• 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 The Dumpster - A Short Comedy

Well jumping in on this thread was surely the right idea...

One last thing Gary, only because you have been pointing out what you consider funny. Here's what I consider funny. Now mind you, I was born and raised in Puerto Rico and didn't come to the USA until the mid 90's.

I consider Mario Moreno "Cantiflas" to be the funniest actor I have ever seen on films. Along with Roberto Gomez Bolaños. I consider "Le Dîner de Cons" to be one of the funniest movies ever, along with "Dumb and Dumber". Does this mean anything to you? Don't know and don't care. Why? Because what I think is funny could be crap to you.

Different tastes, different flavors and different colors...
 
LasVegasIRA said:
:lol: You're ridiculous...

I'm not even trying to "put you down..." I'm simply stating my opinion on how foolish you sound. You take it however you want...

But if you're looking for a second rate, un-original put down, here you go: You seem like you have terrible self esteem issues. You seem very angry and unhappy with yourself. You seem as though you can only find happiness and satisfaction in your own work by trying to tear down the work others have done.

I feel sorry for you. I also feel sorry that you feel the need to argue with someone that you don't even know. I wish you were a happier person.

And if you think you've heard these things before, it's probably due to that fact that many others have already said them to you.

Now, if it makes you feel better to continue arguing, then go ahead. Post whatever you'd like to post, and I'll try to respond in kind. But nothing original, as obviously I have no thoughts of my own. I can only post things that have apparently been said numerous times on many message boards...
Click to expand...

That's odd.

You forgot to mention I still beat my wife.

You're slipping, dude.
 
I read a few pages of Nazi Mamas and I didn't like it. I read the Hanging, and I didn't like it. But the Diva short was average, it was good enough for me to read it all.

The Diva (not in depth critique)
-Some scenes would benefit from being told visually. (As previously stated)
-The beginning was boring, and not funny at all IMO, it can be entertaining if done correctly but not funny.
-Your Spanish grammar needs a lot of work. Some of the sentences made absolutely no sense.
-The ending was bad.

EDIT: Overall, it was good enough for me too read, but I don't want to say it was good, but it's not bad so I guess it's average? IMO
 
TheNoob said:
I read a few pages of Nazi Mamas and I didn't like it. I read the Hanging, and I didn't like it. But the Diva short was average, it was good enough for me to read it all.

The Diva (not in depth critique)
-Some scenes would benefit from being told visually. (As previously stated)
-The beginning was boring, and not funny at all IMO, it can be entertaining if done correctly but not funny.
-Your Spanish grammar needs a lot of work. Some of the sentences made absolutely no sense.
-The ending was bad.

EDIT: Overall, it was good enough for me too read, but I don't want to say it was good, but it's not bad so I guess it's average? IMO
Click to expand...


Thanks.

Do you have a script yourself you could post?

I'd like to see how quality humor is done.
 
By the way, I'd like to re-visit the discussion of the opening dialog in my short DIVA.

The criticism was made that it's "wordy," not well-done, amateurish because it's a phone conversation, not as effective in relying key information via a magazine cover would have been, that it should have been done more visually, etc.

Honestly, where do you people get these screwball ideas?

Dialog that reveals key background information is a standard dramatic tool. Of course there are other ways of transmitting the information, but there's absolutely nothing wrong with doing so in dialog.

Worse still, the examples of how the same information could have been transmitted more effectively given by some of you people were downright ridiculous. Dreadylocks said it could be done visually, then re-wrote the scene where the four key pieces of information are transmitted by the looks and facial expressions of the actors.

That was the dumbest thing I ever saw. It was just a modification done for the purpose of making a modification, not to improve the scene. Indeed, it took longer than the short background dialog and did not transmit any of the information contained in my short, four sentence dialog.

Someone else said the information about the model could have been transmitted from a mock-up magazine cover. Well, no it couldn't, but even if it could, why does that make the short dialog ineffective or poorly placed?

If you want to know how a critique is done, go to the top of this thread and look at my critique of "The Dumpster." This business of throwing out dramatic terms inaccurately -- "More visual," "Wordy," -- is not what critiquing is all about.

Critiquing requires work. It requires a grasp of how dramatic scenes are constructed. If you start of saying background dialog is bad, you're displaying ignorance of the craft. If you say the use of a telephone conversation is amateurish, you relegate the hundreds of quality films with phone conversation to oblivion, something YOU certainly aren't qualified to do.

