HUNGRY

[bankholdup]

Ok, so we had off of school today (MLK Jr.), and I got bored. So, I decided to take out the camcorder sitting on my bookshelf.

I wanted to make some kind of short film today, as an experiment. I didn't think of a plot per-se, but just a basic idea with some shots I was trying out.


The Plot: A kid wakes up, hungry, but there is no good food to eat in the house.

Length: 2:47


There is one major problem I have with the film: There is a shot that starts off extremely blurry, and I couldn't figure out how to fix it. Any suggestions on that?



Right click, hit 'Save Target As...'
{found below}


If anyone knows how I can save it in .mov format, please let me know.

And it is going to be a bit grainy, since I changed the file type. It's perfect in .avi though.

Also, for some reason the video size went down as I saved it to the site.

Let me know what ya think. Thanks.

[bankholdup]

24-hour bump...and why not?

[Bryce Canyon]

Watched it and enjoyed it. Especially liked the fact that there was no dialogue and it was in black and white. Some cool camera angles (shoes..). The only thing that irked me was the question mark after "The End".

[NobodySpecial]

"File not found."

[Tuukka]

Originally posted by NobodySpecial
"File not found."

RE:

Same here.

[bankholdup]

Right click, hit 'Save Target As...'


{found below}




That should work.

[Kastman]

I thought the shots were really good... and ovrall it was pretty cool.

two questions.

1. You say he can't find anything to eat, the fridge is rather full isn't it?

2. What's he doing to the meat in the pan with that spatula?


good stuff.

[Tuukka]

I kinda liked it... It's good practice piece for you. Did you shoot and act yourself? It looks like that. Your film strongly reminds me of the very first stuff I did 10 years ago... The visual language and the consept of shooting and acting by yourself is very similar.

In general the visual storytelling shows some promise... It's rough around the edges, of course, but as a practice piece for a young guy like you it does what it's supposed to do.

The big flaw in your film is that it doesn't have a story. I had to watch it twice to understand what is going on (I didn't read your synopsis). It has no build-up or pay-off. And I don't understand why he is not eating since the Fridge is FULL. Maybe he is just a big pizzalover, but why does he even bother to check out the other food?

I was waiting for some punchline, but it never came...

BTW, does the clip have any sound? I don't have a soundcard, but I downloaded it to Premiere and there was no sound. I don't know how well Premiere reads sound on WMV files, thought.

[bankholdup]

Originally posted by Kastman
I thought the shots were really good... and ovrall it was pretty cool.

two questions.

1. You say he can't find anything to eat, the fridge is rather full isn't it?

2. What's he doing to the meat in the pan with that spatula?


good stuff.


1. Touchee.

2. He was going to eat it, but it was too hard (demonstrated b/c it didn't break when he nailed it with the spatula).

[bankholdup]

oops..

[Tuukka]

Bankholdup, do you have a working e-mail? The one in your profile is not available.

I was analyzing your short film and I was gonna give out some suggestions. But then I realized that I had an hour to kill (waiting for a working partner), so I did some re-editing on your flick to illustrate my point. If you want, I can send it to you with e-mail. It's only about 1MB.

I intended to give some advice in order to make your visual language more dynamic. Your short lasts for almost 3 minutes, but I thought it had story worth of a maybe 1 minute. So I edited it down to 1 minute 9 seconds without losing anything essential (Well, in my opinion anyway).

You might want to watch it in order to learn how differently someone else might interpret your material, and how differently the little drama your short has might be built.

[bankholdup]

Wonder why it doesn't work.


moobysnacks37@yahoo.com is my e-mail address.



I really appreciate the help, Tuukka.

[RicochetShaw]

I liked it a lot, bank. I really enjoy watching student films like these on www.studentfilms.com , ever think of submitting your stuff on there? Other people rate it and critique it. I think it could be helpful.

[Tuukka]

Originally posted by bankholdup
Wonder why it doesn't work.


moobysnacks37@yahoo.com is my e-mail address.


