structure and drive to it: it's not just a series of unconnected test shots.
Geez, maybe I should've given you a 1, then I'd still have to deal with this same sh*t but see you video go down in rating.
My vote is completely justified. Most of the effects in this, to me, seem pretty cheap. It doesn't convey any emotion, narrative, or storytelling, and the editing and cinematography aren't anything special to me. I don't know how to make this clearer, and find it quite ironic that the very same, monumental reasons the likes of Sollthar, schwar, and others harshly criticize my reactions to others comments and ratings on my movies is the very same attitude you and those same individuals seem to be giving off.
The specific purpose for the sequence was to accompany the tutorials on the DVD, of course. Maybe that counts as 'a test' by your definitions, but it doesn't for me.
Well, perhaps had you included the DVD footage on how to
accomplish the effect, this would be the case. Then it would kind of become of 'how to' video. But I think it's rather obvious that taking an effects sequence (once again, one that didn't impress me) out of a tutorial DVD and putting it in the cinema leaves it in kind of an ambiguous genre. Clearly not short film, a feature, music video, trailer, or real tutorial- all this ends up being is, well, a test
It's ridiculous to call it anything else or treat it like anything else. But hey, maybe I'm the minority with that opinion. Tests can warrant high ratings from me, as I said earlier. Being a 'test' video doesn't immediately slap a lower rating on a movie, it just means narrative points can't be found in deciding the rating and thus the rating (in my system/opinion) falls heavily on the visual quality of the overall work.
Now, as I stated before, being an effects-driven sequence the visual component splits into two things: technical value and special-effects value. And, because these two components underwhelmed me, the overall visual quality to me wasn't very high. Ergo, since this video relied
on that visual quality, it ends up with a 2-star rating.
There is a reason the likes of MMMProd's test movie and Sollthar's Nightcast concept teasers and tests have been highly-rated by me in the past. They didn't suffer from being 'just a test' because they had exceptional visual quality. And, you know what, I'm pretty certain I've given all of them 4 or 5 stars.
But anyway, there was no need to have held back on commenting earlier. We're all fairly used to harsh criticism and it's hardly going to upset us. If we were going to get upset about negative comments then we wouldn't have put it up for public viewing in the first place.
Good to know.
Last edited Fri, 23rd Jan 2009, 8:06pm; edited 1 times in total.