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

No Rest For The Wicked

Posted: Thu, 28th May 2009, 10:18am

Post 1 of 44

ben3308

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

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Guns. Mayhem. A dash of comedy. Atomic.

That's what you get with 'No Rest For The Wicked', the fifth annual Atomic Productions entry into the Dallas 24-Hour Video Race. (2009)

When a ragtag team of four men stage an unprepared heist, trouble ensues.

This year the required elements were
-Theme: Misunderstanding
-Prop: Fruit or vegetable
-Location: Any street or traffic sign
-Line of Dialog: "the one on the left."

The movie couldn't be more than five minutes in length and had to be produced, as many of you already know, entirely in 24 hours. We wanted to do something a little different this year and deviate from our knack for overly-dramatic exposition following the lead-up to our epicfail 24 hour project, 'Kingdom Come'. This year we instead tried different things in every field- completely new actors, locations, different styles of music, different styles of writings, lots of new crew members, and took more creative liberties.

We think, even given these things, the movie came out exactly as we wanted it to- and even though this is the first year we didn't make the finals, win, or place; we're still proud of 'No Rest For The Wicked'.


More Info
Posted: Thu, 28th May 2009, 10:35am

Post 2 of 44

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

Rating: +1

YES! At last. I feel, in some ways, like this is the first new Atomic film for years (the magnificent HEAT parody excluded).

With some previous submissions, even when I appreciated the film, I always had a caveat of "do something different, guys!" I felt your films were all blending together through overuse of portentous voiceover and a reliance on fiddly storytelling and a general air of seriousness. Plus the 'Atomic visual style' started to get a bit old, despite still being striking.

No Rest For The Wicked finally throws out your self-imposed rulebook and is all the better for it.

The camerawork opens up to include much more than just high contrast shakey-cam, making fantastic use of the cramped corridors with the dollying/steadycam moves in and out. The shakey-cam attack at the start works perfectly, feeling tense without inducing headaches.

Sound is high quality throughout, from music to dialogue. The very, very nice editing pulls it together with real impact and style, grabbing you immediately with the choice of music and titles at the start.

I think style is the crucial thing here. Before your style was almost too identifiable: high contrast grading, handheld camerawork, non-linear storytelling, overly serious VO, shouty-screamy acting. While it worked in some cases, it became gradually less effective through repetition.

With NRFTW you've expanded that style, keeping most of what you're known for but taking off the brakes, loosening up a little and allowing yourselves to actually have some fun. As such the acting seems mostly very natural, as does the dialogue, in a free-wheeling kinda way. There's no forced melodrama here, even in the final scene. It has a Fincheresque disregard for heightened emotion (ignoring Benjamin Button for the sake of my point...), instead showing almost a disdain and disregard for the fate of the characters. The final scene isn't played out with soaring strings and horns as might be expected, but with no music at all until the crucial moment at which point you introduce a telling but almost cheeky song that sums things up nicely without over stating.

Favourite moment? The clerk's scream as he finds the file and hands it over to the assailant. Highly amusing. smile

In terms of criticisms? Let's see...

* I'd like to have seen some blood splatter onto the locker on the reverse for the clerk to really sell the shot.

* It seems odd that the black guy doesn't here the gunshot just outside the room when the leader starts taking out his crew.

* Post-credits scene felt a little forced. Not sure if it was the acting/writing/editing/camerawork, but it just didn't flow quite as easily as the rest.

* Grading on the final scene was maybe a bit OTT, a bit too dark and murky for my liking, particularly the final shot.

Bring on the Gitlin.
Posted: Fri, 29th May 2009, 4:03am

Post 3 of 44

No Degradation

Force: 20 | Joined: 1st Apr 2009 | Posts: 110

Windows User

Member

AMAZING!

I thought it was incredible! Excellent job! Great camerawork Ben, I thought it really showed your talent. Excellent!!!!!

Wow, can't beleive you guys didn't win the filmfest, but still, be proud of this. It's probably the best movie I've seen on this site. Either this or Pages.

6/5
Posted: Fri, 29th May 2009, 4:23am

Post 4 of 44

sfbmovieco

Force: 2354 | Joined: 19th Mar 2002 | Posts: 1552

VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

I'll keep it short and simple. This was very well done. Of all the things though, I really liked the intro and the opening title.

I can't imagine how tough it is with the judging situation and the assumptions/accusations flying around in the judges head but I think it will make you better at your craft. If you learn now how to deal with those things you'll be much better prepared for the obstacles ahead. Good job guys.
Posted: Fri, 29th May 2009, 4:32am

Post 5 of 44

SilverDragon7

Force: 2265 | Joined: 29th Jun 2006 | Posts: 1990

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

You guys didn't even place? Sux.

Tarn brought up a good point about how your films started 'running together' with the same princable in cinematography, editing and overall atomsphere.

This is where No Rest for the Wicked exceeds in the change of genre (for the 24hr contest) and use of new actors, except Reese technically- but he has grown up quite a lot since Cover's Story.

5/5

Also, were you guys going for a Guy Ritchie feel by chance? 'Cause if you were- spot on.
Posted: Fri, 29th May 2009, 5:20am

Post 6 of 44

Atom

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

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

We wanted something that would show off our small sense of humor while remaining edgy/stylized in the way we like- and have kind of a tongue-in-cheek reference to how gratuitously we're told we throw guns into movies arbitrarily. But in a fun and meaningful way, of course.

Same with the titling sequence- it's something I've always done on demo reels and the lot, what with big in-your-face text and hip-hop/rap music- and have always been condemned slightly for. This was more of a chance to say 'what the hell' and play into that some more in an actual movie. Plus, I absolutely love the music I was given to work with (unreleased tracks from a high school friend who's a signed artist now)- hopefully I chose the best starting and ending tracks. smile

The style was a combination of homages to Scorsese and style notes taken out of the books of Ritchie and, to a lesser extent, Soderbergh's work on the Ocean's movies. All, more or less, subconsciously though. We always have done this- taking the most relevant images in our heads from movies we like and incorporating them into it.

With Redemption dialog bits were referenced from Deja Vu; Cover's Story beginning in medias-res a product of seeing the technique used well in M:I3.

This movie was more the product of me having just rewatched Lucky Number Slevin, Ocean's 12, and being reminded of Snatch by the new Sherlock Holmes trailer. Little bits of substance and style from these, then, were inevitably incorporated into our movie even on a brainstorming level- simply because they were recent memories. And, of course, the playfulness and fun of Star Trek rattled in the back of my mind- and I wanted to make a looser, less-serious movie because of my liking toward that film.