RE:

I just found out that the site hosting my e-mail is doing maintenance and won't be up until after 12 hours or so. And the file is too large to send by my hotmail adress. So I went to that site you use, TBNS, and I put up my own account there.

http://vlinto.tbns.net/cgi-bin/vlinto6/vlinto

...The file should be there. Click right button and "save target as"... I hope it works. I think the straight link is this:

http://www.tbns.net/tuukka/hungry_version2.wmv

Your movie didn't have any sound on my computer, so I did some dubbing. I was rather experimental with the sound, so it's maybe a better idea to watch it without. I just got some new sound CD's and I wanted to play around with them...

Anyway, this shows you how *I* would have edited the thing more or less. The main problem with your film is the lack of drama. So I think it should move pretty fast. Naturally when you are trying to hook up the emotions of the audience, you need to give the film time to breathe. If you are trying to build tension, you can move it occasionally at a snail's pace. But when you are showing rather boring action dramatically like in this movie, I think it's good to keep it as tight as possible.

There is a guy who wakes up and looks for food in his kitchen. That's pretty much the story here. If you drag a story like that much longer than one minute, it's not effective anymore.

Your film was too short to be boring, but it did wonder around without aim. Now, I'm not saying that my version is much better, there is a certain lack of flow (I didn't have much footage to work on), but at least it get's the point across faster. It's also slightly confusing, but that was true of the longer version as well.

I would advice you to check out how in every shot I'm concentrating on the *action* of that shot. I cut in just when the action is beginning, and I cut out just when it's over. You have a tencency to begin a shot 1-2 seconds before the actual content begins, and you let it last 1-2 after the action has already been finished. This results in a slow pace, which can be frustrating to the audience.

Of course sometimes the pacing has to be slow, but that depends on the drama. But since there is not much drama in here, you have no reason to let it drag longer than it absolutely has to. Most good editors edit it tight.

I've also edited away lot's of unneeded shots. Remember that every shot in your film should drive the story further in one way or another. For example I have no idea what the dog was doing there. Yes, the dog was eating and that probably is connected to the hunger of the main character. But *how* does it connect to the main character? What is he thinking? How and why does he react to the dog? I have no idea, it's way too vague.

Also when I watched the film I had no idea that the guy was frustrated when he was frying the food on the pan, but I did wonder what the hell he was doing. I think the concept works a bit better now, because there is intercutting between his face and the pan. We can see his expressions as the situation progresses.

Remember that instead of showing long continuous takes showing single action, try to intercut. Show a face of person, then show what he is watching. Then show his reaction to the thing he is watching. This is far more effective than for example showing a one wide shot of him standing, looking at something and then reacting to it, all in one shot.

Cutting creates drama. It also allows you edit away dead pauses in the acting or camerawork. This makes you film and your drama tighter, and more powerful.

[bankholdup]

Pretty damn stylish, Tuukka. Makin' me look bad here. ;)


Anyway, it definitely gives me some pointers on how I can improve on future short films that I make. Thanks alot.


Originally posted by Tuukka
Yes, the dog was eating and that probably is connected to the hunger of the main character. But *how* does it connect to the main character? What is he thinking? How and why does he react to the dog? I have no idea, it's way too vague.


The main character was thinking that it's ashame that the dog (lesser than humans) is eating, but he isn't (as he shakes his head). Vague, as you said.


BTW, you're going to be getting a phonecall from my dog's lawyer.

[Tuukka]

Originally posted by bankholdup
The main character was thinking that it's ashame that the dog (lesser than humans) is eating, but he isn't (as he shakes his head). Vague, as you said.

RE:

Yeah, I was thinking that the point might be that, but I wasn't sure. The thing is that he has plenty of food in the fridge and even fries some meat on the pan. I'm sure all of that tastes much better than the food the dog is eating.

This would work better for example in this way:

The guy arrives to the kitchen. He gives some food for the dog. Then he opens the fridge, and realizes that it's empty. Every damn cupboard is empty. So he takes the food away from the dog and fries it on the pan. He tries to eat it, but it's so bad he can't. So he gives the food back to the dog and the doggie continues eating, enjoying his meal. The guy looks at the dog depressed.

