just recut it and make it soley about the kid in the library

4/29/2005 3:45:17 PM

In an email from Tom Wallis -

"I wanted to congratulate you and the entire crew at Dropframe for your remarkable achievement. That you completed a feature is in itself quite a feat . . . that you made such an accomplished, cogent, meditative, provocative, and beautiful work is beyond belief. Please keep me aprised of further developments."

I'm pretty sure that someone with over ten years of teaching experience in film has a bit more credibility looking at movies than people who post on the wolf web.

4/29/2005 3:52:04 PM

you cant really say that when it comes to music and movies etc
but
anyways i havent critiqued the film yet because i dont want to be an ass since these ppl put a lot of work into it and i am extremely picky about movies. i did not like it at all. there were lots of things i didnt like. thats all ill really say.

but congrats for finishing a whole feature length

4/29/2005 3:56:38 PM

It was no Catwoman.

4/29/2005 3:57:35 PM

4/29/2005 3:57:53 PM

It isn't so much a matter of people liking the story and camera angles and character developments as it is a matter of appreciating it for what it is, for the work that went into it, keeping in mind what little money and equipment we had to work with. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but no one here is a film critic. Just appreciate the fact that everyone involved in this film had the balls to actually go out and reach for their dreams, despite the long hours, expense, and ridicule.

4/29/2005 4:01:38 PM

thats why at least for me i said i didnt like it but congrats on the work

4/29/2005 4:04:27 PM

thanks

4/29/2005 4:05:03 PM

yeah i'm not bashing the hours logged, blood, sweat and tears...i respect that and understand that...i work in animation and have made films myself

but the sheer length of this thing seems forced just so it could be 2 hours 1 minute

[Edited on April 29, 2005 at 4:09 PM. Reason : .]

4/29/2005 4:07:42 PM

Quote :

"I personally thought this film was fantastic. Brandon did an amazing job and I think it's going to kick ass in the film festivals later on in the summer/fall. Good job to everyone at Drop Frame!"

no way you actually went and watched the film

It's not the actors fault as all, the plot was bad and the story was bad.

Quote :

"I'm pretty sure that someone with over ten years of teaching experience in film has a bit more credibility looking at movies than people who post on the wolf web."

ITS WATCHING A FUCKING MOVIE! It's not like you can be "better" at watching movies than someone else.





Just a hint to the people who worked on the film. If you're capturing video and it skips, recapture it. Don't put it into the final cut. Also, something like 85% of sound is put in later. You could have recorded sounds like the car's engine, the papers shuffling, the answering machine, the phone, other stuff and it would have sounded so much better. I've been workin on videos and editing for a long time and this is basic stuff. When you're showing a car driving down the road and all you hear is the wind, you don't want that.

This is a classic case of over-ambitious people with video cameras and computers trying to do something good. You have to know when something sucks, and if this gets put into a festival it will be shot down. Some of those indy films are amazing. The actors did good, especially the main girl with black hair, some of the ideas and scenes were good, but the total plot and how it was drawn out...it fuckin sucked.

4/29/2005 4:10:01 PM

I wasn't part of the editing process, but I can promise you the length wasn't forced. Initially, the goal was an hour and 45 minutes, if I remember correctly, but there was enough footage to make it longer

[Edited on April 29, 2005 at 4:28 PM. Reason : typo]

4/29/2005 4:10:09 PM

there is a lot of driving/walking/going to the bathroom that is not moving the plot along at all

4/29/2005 4:13:54 PM

Tom Wallis is more qualified to "critique" film because he's studied it as an art form, and knows better than most people here what it takes to create one, especially of that length. As for skipping, there was none. Choppy editing was intentional. Also, there wasn't a lot of time to finish this thing, and Brandon's computer crashed soon after it was done. I really feel like people are lashing out at this film for spite. If you weren't feelin it... fine. It won't appeal to everyone. However, its just plain rude to bash it and attack the efforts of the people involved.

4/29/2005 4:14:12 PM

Also, if you think that you can do so much better, why don't you join Drop Frame next year and show us all how much better YOUR stuff is.

4/29/2005 4:17:28 PM

This is probably why Rodger Ebert doesn't have a forum.

Quote :

"It isn't so much a matter of people liking the story and camera angles and character developments as it is a matter of appreciating it for what it is, for the work that went into it, keeping in mind what little money and equipment we had to work with."

Like I said in the other thread, as a film made by some students, it's alright. I really do think it would be a mistake to enter this into festivals. If you want people to think of this as a real movie, you can't say "yeah but we didn't have a lot of money".

