Posted: Tue, 1st Jun 2010, 10:34am
Post 1 of 42
|[Some people are having problems streaming. To download, Right click, then Save As...]|
We Can Cheat Luck.
'Roulette' tells the story of Jake, a student who finds out his luck is a lot more predictable than everyone else's. The film follows him as he discovers his 'condition', which he must learn to master or live in fear for the rest of his life.
Scott Tanner returns with his fifth film, 'Roulette'. Starring Andrew James, Andy Cruickshank, Jo Tivey and Steve Morris. It took almost a year to make due to a lot of set-backs, but the result is a 70-minute film. Hopefully its 707mb filesize isn't too much. Don't worry, you don't have to download it all at once. By clicking the link, 'Roulette' will start to stream to your player instead.
Copyright © Scott Tanner 2010
Posted: Tue, 1st Jun 2010, 1:51pm
Post 2 of 42
1 hour? Won't have time to watch this anytime soon. However, I'm interested if the quality can be consistent throughout.
Congratulations on completing such a undertaking.
Posted: Tue, 1st Jun 2010, 9:08pm
Post 3 of 42
I've got to tell you man. I've been waiting a loooong time for this film. I really liked it for the most part. I had to ask my chick friend to leave because she kept "distracting" me as I tried to watch your film.
Yes there were a few places that needed some work but this was discussed in another thread after you'd already shot the film so I won't bring them up here.
It may be weird but the character that "to me" stood out the most yet had the least screen time was the leg breaker kid Chris. That kid was great and seemed to be really into his character.
Don't get me wrong... everyone else did a good job in the acting department "some scenes needed a bit more work though" but when Chris was in a scene... I really believed that he was going to hurt someone.
I think it's because he didn't over do it.
I was impressed by the girlfriends acting during the Russian Roulette scene at the end. Of course the other three actors where great as well.
That was a very emotional scene when the old man "does that thing" to himself.
Can't wait for your next film.
Posted: Wed, 2nd Jun 2010, 12:15pm
Post 4 of 42
Thanks a lot man. As I remember, you were one of the ones to proof-read the script, were you not? It's great to hear feedback from someone who technically knew what was going to happen before he watched it.
Thank you too, Fxhome Dude, I look forward to your comments.
As for the rest of you, don't forget to rate this film and, should you have the time, comment on it. In just over 24 hours, the film and trailer have had 250 downloads and yet only 2 comments.
Also, I'll be adding a 'low quality' version soon, for those of you who don't want to stretch their bandwidths. It will be about 300Mb.
Posted: Wed, 2nd Jun 2010, 12:17pm
Post 5 of 42
Bear in mind that while 250 people might have downloaded it, they won't necessarily have had time to watch it due to it length.
I'e only been able to watch the first half so far but was very impressed. It held my attention and was nicely varied in terms of location and character. Acting was variable but on the whole entirely watchable.
Really liked the pull-back through the hole in the wallet - very inventive.
Looking forward to watching the second half!
Posted: Wed, 2nd Jun 2010, 12:25pm
Post 6 of 42
A low quality version has now been added. I've also changed the name of the original to 'Full Movie [High Quality]'. Both links are now pending; now if I could just get them Ok'd...
Posted: Wed, 2nd Jun 2010, 6:21pm
Post 7 of 42
Avenging Eagle wrote:Thanks a lot man. As I remember, you were one of the ones to proof-read the script, were you not? It's great to hear feedback from someone who technically knew what was going to happen before he watched it.AE
Yes sir I was.
Posted: Wed, 2nd Jun 2010, 7:00pm
Post 8 of 42
After going through three different media playesr (the third being the only one that would play it right) it was good.. I only watched about half of it. Simply because I was so tired i was falling asleep at the desk....
Windows Media Player didn't like the movie, it kept getting all free pixeled. Quicktime the video was fine but the audio was off sync. So I used VLC player which seemed to work fine in all aspects.
Posted: Wed, 2nd Jun 2010, 10:09pm
Post 9 of 42
You'll need an mp4 codec for it to work properly. The film was encoded with Videowrap to save on filesize.
Posted: Wed, 2nd Jun 2010, 10:27pm
Post 10 of 42
I wasnt planning watch it all in one go but i got hooked!! i thought the film was wicked! i thought the story was good and the shots you used were really nicely chosen. making a full length feature would be tough but this looks to be worth the effort you put in over the last year!! nice job! looking forward to more of your work!
