For a limited time only...

[tim partridge]

Couldn't agree with you more on the Che observation, Nigel- also, his significance as a motif had pretty much diminished by the end of the short too- didn't really go anywhere. If there was one complaint overall that would be it.

Fascinating that Che Guevara's status has been relgated these days to that of an ordinary, post-modern pop icon. Madonna even referenced him on her last album cover. Damn Pet Shop Boys have a lot to answer for! [img]wink.gif[/img]


"I was faced with a choice at a difficult age
Would I write a book? Or should I take to the stage?
But in the back of my head I heard distant feet
Che Guevara and Debussy to a disco beat"

[Generic Skinhead]

A lot of interesting points to reflect on...

I will refrain from explaining the story at this point, while I deal with some of the other things.

First off the use of Che...

Ironically used BECAUSE of all the reasons Nigel and Tim touched upon. YES it is overused, YES it has lost all meaning. The face of a revolutionary man on the t-shirt of a student who knows fuck-all...thats my point exactly. The face of a revolutionary man, a man of action on the mug of a man who does nothing.

Secondly the script. Kev, I know your into your scripts and I would propose this. Let me e-mail you the script. See if your opinion changes. Probably not, but i feel personally that any problems lie not with the script but with my own execution of it.

Emjen. Glad you got a kick out of the end at least!

[untamed_aggression]

I liked it. I didn't understand it, but I liked it [img]biggrin.gif[/img]

I agree with what everyone else has said, the direction and photography is excellent, and I thought the sound design was excellent [img]graemlins/thumbs_up.gif[/img]

Still have no idea what was going on though, and the running time could've been shaved a tad. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Incidentally, why is it only online for 24 hours? Is it some sort of conspiracy? [img]wink.gif[/img]

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ January 06, 2005 07:45 PM: Message edited by: Untamed Aggression ]</font>

[peter_g]

Yes, the photography was well executed. It was not exceptional, but it complimented the subject matter well.

I thought the film lacked an emotional core. It captured that feeling of late at night when you are on your own and you get paranoid, a paranoia that is often exacerbated by caffeine or other drugs.

I have a feeling there was some intellectual symbolism thrown in there for good measure, but its meaning eludes me. All in all I found the film quite unsatisfying. Your lead?s langer accent is very disconcerting. You might want to do some ADR.

[Kev Owens]

Technically excellent. Well impressed with the look, lighting and it's obvious a lot of thought went into the directing.

The story for me was slightly disapointing. I was getting pretty bored early on, plus the flickering light (from the TV), although maybe good artistically became plain annoying. I felt that too much consideration was given to the ending, almost sacrificing the interest of the beginning and middle.

However, overall I thought it was good, again, direction was strong, but for me more work could have gone into the script.

Well done. [img]graemlins/thumbs_up.gif[/img]

[tim partridge]

First off- the look you got with your DP is FANTASTIC- GREAT to see some expert hardlight in a short after so long- I'd love to see what your DP can do with colour too! Your talent was also top notch and I think you directed them well, you kept them consistently on edge looking paranoid and exhausted.

I also noticed the "energy" sample used by the Boards of Canada on their second album [img]tongue.gif[/img] nice one!

As for the film itself, safe to say like everyone else I didn't get it. Would make a crackin' Guiness advert, however.

[img]graemlins/thumbs_up.gif[/img]

[emjen]

Gosh darnit I couldnt get it to watch in widescreen. Anyway...

I agree with most of the comments made by the others. If it wasn't for the end image with the tree and the people I would've said this film was pretty boring in the end, but that shot is fucking fantastic and makes me want to watch it again and actually think about it. As long as you avoided the David Lynch-style (postmodernism you simply CAN'T understand) I'll have some fun figuring out what the heck was going on.

Well, that's basically the problem I had. I didn't really know what was going on, and didn't really have time to figure out what was going on because new stuff kept coming at me that I had to figure out.

And what I'm going to say is something you won't like, but I think this short is the prototype studentfilm shot in black and white with all kinds of supermeaningful things thrown together but not making any sense in the end. At least, it REMINDS me of it. Don't take this seriously however, I'm only saying this because I saw something similar to your short in a Family Guy episode.

But the ending. Damn, that was fantastic. Too bad it didn't have much impact because I didn't understand it.

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ January 06, 2005 01:06 PM: Message edited by: emjen ]</font>

[Nigel]

I know the pain of seeing what looks so wonderful on film be spoiled by web compression.

I thought that it was a very well made short--Far and away the best that anyone has posted here. That said here are what I feel are some drawbacks:

B&W--I just got off of a B&W S16 shoot myself(November). I will tell you what I told that director. No matter what people expect something when they see B&W. What they expect will vary from viewer to viewer but they do look at it differently than color.

The Short Film Trap--When making a short it is easy to get stuck in the not enough time to develop a story so I will rely on telling a joke/legend. In this case you told the Urban Legend of the drip from another angle.

Finally, this doesn't have anything to do with the quality. t is a style choice you made that I thought was lacking--Che. I am sick of seeing Che used as some sort of Pop-Icon.

Good Work
Good Luck

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ January 06, 2005 12:59 PM: Message edited by: Nigel ]</font>

[twister!]

I agree with most of the comments here. Firstly - well done. Visually it looks very good and the sound design is excellent.

I had read some of the comments here before watching it about people not understanding it so I watched it thinking all the way - yep makes sense, I understand it so far. But then the last twenty seconds - what happened? I can guess but I am really not sure what it was trying to say. There's a confusing image with the handle of a pair of scissors at the top - I really couldn't tell what that shot was supposed to be and I feel it must be quite important to understanding the film. I watched that ending about 4 times (and that blurry scissors shot in slow motion) and still couldn't understand what was supposed to have happened.

The image near the end of the people in the tree is very strong - would be stronger if there was just a hint of an explanation - as it stands I'm left really having to guess as to what I think may have happened . I don't like things being completely spelled out but I think this is a little too ambiguous even for me. This may be what you intended but it's quite unsatisfying for the viewer.

But well done though it really is VERY good! [img]graemlins/thumbs_up.gif[/img]

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ January 07, 2005 05:39 AM: Message edited by: Justin M. ]</font>

[emjen]

I've watched it a 2nd time now and still don't have a clue. So, please elaborate on your short. Eric.