4/29/2005 4:17:51 PM

^^ i write a lot. when i originally heard ppl at state were doing this i was thinking of submitting a script in the future if i thought one was good enough. im think im going to try and do something on my own with some friends at gboro tho

[Edited on April 29, 2005 at 4:21 PM. Reason : ]

4/29/2005 4:20:36 PM

It is a "real" movie. Its tangible. As far as the festivals go, I'm not sure which ones it will be submitted to, and there will be more tweaking done beforehand. Still, its pretty clear that we didn't have any funding for this film, so there's no need to say that at the festivals.

4/29/2005 4:21:00 PM

I think alot of you sound like you expected it to be a Hollywood quality film. Our group obviously did not have the means to create something of that caliber.

4/29/2005 4:24:41 PM

Quote :

"As for skipping, there was none. Choppy editing was intentional."

I beg to differ. I could tell which parts were intentionally choppy (i.e., the car guy bitching to his boss), but there were other parts (like the beginning of that gay dream sequence the library kid has) where the motion is clearly choppy for no good reason other than technical problems. And speaking of the technical problems (which I either stated earlier in this thread or the other thread), there were tons. The video was poorly deinterlaced, and there were tons of interlacing artificats left behind and lots of aliasing. The audio quality was atrocious -- it sounded like a poor quality MP3. These are things that could have easily been fixed, regardless of time constraints and money.

Quote :

"However, its just plain rude to bash it and attack the efforts of the people involved."

No one is doing that -- we're just saying that the film was very, very bad. I guarantee that this movie is going to get laughed out of every film festival it's entered in. You guys are wasting your money if you think this thing is going to win ANY kind of award.

Look, just because you guys worked hard on it doesn't mean you're entitled to receive praise on the movie itself. Congratulations on the hard work. Next time, try and make a movie that's worth watching. That's all anyone in this thread is saying.

Quote :

"It isn't so much a matter of people liking the story and camera angles and character developments as it is a matter of appreciating it for what it is, for the work that went into it, keeping in mind what little money and equipment we had to work with."

So are you saying that if I premiered a two hour drama about me taking a shit that I should reasonably expect anyone to appreciate the film for what it is? Get real.

Quote :

"Tom Wallis is more qualified to "critique" film because he's studied it as an art form, and knows better than most people here what it takes to create one, especially of that length."

I really think you guys are getting all this praise because the teachers know you and don't want to hurt your feelings. I seriously wonder if he identified ANY flaws whatsoever in the movie. Face it, he's blowing smoke up your ass. Enter this thing in a film festival and you'll get some "real" critiques.

[Edited on April 29, 2005 at 4:33 PM. Reason : ...]

4/29/2005 4:29:35 PM

i think someone who has nothing invested in the film is a better critic than someone who has edited it, personally.

4/29/2005 4:30:13 PM

ok, first off no one is really expecting a hollywood film. we understand it was a side project and people had other things to do, thats great and it is an acomplishment to be able to pull off a feat like this, however many people are voicing legitimate concerns about why the movie was bad. rather than listening to the "film" people who will say its great no matter what, i think you should be humble enough to listen to the legitimate criticisms of many people. just becasue people are saying its great does not make it so, i think yall really need to be humble enough to listen to criticism.

my criticisms

bad editing, slow slow slow pace
too many long drawn out scenes
the library story line, even though it may be comic relief, was terrible
lack of character developement
no plot developement
used too many cliches: speed ups, split screens, filters, use of many story lines
tried way to hard to be insightful without really saying anything thought provoking
should have focused on one, maybe two at the most stories, and really developed them instead of four undeveloped stories.

4/29/2005 4:34:25 PM

i cant believe how some of you are ripping this apart...to some of the people involved in the film i know its very disheartening, why be so judgemental...just take it for what it was...instead of yall just sitting on your asses behind the anonymity of your computers talking shit about something you don't have the guts to attempt yourselves

4/29/2005 4:48:22 PM

Quote :

"you don't have the guts to attempt yourselves"

i'm going to be involved with some projects over the summer

you'll get updates

4/29/2005 5:00:16 PM

Quote :

"you don't have the guts to attempt yourselves"

what does having guts have to do with this?

4/29/2005 5:02:05 PM

You're all entitled to your opinions, but don't pretend to know more about this process or this group or their efforts or the actual film than those involved. You didn't like it. Fine! Not everyone was expected to. I just don't feel like any of you really have room to talk until you produce something better yourselves.

4/29/2005 5:03:06 PM

Man, Speilberg told me the same thing when I told him AI wasn't a good movie.

