• READ BEFORE POSTING!
    • If posting a video, please post HERE, unless it is a video as part of an advertisement and then post it in this section.
    • If replying to threads please remember this is the Promotion area and the person posting may not be open to feedback.

watch Distracted

I thought there was some good work in there, but to be honest, I don't quite get it. Maybe I missed the point of the story?

Not sure if it was intentional at times, maybe it was, but the sound design seemed... well, wrong? For example, at around 2:30, in the gym, you cut between shot of him and what I assume are POV shots. With every cut, the sounds of kids playing come and go. Is the character imagining these sounds? If so, it would make sense, but I still don't think it quite works. Just my opinion.

Anyway, some nice ideas in there. Look forward to seeing more.
 
hey man, thanks for your comments. i noted them down, i can see your points and there is corrections to be made. so thank you :)
 
I'm going to be brutally honest.

I'm guessing you're young. From what I've seen, I would think you're a photographer first, and film maker second. You have a great eye for content, but not so much (from my weak brain) for storytelling.

Here's where my weak brain comes in; The first two minutes are pan shots of a piano, chair, dolls, clock... If there's meaning to these, I can't figure it out. While each inanimate object was very pretty, and well kept. The (after the first two) annoying pans had me bored. However, if these were still photographs of the objects, a viewer would probably be more interested. You frame everything beautifully.

The actors unfortunately were awful. But, I expected that. Directing good and bad actors is one of the hardest talents to master. You can't just do it. The director has to know exactly what each character is feeling at the exact moment of each shot. The director then has to convey that to the actor, who lives it in front of the camera. 90% of young people don't know their own feelings, let alone emotions of a fictional character.

There were a few poor edits, the biggest being the beating with the bat. You left in the fact the guy was beating the door and not the kid. Even if you didn't have a decent angled shot of the bat coming down, cut quicker, and use sound effects. You used sound really well. Leaving these bad shots in, destroys any effect the beating could have had.

This could be way shorter then 9 minutes. The pans, oh the pans. I want to seriously break that dolly thing you used. Seriously. :hmm:

If you're young, you did a great job. If you're my age, and new at it, great job. If you're my age and been planning this out for a real long time, not so much.

What you might want to do is, be a Director of Photography for a while. You have the talent to shoot a movie (if that was you behind the camera). But, the experience of working with people who actually direct could help you immeasurably.
 
hey man, thank you for the honesty :) you are really good at reading things, haha I am actually a photographer and i am currently trying to learn the film/movie medium. I guess i am kinda young, give or take. Thank you for these comments, really specific and really helpful I know where to start with my corrections and I am really grateful for the extra advice. Hopefully this next film i am making will be a lot better since my mistakes are pointed out and I have tips for correcting. Again thank you so much :)
 
ussinners said:
I'm going to be brutally honest.

I'm guessing you're young. From what I've seen, I would think you're a photographer first, and film maker second. You have a great eye for content, but not so much (from my weak brain) for storytelling.

Here's where my weak brain comes in; The first two minutes are pan shots of a piano, chair, dolls, clock... If there's meaning to these, I can't figure it out. While each inanimate object was very pretty, and well kept. The (after the first two) annoying pans had me bored. However, if these were still photographs of the objects, a viewer would probably be more interested. You frame everything beautifully.

The actors unfortunately were awful. But, I expected that. Directing good and bad actors is one of the hardest talents to master. You can't just do it. The director has to know exactly what each character is feeling at the exact moment of each shot. The director then has to convey that to the actor, who lives it in front of the camera. 90% of young people don't know their own feelings, let alone emotions of a fictional character.

There were a few poor edits, the biggest being the beating with the bat. You left in the fact the guy was beating the door and not the kid. Even if you didn't have a decent angled shot of the bat coming down, cut quicker, and use sound effects. You used sound really well. Leaving these bad shots in, destroys any effect the beating could have had.

This could be way shorter then 9 minutes. The pans, oh the pans. I want to seriously break that dolly thing you used. Seriously. :hmm:

If you're young, you did a great job. If you're my age, and new at it, great job. If you're my age and been planning this out for a real long time, not so much.

What you might want to do is, be a Director of Photography for a while. You have the talent to shoot a movie (if that was you behind the camera). But, the experience of working with people who actually direct could help you immeasurably.
Click to expand...

sinner, I'm not interested in starting a flame-war with you, but dude, I don't think you should be so harsh on a first-time filmmaker. This is a very harsh review, and needlessly so. It's called constructive criticism.

Nuk, the reason sinner knew you came from a photography background is because your shots are, generally speaking, very nicely composed. That's a huge leg-up over most first-time filmmakers. Most first-time filmmakers are complete idiots with a camera, and as you know, something as seemingly simple as shot composition takes a lot of practice, so you've got a head-start.

I will, however, agree with the sentiment of both sinner and hatter, in stating that I was a bit confused by this movie. I couldn't quite tell what was going on all the time. Just my two cents -- I feel like this is a little too abstract for a first-time new filmmaker to tackle. In my opinion, in your 2nd film, you would be better off if you followed a more straight-forward story. Stuff happens, dude says this, girl says that, more stuff happens, the end.

Learning how to direct action takes practice. Continuity is a major issue, and even the most experienced filmmakers continue to deal with continuity issues. So, in my opinion, at this early stage, you should keep the story simple, and just focus on how to shoot the dang thing, while maintaining continuity.

And yes, I'll agree that the pans are a bit over-done. I think it is wise for a new filmmaker to lock that camera down on a tripod, no pans, no zooms, no tilts. Just learn how to shoot a scene that will cut together well, with stationary shots. When you've mastered that, then you can start to play around with moving the camera a little bit. If you start your filmmaking by never moving the camera, then when you do eventually start to move the camera, you'll be damn sure that every time you move it, you move it with purpose.

You've got a lot to build on, Nuk. I look forward to seeing your next entry.
 
woah, Thank you Cracker Funk. Not only did you point out specifics in my mistakes, you were specific in how to fix them. of course, why did i not think of that! getting the basic and fundamentals correctly before going into advance and more complicated techniques. I am now more excited for shooting my second film, from your comments, i know what to do. premiere member wow, such an honor to receive a critique from you :) Thanks again :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top