Hopefully, though, this movie above all holds- without being too blatant- the 'Atomic' stamp of style. If there's one thing I like integrity in- it's the consistency of style in our movies. The ending, similarly, is something I hope is noticed- it was played in a different way than we usually do; but the overall effect I wanted to remain the same, something with a subtle impacting 'whoa' feel to it. And I thought it really worked well with the theme of 'misunderstanding'. Fingers-crossed it came off that way.

And Tarn, as far as your criticisms: Yeah, I wrote into the script he kills them off with a silenced gun, thus making Jones (the black guy) none the wiser- but in the editing it just held so much more punch and impact to do an all-out loud gunshot noise. I guess you could then say Jones simply doesn't think anything of the sound, as he's a criminal and they're robbing a place to begin with?

The scene you speak of is a little more jarring than the others, I agree, and I think this was inevitable- it was the first scene we filmed that day- it was bound to have less flow and momentum as the rest, you know? But I still think it serves its purpose- setting up Reese and Harrison's characters/segue-ing between hitting the manager and him opening the drawer- pretty well; even if it does slightly stand out as the worst scene. It served its purpose, I'm content with it, and it helped the rest of the movie flow as a whole.

Thanks for the great comments, guys!
Posted: Fri, 29th May 2009, 4:06pm

Post 7 of 44

RodyPolis

Force: 805 | Joined: 28th Apr 2007 | Posts: 1839

CompositeLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I liked this a lot. I think it's my favorite movie from you guys. I liked how it got to the point, instead of just pretty narrations. The camera angles were also great, and the beginning song worked pretty well too. The acting wasn't great, but it didn't need to be in this movie.

The scene where you had to include "the one on the left" did feel out of place and not really needed. Other problems were the muzzle flashes, could have been done a little better. But you had one day so that's fine too.

So I'd give this a 4.5 considering the time limit you made it in. Good job
Posted: Fri, 29th May 2009, 5:22pm

Post 8 of 44

Mike Q

Force: 1340 | Joined: 20th Jan 2008 | Posts: 255

VisionLab User VideoWrap User

Gold Member

Loved the opening, excellent lighting/grading on that first shot. Really liked the camera work, camera moving backwards as the thugs enter the place. The whole begining reminded me of a Guy ritchie film, not sure if that's an insult.

I didn't like much after that begging though, and lines like "I'm gonna bust a cap in your ass" really annoy me. Some effects on the bullet hits would have been nice.

I think if you'd kept the tone more in tune with that opener You would have placed higher, if not won. Good attempt though
Posted: Fri, 29th May 2009, 6:37pm

Post 9 of 44

ben3308

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

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Yeah, the ultimate goal here was simple: let's do something new, something simple, and something stylish. I think that, especially in the opening 1.5 minutes, the 'style' for the entire thing (screwball-esque comedy, Snatch-esque drama) is set up relatively well.

Tarn wrote:

The camerawork opens up to include much more than just high contrast shakey-cam, making fantastic use of the cramped corridors with the dollying/steadycam moves in and out. The shakey-cam attack at the start works perfectly, feeling tense without inducing headaches.
The goal was to meld Guy Ritchie and Lubezki for the cinematography. Hence, some frenetic, some longer, more austere (the end, the pre-killing everyone shot, etc)

Tarn wrote:

Favourite moment? The clerk's scream as he finds the file and hands it over to the assailant. Highly amusing. smile
Heh, that happens to be none other than one of the writers of the film! Unfortunately, there's a whole scene shaped around him (hence the jump in counting from 10 to 5, and us not seeing Jones enter the room to 'bust a cap') but it had to be cut in the editing.

Tarn wrote:

* It seems odd that the black guy doesn't here the gunshot just outside the room when the leader starts taking out his crew.
We debated this before shooting, actually. When it got to the point that I decided I just wanted to do one long shot for the entire 'shooting everyone' moment, we had to make a judgment call on Jones hearing the gunshot. The reasoning behind leaving it there is that this is an odd, inexperienced group of robbers in the first place. Maybe their ineptitude is so high that they don't realize unnecessary gunshots could mean something? I dunno.

Tarn wrote:

* Post-credits scene felt a little forced. Not sure if it was the acting/writing/editing/camerawork, but it just didn't flow quite as easily as the rest.
Probably three reasons here: the acting is a bit rougher, especially with Harrison, given it was his first time acting (ever), and the cut to 'no reason' is awkward because of the switch from dolly to handheld, then back to dolly and tripod. So it's just one of those things that you look back at, I suppose. biggrin

Tarn wrote:

Grading on the final scene was maybe a bit OTT, a bit too dark and murky for my liking, particularly the final shot.
Ah, well, as always, there's some brightness lost in compression, but the dark, low-key lighting in the end is sort of my attempt at saying, here was this goofy movie, not it's time to get serious. And yeah, it's intentionally very Fincher-esque. I watched Se7en for the first time two days prior, and got inspired, directorially. The Scorcese reference there should be obvious, too.

No Degradation wrote:

I thought it was incredible! Excellent job! Great camerawork Ben, I thought it really showed your talent. Excellent!!!!!
Thanks, glad you enjoyed it!

sfbmovieco wrote:

Of all the things though, I really liked the intro and the opening title.
Yeah, the opening 1.5 minutes is my favorite, too. I think it's just that the story got cut so much in the editing that the stylish/funny/goofy bits run lower in the second half. Even so, though, I think the ending is pretty compelling in an 'everyone gets their just desserts' way, especially with the 'crime pays' mindset.

SilverDragon7 wrote:

Also, were you guys going for a Guy Ritchie feel by chance? 'Cause if you were- spot on.
Yes, precisely. Tony Scott is my usual goal in everything I shoot/direct but there was certainly a Ritchie mindset for 90% of this, specifically the beginning. That, and a dash of Soderbergh. biggrin

RodyPolis wrote:

I liked this a lot. I think it's my favorite movie from you guys. I liked how it got to the point, instead of just pretty narrations.
Thanks a lot, man, glad you like it! I still feel that the actual narration in Redemption works pretty well, but the omniscient monologues in our other stuff does indeed 'blend' a bit.


RodyPolis wrote:

The scene where you had to include "the one on the left" did feel out of place and not really needed.
The main mantra of this film, more than anything we've ever done was "show, don't tell", the audience can make up their own minds about things. I like to make these contest films so that they can be watched independently of the contest and still be good. I don't mind screaming "oh, this was made in 24hrs!!!" (you know that!) but I definitely don't say "oh, in Redemption the 'wrong turn' line was to match the theme!".

