Shot Comparisons - the left hand side are the ones I thought were bad, and the right hand side are the ones I think were good. I don't have the time right now to list
all of the shots (the last time I did that for a short it took me a good couple of hours or so), but really the vast majority of the film is fantastically done.
The more I look back at it I don't think there was really that much wrong, just the narrative style change (?) threw me off a lot (the majority of the video is pretty abstract but in the black and white sections it's mainly character focused). Saying that, the "off" feeling that I had was probably directed at shots like the second on the left in that picture. You'll notice that the wide depth of field (?) has managed to catch the entirety of the background (car, etc.), whereas shots like the one on the top-right haven't - this draws the attention from the main subject and makes the thing feel
flatter. The shot in the top right is one of my favourite shots of the entire film, along with the one towards the end where she spins (but my delayed reactions right now just won't let me stop it on the frame I liked the best - the last one), because they keep the attention solely on the woman.
One of the things I always successful short films and films do is they always have the scenes written and shot as if from a single character's perspective. Occasionally that
might change for some reason, but really it has to be a fantastic reason otherwise it just doesn't feel right at all, especially for narrative pieces. One of the main things that is really putting me off about that shot where you can see the car in the background, and I think the whole scene, is that the girl is clearly focused on her sketching, and yet you have the car in focus and are keeping things like the man as main shots. Imagine the whole first part as one scene - you have the girl, sitting on the bench, sketching, and the guy comes along and sits next to her. It feels off that the audience is introduced to the man before the girl has even taken notice of him - we see him walking well before the girl takes her eyes off her sketchbook.
Really though I think this
may be a subjective thing, and anyone here can feel free to say I'm wrong.
It was really a fantastic piece though, and to make a video that fits so perfectly around such a unique musical piece is truly something to be proud of!
Edit:
And I've just realised that it was probably a technical limitation with your camera's depth of field (?) that caused the problems I thought were there, which is totally understandable.
Edit:
Watching it for the fourth time now, is that guy that sits next to her the same guy that she's been drawing and is in the shots? I have the feeling that she was someone close to him and something happened to change her perspective of him. From a couple of the shots (like the fact that she's dressed in teenager-esque clothing and he's very formal and business-like) I have the feeling that he's the father, and if he was the one she was drawing then perhaps she didn't like the way her father had strayed from his younger life of being a lot more free and instead chose profit over enjoying life? Or perhaps she just didn't like her father at all and was drawing the way she wanted him to be.
See,
this shot in particular got me thinking about that.
Is that someone there in the background? Because if it is, and they were meant to be there, then I think it's a pretty important point that you don't see them again in the ice rink shots and from that point on she seems very lonely and isolated. It lends to my theory that someone close to her changed into someone she didn't like anymore, at least.
If that ends up being a sign in the middle of the arena, I'm going to feel like an idiot.
Edit:
And now I've just read your reply to the other guy and I've realised I'm completely wrong. You know, I don't mind, because this short film is still amazing.
