This is a short film based on a Biblical interpretation on the theme of homosexuality. Comments welcome!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiZsQH07m5k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiZsQH07m5k
-
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 Inner Joy of a Broken Heart - Powerful Short Film
- Thread starter Graeme Noble
- Start date
Mostly well shot (some of the framings in the party scene seemed a bit low during pans). Depth of field in the ending closeups is just right. I could have used a bit more variety in the HUGE dialog scene at the end which ended up feeling more like a sermon than a real conversation between two people.
I won't speak to the content at all as this is the inappropriate place on the interwebs for it... but it is technically well produced with some minor flaws and could use some refinement in the rhetorical delivery to be a more effective instrument for you.
I won't speak to the content at all as this is the inappropriate place on the interwebs for it... but it is technically well produced with some minor flaws and could use some refinement in the rhetorical delivery to be a more effective instrument for you.
Thanks for the reply, knightly. I agree with your comments, especially with the huge dialogue scene - there definitely should have been more variety with the shots.
Thanks for the comment, Dr Stilly. This was the first week of working with the lead actor and he brought his own style to the role. I understand what you're saying and will definitely keep this in mind for future projects.
I actually liked his performance quite a bit, he was really convincing... the problem I had was the length of the dialog he was forced to deliver. If the same thing delivered from a podium wouldn't seem out of place, it shouldn't be in the script... unless he's at a podium on screen (and even then I tend to frown).
I've actually spent a chunk of time thinking about the rhetorical strategy you're using (I agree with absolutely none of what you're saying, so I'll only comment on the argumentative structure of the piece). The approach is a novel one, avoiding the straightforward arguments that have been used for so long. Specifically here you never state that the character shouldn't be gay, just that since he is gay, to be a good christian, he should not pursue a gay lifestyle and choose god over a human relationship.
I do appreciate the way that you addressed his "coming out" and thought that was actually a delicate approach (although her reaction would have been much bigger if he were in a relationship with her) to have the rhetoric that lying about being gay hurts oneself and those around you... The alternative given, however, suggests that the only option that leads to happiness is celibacy and devotion. The presentation of this option is actually given in such a way that the viewer feels bad for the protagonist who will never be happy and for whom god becomes a second choice that is made under duress.
Rhetorically speaking, you've got a bunch of pieces that actually have quite a bit of value for your argument. You're not defaming the subject, but you are preaching to the choir... if this strategy is to work, you need to first build a rapport with the target audience (not the church nor the censors), then state your argument in a way that doesn't alienate them. A strong syllogistic argument is so close in this one... but you've got an enthymeme hurting your case.
Your syllogistic argument:
A: Having a hetero- relationship is hurtful in entered into under false pretenses
B: Having a homo- relationship is against the bible
Therefore,
C: Devotion is the only option remaining
Your C requires that the subject is specifically a christian already... without that, the bible doesn't hold the argumentative power that you need to make a solid argument. I've never found an argument that uses the bible as a source that holds up under rhetorical scrutiny and it's quite easy to find counter-arguments within the text itself (yes, I've read it cover to cover) to destabilize any argument using it as a source.
If your target audience is specifically Gay Christians, then these arguments may work (although not as drawn out as you're presenting here -- concision my friend), but will need specifics from the bible to hold any weight... and you should also make sure to do your research on the possible counter arguments and address them as well. However, it needs to be in the form of a short film rather than a filmed essay book on tape type of thing.
As was previously stated, Show, don't tell... this is a visual medium.
I've actually spent a chunk of time thinking about the rhetorical strategy you're using (I agree with absolutely none of what you're saying, so I'll only comment on the argumentative structure of the piece). The approach is a novel one, avoiding the straightforward arguments that have been used for so long. Specifically here you never state that the character shouldn't be gay, just that since he is gay, to be a good christian, he should not pursue a gay lifestyle and choose god over a human relationship.
I do appreciate the way that you addressed his "coming out" and thought that was actually a delicate approach (although her reaction would have been much bigger if he were in a relationship with her) to have the rhetoric that lying about being gay hurts oneself and those around you... The alternative given, however, suggests that the only option that leads to happiness is celibacy and devotion. The presentation of this option is actually given in such a way that the viewer feels bad for the protagonist who will never be happy and for whom god becomes a second choice that is made under duress.
Rhetorically speaking, you've got a bunch of pieces that actually have quite a bit of value for your argument. You're not defaming the subject, but you are preaching to the choir... if this strategy is to work, you need to first build a rapport with the target audience (not the church nor the censors), then state your argument in a way that doesn't alienate them. A strong syllogistic argument is so close in this one... but you've got an enthymeme hurting your case.
Your syllogistic argument:
A: Having a hetero- relationship is hurtful in entered into under false pretenses
B: Having a homo- relationship is against the bible
Therefore,
C: Devotion is the only option remaining
Your C requires that the subject is specifically a christian already... without that, the bible doesn't hold the argumentative power that you need to make a solid argument. I've never found an argument that uses the bible as a source that holds up under rhetorical scrutiny and it's quite easy to find counter-arguments within the text itself (yes, I've read it cover to cover) to destabilize any argument using it as a source.
If your target audience is specifically Gay Christians, then these arguments may work (although not as drawn out as you're presenting here -- concision my friend), but will need specifics from the bible to hold any weight... and you should also make sure to do your research on the possible counter arguments and address them as well. However, it needs to be in the form of a short film rather than a filmed essay book on tape type of thing.
As was previously stated, Show, don't tell... this is a visual medium.
Thanks again for the comments, knightly. I didn't write the script for this movie but I shall pass on these opinions to him.
sorry i should of clarified, when i said lead, i meant lead 'character' was not likable, not the actor. I actually agree with knightly and think the lead actor has presence and talent.
I'm not going to re-post or quote knightly's comments because frankly i think they are spot on, so just imagine I have also stated his above sentiments in terms of camera-work and production.
I did enjoy this short film, I think it is deliberately thought provoking as evidence of the actors lines and dialogue.
In terms of acting I thought the cast was very good. I agree with Knightly and Dr. Stilly that the male lead was good and to me personally, a particular highlight. He does seem to possess and on-screen presence and there is certainly talent there, it was a very convincing performance in such a challenging role to portray. (Not to mention I thought it was David Tennant when I first saw the thumbnail!)
If there is one thing I know about an audience, it is the people feels uneasy and uncomfortable when biblical ideas are thrust upon them. I'm not saying that you should not do it, but I have never done this in terms of specific bits of dialogue which was part of the film. It makes one feel uneasy when one is "told" how to think, you mind wants to reject it. But I do not want to detract from what I thought was an overall good production.
Please do not think I am trying to be harsh or over critical. These are merely my opinions and observations and I aim to be constructive.
Thank You for your very fair comment JBD 1955. Like I stated in a pervious post, I did not write the script for this film but I am very much behind the focus of the film as I edited, produced and directed it.
I can understand that some/many would have problems with 'the preachy' style or 'being told what/how to think' and this is something we won't be repeating in future films as I believe a more balanced argument would be more beneficial.
Thanks again.
I can understand that some/many would have problems with 'the preachy' style or 'being told what/how to think' and this is something we won't be repeating in future films as I believe a more balanced argument would be more beneficial.
Thanks again.