Why? Because I think that if you make a film in these contests to just pander to the elements, then your film is gonna just seem the same as the others. Our cell phone in Redemption wasn't really a 'musical instrument', but at least our film wasn't about a guy who played guitar for money. Likewise, in 'No Rest', the story isn't about a supermarket (fruit prop) as so many were, but the pear is still important - it's literally the first 'tell' that something isn't right; that the film is a comedy, not a heavy drama (as you can imagine many expected).

The 'one on the left' scene is there for a purpose - it furthers the whole irony that's used throughout the movie. The leader, Ray, is the one who not only takes Jimmy (Trevor) to buy the gun, but he picks it out for him. Ironically, then, he picks his own weapon of destruction. Likewise, the dialog correlates to this ("Got rid of the body, you can take care of the rest?")

The final irony, of course, is the final scene - wherein the only one who left the opportunity to make money off the file is the only one left alive - by leaving he saved his own life and became the tool of vengeance for the end. And it's not that easy to see coming, but it makes sense when it happens.


Mike Q wrote:

I didn't like much after that begging though, and lines like "I'm gonna bust a cap in your ass" really annoy me.
This is another one of those things that would probably seem more justified had we been able to keep the other clerk and Jones scenes in the film. The whole point of the Jimmy character (Trevor) is that he's not tough at all - he wants to call his friend in to shoot someone, he backstabs others, and he speaks in a black dialect; in the vein of a colossal poser. There's a LOT more Jones/Jimmy interaction that plays up the color commentary, but it was cut out for time and respect for Willie (who played Jones).

Ultimately, those kind of lines are one of many things that are there to push character development. Luke (Reese) is obviously younger, so he's inexperienced and apprehensive, which lends credence to him leaving mid-job. Jimmy (Trevor) is a smartass who thinks he's the brains of the operation, but is obviously not as tough as Ray (Harrison). And it goes on and on, etc.

I know this response is a bit long - such is my style - but hopefully it clears maybe a few questions up, as this film was very less exposition-laden than our other stuff. biggrin
Posted: Fri, 29th May 2009, 6:44pm

Post 10 of 44

Atom

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

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

The point to that line, Mike, was that there's a latent racism of the character in saying he'd get Jones, the black guy, to 'pop a cap in his ass'. It's completely wrong/politically incorrect to say and is unnatural and untimidating coming from Trevor- and that was kind of the point.

He's the smug character who comes from obscurity and tries to be assertive while only looking puny. At least, that was the intention- which is supposed to make his turn all the more interesting and the ending all the more effective. As in, there really is 'no rest for the wicked'.
Posted: Fri, 29th May 2009, 6:54pm

Post 11 of 44

Mike Q

Force: 1340 | Joined: 20th Jan 2008 | Posts: 255

VisionLab User VideoWrap User

Gold Member

I suppose that's the problem with the short film, especially when its a 48 hr production, to try and cram in the character development. Don't know if you have more footage that builds up their characters more,it would be worth watching an extended cut, just to see them fleshed out a bit.
Posted: Sat, 30th May 2009, 3:28am

Post 12 of 44

Jakescam

Force: 410 | Joined: 8th Mar 2009 | Posts: 6

EffectsLab Pro User

Gold Member

Cool. Kind of violent, but I liked it.
Posted: Sun, 31st May 2009, 3:15am

Post 13 of 44

SGB

Force: 2199 | Joined: 9th Aug 2005 | Posts: 855

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

After an initial viewing, here are my thoughts -

First: Thank god it had its own style! From the first shot with the guy smirking at the camera I could tell that the movie had a different feel than your others. The grading was similar, though not identical. And, of course, the fruit prop followed by the title sequence sold it perfectly.

The camerawork in the scene that followed was a little weak I thought, the dollying wide shot didn't work out so well, especially the dollying out. Everything else worked stylistically and really made the film enjoyable.

The following scene in particular suffered from bad acting.

I'd say overall the movie suffered from poor acting, which contrasted sharply with the high level everything else was at.

However, I'm still mystified as to how all that was possible in 24 hours. The set was terrific, the acting was passable, the camerawork was mostly brilliant, the props were great, the effects were close to perfect, the music was very good. The titles were spectactular, I really really enjoyed those, along with how they were perfectly edited into the movie.

The editing was just perfect. Not much to say there, it just worked. That combined with the spot on cameawork (except the wide shot i mentioned earlier) were the two of the strongest points in the movie.

The swearing in the movie did seem forced and unnatural, although from previous posts it seems like some of this may have been deliberate. Still didn't work so well for me.

Also, I'm not totally sure what it is I'm seeing, but some of the movements, especially in the begining and ending scenes, seem a little too "fluid". I think this might be a high framerate? I'm not sure exactly, but converting to 24 fps might be the answer.

Anyhow guys, I loved watching it, I think its a move in a great direction, basically keep it and I can't wait until next time.
Posted: Sun, 31st May 2009, 3:27am

Post 14 of 44

ben3308

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

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

SGB wrote:

The camerawork in the scene that followed was a little weak I thought, the dollying wide shot didn't work out so well, especially the dollying out. Everything else worked stylistically and really made the film enjoyable.
Thanks for the reply!

Why, in particular, were you not a fan of the dolly shot (if you don't mind me asking)? Was it too unsmooth for you, because I tried to rid it of bumps/shake. Or does it just not fit the style in your eyes? I'm mainly curious because it's one of my favorite shots I've shot in the history of me owning my GL2 (3+ years), so I find it a little odd you consider it weak. biggrin

Could it be the transition from the dolly to the handheld in that sequence? That seems to be the jarring bit - which makes the acting seem less smooth, IMO.
Posted: Sun, 31st May 2009, 3:48am

Post 15 of 44

SGB

Force: 2199 | Joined: 9th Aug 2005 | Posts: 855

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

it was nothing to do with how smooth it was, that was done very well. I'd say mostly it was the dolly out afterwords that didn't really fit. The transition to the close up shots was also quite jarring.

I guess mostly it may have been the way the actors were standing, as if positioned for the framing of the shot, that seemed very unnatural. The guy in the middle was standing especially awkwardly.

I'd say the crane shot in marathon was with out a doubt much better than this shot.

But anyhow, the camerawork was really impressive in the this movie, and as an aspiring cameraman myself I can say that I've learned a lot from your work, so don't get the wrong impression heh.

EDIT: one more thing, I think also with that dolly shot the camera came to rest a little to far away from the actors, which was most noticeable when the closeups cut back to it. It seemed awkwardly far away IMO.
Posted: Sun, 31st May 2009, 4:25am

Post 16 of 44

Limey

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

Gold Member

This was dope.

