archived-videos DEPART FROM ME (sci-fi)

Zensteve said:
Sure, it might be experimental (and evolved from something else)... but this story has been told since the dawn of recorded history... even with a nod to a particular publication from 1818.

Maybe I'm just reading more into the OP's work than is there, but there's a lot more happening there than a VFX showcase.
Click to expand...

There's definitely a lot more going on than a VFX showcase, for sure. But I don't see any story. If you don't count the credits, this movie is 3-minutes long. And it's 3-minutes devoted to what? "Igor, flip the switch!"

Plus, I'm not quite sure what the story is that you're referring to, that has been told since the dawn of recorded history. Nor am I convinced that this is a nod to "Frankenstein". Because this narrative, if there is one, is so vague. And that's cool if it's an experimental piece of work. Maybe the filmmaker WANTS the audience to formulate their own ideas, figure out their own narrative. Is this some sort of futuristic torture? Is it experimentation for a new "Frankenstein"? Is it an absolutely meaningless narrative that is actually a metaphor for our dependence on oil? I don't know! Because there is no clear narrative structure; there is no actual story being told.

Again, I'm not trying to discount this work, because it's pretty sweet, for many reasons. But story ain't one of them.
 
Zensteve said:
Sure, it might be experimental (and evolved from something else)... but this story has been told since the dawn of recorded history... even with a nod to a particular publication from 1818.

Maybe I'm just reading more into the OP's work than is there, but there's a lot more happening there than a VFX showcase.
Click to expand...

I caught it too, you're not alone. It's also a short-short: trying to cram a three act structure doesn't work. It's a format for visual storytelling and thought provoking, as well as an excerise in being prolific. Far more important than attempting to be too big for your current shoe size.

Technic question for the op: my guess is that the light is a kino or similar foul panel cto'd and a fog machine? Or did you have her hovering over a burnin' hot 350?

I'm a sucker for glowing things and bright, mystical light breally liked the effect.
 
Story-wise, consider this interpretive dance rather than a baseball game.
It's Eastern sushi rather than a Western burger.

The technologically savvy wield their tools of "creation" in an attempt to build or revive a life.
@ 1:25 the three scientists spark ol' Frankie up.
The gauges and oscillators say all is well
@ 1:57 stage two of the procedure initiated.
Scientists Peter & Paul are engaged themselves in the readouts within norms. Supreme satisfaction evidenced in their blank expressions.
However, @ 2:05 clearly the subject finds the procedure "problematic".
Problem self-resolution ensues as Mary watches all in covert smirk. Agenda unnoticed by Peter and Paul.
Not until the readouts go wonky @ 2:13 do those two data freaks even note there is a problem with "the procedure".
@ 2:14 they investigate with wet-tech, AKA: their eyes. The dummies turn and look.
Mary continues with her nothing.
@ 2:29 sparks of life or...
@ 2:37 tech boys are still reeling from their interpretive algorithm shock: Eyes to data, WTH are we looking at?
@ 2:48 Mary... she's an a$$. Procedure is clearly beyond critical failure, however the plan is on schedule.
@ 2:53 "Save me, you bitch!". "What? Moi?" she replies. "As if."

Some cheating/beating/murdering boyfriends or husbands never need to be resurrected or cloned. Thus the short's title.

This story is both about the problems with science when it fails to monitor the living subjects as beings rather than data and that within the minds of some of those beings sub-routines run.

There's a story.
This one's just not as overt as say The Opus Fuller's Moby:The Day
http://theopusfuller.com/2011/05/11/moby-the-day-music-video/
Flower's "Mama" leaves for the day.
Flower kinda feels dry.
Flower looks to the world outside, looks for mom at the door, looks back outside.
Flower feels quite dry, now. Looks at water can on floor.
Flower eventually makes a self-determined break for the edge of the table. The risks are high! The reward is critical. Will flower survive its own plan to survive?
Flower finds water in the can.
Life continues for the day.


Same kind of story.
 
Last edited:
Kholi said:
I caught it too, you're not alone. It's also a short-short: trying to cram a three act structure doesn't work. It's a format for visual storytelling and thought provoking, as well as an excerise in being prolific. Far more important than attempting to be too big for your current shoe size.

Technic question for the op: my guess is that the light is a kino or similar foul panel cto'd and a fog machine? Or did you have her hovering over a burnin' hot 350?

I'm a sucker for glowing things and bright, mystical light breally liked the effect.
Click to expand...

I disagree. 15/30 second commercial spots succeed with classic narrative structures all the time, or they'd fail to appeal to the mass of their demographic.