Finally, be prepared to defend your critique. If it's clear you have no idea what you're talking about, I'm going to be all over you like white on rice.

Save your faux film school homilies about what the writer is supposed to do during a critique for somebody else.

Homey don't play that.
 
And I want to see some scripts...

Dreadylocks, NOOB, Las Vegas, let's see what you got.

And no Fourth of July speeches, just put up or shut up.

Dreadylocks, you're up first, NOOB you're second, Who's on Third.
 
Okay after reading the whole thread again, btw it was definitely worth a second read, I have a couple of questions for Gary.

Gary, you and I became members around the same time and I remember reading a couple of your posts asking for advice on equipment and such - these were pretty much your standard noob threads. Nothing out of the ordinary there.

Then on a fellow members' critique thread, you responded --

"You don't have anything good going on at all here.
Go to my site and download one of my short scripts. In fact, download them all and produce each, that way you'll get a sense of what story is about."

So then I'm thinking, humm this guy is either a great proven writer or he is too enamored with his work. So I took your advice and I read "nazy mamas", and as mentioned before, I couldnt finish it, it wasn't funny and didn't grab my attention. So now I'm thinking, hey I think this guy is way to high on his own supply, and then I read this thread, and whattayouknow, here's Gary again promoting his work as "true genius" material.

So the question is, what the hell happened to you in the 3 weeks you have been a member? Something must have happened to cause your drastic 180 reversal from a "normal" noob to the noob you are now. What was it Gary?
 
joey1320 said:
Okay after reading the whole thread again, btw it was definitely worth a second read, I have a couple of questions for Gary.

Gary, you and I became members around the same time and I remember reading a couple of your posts asking for advice on equipment and such - these were pretty much your standard noob threads. Nothing out of the ordinary there.

Then on a fellow members' critique thread, you responded --

"You don't have anything good going on at all here.
Go to my site and download one of my short scripts. In fact, download them all and produce each, that way you'll get a sense of what story is about."

So then I'm thinking, humm this guy is either a great proven writer or he is too enamored with his work. So I took your advice and I read "nazy mamas", and as mentioned before, I couldnt finish it, it wasn't funny and didn't grab my attention. So now I'm thinking, hey I think this guy is way to high on his own supply, and then I read this thread, and whattayouknow, here's Gary again promoting his work as "true genius" material.

So the question is, what the hell happened to you in the 3 weeks you have been a member? Something must have happened to cause your drastic 180 reversal from a "normal" noob to the noob you are now. What was it Gary?
Click to expand...

You got a script, pal?

Post it.

That's the new rule.
 
First of all Gary there are no rules. A lot of these guys don't write, they are directors and editors and cameramen, so asking ofr a script is kinda dumb.

As for what happened to Gary, nothing. He pulled this same crap over on the Nicholl's Fellowship Facebook page when they didn't like his script. Big surprise there.

You want to read some good, well done comedy? Read Desperados by Ellen Rappaport. Read Everything Must Go by Dan Rush. Read Crazy, Stupid, Love by Dan Fogelman. In fact read anything by Fogelman. Read anything by Aaron Sorkin. Read anything by Jon Spaihts and you will start to see what current day quality screenwriting is about. We aren't in the roaring 20's anymore. And if you haven't heard of these guys Gary then you really aren't up to date on who is hot in the screenwriting world. Max Landis. He's another one. The kid is on fire.
 
That was the dumbest thing I ever saw. It was just a modification done for the purpose of making a modification, not to improve the scene. Indeed, it took longer than the short background dialog and did not transmit any of the information contained in my short, four sentence dialog.
Click to expand...

Who cares if it took longer? It was better. If you're worried about how long it will be, why not just have your main character on the phone for the WHOLE scene and have her TELL the person on the other end what happened with the male prostitute? You could get the whole thing done in about a minute that way. Much shorter, right?

And I already uploaded my last short film that I made from a script that I wrote myself. It's on here, look for it. Post whatever you want about it, I don't care. I'm on to you, Gary. You have no more talent or knowledge that any of us, yet you act like you know everything. But I agree with Joey. You're on other threads asking for lighting and other filmmaking advice so you're just a noob.

And now, you're like a trapped animal, lashing out at everyone and everything that you come in contact with. You're overly defensive and trying to compensate for your lack of knowledge with overblown bravado. You will be nothing but argumentative from here on out, so it's useless to try talking to or reasoning with you.