I really liked the part where he hits the guy with his gun and it paused and the title came up. The location was great and the lighting was well done also. The color grading and editing were good too and fit the mood of the film throughout. Music was good and seemed to give it a nice feel. I liked most of the camerawork as well.

But I think that the part were you flashback to them buying the guns didn't really fit. I know you had to use that line, but I think the line might have worked better if one of the guys said it during the robbery and you didn't have that flashback thing. Like he could have pointed to one of the keys and said it or something.

Overall, I really like the feel of the whole thing. The titles and editing really made the mood of the whole film.
Posted: Sun, 31st May 2009, 4:31am

Post 17 of 44

ben3308

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

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

SGB wrote:

I guess mostly it may have been the way the actors were standing, as if positioned for the framing of the shot, that seemed very unnatural. The guy in the middle was standing especially awkwardly.
Yeah, we tried the stances a couple of different ways, with Reese (youngest one) on different sides, approaching Harrison (oldest one). I knew we wanted Harrison in the middle, especially in Trevor (guy who screw them over) would be walking into frame. Another placement issue was Willie, who had to leave to get his hair cut about 20 minutes into shooting the movie. biggrin

I'd say the crane shot in marathon was with out a doubt much better than this shot.
Lord, I'd expect it to, given that that portion of Marathon took an entire day to film! I realized in 'No Rest' that 8ft of track for my dolly probably wasn't enough, and experimented with the camera at different lengths away from the talent. Any further back, it would just be too far. Any closer, and you obscure Trevor walking in (he just doesn't hit the frame of the camera). I believe some of the awkwardness there may be in the editing, it's just one of those things where the shot looks iffy because of how it is placed around other shots. I dunno what I'm saying. biggrin

Still, glad you enjoyed it! We honestly made this movie primarily for what people here wanted, given that last year we were the contest's runner-up, but our film was 'Atomic' as hell - too much so! This year, we did the opposite, and weren't even considered in the contest. Win some, lose some.

But anyhow, the camerawork was really impressive in the this movie, and as an aspiring cameraman myself I can say that I've learned a lot from your work, so don't get the wrong impression heh.

EDIT: one more thing, I think also with that dolly shot the camera came to rest a little to far away from the actors, which was most noticeable when the closeups cut back to it. It seemed awkwardly far away IMO.[/quote]
Posted: Sun, 31st May 2009, 5:25am

Post 18 of 44

Captain Amazingly Incredible

Force: 2000 | Joined: 14th Nov 2006 | Posts: 105

VisionLab User VideoWrap User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Awesomely done! In 24 hours? Bloody impressive for a 48 hour comp, let alone half that! Well done!

Although, next time you're outside and it's a little windy... try putting a fluffy on the mic (in fact you should always have one when outside)- wind noise is one of my pet hates.

All in all though, 5 out of 5!
Posted: Sun, 31st May 2009, 5:50am

Post 19 of 44

Atom

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

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

First off, just so it's clear: this was not a 48 hour race. A buncha people seem to have said 48 hours in their posts and I think it's gotten misconstrued. I know you didn't confuse it, Capt., but I thought I'd clarify nonetheless. Unlike the international 48 Film Project- which is horridly-run here in Dallas, the 24 Hour videorace is a whole different, smoothly-run, fun-filled event. I'd hate for someone to confuse them- there's such a world of difference in the two contests here, it'd almost be insulting to the 24 to call it the 48. biggrin

SGB wrote:

The following scene in particular suffered from bad acting.
I'd say overall the movie suffered from poor acting, which contrasted sharply with the high level everything else was at.
Hmmmmm, I wouldn't go as far as saying that. Certainly our Atomic films have been prided (besides technicals) on having excellent acting, something we're very thankful for, but that doesn't make not-excellent acting in our latest movie, even contrasting the other high levels, poor- does it?

I felt, actually, that the acting worked really well- not pitch-perfect but naturally-flowing and never really 'rough' like you see with, well, like 90% of new movies on here. Reese and Trevor I both consider excellent actors, actually. The same can't be said for Harrison or Willie or the clerk or the manager characters, simply because none of them had really 'acted' officially in a short film before, but I thought all did rather passable if not 'good' jobs. And lets also not forget the detective! I can't believe no one's mentioned him yet. The man, a family friend, I thought was excellent- especially because his real Bostonian accent sticks out like a sore thumb here in Texas. He also actually is an employee of the FBI, which I thought was interesting. I absolutely loved him in the role; played the toothy cop character exactly as I imagined it in writing.

But, yeah, especially with Trevor and Reese- I think they have actual acting talent. If nothing else, the last scene couldn't be pulled off without it.

I know this may sharply contrast the rather lucky casting of excellent actors we've had in the past, but.......yeah......I don't think I'd go as far as calling it poor.

And Capt.: The outdoor stuff was actually recorded with a mic covered in a Rycote Softie, so I don't know quite what to tell you. I thought the audio was pretty wind-less as far as noise interference goes- but maybe that's just me. Also bear in mind that they are standing under a car bridge, too, as the location should point out, and there's a lotta inherent car noise that comes from that. But I wanted a lot of that sort of thing, I guess. I originally had the scene at a train yard and pictured it loud and thrown together; the way they met.

But once we got to the train yard, a big lot [u]under[/i] that very bridge, Ben turned the camera around and instead faced the bridge's columns and piles of dirt excavated from the train yards instead. I can't tell you how pissed with him I was about this smile -but the location and feel and coolness of it remained the same, so it worked fine.

And finally thanks for all the comments! Especially the ones on writing and editing- I tried my best, haha. I find it funny people have seemed to love the opening credits, as they were just rather simply Vegas 6 text slides. I guess the footage before them and music sell them as something more. smile
Posted: Sun, 31st May 2009, 6:11am

Post 20 of 44

SilverDragon7

Force: 2265 | Joined: 29th Jun 2006 | Posts: 1990

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I re watched and have to say that the choosen opening and ending songs were quite nice.

