• 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 So, We Killed Our Parents

A

alterEGOcinema

"So, We Killed Our Parents" by Shane Ryan is now online.
http://studentfilms.com/film/get.do?id=800

This is another "Pinata" short to anyone that remembers that story. If you remember "A Normal Life", this is basically the same thing, with the same running time, but in a very different, unsettling way.

"4 STARS!
a fairy tale for the modern world"
-FILM THREAT
read the full review here:
http://www.filmthreat.com/Reviews.asp?Id=6499

The movie screened in New York on Industrial Television and won Best Supporting Actor (Rex Cobalt as Big Man), Most Unusual Kiss and Most Weirdest Use of Sex and/or Nudity at Oceanside Underground Cinema

Warning: contains sex and violence and very disturbing content.

more info on the movie here:
http://alteregocinema.com/SOWEKILLEDOURPARENTS.html

Michael-Brian
Alter Ego Cinema
www.alteregocinema.com
 
One thing is for sure, Shane Ryan is an interesting filmmaker.

Like "Sane: The Story of the Boredom Killings," the short seems to be glorifying the actions of the characters. I do have a problem with this, but I've spoken about that in the thread for the aforementioned title so I won't go into again.

But that aside Mr. Ryan's visual strong points are on display here - loved the blood in the tub. And I'll say it again for good measure, he is a very interesting filmmaker.

Poke
 
Sane has more integrity.

Ok, Sane has more integrity than this movie. This is just senseless violence made to look fun, then celebration with incest sex? I'm sorry, there is no substance, I cannot appreciate this film.

Meanwhile, Isolation by Shane Ryan is one of the best shorts I've seen in quite some time. He should go back to making stuff like that.
 
Last edited:
This is probably the first product from the Alter Ego Cinema crew that I really liked. The editing, pacing, camera angles, and visual treatment were brilliantly handled.
 
Yeah, it does almost glorify and “Tarantinatize”© the sex and violence, doesn’t it? The talent and visual style of the filmmaker can’t be denied though. I give it 3 out of 5 stars.
 
I like this film much better than Sane. I really enjoyed the composition of Sane, but this one was put together in a much better fashion in my opinion. I felt the content of this film had more of a purpose than that of Sane. I don't really see anything wrong with filmmakers glorifying the actions of their characters. It is a very common thing... whether you are glorifying one's nobility, heroics, or perversity.
 
Charles@Bophe said:
I don't really see anything wrong with filmmakers glorifying the actions of their characters. It is a very common thing... whether you are glorifying one's nobility, heroics, or perversity.
Click to expand...

Hi Charles, I'm John! Your comment triggered a new line of thought with me...doesn't it seem like the American culture should be beyond pretenses when it comes to pointless violence? After all, in our society (sad as it is to say...) it seems that violence - substance = entertainment. If it weren't, would we have shows like professional wrestling, or would we take so much pleasure in watching people get hurt or humiliated in 'reality TV' programming? Would people have watched Jerry Springer if the arguements didn't escalate into all-out free-for-all brawls? This is where the American culture is right now.

Some of the more intelligent horror films might have managed to craft their story around a certain moral lesson, but the endless chain of sequels and remakes have all but drained the original visions from the franchises. Hollywood just tries to deliver what the THINK people want...and this is message we have apparently sent them.

And one final note about the movie "So We Killed Our Parents." There is plenty of substance in this story for those willing to see it. Truth is, Shane Ryan has actually made a rather telling social commentary with this film. (Whether or not that was his intention, well...I can't say.)
 
I like this line of thought. I think overall violence has lost it's "shock" factor in our culture and I am not averse to violence in film. I don't know a lot of folks who hold too many pretenses when it comes to violent fair as long as it's handled properly.

The way the violence was portrayed in this film and in "Sane" is what got to me. "Glorifying" is too broad a generalization and that term has been overused with violence in film and media. I like bensmerglia's comment:

This is just senseless violence made to look fun, then celebration with incest sex...
Click to expand...

My problem with some of Mr. Ryan's work, in particular this and "Sane," is that it comes off as glorifying the violence, not that the violence is there. It's a tight rope that must be walked. We've had similar discussions before about character's language (cursing, racial epitaphs, derogatory terms) and in the end it seems that the overwhelming opinion is that it must be about the character and not the writer or filmmaker, meaning - let the audience know that this character is a racist, mysogynistic, filthy mouthed person not the filmmakers. These films say to me that Mr. Ryan like violence. It may not be true, but that's how I see it. And in my opinion that means he failed to show clear seperation from his characters.

Now, with that being said, I would encourage alterEGO to shoot "Pinata" as the feature it was intended to be with all the violence that was intended. They would definitely get folks attention with it, and they could explore the social commentary (that no doubt was intended) in fuller detail.

But I don't think it's an acceptable excuse to say, "Well, everyone else is doing it." Violence has become entertainment in our culture, but that doesn't mean that those of us who disagree with that turn of events should just shut up and take it. I am not usually one to quip about violence. In fact, I enjoy many violent movies, but I don't like it if violence is portrayed in the way I feel it was portrayed in the two aforementioned films.

Poke
 
Poke said:
... I enjoy many violent movies, but I don't like it if violence is portrayed in the way I feel it was portrayed in the two aforementioned films.

Poke
Click to expand...

Poke, I'm with you on this. I guess the bottom line is that no one needs to shut up and take anything. On that same note, we can't really shut anyone else up and force them to "take" anything. Artists are going to put out whatever they want regardless of:

-- who it pleases or upsets
-- what society's "satndards" are
-- whether it is an expression of the story/characters or an obvious direct expression of it's creator's views

... Let's just pick what we like and watch it.
 