You have much more story there. Much more drama. And in a way you also have a punchline.

[Tuukka]

All in all I think making short movies like this is great practice, and it was pretty creepy for me to see how close your film was to the 2nd short film I've ever made, roughly 10 years ago. Some shots are almost identical in terms of content.

There is one good lesson in here:

I edited the whole thing in a totally different order than you did. I stole shots from some scenes and put them into scenes where they were not supposed to be. This is something that is done in big Hollywood movies as well. Some shots end up in places where they were never supposed to be, they just fit in there.

Or sometimes you know you need some shot, but you never shot it. Maybe you didn't have time to shoot it. So you just go through all the material you have, trying to find out if some other scene has some suitable shot to replace the missing shot.

It's good to make a storyboard before filming. During the filming it's good to often change the storyboard a bit. In fact it's often *necessary* to change it. And once you enter the editing room, it's often best to forget you ever even had a storyboard. The shots never work how they were supposed to work. You usually end up with far better results if you don't edit according to the storyboard, but according to the footage you have.

[Jerk Shapiro]

Very cool, bank my friend. Very cool. Very reminescant of the silent era.

[NobodySpecial]

I watched the original and Tuukka's version, and while Tuukka's is a bit "music video"-ish, I think it does work much better due to it's increased speed.

Ultimately I have the same criticism that I think Tuukka made, that there isn't much drama here. Think about pushing this premise farther. For instance, what if the reason your Guy is hungry is because there's no food.... at all.... anywhere. He wakes up and all the food in the world has disappeared.....

That's a premise for a short. It's a self contained story. Most importantly it can be played several different ways. It could be drama (what will I do without food?), a thriller (who do I have to kill to eat?), or a comedy (should I serve a red or white wine with the shoe I'm having for dinner?).

Something like that.

A good start, nevertheless.

[bankholdup]

Hungry (re-edited):

{right click, Save Target As:}
http://www.tbns.net/bankholdup/hungry.wmv



After debating, I decided to re-edit my film. I think it is alot better than the original version.



I'd like to give a special thanks to Tuukka for opening my eyes more to the power of editing.

[Tuukka]

Yeah, I think it works much better now.

There is a minor thing I would like to point out about the shots.

When the guy drops off from the bed, you cut to a shot of him lying on the floor. This is all fine, but both shots are taken from the same distance. It seems that the camera position is exactly the same. This might not be the case, but it *looks* like that, only the direction of the camera is slightly different. This results in jarring cut. It would work only if either of the two shots would be much closer or in a much greater distance. If the shot of guy laying on the floor would be twice as close, the cut would be much smoother.

Later on in the films there is a another slighty jarring cut with similar problem. The guy goes down in front of a cupboard, then we see him opening the cupboard. Again the camera is seemingly on the same place, shooting from the same distance. Only the direction is slighty different. If the second shot, the opening of the cupboard, would be twice as close, the shots would cut much smoother.

Yes, you can cut together same-sized shots. But only if they are showing a different object. For example in the cupboard shots I can see the cupboard in both shots. In the bed shots I can see the guy in both shots. If you show a guy's face in close-up looking down, and then you cut to another close-up of his hand holding an object, the shots "flow" even if they are in the exactly same size. But if you show the object in his hand in close-up and then show it from exactly the same distance again in another close-up, only from a slighty different angle, it results easily in a jarring cut.

So try not to cut together shots which are in more or less the same size, showing the same object. This is something you have to figure out already in the stroyboarding.

[Tuukka]

There is also a problem with the switch shot. The guy walks by the wall in a rather wide shot, then you cut to an extrem close-up of the switch. This is *maybe* a bit too big jump in shots sizes.

But anyway, the shots give a different impression than what you are aiming for. The guy turns the switch. The next shots starts DARK. This gives the impression that he in fact turned the lights OFF. The shot of the switch is rather light, the next shot is dark. I also think that the switch shot is a bit too fast. In this case it might be good to let it linger for another 6-12 frames in the end. But the shots *starts* in exactly the right moment.