I'd also like to ask, at the beginning when Trevor hits the guy (before the title) does he say "Shamwow b!tch!" as in the ShamWow? 'Cause that's hilarious.
Posted: Sun, 31st May 2009, 6:18am

Post 21 of 44

Atom

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

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Limey12345 wrote:

But I think that the part were you flashback to them buying the guns didn't really fit. I know you had to use that line, but I think the line might have worked better if one of the guys said it during the robbery and you didn't have that flashback thing. Like he could have pointed to one of the keys and said it or something.
Yeah, I know what you mean. I wanted the gun-purchasing scene in there- although it didn't come out exactly as I wanted it- for the irony of it all, a feeling that would accompany the rest of the movie's tone. You see, in the pawn shop Ray is picking out Jimmy's (Trevor) gun for him. Since Jimmy kills Ray, Ray is essentially choosing the weapon that kills him, picking out his own demise. It was supposed to be furtively funny- but it just didn't translate well from paper to screen. I still think it works alright, though, and like I said- I'm happy with the project as a whole.
Posted: Sun, 31st May 2009, 6:25am

Post 22 of 44

SGB

Force: 2199 | Joined: 9th Aug 2005 | Posts: 855

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

I dunno Atom, the acting really didn't do it for me in this one. Sure, there were some parts where it worked just fine, and some parts (the opening) where it was quite good, but there were some lines that just didn't work at all (scene in the gun shop, the "take your diaper off" line). This is obviously a subjective matter, but to me the camerawork, editing, music, etc, were so much better than the acting that it seemed, to me, to stick out. But hey, its all a matter of opinion. I've always liked the acting in your stuff, and I think the acting in films like Cover's Story, and especially Redemption were quite excellent.
Posted: Sun, 31st May 2009, 6:29am

Post 23 of 44

Atom

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

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

And, like I said, I think that's what is throwing you off- which is fine, it's really a compliment to our previous actors. I was just saying I think that 'poor' is a pretty low category to put them in. If you feel that way, that's cool, I just thought you might've mixed your words up a little.

And yes, SilverDragon, he said 'ShamWOW, bitchh!' as in the ShamWOW. We thought it was hilarious when brainstorming and it was, along with the Chris Brown joke, one of the only things that made it entirely from conception-of-idea to the final edit. I'm glad, too, as we tried it a few different ways- him saying 'Oprah, bittch!' and 'Yahtzee!' and stuff like that we thought might sound funny and throw the seriousness off- as eating the pear was supposed to do also. (Thus highlighting its significance in the movie! smile If only the judge had picked up on this as some of you guys have.)

And, just in case any of you were wondering, here's some of the movies that made it to finals-
Not for Sale
Accidental Shift

And some, besides ours, that didn't make it that I thought were excellent: (there were many of these)
Hurt Peelings.
Sweet Potatoes.

Make no mistake, they were all pretty great this year- just thought I'd throw this out there- as I thought the two latter ones deserved to beat the two former ones; and didn't.

Another thing, which I don't think anyone made mention of- although it usually doesn't come up anyway- was the costuming. This movie we really tried hard to give each character a real 'heist'-y look, an authentic one, with dirty army jackets, hoodies, pants, shoes, and panty hose on their heads- while also keeping each of the four robbers with unique individual looks- and did suits for the manager, clerk, and detective.

Just kinda wanted to point that out, as my little brother Will went to some lengths to rummage through the MSB vault and pull out worn-looking and tone-appropriate articles of clothing and props (the guns included, are his) for this movie- and I really appreciated that, especially since he's only 13 and I gave him very little direction as to what I wanted in terms of the style. I was proud of him, he took behind-the-scenes pics for us for the first time, too. He's taking to the family business. wink
Posted: Sun, 31st May 2009, 7:33am

Post 24 of 44

Captain Amazingly Incredible

Force: 2000 | Joined: 14th Nov 2006 | Posts: 105

VisionLab User VideoWrap User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

The acting actually stood out to me. I thought they were all great. maybe a couple of slightly wooden moments but all in all a high calibre, definitely.
Posted: Sun, 31st May 2009, 7:33am

Post 25 of 44

ben3308

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

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

For starters, thanks again everyone for the comments! Also, Trevor is the narrator, Harrison is the 'shamwow' guy. And yeah, that's intended to reference the chamois infomercial product. Though the Chris Brown joke was more timely and racial than anything, the 'ShamWoW' joke was a pop culture reference we assumed most people would understand, seeing as infomercials are so ubiquitous. biggrin

SGB wrote:

I've always liked the acting in your stuff, and I think the acting in films like Cover's Story, and especially Redemption were quite excellent.
I liked the style of acting here, though I'll concede Harrison definitely developed as we filmed. We used SAG and Julliard trained actors, respectively, in Cover's Story and Redemption, so I don't think we can get any better than that - we've spoiled you guys on acting! biggrin I mean, you don't get more prestigious than Julliard!

As Atom says, too, there's several ironies/clues we purposely put throughout the film that didn't come out as obvious - the pear as the first clue of zany/comedy appeal, the picking the gun as an irony of basically 'choosing' one's own weapon of destruction, etc.

Also, FYI the cop in the end is not FBI, he's DEA - he came in with a badge, gun, notepad, fountain pen and handcuffs on his belt - but filming those items is another legal issue in and of itself, and we had enough paperwork to do already! The pen and notepad are (obviously) the only real things we could put in the film without running into some red tape.

Even so, his smile while acting is but more evidence of the absolute blast we had while making this. Honestly, some of the most fun I've had in my life. Almost the exact opposite compared to our Batman sequel, which has had its miserable moments. biggrin
Posted: Mon, 1st Jun 2009, 8:48am

Post 26 of 44

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

Yeah, I thought the acting was fine for the most part. A few wobbly moments and a few really good moments, but overall it did the job. Certainly above the level of most amateur productions.
Posted: Mon, 1st Jun 2009, 5:32pm

Post 27 of 44

Bryce007

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

VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

I was thinking that the acting from.. Reese, I believe his name is... Was pretty rough, especially towards the beginning.


Also, I did take notice of the costuming. And really, more people around here should remember to consider that facet of film making.
Posted: Mon, 1st Jun 2009, 6:25pm

Post 28 of 44

ben3308

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

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Thanks for the kudos, guys.

I think Reese's opening few words may be stifled by poor writing ("ain't", etc) or writing that doesn't really fit him. Still, the "sure as hell" bit is probably my favorite part of his acting in anything I've cast him in.

And thanks for the props on costuming, it's something we stick to, however strange. You'll notice in the pawn shop, there's no jacket being worn - and the character looks worse off for it. biggrin
Posted: Fri, 5th Jun 2009, 1:57pm

Post 29 of 44

davlin

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

EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

This movie has a much more mature style than previous and is all the better for it.
Cam work and editing are first class with the title sequences being
especially classy.
I thought the acting was more than upto the mark with some outstanding performances in places.
Script was great with some good humour ,put in for good measure ,giving a real feel of contempory movie making.
I can say that the viewing experience was really enjoyable and that is what it's all about.....well done all.

Dave
Posted: Fri, 5th Jun 2009, 10:26pm

Post 30 of 44

ben3308

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

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Thanks dav, glad you enjoyed it!