4/29/2005 5:29:30 PM

his movie was advertised as something like "over 30 ncsu students come together" to make a movie.

however, you have the three most important roles resting in the hands of one person:

Quote :

"Brandon Tweed Director, Writer, Editor"

its also clear from the production stills that brandon is the one operating the camera in the majority of the film:





but seriously, whats the purpose of having a film group if you're going to let one person be in charge of directing, writing, cinematography, and editing? especially for a film of this length, made in such a short amount of time, i really think this would have come out better if different people could have had the chance to focus on different aspects of the film construction - and the construction is ultimately what is being criticized here, we're not giving the actors and crew members a hard time.

in other words, if you're not going to be able to plan out shots that make sense because you're too busy writing and directing, let someone else have that responsibilty.

you might have even benefited by having different directors tackle the different segments. if this is truely a film GROUP, you have the benefit of showcasing the directing talents of different directors. using different directors generally has mixed results ("four rooms"), but then again you guys weren't trying to make "hollywood" picture anyway.

4/29/2005 5:29:58 PM

Quote :

"I just don't feel like any of you really have room to talk until you produce something better yourselves."

This is the lamest comeback ever. Do you think Roger Ebert needs to stop being a film critic until he produces a series of masterpieces?

Believe it or not, some of us here have seen enough movies and understand enough about what makes good movies in order to make valid criticisms without having actually made a movie ourselves.

4/29/2005 5:36:46 PM

This thread would pretty much be over if it weren't for the "you don't know what you are talking about" come backs.

4/29/2005 5:39:07 PM

im not hiding behind my computer. i was initially involved in this group and i tried to make numerous sugesstions while it was in pre-production. for one, i said the story was weak, the character developement was weak and it needed work. i offered initial criticism in the begining and i ioffered some suggestions, but no one wanted to listen. my friend who was also in the group offered similar criticisms and sugesstions but they were not taken in. ( i basically said all along, rather than have 4 short undeveloped stories, focus on one story and really develope it) basically, i stopped being involved in the group becasue i felt the few people running it would not listen to criticism and suggestions. hell i did a small cameo in the movie as a favor. but i really stopped being involved becasue i didnt like where it was going and i felt people werent allowed to offer input. after seeing the movie, i realize my initial criticisms were right, and i alos realize that the group still is unable to take criticism. yall need to work on that if you really expcet to go somewhere.

i applaud the group for making the movie and devoting the time, no one is criticising you for that. all i am saying is stop being so damn stubborn. listen to the real criticism, be humble and use this as a learning experience to improve. what makes a good movie is not impressive metaphors, cool cmera tricks, cliches, quick editing and smart sounding dialouge, a good movie is one in which a good story is developed and good characters are developed and therefore people feel emotionally attatched.




[Edited on April 29, 2005 at 5:53 PM. Reason : .]

4/29/2005 5:47:09 PM

To me a movie is a movie. I don't have the "ability" to look at the "art" of movies. I either like a movie or I don't. And I haven't seen this movie so I can't say if I like it or not.

I'm in a film class as an elective and I have come to realize that look at film as an art is NOT something I want to do. To me it is just a movie and some of the movies we watch in that class are flat out boring.

Maybe that is why I am in PAMS, haha just give me my meteorology

What I'm saying is, if I attempted to make a movie, it would suck. And these people are in film as a major (i think) so they know more about a movie than I would ever know.

[Edited on April 29, 2005 at 7:42 PM. Reason : yeah]

4/29/2005 7:37:14 PM

Quote :

"what makes a good movie is not impressive metaphors, cool cmera tricks, cliches, quick editing and smart sounding dialouge, a good movie is one in which a good story is developed and good characters are developed and therefore people feel emotionally attatched."

film students listen up

4/29/2005 7:55:33 PM

pretty insightful coming from a chass major huh....i didnt even have to take a film class to learn that. its the same thing that makes a fiction novel worth reading

4/29/2005 8:08:25 PM

bingo.

4/29/2005 8:14:29 PM

Quote :

"In an email from Tom Wallis - "I wanted to congratulate you and the entire crew at Dropframe for your remarkable achievement. That you completed a feature is in itself quite a feat . . . that you made such an accomplished, cogent, meditative, provocative, and beautiful work is beyond belief. Please keep me aprised of further developments." I'm pretty sure that someone with over ten years of teaching experience in film has a bit more credibility looking at movies than people who post on the wolf web."

Same reason a kindergarten teacher says the kids shitty crayon drawing is a brilliant work of art too. You guys couldn't handle it.

4/29/2005 8:15:42 PM

Quote :

"instead of yall just sitting on your asses behind the anonymity of your computers talking shit about something you don't have the guts to attempt yourselves"

I create and edit my own work with my shitty DV camera and my illegal copy of Adobe Premiere. I guess that makes me a director also. But the difference is I don't tout it around as some incredible peice of artwork and try to enter it into anything. In fact, almost no one has seen any of my work. Maybe it's brilliant, who knows.