I definitely believe this work "tells a story", albeit one which we've seen many a time. I'm a staunch proponent of 'form following function', but here, style trumps narrative content. So, while there's nothing revolutionary about the topic, I would agree that Dmathen1 fully effected his FX. He also succeeds, expertly, with what I consider movies' most pertinent formal aspect...that of *Timing and Motion*....this one particular point/ talent I've come to believe one either has or doesn't. JMO
 
bird said:
I disagree. 15/30 second commercial spots succeed with classic narrative structures all the time, or they'd fail to appeal to the mass of their demographic.
Click to expand...

I don't consider successful delivery of punchlines the same thing as three-to-five act narrative structures, but technically it could be considered the same exact thing.
 
Kholi said:
I don't consider successful delivery of punchlines the same thing as three-to-five act narrative structures, but technically it could be considered the same exact thing.
Click to expand...

My opinion is based on my belief that the classic narrative structure need only have a beginning (exposition), a middle (climax) and an end (resolution). Great, even good, commercials exploit this western, linear pattern, with the more successful spots employing a great punchline (to me, equivalent to the *twist*). I think we agree on the basic tenet, just see a difference in the duration and what can be perceived by an audience within a specific time frame. :)
 
Last edited:
bird said:
My opinion is based on my belief that the classic narrative structure need only have a beginning (exposition), a middle (climax) and an end (resolution). Great, even good, commercials exploit this western, linear pattern, with the more successful spots employing a great punchline (to me, equivalent to the *twist*). I think we agree on the basic tenet, just see a difference in the duration and what can be perceived by an audience within a specific time frame. :)
Click to expand...

Indeed. Agreed.

Still waiting for the light explanation from OP!
 
Hey guys. I know what a lot of you guys are saying, about narrative and all. I agree. That's the reason why I watch feature films. I watch them for the stories. But that's what I like so much about short films. They can be anything you want. I know it's my film, but there is definitely more going on than "igor, flip the switch." It seems to me that's just the setting. You do have to look a little deeper. It is a somewhat experimental piece, but I made it about the agony of love, and what it feels like to sever a bad relationship, either with yourself or someone else. It can also be interpreted as other things, such as a super hero origin story (someone just told me that last week), or a piece of garbage, but ultimately it's up to the people who watch it. I've heard a lot of really cool interpretations over the past month. Again. This is just me, as the filmmaker, but i feel somewhat of an emotional connection to the short when i watch it. it very sad to me in a way, and i think the visuals really express a lot of emotion.
 
Dmathen1 said:
Hey guys. I know what a lot of you guys are saying, about narrative and all. I agree. That's the reason why I watch feature films. I watch them for the stories. But that's what I like so much about short films. They can be anything you want. I know it's my film, but there is definitely more going on than "igor, flip the switch." It seems to me that's just the setting. You do have to look a little deeper. It is a somewhat experimental piece, but I made it about the agony of love, and what it feels like to sever a bad relationship, either with yourself or someone else. It can also be interpreted as other things, such as a super hero origin story (someone just told me that last week), or a piece of garbage, but ultimately it's up to the people who watch it. I've heard a lot of really cool interpretations over the past month. Again. This is just me, as the filmmaker, but i feel somewhat of an emotional connection to the short when i watch it. it very sad to me in a way, and i think the visuals really express a lot of emotion.
Click to expand...

Aha! I knew it! :)

I agree with all of your points. I think you did a terrific job creating a powerful mood, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with a short film that asks the audience to draw their own conclusions. My negative comments we're definitely only discussing it from the perspective of a traditional narrative structure. But like you said, a short can be whatever you want it to be, traditional narrative structure be damned. Kudos to you for making this!
 
thanks for the unaffected version I learned a lot watching that.
Its quite inspiring, I know that I have all the equipment, abilities ( learned here) to make something that cool. Now I just need an idea and some talent!

By the way, what did you spend $700 on? My first guess is smoke machine and dolly..

Thanks
 
wheatgrinder said:
By the way, what did you spend $700 on? My first guess is smoke machine and dolly..
Click to expand...

You should check out the set and behind the scenes photos, here:

http://www.davidmatheny.com/


Once again, a DSLR camera shown kicking visual ass! (I don't have one, but I notice the images.)

Repeating what I asked earlier: David, I'll trade you my sci-fi feature, EXILE for a DVD copy of this. Would love to show it at IndieMeet, at the end of the month.