Our goal, as I've said before, is to push messages and entertain; so if you were entertained we did our job. biggrin The 'message' here is lighter, but ties into the title in that just when the perpetrator thinks he's gotten away with his crime (he's released from police custody, everything looks alright) he still encounters a fellow cohort, who kills him. In this respect, he's "the wicked" and instead of finding relief, in the end, he finds death, thus "no rest". Yes, I know death is 'eternal sleep' but when you consider rest as something wanted, something soothing and comfortable, death is far from that - especially in the case of being murdered.

The other basic element here is irony, and that, in the end, people will get their just deserts. The leader, Ray, is a bad guy. He's quirkier than the rest (shamwow!) but still a bad guy (kills the business owner). As such, when he picks the gun at the pawn shop, he's fulfilling the irony of self-destruction throughout the entire thing - that's the gun he dies at the hand of. Likewise, Jimmy screws everyone over and shoots himself in the leg, which in turn begins his path towards self-destruction (vengeance as a result of his actions). Luke (youngest one) is the only one wise enough to back out of the heist, so he in turn prevents his own destruction. Jones, well....he just gets caught up in the killing, I suppose. biggrin

Anyhow, glad you liked it!
Posted: Sat, 6th Jun 2009, 2:59pm

Post 31 of 44

davlin

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

EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Ben your movie fully explained itself, much to your credit,with your
storylines leaving nothing to explain.
My post was in fact a second version... the original and more indepth somehow did'nt get put up so I quickly done another perhaps giving the impression that the "meaning" of your film did'nt quite reach me....not so Ben.

Dav smile
Posted: Sun, 7th Jun 2009, 6:38pm

Post 32 of 44

EBC films

Force: 0 | Joined: 8th Apr 2009 | Posts: 19

Member

i love this film so much
Posted: Tue, 9th Jun 2009, 7:09am

Post 33 of 44

Atom

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

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Just wanted to let everyone know, for those that are interested further in the film, that we've recorded a commentary track for the race's DVD they're putting out this year.

I've uploaded it to YouTube now. So if you're interested, please listen/watch No Rest For The Wicked with Commentary. Unfortunately Ben isn't included on it, as he's been in Boulder, CO since the race; but myself, the AD, and our crewmate of many years and all of the races, Ben Haschke, are on it.

If you have the time, please check it out!
Posted: Tue, 9th Jun 2009, 7:35am

Post 34 of 44

ben3308

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

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Put it in the correct aspect ratio or don't bother uploading to YouTube. I'll continue to delete anything that's errant.
Posted: Tue, 9th Jun 2009, 5:32pm

Post 35 of 44

AwesomeFist

Force: 288 | Joined: 6th Dec 2008 | Posts: 541

Windows User MacOS User

Member

not bad it was short but the script and acting wasn't bad
Posted: Tue, 9th Jun 2009, 9:16pm

Post 36 of 44

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

Rating: +1

Cool to see something slightly different in style. Glad to see there's little of the brooding selfimportance and more of the lighthearted fun inside this, works much better for me. It still has guns and brooding sounddesign, but it fits. smile

Camerawork is quite good in this with some nice shots, smooth motions and shot variety. I think I find this one of your best shot works. Attention to light is excellent in some scenes, alright in others. Woudl have loved to have the same visual strength as in the interrogation scenes or the outside debate dolly shot. Sound is strong throughout, crisp and clean. Very nice.

What makes me stop from giving it 5 stars is for one, those few things that are just not quite there yet - probably mostly because of time restrictions, but we've heard that one since forever. wink
And secondly, my main gripe with the film, that almost made it come down to a 3, but was held up by the strong technicals in certain places: the acting.
What's usually one of your strengths is the weakest part here in this film for me. The main characters acting just doesn't work for me, at all... He appears more like someone quickly reciting his favorite movie moments then someone who does proper acting. He threw me off of what would have been an almost excellent little made-for-fun flick. So it's just a good little made-for-fun flick.

Oh, and I'm still waiting for that big film project of yours that doesn't have that "It was made in 48 hours" aera around it too. Cause I still believe when you guys take your proper time doing a proper film that plays the strengths shown in your work, you can actually do something doubtlessly excellent, rather then a nice finger-play with many rushed elements thrown in for good measure.
Posted: Wed, 10th Jun 2009, 5:13am

Post 37 of 44

FreshMentos

Force: 1667 | Joined: 10th Jun 2006 | Posts: 1141

VisionLab User MacOS User

Gold Member

I'm really bad at writing full written reviews, so I'll keep this short. My favorite piece from you guys yet. On all levels: technicals, acting, script, plot, etc...

Bravo Atomic Productions! 5 Stars btw.
Posted: Wed, 10th Jun 2009, 5:31am

Post 38 of 44

spydurhank

Force: 1956 | Joined: 24th Jun 2008 | Posts: 1357

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Rating: +1

Wow guys!!! This was way, way beyond good! eek

Locations. Bad-ass.
Costumes. Bad-ass.
Music. Bad-ass.
Lighting. Bad-ass.
Grading. Bad-ass.
Camera work. Bad-ass.
Damn! Pretty much everything was bad-ass.

Acting. To me this includes facial expressions and body language, interaction with props and environment, that's some of the things I look for so here goes.

There were a few snippets here and there that could have been a little tighter. The scene where the one guy leaves the office when things start going bad... it was good but was missing a little something from the actor that leaves. He didn't seem to pull off that he was "shocked" at what his partner did. He was good with the "I'm out of here" part though.

The scene where the guy finds the file... he could have been a little more panicked and afraid. Other than that... all in all everyone's acting was pretty good.

I liked how the 1st "manager"? guy had a "just take what you want and get the hell out" type attitude. Like he'd been through something like that before. Very cool.

The detective guy was fan-freaking-tastic even though he was only in that scene for a few seconds. Would have liked to have seen him a little more. He was a great asset to have and really sold his part. Nice.

The guy that kills everyone was done very well I thought. He pulled it off im my eyes anyway. He had the whole loud mouthed, arrogant wanna be, "I'm tougher than anyone" thing going on but he's really not.

The dude that picked out the gun for him in the pawn shop, was more of the laid back, cool under pressure type of villain. I thought he was the mastermind of the whole thing or should have been anyway.

The 2nd bad guy that was shot seemed like the silent muscle type. He didn't have much to say but let his posturing and body language did his talking for him. Very cool.

My absolute favorite parts were the beginning and the end.
ShamWow bitch! Sooo cool.
When the guy who left and didn't die meets the other bad guy in his house for a little revenge... Very cool. What made it cool for me was that the guy didn't take his hood off to mysteriously and dramatically reveal himself. I'm glad you guys didn't do that but that's just my personal taste as I feel that it's been done to death. It's like... Dude I know it's you man... you don't have to take your hoody off, just shoot me and get it over with.
But I'll tell you what... you give those guys a little more time and work with them some more and I'll bet you that their acting will improve greatly... not that it was bad mind you, I've seen worse. Those guys have tons of potential.