Posted: Thu, 3rd Jun 2010, 2:06am
Post 11 of 42
Have that for both quicktime and WMP. Not a huge deal.
Posted: Thu, 3rd Jun 2010, 2:56am
Post 12 of 42
I started watching this earlier today. I said to myself "If I'm not hooked by 10 minutes I'll quit watching this." Before I knew if, I was 30 minutes in it. I had to work so I could only watch like 75% percent of it. Gonna watch the rest in a bit. Good job
Posted: Fri, 4th Jun 2010, 8:07am
Post 13 of 42
The filesize and time are both of epic length- it'll take me a few days to give it a watch. Judging by your commitment and the promising trailers, I expect to enjoy it and look forward to watching!
Posted: Fri, 4th Jun 2010, 12:44pm
Post 14 of 42
I was very excited for this film to come out and finally it did! I watched it as soon as I could and loved it. Well done, filmed and edited. Great job!
Posted: Fri, 4th Jun 2010, 2:03pm
Post 15 of 42
5/5. While acting varies the story is great. It's gripping and for it's length, extremely well done.
Posted: Sat, 5th Jun 2010, 11:08pm
Post 16 of 42
I haven't gotten through all of this due to the length (and my lack of time), but I have alas skipped around and have a general idea of how I feel so I can give you some feedback without waiting a ridiculous amount of time. I've come to a conclusion, which is like this:
There are really winning, true spots of genius and greatness in this from what I can see- and they are so well-orchestrated I almost want to commend you in-person. Really, good job.
The offside then here is that because of this, there's also unfortunately an uneven side of somewhat lossy technicals, editing, and story cohesion in other parts. It's ignorable to most extents, and I absolutely understand how daunting such an epic project can be and that you can only thinly-spread your resources and efforts (even when top-notch) so far. So don't think I'm trying to bash the movie- I absolutely am not.
I am exceedingly impressed. Given a slight bit more narrative focus, bits of better acting, and more consistency in the technicals- you'd have something incredibly
cinematic here that oozed with the finesse of a 'real' movie.
As it stands now, this isn't quite there. There are spots and moments, even spliced together with absolutely great ones (the greatest
'magnum opus' part coming together at 1:03:51- bravo, really) where the score, lighting, cinematography, narrative flow, and editing are so incredibly top-notch that a switch to a 'lesser' shot like the one just before it (1:03:33) is glaringly worse- even though it's not that bad itself. Same with the acting. The actor who plays 'Chris'. Even in his smaller screentime (to me) he so immensely outacts and outclasses almost all of your other actors, that I begin to wonder why he
wasn't the lead Jake. Obviously the look and character didn't fit; just pointing out something that lends itself to being more critical. Chris is well-acted, so it points out the acting flaws in Jake when they're together and/or juxtaposed. Again, a minor enough complaint- just something I noticed.
I guess that's my primary complaint, even though it's a fault that is otherwise harmless and to be expected. The movie is full-and-full perfect
. But, hey. It doesn't really have to be. You get enough things right and do so with enough cinematic impact that I'll gladly give you a 4/5.
I keep that last point away only because I see promise in you (and because I'm a hard critic
) and I know, in the future, I'll see work from you that hits all of my minor gripes and is truly
Atom-deemably '5 star' work. Until then, you've got yourself a nice work here.
Be proud of it. 4/5
is Harry Stamper. I know I've mentioned this before, just in the future be careful with picking semi-iconic character names.
Posted: Sun, 6th Jun 2010, 1:11am
Post 17 of 42
Overall this a decent film. Interesting story, age-appropriate actors, and like others have said, Chris stands out the most and he does overshadow anyone else.
On the down side, the whole thing feels too long. Although I'm not sure how you could make us care about the character without decent buildup. I think the problem I had was the editing, specifically the amounts of shots i suspect you had to pick from.
To me, it's the little things. When the main character goes to gamble the first time, you go back and forth to the same framed shot of the woman, the older man, the dealer, and main character. No new angles. It just didn't feel like it was moving forward.
The sound was also a bit problematic. It sounded like everything was recorded with the on-board camera mic and you can here the room echos. Also when Chris and the main character fight in the alley, there are no impact sound effects to give it a little more edge. It just feels flat.
There were also some cool shots of the dollying moves only to be thrown off my some jerky left/right pans while dollying.
I know this review is more negative than positive, but i do see the effort here and applaud you for it. I know it's not easy especially when the finished product clocks in over an hour.