In addition, I'm interning at a production company this summer. I am also working on a script that I will produce, and believe me it won't have any technical flaws when it's finished.

Technical flaws in film are like grammatical errors in an english paper. No matter how good the paper is, yuo cant get yer point acros if u look/spel liek an idiott.

4/29/2005 8:27:32 PM

i thought this was kind of funny actually, the director of the movie got mad at me for my posts here. he said i should support the group. i do support the group, i said that it comendable to produce a movie in your spare time. all of my criticisms were about the movie itself not the group. there were many many flaws with the movie and it just wasnt really good. rather than be humble, he got mad at me for expressing my opinion (not that i really care). it just proves the lack of ability to accept criticism. just cause you can and did make a movie doesnt mean you made a good one. and the spare time excuse is ok if you are saying ya didnt have time to fix some glitches, but the story, plot, editing and directing being bad have nothing to do with that. all i have been saying is for the next time, work on the areas that this one lacked. and a standing O at the end doesnt mean anything, it just means that people were saying "good job on making the movie" not "it was a great movie"

just cause i was sort of in the group doesnt mean i have to like the movie, or pretend that i do.

[Edited on April 29, 2005 at 9:31 PM. Reason : .]

4/29/2005 9:25:56 PM

They just knew he would commit suicide if they didn't.

4/29/2005 9:29:35 PM

i wouldnt go that far

4/29/2005 9:37:21 PM

I think I am going to start producing pornographic films. Do any of the NCSU girls who were involved in Matchbook Morning want to become a *REAL* star?

4/29/2005 9:40:26 PM

All these opinions make me want to see the movie even more

4/29/2005 11:42:17 PM

Quote :

"I just don't feel like any of you really have room to talk until you produce something better yourselves."

So if you hear a song and say "that singer sucks" or "they're horrible", then are you not entitled to say that? 1,000,000 bucks says you've put something down this week that you can't do anybetter

Quote :

"Tom Wallis is more qualified to "critique" film because he's studied it as an art form, and knows better than most people here what it takes to create one"

Quote :

"i also realize that the group still is unable to take criticism. yall need to work on that if you really expcet to go somewhere."

EXACTLY. You can't expect to go anywhere if you can't take any criticism. Instead of saying "you don't know what it's like," don't you think you might wanna listen to what we're saying so you can do it better next time? The public and their opinion makes a movie successful, not some teacher that sits behind a desk. We may not have all the answers, but as film makers, writers, producers, etc you should have the answers.


I've made some short stuff, movies and skits, only like 2-3 minutes long. My friends love it, they always ask about seeing it and want me to send it to em. pwnt

4/29/2005 11:48:25 PM

Quote :

"There is no other way of guarding oneself against flattery than by letting men understand that they will not offend you by speaking the truth"

-Machiavelli

of course they wont listen to criticism if the only thing they hear are the people who agree.

4/30/2005 12:35:41 AM

HEY YOU GUYS COME READ MY BOOK

IT'S OVER FOUR HUNDRED PAGES LONG

OVER A DOZEN PEOPLE WERE INVOLVED IN ITS PRODUCTION

i mean please overlook the fact that the story sucks

4/30/2005 12:42:49 AM

I couldn't go to the screening, and I was going to make an effort to see this, but now I think I'll watch Rock 'n' Roll High School instead.

4/30/2005 12:56:55 AM

HEY YOU GUYS COME READ MY BOOK
IT'S OVER FOUR HUNDRED PAGES LONG
OVER A DOZEN PEOPLE WERE INVOLVED IN ITS PRODUCTION
i mean please overlook the fact that the story sucks

thats what i am saying

4/30/2005 2:05:37 AM

Quote :

"what makes a good movie is not impressive metaphors, cool cmera tricks, cliches, quick editing and smart sounding dialouge, a good movie is one in which a good story is developed and good characters are developed and therefore people feel emotionally attatched."

I feel that Pixar is the best film studio on the planet at this time because of thinking like this. Story first, pretty pictures later.

4/30/2005 2:10:52 AM

your opinion of pixar's story lines is all fine and dandy but "pretty pictures later?" come on why make a computer animated movie in the first place if you're not out to make pretty pictures?

4/30/2005 5:17:47 AM

Because computer animation can do things that regular animation can't. The point is that it takes years to animate a Pixar film, but they spend almost as long on editing the story as they do on the complex animation.

4/30/2005 5:47:38 AM

I'm seriously thinking about making my own full length movie just to say "I did and mine was better"

It sure as hell won't be a drama, not my cup of tea

4/30/2005 4:10:29 PM