Dude if you guys re-shoot it and put more time into it than you were allotted for the competition... I bet your actors will be spot on. Like I said... they weren't bad at all and I rather think it came out like that because you only had so much time to put into any particular scene. So anyway I give this a freaking 4/5 only because of those two scenes that I mentioned earlier... other than that you'd have a 5.
So yeah you guys were awesome and your actors were awesome. So think about a re-shoot if you have time, that way we get to see more of what you guys can do. biggrin

P.S.
Did I tell you your movie was bad-ass!? Cause it was!
Posted: Sat, 13th Jun 2009, 9:22am

Post 39 of 44

Atom

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

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Hey thanks for the comments, guys- especially in such though-out detail! It doesn't go unnoticed!

FreshMentos- heh, short and sweet, I like it! Haha.

Sollthar, I know what you mean on the acting. But, hey, we tried our best with the people we had or could get, you know? That's fine by me- although I have been pretty surprised by how many people take notice/jab at the acting; especially Trevor's. You put it a very interesting way- like he's acting out bits of scenes he's seen in the past, which I can kind of see. But overall I think his acting if no one else' stands as good as if not better than some of the acting in our previous project.

Obviously this movie isn't as brooding or drama-intense, so there's less room for flexing those acting muscles with dramatic exposition and therefore less to impress with, you know? I'm just happy we (somewhat) successfully bordered the thin line between comedy and drama without becoming overly preposterous. We knew that we'd have to keep it all light in general tone given the style or else it'd just come off confused. Hopefully we sold it.

Oh, and I'm still waiting for that big film project of yours that doesn't have that "It was made in 48 hours" aera around it too. Cause I still believe when you guys take your proper time doing a proper film that plays the strengths shown in your work, you can actually do something doubtlessly excellent, rather then a nice finger-play with many rushed elements thrown in for good measure.[/quote]


Spydurhank, thanks man! Good to hear you liked it. "Badass" is definitely what we were going for in the script and idea from the get-go. Something we wanted to be a real crowd-pleaser/entertainer and still have some impact and integrity to it. Likewise with the cast of characters, which I'm glad you picked up on. They're all written as sort of ironic caricatures, and acted that way. You really hit the nail on the head with the robbers, which I'm happy someone noticed! They were written as

Luke- The stereotypical naive, spunky, innocent young gun with a conscience.
Ray- The stereotypical pretty-boy head-honcho and laid-back orchestrator of the whole operation.
Jones- The stereotypical silent black guy muscle of the heist.
Jimmy- The Steve Buscemi character. Overly arrogant and confident with little to show for it. Talks tough.

We thought, given the way we had scripted them, the actors did great jobs. The detective was a rarity, because the guy is authentic- from the North with that accent and demeanor and everything. Andy Merlino's the name. Great nice guy to help us out. Glad you liked them all.

What then trips me up, slightly, are the parts you didn't like, as lots of people have specifically made comment on them as being bits with some of the best acting. A little perplexing, I guess.

There were a few snippets here and there that could have been a little tighter. The scene where the one guy leaves the office when things start going bad... it was good but was missing a little something from the actor that leaves. He didn't seem to pull off that he was "shocked" at what his partner did. He was good with the "I'm out of here" part though.
See, I and a lotta people who've seen the movie seem to think the moment his eyes widen and flip back-and-forth is the best bit of acting in the movie, which makes me scratch my head as to how it didn't sell as well with you. Reese, the character in the scene, is the only 'real' actor in the movie; and we really think he's quite good. We specifically wrote the role for him because we knew it'd have more of a dramatic, naive 'shocked' turn in it- and I thought he pulled it off beautifully. But, opinions differ I guess.

The scene where the guy finds the file... he could have been a little more panicked and afraid. Other than that... all in all everyone's acting was pretty good.
Hehe. Well, I don't know what to say about this either. This scene was pretty heavily cut down, as the longer scene plays with the clerk being pistol-whipped by Jones and asking for clarification on how Jimmy is going to 'count to ten'. (as in 'ten seconds' or '10 9 8 7, etc.'). Together the scene played too long and not frantic enough- and I feel like it's current length and takes really push the panicky feel. Maybe not enough for you, but hopefully you still got some of it in there. Andrew Allen, the AD on the movie and actor of the clerk, we felt like did a great job playing the girlishly-screaming and whiny role. I'm sure you'll notice, as you mentioned the manager who gets killed earlier on, that the latter clerk was supposed to be a younger employee who hadn't been through a robbery before the way the more laid-back manager had, and therefore a humorous comparison could be drawn between their demeanors.

Dunno if anyone caught that, though. Because, yeah, like I said- that one's a little perplexing. People seem to really like the 'just please please please please okay okay here here!!!!!' repetition and panicky style of the clerk. Guess it wasn't panicky enough for you, eh? smile

Thanks for the great comments on everything else, though! Glad you took notice to some aspects and plot/character points others have yet to mention, too! It's always fun to have a viewer find those. Yeah, the ending we played the way we did for the very reason you mention- and I think, coupled with the reasoning Tarn made earlier- it works all-the-better for it. And, hehe. 'ShamWOW, bitchh!' Yeah.....glad someone got a good laugh outta that- it's been really mixed reactions so far. We don't reshoot movies, though, man. Especially not timed ones- if we find time to work on something, we like to make sure we're progressing with something new and different, you know? smile

Overall, though, glad you guys liked it! Thanks once again!
Posted: Mon, 15th Jun 2009, 7:30pm

Post 40 of 44

ben3308

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

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

FXhomer73396, would you kindly share why you saw fit to give this film a 2? I know it's not perfect, but that's kind of harsh, all things considered. biggrin
Posted: Thu, 18th Jun 2009, 10:48pm

Post 41 of 44

Jabooza

Force: 2743 | Joined: 21st Jul 2006 | Posts: 1446

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Ah, this was quite good. smile It's interesting though that I didn't really care much for it, not really sure why, I guess it's just because of my taste in movies. Maybe it's because, as you say, this is a comedy... I didn't really find it funny, maybe cause I have an odd sense of humor, which is definitely not the kind of sense of humor you guys seem to have. biggrin

The only real criticism that I have would be, as Sollthar mentioned, the acting. Not that it was bad, but it definitely wasn't up to par with your other stuff.
Besides that, this is nearly technically perfect... just not my kind of thing, if you know what I mean. biggrin
Posted: Sat, 20th Jun 2009, 12:11am

Post 42 of 44

Terminal Velocity

Force: 2507 | Joined: 7th Apr 2008 | Posts: 1350

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I'll start by saying that though the plot was obviously very small, I thought the story was good as far as it went. You didn't try to do anything complex in the five minutes of the story, which made it harshly clear exactly what was happening. I thought it was funny in a twisted way how the protagonist was so clever, killing everybody off, but in the end too clever for his own good. It was kind of a master stroke, all his conniving left him groveling on the floor dying. I think this particular part was very well done. But one thing I didn't understand; who was the guy who shot the protagonist? The boss?

