10.14.07
Twilight
Here’s the film I’ve been making over the last two weeks. I stayed up ’till 7 am last night to subtitle it in English and encode it back to mp4 - I tell you, navigating the jungle of video encoding programs is not for the faint of heart. The film is 8 minutes, and I’m moderately happy with it.
Click here 
to download it as an .mpg file in a .rar archive (edit: The sound was out of sync on the .mp4 - this is 20 megs bigger, but the sound fits). I tried to make it stream from the page as well, but the audio was out of sync, so until I find a better solution (possibly YouTube), you’ll have to download it if you want to see it.
Read my comments after the jump, but not before you’ve seen the film, lest I ruin it for you.
I think some self-criticism would be appropriate here. The part I focus on the most is the script, because my group was generous enough to let me write it. Now that the film is done, it’s clear that I made a few mistakes. First of all, the beginning is a little dull. It was meant to be about a minute until Peter found the corpse, but it was supposed to be a minute of character portrayal, where we would get a glimpse of Peter’s environment and his personality. Unfortunately that requires a couple of things, like good set design, well-planned photography, and really good acting. What we had was somebody’s apartment generously lent to us and equipped with a few select props (men’s magazines, a withered house plant, a knife block), three media students with a year of AV studies but no practical experience to their name, and amateur actors.
Secondly, the film has way too much dialogue. It’s practically a kammerspiel, taking place almost entirely within a single room and being driven completely by its dialogue for about 5 whole minutes. The beginning at least theoretically succeeds in showing rather than telling and the ending I feel succeeds in what we set out to do, but the large middle part is nothing but dialogue. And… I’m ashamed to admit that the dialogue isn’t very good. I mean it does the trick, it conveys the information we need it to convey, but it sounds like it’s taken straight from a soap opera. Especially “it’s Brian’s baby” would be completely at home in Days of our Lives.
Annoyingly, I’m not sure how much of that is my fault and how much can be blamed on the actors. In general I don’t want to blame the actors at all, they’re amateurs, they did this in their weekend for free, and we’re deeply grateful for their help - but they are amateurs. I think part of the problem is I didn’t consider that I was writing dialogue for amateurs to act, I just assumed I’d have some good actors, and I wrote dialogue that was pretty hard to remember and speak naturally. I’ve uploaded the script 
, so any of you who speaks Danish can see how much of it was changed on the set - nary a single line remains intact. The dialogue that ended up in the film is much more casual than what I wrote, but it’s also less structured, less precise, and contains more repetition.
Technically, we did all right. We should’ve filmed more close-ups and we should’ve experimented more with the camera, but I think the film itself looks surprisingly good considering we didn’t set up any lights at all apart from what was on the set. There’s some genuinely good stuff in there, like the camera angle and movement in the shot where Solveig comes up the stairs, or the disconcerting camera work in the scene where Peter picks the knife up from the floor at the end. We also managed to experiment ever so slightly with the difference between a wide-angle lens (that we used in most of the film) and a regular 35-55mm lens that we used in the shot/reverse between Solveig and Brian in the hallway and in the outdoor scenes. I just wish there were more of those experiments.
The real experiments took place in the editing room, and although I think we largely succeeded in cutting the film like we’d intended and creating the subjective effects that we wanted, it’s pretty obviously an amateur film - it’s disappointingly conventionally filmed and cut and has a few really bad cuts, like the cut between Peter finding the corpse and the shot where he gets up from the floor and goes to open the door (I tried to salvage it with a dissolve, but it still looks terrible) or the cut between the two shots of Brian and Peter entering the living room (where Peter is suddenly looking in a different direction).
Still, it was a lot of fun to work on, and I think we succeeded on one count: The ending is exactly as powerful as we intended. Groupwise, we wanted to experiment with interesting camera work and subjective effects, which I think turned out well, and personally it was an experiment of writing the music into the actual script - if you do read the script, you’ll note the soundtrack actually appears in there and is even explicitly timed to the action. I’m really happy it turned out well, because I’m under the impression it’s a pretty unorthodox way to treat your music.
In closing, I have to say that although I feel the script is my baby (slightly handicapped and unintelligent baby though it may be), the film itself is definitely a group effort. It’s been great fun working with Carina and Anne, and I’m quite shocked with how much we all agreed throughout the production.
fox said,
October 15, 2007 at 13:43
“I tell you, navigating the jungle of video encoding programs is not for the faint of heart.”
QFT!
fox said,
October 15, 2007 at 14:18
I like the script! It’s also quite well done but I am glad to see, you made some of the faults I did with my first experiments, too.