Honestly, you're displaying textbook behavior of a sociopath. You need help.

Now please, tell me again how I'm un-original... :rolleyes:
 
LasVegasIRA said:
Who cares if it took longer? It was better. If you're worried about how long it will be, why not just have your main character on the phone for the WHOLE scene and have her TELL the person on the other end what happened with the male prostitute? You could get the whole thing done in about a minute that way. Much shorter, right?

And I already uploaded my last short film that I made from a script that I wrote myself. It's on here, look for it. Post whatever you want about it, I don't care. I'm on to you, Gary. You have no more talent or knowledge that any of us, yet you act like you know everything. But I agree with Joey. You're on other threads asking for lighting and other filmmaking advice so you're just a noob.

And now, you're like a trapped animal, lashing out at everyone and everything that you come in contact with. You're overly defensive and trying to compensate for your lack of knowledge with overblown bravado. You will be nothing but argumentative from here on out, so it's useless to try talking to or reasoning with you.

Honestly, you're displaying textbook behavior of a sociopath. You need help.

Now please, tell me again how I'm un-original... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Dreadylocks scene was not "better" because it did not transmit the key background information.

What part of that don't you understand?

The entire play is built on the opening dialog. By cutting it Dreadylocks removed this key information. There's no way, this key information was transmitted by the way the guy looked or the way model looked at him. That's astonishingly ridiculous I can't believe we're even having this conversation. Ten different assumptions could have been made from the interaction Dreadylocks substituted.

Likewise, a photo of the model on a fashion magazine would have been a nice addition -- but by itself it would not established who she was the way her few words on the phone did.

But the main thing is, placing background information in dialog is a tool used in all drama. Why can"t you people grasp this? The notion that it shouldn't be be used is something only a bunch of uninformed amateurs would make in order to serve some other agenda.

You just don't know what you're talking about and that's a real problem in these kinds of forums. People like you, Dreadylocks, NOOB, who never picked up a book on drama making these bizarre opinions about how to improve someone's work.

None of you have read Egri's "The Art of Dramatic Writing". None of you have read and understood any of these books. You all just throw around words like "wordy" and "visual" without really understanding what they mean.

And it shows ....

And save your overweening Farewell Messages to the Troops for your screenplays. I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks they're a waste of bandwidth.

Oh, exactly where is your script?

You're supposed to link when you have something you're telling people to take a look at.

Can't you do anything right?
 
Last edited:
Never one to resist a troll-heavy discussion, chiming in where I'm not wanted, I did have a chance to check out the film last night. I enjoyed it a lot, though I didn't really laugh. I found it more "amusing" than "funny", but pleasantly so. I don't really like comedy, so that I enjoyed it says a lot. I do like this style of humor much more than, say, sitcom humor, for what it's worth.

Thinking about what you could have done differently/improved on for you next, I think it could have been faster and more absurd. You've already got an absurd situation (who throws away a full sheet of drywall!) and a good comic character (someone who feels the need to "get one over" on his neighbor past all reason). However, it felt like there were too few obstacles to overcome, and each one took too long. If there were more absurd challenges and paced so that the scenes became faster and faster, I think it would have been funnier.

For example (note: I am a musician, not a writer, and not particularly funny at that, but I like to think about stuff)
-drags the sheetrock (take about the same time that you did)
-sees the line, goes for the hose
-hose doesn't reach the street, goes to garage for extension
-his extension is gone, with a note from a neighbor who borrowed it
-because he doesn't want anyone to know what he's doing, goes to another neighbors house to steal a hose to use an extension
-gets the hose, and the automated sprinklers come on (bit of slapstick)
-attaches hose, only partially washes off, like you have (the hose he stole wasn't as long as he had thought)
-gets chalk. Either searching at home, like you have, should be much shorter, or another more absurd way of getting it. Stealing from a kid playing on the street maybe? Either way, the pace and edits should be picking way up at this point.

Cutting away to the neighbor driving at a leisurely pace every once in a while would have added tension as well. More tension==more chance for comedy.

Overall, I did enjoy your film. I think you've got the foundations down to build some good stuff. Looking forward to seeing your next one!

And now I want to rewatch The Burbs!
 
joey1320 said:
Well jumping in on this thread was surely the right idea...