The grading was good and fitting in with the film, except the green tint that made me think of the Matrix, especially in the urban setting. I think the green could have been left out altogether and been replaced with a cold blue or maybe gritty grading. I've heard that the green is your signature "atomic" thing, but it might well get a bit tired. Maybe if it doesn't fit with the story, you could stick it in the intro and leave it out for the rest. Just a suggestion.

Acting-wise, I didn't mind it at all. Not much to say on this, since the range of emotion is limited, but what I saw was pretty good. Gung-ho and all that.

Technically it was really nice. One thing I disliked was the lack of blood, when I think a few shots of wounds would have fit in well. Maybe blood pooling around your "hero"'s body when he was lying there. It might have added another element of grit to the story. Muzzle flashes were great.

I'll give NRFTW a 4/5, just because it's too short.
Posted: Sun, 21st Jun 2009, 9:36pm

Post 43 of 44

swintonmaximilian

Force: 1970 | Joined: 23rd Jun 2007 | Posts: 527

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Hi, just got round to watching this today. I thnk that you did a good job with it, the camera work is nice, the handheld stuff works well and has a good, adrenaline fueled feel to it. The dolly shots are good too, at the part where the team is arguing over the job, the movement of the camera away from the group creates a nice sense of forboding, and you really start to anticipate the coming story. I think that for the most part the acting is solid from all concerned, this is not a criticism of you actors or directing, but I think that the timescale you were working too hindered you in the acting department. Obviously this is part and parcel of having such a tight deadline, and I have no doubt that, with more time, you could pull off a very engaging character based film. I think that the tone of the film overall works well, and the mild comedy keeps the whole thing from becoming stale. Thre is one part I really don't like, and that is when Ray is shot. It looks lazy, no offense, and it looks like time was the problem, again. My other major criticism, I feel bad for doing this because it's so obviously time related in each case, is with the gun fire. It just looks fake, and it takes me right out of the film. I'm aware that this sort of criticism is perhaps annoying, because you were working to a deadline, but as a viewewr watching this film as it stands by itself, the points I have mentioned impair my enjoyment. I really want you to make something that takes you a really long time, because then you could you would give your film making talnts room to breathe. It's admirable that you tried for so much in such a short space of time, and it's exciting to think what you could do with more time. I enjoyed this film, and I want to see you working without such limitations. Technically it's solid in most places, a little shaky in others, but again, there is almost no point in me saying this because you know it I'm sure. So, I look forward to your next film chaps, there is a lot of potential here.
All the best,
Max
Posted: Wed, 1st Jul 2009, 7:07am

Post 44 of 44

Atom

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

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

First off, sorry for getting back to all of you guys so late. Been busy! So here we go:

Jabooza wrote:

The only real criticism that I have would be, as Sollthar mentioned, the acting. Not that it was bad, but it definitely wasn't up to par with your other stuff.
Besides that, this is nearly technically perfect... just not my kind of thing, if you know what I mean. biggrin
Thanks, Jabooza- yeah, the acting wasn't up to par with some of our other efforts, but we're still generally happy and impressed with our actors- especially considering you can get away with less acting gravitas in a movie like this. wink Sorry you didn't like this- kinda odd, most people we've talked to have the best reaction to this as far as 'liking' any of our movies.

And thanks for finally taking a look at this, Richard III- I'm glad you semi-liked it and were willing to watch it, even with a little bit of stubborn principle. wink

Richard III wrote:

But one thing I didn't understand; who was the guy who shot the protagonist? The boss?
No no no, this was supposed to be the 'kid' character, from the beginning. The point of establishing him in the '16 hours ago' scene was to show his stressing of the plan having structure; then his conscience when they killed the manager which causes him to desert the whole operation. He's the one who kills Jimmy in the end; a bit of cruel irony and justice there. If you notice, that's where the name really comes from as there truly is, in the movie, 'no rest for the wicked'. Hopefully the ending music playfully and cool-y plays into that, too.

The grading was good and fitting in with the film, except the green tint that made me think of the Matrix, especially in the urban setting. I think the green could have been left out altogether and been replaced with a cold blue or maybe gritty grading. I've heard that the green is your signature "atomic" thing, but it might well get a bit tired. Maybe if it doesn't fit with the story, you could stick it in the intro and leave it out for the rest. Just a suggestion.
I'm sorry, but I can't agree with you here. Although we're somewhat notorious for having 'green grading' I want to make it clear it's not simply a filter or anything, we're known for good grading, too. It's a choice that goes with the tone of each movie, and I hate it being labeled as 'green'. Specifically in this movie, I went with a corporate-y set of blue and orange tones that I never do. Likewise, in our movie now in the cinema, 'Exodus', I've gone with a more desaturated, bleaker color palette that builds up to more golden tones throughout the movie. Hopefully you can note some of these things.

Technically it was really nice. One thing I disliked was the lack of blood, when I think a few shots of wounds would have fit in well. Maybe blood pooling around your "hero"'s body when he was lying there. It might have added another element of grit to the story. Muzzle flashes were great.
Sure, turn it off the first sound of some coarse language, but bring on the blood! wink No, really. Thanks for watching, seriously.

And thanks for the comments, Max! You're absolutely right about the movie being 'stale' at that point, kinda loses its momentum that it tends to build the rest of the movie. I agree, but woe is time, you know? Hopefully, as I realized this, pushing more into the ending as far as style and intrigue helped the viewer, you, to forget about that point or at least get past it- as I think all successful movies do and/or should do. If you can't sell the bridge, make sure you've got a strong beginning and a memorable end- and that's generally what I went for here.

Also I'd like to note, that we're moving forward likely with a prequel to this movie currently titled 'Let Sleeping Dogs Lie', which we'll make in the coming weeks and center around Trevor's character Jimmy- who kills everyone off- and his 'mob son screwup' beginnings. Looks to be a lotta fun, especially coming off of the momentum of 'No Rest', 'Exodus', and the movie I made this past weekend, 'A Love Not Standing'.