Posted: Sun, 6th Jun 2010, 12:08pm
Post 18 of 42
Thanks Atom, great to hear such constructive feedback from you!
Unfortunately, Garrison, I disagree with you on some points.
I've shown this film to many people and almost all of them have said that it didn't feel like a 70-minute film. Indeed, even some of the previous comments in this thread state that while watching it, a half-hour just flew by.
It's true that I did use many of the same angles again for the croupier, and the other players during the casino scene. But these characters aren't really that important. There are several angles on Jake, the main character, in that scene and you may have noticed it kept cutting closer in on him to 'ramp up' the tension. I agreee, this is perhaps not the most effective way of doing it but, oh well, the entire sequence (almost 7 minutes of the film) was shot in 4 hours one night in September, which was all our location would allow.
Yes, the sound was an issue. It was indeed recorded with the onboard mic, though some of it was put through some filters to minimise the hum of the camera mechanisms. There was also some ADR done on certain scenes, though not extensively.
Actually, there ARE impact sounds during the fight scene; I recorded them myself. The music in that scene on the other hand is quite percussive, so some hits might be mistaken for beats of the drum.
Yeah, I was using dolly wheels as opposed to track, so some of the moves aren't as smooth as they could be.
Anyways, thanks for watching the film and thanks for the 3-star rating...I guess...
Posted: Tue, 8th Jun 2010, 8:42pm
Post 19 of 42
Well a 3 star rating ain't that bad; just hope the guy who rates everything a 0 don't watch it
Posted: Mon, 14th Jun 2010, 8:50am
Post 20 of 42
Comments and ratings have dropped off in recent days. Please, if you have watched the film, don't forget to rate it and/or leave a comment.
Posted: Sat, 19th Jun 2010, 3:43am
Post 21 of 42
This film was so amazing. It was so well done with such a grading, I forgot that I wasn't watching a "silver screener."
Posted: Mon, 21st Jun 2010, 12:21am
Post 22 of 42
You're at least on the right track. The acting and direction is competent, but your sound, which is actually more important than picture, is hollow and amateur sounding and detracts from the overall film. You got the two stars for the acting and direction and the attempt you made at an actual story, albeit a difficult one to market, even with a name. Story is the missing element in about 98 percent of the films posted here and the reason I give them a ZERO. Special effects are nothing without a great story to support them. Notice I said a GREAT story, not just a decent one. A great story is the basis for all successful films. If you’ve ever wondered what makes home videos so boring, now you know. There is no story for the viewer to become involved in. The maker knows the people and, therefore, has a connection, but everyone else is just subjected to a special torture while politely pretending they are being entertained. The same is true for feature films except, thankfully, we aren’t required to pay an admission fee for the home video. You’re moving in the right direction and I’ll be awaiting your next project. I remember a line from “Cool Runnings” where John Candy was telling one of his Bobsledders about he importance of winning saying, “If you’re not enough without it, you’ll never be enough with it.” The same is true for your story. Though this site is all about special effects, if your story and film aren’t great without them, it will never be enough with them.” Concentrate on your story and you’ll get the attention of the right people at the film festivals.
Posted: Mon, 21st Jun 2010, 8:23am
Post 23 of 42
While your focus on story is commendable, FXhomer32915, I think your judging of films to be entirely worthless if they don't have a 'great story' a little harsh.
For filmmakers that are just starting out, getting the technicals right is just as important as finding a good story. A good story told with bad technicals is just as problematic as a technically great piece with a poor story.
The difference is that with zero-budget, amateur filmmaking people have to try out all sorts of different things. You don't always have the luxury of having a great story and great technicals, because you don't always have a full crew to specialise in each area. Sometimes you simply have to prioritise and decide to make your current project about improving your cinematography, or your sound, or your acting, or your writing, etc.
The practicalities of this kind of shooting mean that it is very, very difficult to tick every box. While you're entitled to your vote, I don't think voting '0' so swiftly necessarily aids new filmmakers. Certainly give them feedback to help them improve in their weak areas, but voting so harshly will only discourage people from ever progressing.
Last edited Mon, 21st Jun 2010, 9:37am; edited 1 times in total.
Posted: Mon, 21st Jun 2010, 9:32am
Post 24 of 42
Obviously, I'm a little biased on this since it's my film but I agree with Tarn. Also, I think you have to look at these films in the context of their competition. How amateur does 'Roulette' look against some 14-year-old's VFX test?