Some stuff I didn’t like:
- some timing-issues
- the last sequence was great and all but I don’t think the guy shouldn’t turn around to the camera before he opens the door(s). Only one door would’ve looked better. He also moves a little bit too slow, imo. Digital zoom is almost always a bad idea.
- intro and main title seem a little bit out of place to me. They are meant ro be subtile and Lynch-like I guess or Ju-On/Ring. Bit too much mystery and cliche.
But as I’ve said - all in all, like it!
Jonas said,
October 15, 2007 at 15:24
What timing issues? I’m sure there are some, but I’d like you to point them out
We chose two doors because first of all, it has to fit the music (same reason why he walks so slowly), and secondly it created a cool tunnel composition. Also, it’s not digital zoom, we zoomed optically with the camera.
And thanks
fox said,
October 15, 2007 at 17:48
“I’m sure there are some, but I’d like you to point them out :)”
Um…yeah. Maybe I’ll do that but tbh I am too lazy right now because this would require an detailed analisys and is very hard to describe without showing you directly.
Jonas said,
October 15, 2007 at 18:07
Yeah I guess so. I’d just like to know what you mean so I can learn from it, you know?
I’m looking forward to next Monday when we’ll see just how much all the other groups surpassed us. I think we did well for probably the only group with no practical experience what-so-ever.
fox said,
October 15, 2007 at 18:35
I am sure you did good! Those timing-issues I am talking about are mainly in the cuts and transitions -not- the narrative style. Which means, that you should take a break from editing and maybe tomorrow, you should watch it again without focussing on anything special. Try to be a first-time viewer again (which is the hardest part of the editing process, imo). Then you’ll see them for yourself. A second opinion helps a lot.
There’s one thing I’ve noticed about the scene where Solveig rants at her boyfriend. I think there are some dispensable lines (especially his). I think you did a good job with cutting or not writing in unnecessary stuff but maybe this scene could be a bit tightened.
The music shouldn’t be more important than the scene. I understand you but I think, you can edit both to fit again by cutting a measure or two or fading in at another position. It’s could become tricky but maybe worth the effort.
Jonas said,
October 15, 2007 at 18:59
Actually the music was intended to be more important than anything else in that scene at the end. Like I wrote, it was an experiment. I feel your criticism, but we chose specifically which parts of the music we wanted to use, and everything else just had to fall into place around that. It was meant to be that slow
Matthew said,
October 15, 2007 at 19:33
Awesome video, Jonas! I was a bit confused at the end when I found out that Peter had just imagined everything, and it was VERY creepy when he decided to go and kill his friend and friend’s girlfriend in some psychotic rage!
The only criticism I have with the film was the transition between the shot of the blood-soaked rug and Peter holding his head; it felt very out of place with the other parts of the movie and ruined the movie’s flow just a bit.
fox said,
October 15, 2007 at 20:13
I do understand your approach of using the music as a storyteller and I do realize, that everything is synced to the music. And yes, this limits you very much with the editing because it plays so long . Now that I’ve watched this last two minutes about 10 times while thinking about ways to optimize it, I have to admit, that I am pretty clueless because everything seems to require another filming session. Still, the music should add to the movie and not the other way round. in this case it even dictates some important things but it remains just a good vehicle to tell your story in the form of a short movie. You’ll have to decide wether you want to reshoot scenes to make the timing perfect for the music (because the specific music is exactly what you want for the movie) or to manipulate/change the music (because the video material is exactly what you wanted). One of them has to be the base for the editing of the other. In your case it’s this NIN-song so your job is then to make the visuals perfect for the music. My opinion is, it’s not perfect in the current form, which is unfortunate for the project. The ending is one of the most important parts of the experience, as you know.
Now, please don’t get me wrong and I wrote it before: You movie is cool and what I am ranting about is nitpicking and perfectionism which is not meant to distract from your very good first try!
I think you shouldn’t limit yourself with the music the next time. There are lot’s of songs out there which transport similar messages. Of course this requires lot’s of research too and you’ll have to be totally aware of what you essentially want to tell the people before you start searching for a song. Instrumentals are easer to use of course. There’s a reason for why there are so many people who are specializing on specific parts of commercial movies…
Jonas said,
October 15, 2007 at 22:38
Fox: No, nit-picking is fine, like I say this is a learning experience. I agree that the footage could’ve fit the song better, for example it would’ve been nice if we had some material to cut between in the final shot. Still, by the time we started editing, we’d already turned in our filming equipment, so it was never really an option to go back and film additional shots
Also there was never a question about which song to use. The moment we’d established the outline of the story, I knew which song I was gonna use. You can argue there may have been better songs, but I chose the song I wanted to use in my film, and I’m quite happy with it.