Though the movie is up to interpretation, it is emotionally powerful. People are saying they've seen these effects before, but not with this kind of detail and delivery - the person on fire is horrifically real. And, you're still a student????!! You are going places. I think your award for "Auteur of the year" is telling.
 
ah yes.. building a set from scratch.. so with a good location this film could be had for the cost of cookies and soda.. very cool.. I have that same smoke machine! WOOT


Right, Iv gone through the same VC after effects Tuts, and recognize the techniques, but its the way the virtuals are integrated into the set that rocks... as well as being SUPERBLY done. Even if its virtual, its still requires good production design. This is a good reminder.. Iv heard it said that one of the reason Jurassic Park was so mind blowing is that Spielbergo simply directed as if there were trained dinosaurs on set. Treat the virtual as real and your golden.
 
Last edited:
Kholi said:
I caught it too, you're not alone. It's also a short-short: trying to cram a three act structure doesn't work. It's a format for visual storytelling and thought provoking, as well as an excerise in being prolific. Far more important than attempting to be too big for your current shoe size.

Technic question for the op: my guess is that the light is a kino or similar foul panel cto'd and a fog machine? Or did you have her hovering over a burnin' hot 350?

I'm a sucker for glowing things and bright, mystical light breally liked the effect.
Click to expand...

I used 4 $15 flourecent lights from wal-mart. I coudn't really afford to rent kino's or anything. I was gonna use a mole richardson 2k for certain things, but it ended up not looking very good.
 
I think it's important that we look at both sides of the spectrum here. To say there's no narrative at all, may be a lil' much don't you think? The narrative is definitely there, albeit subtle. I mean, c'mon, it has all the elements of a classic Frankenstein story! The mad scientist, the human test subject, it's all there. I guess it all depends on how much you read into it.

I will say this though: I think it needs to be longer. It feels more like an opening scene to a video game, or a really good sci-fi movie, but just the opening scene and that's it. You setup everything in such a way that it's a shame that we don't get to know who the characters are at all.

Anyway... that's just me nitpicking.

I like this flick, not only because it's visually pleasing, but because it requires using your imagination to fill in the gaps. I understand a lot of people don't enjoy doing that anymore, but I would assume a community of aspiring filmmakers know the importance of having an imagination.
 
Last edited:
Dmathen1 said:
I used 4 $15 flourecent lights from wal-mart. I coudn't really afford to rent kino's or anything. I was gonna use a mole richardson 2k for certain things, but it ended up not looking very good.
Click to expand...

So the fluo's are under her and that's what's kicking up the really bright light? Wouldn't have expected that, but way to work it.
 
Kholi said:
So the fluo's are under her and that's what's kicking up the really bright light? Wouldn't have expected that, but way to work it.
Click to expand...

Actually I had a battery powered 6" fluorescent light that was attached to the clipboard she was holding. I don't even know if you see the clipboard in the short, but she's holding it.
 
Dmathen1 said:
Actually I had a battery powered 6" fluorescent light that was attached to the clipboard she was holding. I don't even know if you see the clipboard in the short, but she's holding it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what I thought. It looked like a Lite Panel on full blast, the smoke acting as a net for the light making it that much brighter. CTO on it.

Way to make it work.
 
I lifted this from Wikipedia's explanation of narrative. It's the very first sentence:

A narrative is a story that is created in a constructive format (as a work of speech, writing, song, film, television, video games, photography or theatre) that describes a sequence of fictional or non-fictional events.
Click to expand...

Sure, the article is much longer than that. But that seems to pretty much state the fundamental meaning. Seems to me like the filmmaker has delivered that.

I really enjoyed your rundown of the action, rayw. But I for one read a bit more into the players' motivations and actions. When Scientist Peter or Paul looks away from his instrument panel, for example, I couldn't help but interpret that as though maybe there were concerns going on in his head besides algorithms...like, maybe, maybe even a conflict of the conscience, etc.

Actually, as I watched Dmathen1's short, I pretty naturally felt like I had been plopped down in the middle of something like a Steven King movie -a really really well put together Steven King movie...ala Firestarter, or something- perhaps somewhere in the Middle Act of a feature film.

I really appreciate the generosity and openness you've shown regarding how you made this, Dmathen1. It reminds me of what Austin Kleon wrote in that article Dreadylocks posted not long ago. That is, he wrote that you should share with others how you work. I really liked to see how you guys made this thing in what looks like suburbia (no doubt where many of the filmmakers here do their work, of course). Just cool to see all y'all working there in your garage...and with such cool results!

PS I hope you had a fire extinguisher on hand...just in case. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top