You say you gave 'Roulette' 2 stars, for acting, direction and 'the attempt you made at an actual story'. Thank you. I feel privileged 'Roulette' was one of only 8 films you've rated on this site. Out of interest, what would I have got more stars for? I do agree, my sound wasn't great but I surely didn't lose 3 stars purely for that. Also, you said my story was 'a difficult one to market'. This is Fxhome, not Cannes; I'm not going to have to worry about Sales Agents and Promotional Material with this one, realistically. I just hope you understood the story I was trying to tell.
Fxhomer32915, I see you're a Producer, and that naturally lends itself to a 'no bulls**t' approach to film and life in general. But have a heart for those of us who still have much to learn. And I'm not talking about myself, I'm talking about those poor 14-year-olds you keep rating zero on. What that tells them is that they put absolutely no effort in to any aspect of their film; the acting, story, cinematography, sound and VFX are all rubbish. That's destructively disconcerting for the poor 14-year-old. You above all people should know how difficult it is to even get a film off the ground, let alone make it good. That deserves at least one star in my book.
Posted: Mon, 21st Jun 2010, 10:39am
Post 25 of 42
Tarn and AE say it all for me also....well put both of you.
Posted: Mon, 21st Jun 2010, 12:08pm
Post 26 of 42
Finally got the time to watch this and first, let me congratulate you on an outstanding piece of work! As the trailer suggested, this is the kind of film we should get more of in the fxhome cinema. Not just an effects test but a real film with a script, acting and technicals that had a lot of thought, sweat, time and effort put into them. I can't commend you enough on even undertaking such a thing and actually finishing it.
The story was based on an interesting idea and had a lot going for it. I liked the characters and their struggles. There clearly went a lot of thought in that area and that's brilliant. We have all a film needs. Friendships, Love, Argument, Betrayal, Struggle... Excellent.
The acting is mostly solid and helps tell the story. The directing clearly helps - since it's always aware of the emotions of the characters and doesn't go for the simple action, but goes for emotional details: Looks, expressions, movement... Everything is there that makes it interesting.
The camerawork and editing are okay. Some shots are a bit oddly framed and overexposed, but it doesn't distract too much. The montage shows a clear direction in terms of what you want the audience to focus on and what you want to tell.
As has been mentioned, another problem the film had was some of the sound. The quality was hit and miss. It wasn't distractingly bad, but it certainly has a lot of room for improvement.
Acting wise, your actors did a good job. Allthough, the character of "chris" makes it obvious how much is missing from everyone else. Even in his few minutes of screen time, he blows every single other actor completely out of the water.
Unfortunately, the film was waaayyy too long. It's the most difficult problem to get right and a problem I've myself often failed to properly avoid. In your case, it's an even bigger shame since you have so much detail in your film. But still, for 70 minutes, it was too little. This film could be cut down to 45 minutes I'd argue and not lose anything important. In fact, I'd say it would gain a lot and make it a much better film. More compact, more to the point, more clear, more even. Theres lines in this that aren't necessary, there's bad shots in this that aren't necessary, there's pauses in it that aren't necessary, there's bad acting in it that isn't necessary and there's many moment that could easily be half as long and would not lose but actually GAIN impact.
Now I know you disagree and I know many others have told you the film doesn't feel too long. I'm sure they don't lie, but I doubt how experienced in storytelling those people were and I certainly hope you don't disregard the notion that your film is indeed too long just because "others have said it isn't".
I sympathize with the problem. You spend so much time and effort into making it all right and then one grows fond of every little thing and it's utterly, utterly, devastatingly hard to part from things that are unnecessary to improve the pacing. It's also hard, because it needs a lot of experience to know what is necessary and what isn't. Seeing you spent so much time thinking up details you start to believe they're all necessary and add something when in fact, not all of them do. And maybe the film is just too fresh for you to see it in the necessary distance. Hence and editor that has no connection to the material can sometimes help a bunch.
So all in all, this shows incredible potential and is indeed very, very watchable EVEN though it is way too long. And that is more then good credit for your abilities as a filmmaker. Now I hope that you take the compliments, but also the critique in account for your next film I personally am looking forward very much to see. I hope to see more stuff like this on fxhome!
Posted: Tue, 22nd Jun 2010, 4:34pm
Post 27 of 42
Avenging Eagle wrote:Fxhomer32915, I see you're a Producer, and that naturally lends itself to a 'no bulls**t' approach to film and life in general.