One last thing Gary, only because you have been pointing out what you consider funny. Here's what I consider funny. Now mind you, I was born and raised in Puerto Rico and didn't come to the USA until the mid 90's.

I consider Mario Moreno "Cantiflas" to be the funniest actor I have ever seen on films. Along with Roberto Gomez Bolaños. I consider "Le Dîner de Cons" to be one of the funniest movies ever, along with "Dumb and Dumber". Does this mean anything to you? Don't know and don't care. Why? Because what I think is funny could be crap to you.

Different tastes, different flavors and different colors...
Click to expand...

Cantiflas is a legend and I really should have included him.

Also, Telemundo has some amazing comedy, I just wish I understood enough Spanish to get it all.
 
I guess I should point out that the original impetus to make my short was a contest for movies under 2mins. I thought mine would be under 2, but when the first cut came in at 4mins I knew I was in trouble. I tried cutting it down and I did even lose what I considered a very important scene, but ultimately losing it made it funnier. Had I gone into it without any parameters I might have expanded the story a bit. But it is what it is. I'm glad you liked it.
 
JoshL said:
Never one to resist a troll-heavy discussion, chiming in where I'm not wanted, I did have a chance to check out the film last night. I enjoyed it a lot, though I didn't really laugh. I found it more "amusing" than "funny", but pleasantly so. I don't really like comedy, so that I enjoyed it says a lot. I do like this style of humor much more than, say, sitcom humor, for what it's worth.

Thinking about what you could have done differently/improved on for you next, I think it could have been faster and more absurd. You've already got an absurd situation (who throws away a full sheet of drywall!) and a good comic character (someone who feels the need to "get one over" on his neighbor past all reason). However, it felt like there were too few obstacles to overcome, and each one took too long. If there were more absurd challenges and paced so that the scenes became faster and faster, I think it would have been funnier.

For example (note: I am a musician, not a writer, and not particularly funny at that, but I like to think about stuff)
-drags the sheetrock (take about the same time that you did)
-sees the line, goes for the hose
-hose doesn't reach the street, goes to garage for extension
-his extension is gone, with a note from a neighbor who borrowed it
-because he doesn't want anyone to know what he's doing, goes to another neighbors house to steal a hose to use an extension
-gets the hose, and the automated sprinklers come on (bit of slapstick)
-attaches hose, only partially washes off, like you have (the hose he stole wasn't as long as he had thought)
-gets chalk. Either searching at home, like you have, should be much shorter, or another more absurd way of getting it. Stealing from a kid playing on the street maybe? Either way, the pace and edits should be picking way up at this point.

Cutting away to the neighbor driving at a leisurely pace every once in a while would have added tension as well. More tension==more chance for comedy.

Overall, I did enjoy your film. I think you've got the foundations down to build some good stuff. Looking forward to seeing your next one!

And now I want to rewatch The Burbs!
Click to expand...

I told him exactly what he needed to do with his script and gave him step by step instructions a child could follow, but he blew me off. Then he began attacking me like a mad dog.

The two complications he has in the thing are anemic. His photography of them is excellent but what he doesn't seem to grasp is that's not enough.

Basically, he took a simple idea and filmed it. That's all he did.

I can almost see him at breakfast one morning: "Hey, let's make a movie of a guy who tries to dump his trash in his neighbor's dumpster and gets caught"

Buddy: Ok -- let's do it!
 
There's no way, this key information was transmitted by the way the guy looked or the way model looked at him. That's astonishingly ridiculous I can't believe we're even having this conversation.
Click to expand...
If you truly believe this, Gary, you will NEVER be a good director.

You keep talking about how great Chaplin was. He never used dialogue, and yet he got the point across every time... You're continuing to contradict yourself, Gary...
 
garylloyd said:
I told him exactly what he needed to do with his script and gave him step by step instructions a child could follow, but he blew me off. Then he began attacking me like a mad dog.
Click to expand...

I remember the day clearly. I woke up and there was Gary telling me how to fix my script. But did I listen? No. I didn't. Damn I wish I would have listened to Gary a year and a half ago when I made my film.

And then I had the audacity to attack him like a mad dog. Mad dog? Mad dog? Who's the mad dog here? Who was the mad dog over on the Nicholl's Fellowship page?

Have you looked up those screenwriter's I mentioned yet? Having trouble there? Maybe you should know more about this industry and the business of screenwriting before you start spouting off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top