• 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 Mystery/Drama "Short" Film

D

dxterityproductions

Was shot on one camera Canon 60D DSLR and one microphone. Really need to work on my audio levels during filming and post. Directing, editing, writing and producing was all done by me. Hired a buddy to record the audio with a boom pole. Actors were either friends or students from my school's theater department. This was my first major short film. There are a ton of issues that I see but all things I can improve on. It is a stressful but rewarding experience seeing your vision come together. Thanks for listening and enjoy. Feedback is greatly appreciated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xigdAWgGHA4
 
Last edited:
dxterityproductions said:
Really need to work on my audio levels during filming and post.
Click to expand...

Audio levels were consistently and issue. The level of the different characters' dialogue, the levels between dialogue and atmos and between Foley and other SFX, was often inconsistent and off putting. Perspective was another issue; In one scene a character might be a certain distance from the camera/POV and in the next scene the character might be the same distance away but sound twice as far or, a character further away might sound closer than a character which is actually closer. Just using incidental music on it's own tends to remove the audience from the action and remind them they're watching a film. For this reason it's rare to just use music and no sound. There's no real sound design in your film. Sound appears to have been a purely technical endeavour in your film whose only purpose is to support the visual images, instead of sound being used to heighten the emotional response of the story and aide the pace. All these issues combined constantly jar the audience out of any involvement in your story.

I'm not intending to be overly harsh, I've certainly heard worse. BTW, I didn't watch all your short, just the first 5 mins and then bits of various other scenes.

G
 
AudioPostExpert said:
Audio levels were consistently and issue. The level of the different characters' dialogue, the levels between dialogue and atmos and between Foley and other SFX, was often inconsistent and off putting. Perspective was another issue; In one scene a character might be a certain distance from the camera/POV and in the next scene the character might be the same distance away but sound twice as far or, a character further away might sound closer than a character which is actually closer. Just using incidental music on it's own tends to remove the audience from the action and remind them they're watching a film. For this reason it's rare to just use music and no sound. There's no real sound design in your film. Sound appears to have been a purely technical endeavour in your film whose only purpose is to support the visual images, instead of sound being used to heighten the emotional response of the story and aide the pace. All these issues combined constantly jar the audience out of any involvement in your story.

I'm not intending to be overly harsh, I've certainly heard worse. BTW, I didn't watch all your short, just the first 5 mins and then bits of various other scenes.

G
Click to expand...
Appreciate it. Yeah like I said in the OP the audio was a big problem. I will improve though.
 
I'd say focus and white balance (or colour correction) of exteriors are the two biggest jarring factors. The actor in some scenes is behind the focal point for the entire shot, or moves out of it and the focus is not changed - eg. in either of the dinner/bar scenes, or in the jewellery shop where the 'diamond ring' sign is not too legible.

The exteriors are way too cold - there's no colour except blue in any of them. It may have been a stylistic decision, but when the interiors are properly adjusted it feels strange to cut between them (especially going straight from the poker game to the outside at the start). It would have worked if only the opening scene were set like that - to distance it from the rest of the film.


There were a few lines that were confusing - one that sticks out at the beginning: about "paperwork...serial kidnapper/better him than us". This could work better if their order were switched ("there's a serial kidnapper...he's doing paperwork"). It's like a pronoun - you have to be careful about what it's seen to be referring to.

There's too much moving to music. People driving to music, people drinking to music, or walking to music. It feels very filler-ish when it's so condensed: in the first 6 minutes probably 40% is that. There's not enough content, not enough to make somebody interested from the outset.

Considering there are only 4 people we need to remember, there are too many extraneous characters. A whole poker table full of people we never see again.

Also, what was the situation with the kidnappings? We see at the start that the white shirt man is the apparent perpetrator, and then it's actually his boss? Why did the boss kidnap black shirt's girlfriend - how did he know she was reporting him to the police? Why didn't white shirt just report him himself, or get the other woman to do - since he knew the first woman was his brother's girlfriend? What exactly is the deal with white shirt leaving for six months?

I don't really see how anything is resolved at the end, either - white shirt still wants to leave the business, black shirt's girlfriend is kidnapped: it's more of a set-up for a longer story than a resolution to this one.
 
RyiGarry said:
I'd say focus and white balance (or colour correction) of exteriors are the two biggest jarring factors. The actor in some scenes is behind the focal point for the entire shot, or moves out of it and the focus is not changed - eg. in either of the dinner/bar scenes, or in the jewellery shop where the 'diamond ring' sign is not too legible.

The exteriors are way too cold - there's no colour except blue in any of them. It may have been a stylistic decision, but when the interiors are properly adjusted it feels strange to cut between them (especially going straight from the poker game to the outside at the start). It would have worked if only the opening scene were set like that - to distance it from the rest of the film.


There were a few lines that were confusing - one that sticks out at the beginning: about "paperwork...serial kidnapper/better him than us". This could work better if their order were switched ("there's a serial kidnapper...he's doing paperwork"). It's like a pronoun - you have to be careful about what it's seen to be referring to.

There's too much moving to music. People driving to music, people drinking to music, or walking to music. It feels very filler-ish when it's so condensed: in the first 6 minutes probably 40% is that. There's not enough content, not enough to make somebody interested from the outset.

Considering there are only 4 people we need to remember, there are too many extraneous characters. A whole poker table full of people we never see again.

Also, what was the situation with the kidnappings? We see at the start that the white shirt man is the apparent perpetrator, and then it's actually his boss? Why did the boss kidnap black shirt's girlfriend - how did he know she was reporting him to the police? Why didn't white shirt just report him himself, or get the other woman to do - since he knew the first woman was his brother's girlfriend? What exactly is the deal with white shirt leaving for six months?