I think the moral of the story, is that anyone can claim to be a producer, a director or a VFX Artist - But alone that doesn't lend weight to an opinion, especially if it is both worded and structured badly. In this case, the criticisms are not only disproportionate and incorrect. But they're also coming from the producer of this website :http://www.redwoodmotionmedia.net/
Adjust your value systems accordingly. I hope to get to watch Roullette over the next couple of weeks and I'll post again when I've done so.
Posted: Tue, 22nd Jun 2010, 8:42pm
Post 28 of 42
FXhomer32915 wrote:practically anything this guy has said
Get out of here, buddy. Rating a buncha movies 0 and offering nothing but snarky, wildly impractical, short-sighted, naive criticism from such a haughty tone does no one any good- and just makes you look like an ass.
No one cares if all you're going to do is troll/spam all of our movies with little to no rational
rhyme or reason. It just comes off as very Armond White-ish to me. A quick look at your recent ratings immediately tells me what kind of negative and possibly unpleasant sort of critic you are- and that's really an unfortunate indicator.
If that isn't your intent, take a good look at how you're judging things here and on what scale- and I hate to say this: but what you could do yourself. And really reflect on whether what you say is conducive to learning or growing as a filmmaker; or whether it simply is a 'condemn-everything' approach.
Unlike the rest of the people in this thread, I've read more of your filmmaking insight through messages with my brother on one of our films- and it's all a perspective I entirely disagree with that is absolutely cynically perplexing. So it's slightly harder for me to take a 'well, let's try and figure this guy out first' approach. So.......yeah. You anger me almost as much as all the bullshit about and around the Writer's Strike did.
If movies were solely stories they'd be books- not movies
. To ignore all the integral and talented facets of filmmaking besides story is to spit in the face of the art itself. Get your head out of your ass.
Posted: Tue, 22nd Jun 2010, 11:17pm
Post 29 of 42
Vote 'Atom' for international diplomacy.
Posted: Tue, 22nd Jun 2010, 11:54pm
Post 30 of 42
Posted: Wed, 23rd Jun 2010, 8:17am
Post 31 of 42
As much as I share a different viewpoint, I don't quite get how the "I only give 5 stars to something that is truly perfect in every regard" is completely utterly invalid and the "I'll rate it 5 stars because compared to the other stuff here it's very good" is ultimately valid and everyone with a different set of judgement gets the "get out of here" card?
Relative and absolute judgements (which is basically the issue here) are both perfectly okay and valid. Especially since the guy took the time to explain his viewpoint, we all know how to take it - we all know how it works.
Why not take the 2 simply for what it is and leave it at that?
Posted: Wed, 23rd Jun 2010, 8:22am
Post 32 of 42
Sollthar wrote:we all know how to take it - we all know how it works.
While I expect this is the case for Avenging Eagle, as it is for you, me and some others, it's not a blanket assumption that can be made for everybody. A lot of filmmakers here are very new, very young and very inexperienced. Many of them will be at a critical point, not just in their filmmaking but in their development in general, during which they can be very sensitive to negative comments.
Which isn't to say that you should sugarcoat your comments: it's obviously very important to tell them the truth and how to improve. But to essentially dismiss their work in this manner doesn't really help.
If you're talking to experienced and/or professional filmmakers, you're absolutely right. But FXhome.com clearly isn't just about experienced and/or professional filmmakers.
I've seen a fair few filmmakers here start off with awful
work, and gradually get better and better over the years. If they'd been completely dismissed right at the start they might never have bothered embarking on that road of improvement.
Posted: Wed, 23rd Jun 2010, 7:07pm
Post 33 of 42
Tarn wrote:I've seen a fair few filmmakers here start off with awful work, and gradually get better and better over the years. If they'd been completely dismissed right at the start they might never have bothered embarking on that road of improvement.
I think quoting this should suffice in mentioning my point.
Posted: Thu, 24th Jun 2010, 7:54am
Post 34 of 42
Posted: Thu, 24th Jun 2010, 10:00am
Post 35 of 42
Same here dude.
This isn't some kinda reality talent type of t.v. show where you have one douche bag dogging a first timer.
Nothing wrong with being over critical but you could at least show some class and help that first timer learn something to help him or her improve their skills rather than just putting him or her down.
In the words of my dad "you can't get sugar from sh!t"
Posted: Thu, 1st Jul 2010, 12:38am
Post 36 of 42
A highly commendable effort, by far one of the best amateur productions I've seen. Everything on the directing front is unfaltable, at least in the context of the constraints you would have had.