Matt: Yeah that’s one of the cuts I mentioned as being unhappy with in my self-criticism. Cool that you noticed it too - it’s a really bad cut, but mostly because it was really terribly filmed (and since I filmed it, I can’t even blame a director).
Christian said,
October 16, 2007 at 00:37
Det var sgu sjovt nok! Jeg troede at skuespillet i starten var overfladisk og skide dårligt, men det tog jo noget af et twist!
Trestkon said,
October 16, 2007 at 04:36
Since I’ve already told you how awesome it was, I’ll add a small crit. here.
I agree with fox about Peter turning around in the last scene to look at the camera. I thought that was the most unnatural and out of place moment in the film. It was a little to ‘cheap horror movie’ ish for me.
Of course, nothing can beat the stop motion playdough animation I made when I was 15, so you’d best just stop trying
Smike said,
October 16, 2007 at 06:26
OMG DANISH STOP-MOTION TURTLES!!!
EER said,
October 16, 2007 at 07:54
I totally agree with Smike. Maybe I’ll post something relevant later.
EER said,
October 16, 2007 at 22:06
So, where to begin. The script seems unreadable, not only by your use of Danish, but also because some letters are printed over eachother. If my danish was any better I could possibly guess what it should say, but it involves a lot of guessing as it is
Then the movie .. I certainly liked the surprise that it was all in his head. But the movie feels like you had so much more to say, but didn’t due to a time limit of sorts.
I say we need a director’s cut, or a writer’s cut perhaps
Jonas said,
October 16, 2007 at 22:47
It’s more like I had so much more to say, but the actors couldn’t remember their lines and couldn’t deliver them properly when they did remember. So a writer’s cut would only work if you gave me a set of professional actors and preferably in fact a whole other, more experienced film crew. Including a real director.
Weird about the script, I just checked it, and no characters overlap for me. You’re sure your Reader isn’t just fucked up?
Jonas said,
October 16, 2007 at 22:49
Hm, I shouldn’t blame everybody else though. It’s not the best script in the world, it was written in 3 days and only revised 2 times. Also I’m sad to admit I’m just not very good at deep emotions. It’s hard to do right unless you really tone it down and underplay it, and that was pretty damn hard to do in this situation where we were told the plot had to be crystal clear - it was an excersize in telling a story on film, narrative experiments were strongly discouraged.
EER said,
October 16, 2007 at 23:14
Yes, apparently it was my foxit reader that was acting up, I installed Sumatra PDF and it works now
* files bugreport with Foxit.
Jonas said,
October 16, 2007 at 23:34
You crazy kids and your open-source operating systems.
Smike said,
October 17, 2007 at 03:32
OMG DANISH OPEN-SOURCE STOP-MOTION OPERATING SYSTEMS WITH TURTLES!!!
Jonas said,
October 17, 2007 at 10:32
EER is Dutch, actually.
EER said,
October 17, 2007 at 15:08
Not only that, I run Windows(tm).
I just hate the Adobe Reader
Smike said,
October 17, 2007 at 18:31
Wait… I’m sorry, was someone trying to make sense out of that comment? Jonas you are too funny sometimes. I’m happy to blame it on cultural disconnect, though.
Also, Dutch women are the BEST. You guys are SO lucky to live so close to so many of them!
EER said,
October 17, 2007 at 21:55
This was a triumph
I’m making a note here: HUGE SUCCESS
It’s hard to overstate my satisfaction.
Smike said,
October 18, 2007 at 05:04
…with your ass?
EER said,
October 18, 2007 at 06:34
Of course, what else?
Jonas said,
October 18, 2007 at 09:47
Smike, I could never be as stupidly silly as you or OiNutter (whom you evidently aspire to copy), so I generally just choose to pretend your silly comments carry a hint of sense. OiNutter has learned to deal with that.
Smike said,
October 18, 2007 at 17:55
Oi is a brilliant Pirate indeed - ARRRGGHH!!! AYE MATEY!!! I do so enjoy his antics. But I could never copy him. I can only provide my own brand of crazy when my mind is lost among the tall timbers of stress and ado.
EER said,
October 18, 2007 at 23:06
So what are you saying? You’re all a bunch of communists?
Jonas said,
October 19, 2007 at 08:57
Anarchists, really. Without bombs, though.