Felt like I watched the same short as last time.

1. I would suggest little more work on your story concepts.

2. Violence is great to get a reaction but just like anything thats good too much can make it the norm. This can cause your viewer to loose interest or become num to it. The violence then loses its power and shock value defeating it's purpose.

Just a side note:"4 STARS! a fairy tale for the modern world" come on now they need a little more realistic reviewer.

Hope this helps.
 
Last edited:
I am not a fan whatsoever of gratuitus violence in cinema, nor incest etc. etc.

But I can see exactly what Shane was going for, I just don't think he pulled it off quite right. And the consequence for doing so is obvious, the audience thinks you were attempting to accomplish something totally different, glorifying such actions, and therefore it is repulsive. As was said above it is a total tight rope situation. That said, I feel that this concept has validity in an interesting bonnie and clyde, bowling for columbine, natural born killers kind of way. Shane just needs to be more careful to get his point across correctly next time.
 
WideShot said:
I feel that this concept has validity in an interesting bonnie and clyde, bowling for columbine, natural born killers kind of way. Shane just needs to be more careful to get his point across correctly next time.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

Poke
 
Wow! That's what I have to say. This was a surprising film. You totally got the message across in the short amount of time (5:41)

The subject matter brings you in and you know what's going to happen due to the title, but when? How? and Where? and most importantly, WHY!?
It was all pulled of in this short. Don't know if the actress is really 15 or not but if under 18 you gotta watch it! Due to nudity. I think it may be illegal to have an actress over 18 playing someone under 18 and they are nude. Make sure you look into that.
 
CootDog said:
I think it may be illegal to have an actress over 18 playing someone under 18 and they are nude. Make sure you look into that.
Click to expand...

How would that be illegal? It's illegal to have an under eighteen year old nude without parental consent, but many films utilize over eighteen actresses to play underaged actresses, especially when nudity is involved.

Poke
 
I just heard it somewhere, that's why I said it MAY be illegal.. If I would have verified it then I would have posted that verbiage from the law. BUT I actually didn't look into it so... I think the film is great, I was just saying to watch yo a$$ just in case, and it don't have to be a nude a$$ either. ;)
 
this got brought up once before on Studentfilms.com

apparently in Canada it's illegal for an actress over 18 to portray under 18 and be nude.

Not sure if that's correct but in the states it's perfectly legal for an 18+ actress to play under 18 and be nude. Vicky was 22 when we filmed her scenes, older than the director was.

but thanks for looking out cootdog
 
Last edited:
I understand that some people have a problem with violence and nudity that doesn't seem to have a place in a film. That makes perfect sense. The point I want to make is that some of the best films leave us with thoughts that repulse us, and maybe that's when you know they've got their point across. Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying violence should be used as a way to bypass flaws in plot. I'm just saying that some films that repulse us are those that really succeed.
 
learning

So many shorts like this out there. But its ok - gotta start somewhere.

I'm not exactly sure what the point of this film is. Is it to demonstrate how we learn from our parents - that the neagtive things rub off on us?

Don't we all know this already? This short brings nothing new to the table.

Violence is a result of many different problems. The violence is the easy superficial stuff. Lets really examine the cause and effect of a disfunctional or abusive family environment.

Ever see Tim Roth's film, "The War Zone"?

I've watched "So,.." once. Once was enough. There are many many other films like this on the net that are action-packed but substance free.

But its the youth grown up on MTV and Jackass and gangsta rap - so, I guess its expected. We all mature at different ages.

But how bout that girl- I'd nail her.
 
Hey Zensteve's back! awesome, worried you vanished! thanks for the comment.

As for "The War Zone", not sure everything I've said or Shane said about "Pinata" or if you (great wareagle) even heard about the orginal feature it was before, but The War Zone is what started it all.

The original 3 page or so script was nearly identical to The War Zone (although one or 2 of the characetrs were either deaf or blind. Shane was going to make it for a film class that required to make a 5 minute or so film, so he wanted to try and capture the emotion he felt from that film. He hadn't directed anything in 4 years and had spent those four years doing a lot of writing and acting. He saw the War Zone and within days was casting and shooting "Pinata". The 3 page script became a 20 or so page called "Pinata" making it also a very different film. Then it became a feature and ebing only a teenager and not having shot anything in 4 years and not knowing much, etc. etc. is when all the rewrites and re-shoots and all that fun stuff took place until Shane eventually realized he would never find the support or funding he needed to finish. Then the footage was broken down into nearly 10 shorts minus a lot of the dialogue. But I think after making "A Normal Life" and his short "Isolation" and being so serious, he just kinda let loose and decided to have fun with "So, We Killed Our Parents".

But I can tell you that Shane hates Jack-Ass, really hates most rap and won't watch most TV, including MTV, so your wrong about that. He likes a lot of old films, independent films, old music and rock, and only watches cartoons when it comes to TV. Now immature? sometimes. He's still young and was very young when he actually shot this, but as far as the way he treats people and talks about life, I don't know many grown-ups who could sound more mature.

Then again, and I'm probably repeating myself, there's no way we expected people to take this short seriously. I mean, c'mon. jumping on a trampoline? I think he was pushing the corniness.

But thanks again everybody for being polite and respective with your responses. I know I've said that before but with so many other sites full of a-holes who love to bash others, this site defintaley has respect by everybody.

Mike-B
Alter Ego Cinema

p.s. Shane is currently putting together an uncut version of the movie. Looking to add a lot of stuff he didn't beofre. Including the parents when they were kids, a lot more of the father played by Rex Cobalt and much more relationship stuff involving the kids. Not sure if this will irritate people even more or if we'll even be able to get it online at Studentfilms, but we'll try.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top