The biggest issue for me was the story and script writing in particular. Obviously, I wasn't expecting an Oscar winning peice of story telling but for me, the way the story is told is paramount to the success of a film like this. You seemed to simply overlook some of the most important relationships, and nothing really felt important. The acting was mostly mediocre, as many other comments have said and the character of Chris was indeed superb, but the mainly average acting can only be blamed to an extent, in my opinion. The relationship between Jake and Sophie, for example, was not explored enough to make it a real relationship. We find out they're dating, then she says he hasn't been seeing her and then she's kidnapped and loves him; I didn't believe it. Maybe showing more of them, some kind of heart-felt moments would have helped. Equally, the inclusion of Jake's friends seemed to go nowhere, aside from one phone call as Jake's luck begins to change for the worse. Again, some more moments of friendship would have helped. However, the moments that you did show were probably the worst of the film. For example, the scene in which Jake gets rejected by Sophie has his friends biting their fists. Whilst I can see what you were trying to do here, it just came across as cheesy and was unfortuneately cringe-worthy. The majority of their dialogue provoked the same feelings. Furthermore, the whole father-son relationship between Jake and Harry wasn't full explored and again, I didn't understand why these characters were so emotionally close depsite having only met a few times.
However, I know this wasn't all about and the story and the directing, as I have mentioned, was superb. Some of the shots were fantastic and you have a lot of potentioal. However, I just feel that a film is another way of telling a story and if it's not doing it well it wasn't worth watching. So the downsides to the story were unfortuneate but I can see what you were trying to acheive and for that I gave you four stars.
Posted: Sat, 3rd Jul 2010, 7:01pm
Post 37 of 42
I enjoyed the movie, and think it is pretty good! Don't let the "wannabes" get ya own, it is a great effort.
My only complaint is the topic.....I think it would have helped a lot to know WHAT this condition is. Is it inherited, going back 1000's of years. Can it be used at will? etc etc..
Overall I find it a movie that you can be proud of!
Posted: Sat, 3rd Jul 2010, 7:08pm
Post 38 of 42
Smurf43 wrote:I think it would have helped a lot to know WHAT this condition is. Is it inherited, going back 1000's of years. Can it be used at will? etc etc..
This is actually what I enjoyed most
about the film. Lack of exposition or details surrounding something vaguely magical/spiritual/etc.
Odds are, were this to happen in real life, nobody
would have any
idea where it came from or why. And so, leaving those frivolous details out worked in the movie, I think. I liked it a lot more because it realized the risk in posing a potentially lame explanation for a very vague, cool premise.
Posted: Mon, 5th Jul 2010, 1:57pm
Post 39 of 42
ben3308 wrote:I liked it a lot more because it realized the risk in posing a potentially lame explanation for a very vague, cool premise.
Yes, this was the intention. I wasn't going to come up with some bulls**t science to explain what the condition is because, as you rightly say, it would have been lame. The audience is left to make up its own mind on what it is. They get given clues. Throughout the film, Jake is at the mercy of condition, not the other way round. So, no, it cannot be used at will. It's definately not hereditary, since Chris clearly doesn't have it. As for the 1000s of years thing, I have to be honest and say I hadn't thought of that. But now you mention it, yes, this condition could stretch way back in to human past, but that doesn't mean it had anything to do with our evolution...
...whoa, the condition could seriously distort natural selection.
Ok, enough of this Darwinian speculation; I'll drive myself crazy if I think about it anymore
Keep commenting and keep rating!
Posted: Thu, 26th Aug 2010, 2:05pm
Post 40 of 42
I absolutely loved this movie. I was sucked in and thought I was looking at a Hollywood production.
Of coarse I have to offer some advice, which is very hard to find in this film, since it is so well made. The only thing that needed work is how the opening scene is used in towards the end of the movie. It looked like you just took the opening scene and copied and pasted it in the climax. It is structured differently than the rest of the scene and the music is very different. It felt odd to me.
Posted: Mon, 30th Aug 2010, 10:57pm
Post 41 of 42
Hey I really enjoyed this film and I am always looking to showcase Indie films on my website www.hotdogsandpopcorn.com
Posted: Tue, 8th Feb 2011, 1:09am
Post 42 of 42
'Roulette' is now available on 2 disc DVD! To find out more, go to:http://tannerproductions.webs.com/roulette.htm
Thanks for all of your support!