I don't really see how anything is resolved at the end, either - white shirt still wants to leave the business, black shirt's girlfriend is kidnapped: it's more of a set-up for a longer story than a resolution to this one.
Click to expand...
First of all there will be a sequel so you are right about it being setup for another. As for the focusing you are also absolutely correct. This was my first time shooting on a DSLR so manual focus was a bit of a challenge. Considering I didn't have a lot of light in some shots it forced me shoot at 1.4 which lightens up the shot but leaves less wiggle room for focusing. I will be buying lights to counteract this. I liked the way I used the color correction but I agree too much difference.

I can see how you have an issue with the music "montage" scenes and I will reduce those considering they can be seen as "fillers". Personally I don't see an issue with have minor characters but maybe I need to work on keeping them involved. This was my first time writing a lengthy script so I need to work on my dialogue as you said.

Now as for the story you are the first person I've spoken to that has had this much confusion with the storyline. White shirt is a hitman working for a criminal organization. When he tries to leave the boss threatens to kill the girl. The visions black shirt is having points to a man kidnapping his girlfriend so white shirt assumes that it's his boss. However during the poker scene and the father son scene it is pointed out that there is a serial kidnapper. The serial kidnapper is NOT white shirt. During the bar scene a man comes up to white shirt and says "pretty girl". At the end "pretty girl" is written on the envelope and white shirt comes to the realization she has been taken by the serial kidnapper and not his boss. Hope this clears things up. Things will become clearer in the next segment.

Special thank you for going so in depth on the review! I will be sure to work on my writing as well to make things clearer.
 
dxterityproductions said:
First of all there will be a sequel so you are right about it being setup for another. As for the focusing you are also absolutely correct. This was my first time shooting on a DSLR so manual focus was a bit of a challenge. Considering I didn't have a lot of light in some shots it forced me shoot at 1.4 which lightens up the shot but leaves less wiggle room for focusing. I will be buying lights to counteract this. I liked the way I used the color correction but I agree too much difference.
Click to expand...

As I say, if it were just in the opening sequence, it would have been effective - distancing us from that bleakness - and separating now and then. That's what he wants to get out of!


dxterityproductions said:
Personally I don't see an issue with have minor characters but maybe I need to work on keeping them involved.
Click to expand...

It's more the fact we are introduced to all these people in such a short space and don't know which ones are important - if you see what I mean. We don't know yet who is the main character in that poker game - in fact, the opening shot is of someone we never see again! Only the second shot shows the main character.


dxterityproductions said:
Now as for the story you are the first person I've spoken to that has had this much confusion with the storyline. White shirt is a hitman working for a criminal organization. When he tries to leave the boss threatens to kill the girl. The visions black shirt is having points to a man kidnapping his girlfriend so white shirt assumes that it's his boss. However during the poker scene and the father son scene it is pointed out that there is a serial kidnapper. The serial kidnapper is NOT white shirt. During the bar scene a man comes up to white shirt and says "pretty girl". At the end "pretty girl" is written on the envelope and white shirt comes to the realization she has been taken by the serial kidnapper and not his boss. Hope this clears things up. Things will become clearer in the next segment.
Click to expand...

I think some of the confusion came from the boot shot at the beginning. Even if he pulls out a gun and we know nothing else is in there, it implies the perspective of of kidnap victim - it makes that association in your mind (or my mind, at least).

Also, the 'vision' at the beginning is from the character's own perspective - but then later on is from the kidnapper's perspective? Am I understanding that right?
 
RyiGarry said:
As I say, if it were just in the opening sequence, it would have been effective - distancing us from that bleakness - and separating now and then. That's what he wants to get out of!




It's more the fact we are introduced to all these people in such a short space and don't know which ones are important - if you see what I mean. We don't know yet who is the main character in that poker game - in fact, the opening shot is of someone we never see again! Only the second shot shows the main character.




I think some of the confusion came from the boot shot at the beginning. Even if he pulls out a gun and we know nothing else is in there, it implies the perspective of of kidnap victim - it makes that association in your mind (or my mind, at least).

Also, the 'vision' at the beginning is from the character's own perspective - but then later on is from the kidnapper's perspective? Am I understanding that right?
Click to expand...
Correct.
 
I think the film picked up it's pace towards the end. The length of the short in and of itself isn't a problem but coupled with pacing issues that length begins to feel longer than what it is.

I think that it would have been more effective if the kidnapper was at the poker table too and not just in the bar when Connor was there. That might have made the poker scene feel more relevant in the grand scheme of things, and coupled with the brother's psychic abilities, for him to be able to see what Connor was seeing (as an extra side to his psychic ability), and to see what Connor remembered (the kidnapper behind him saying "Pretty girl.") would have triggered the brother to realise he himself had seen the kidnapper at the poker game.
 
Last edited:
PhantomScreenwriter said:
I think the film picked up it's pace towards the end. The length of the short in and of itself isn't a problem but coupled with pacing issues that length begins to feel longer than what it is.

I think that it would have been more effective if the kidnapper was at the poker table too and not just in the bar when Connor was there. That might have made the poker scene feel more relevant in the grand scheme of things, and coupled with the brother's psychic abilities, for him to be able to see what Connor was seeing (as an extra side to his psychic ability), and to see what Connor remembered (the kidnapper behind him saying "Pretty girl.") would have triggered the brother to realise he himself had seen the kidnapper at the poker game.
Click to expand...
I like it. That's a great idea! Appreciate you taking the time to watch it as well!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top