UPDATE: You see? I took your advice! So, it’s different not. Maybe it’s better?
Another Video?! I am on a roll, or rather making up for lost time.
This is second of the video projects I’m doing for my “Constructing the Urban Landscape” class in Boulder (How I plan to construct something Urban in Boulder, I still don’t know). This assignment was fairly open, we merely had to pick a spot one block outside of campus and explore space through film. The spot I actually picked wasn’t one block away from campus, but I’m completely content with the place I picked. It’s an abandoned pool by a playground with a rocket ship.
Anyhoo, let me know what you think. And, if you give me some good criticism before tomorrow (Friday Nov. 6) at 1:00 I can actually re-edit it to fix the errors. For once, I got something done before “on time”.
If you can’t fit it on a single title card, maybe just flash two on screen instead of scrolling them past. It was the movement that got to me.
For what it’s worth: the only two shots in the film that strike me as ‘playful’ are the zoom in/zoom out composite shot and the squirrel vignette. I think that it’s tough to produce something playful from that subject matter by only modifying your form rather than your content. (Is there any way to imbue horrific murder, for instance, with a feeling of playfulness using only camera movement and cutting?) Actually, that’s a bad example, as it sounds entirely possible and furthermore, like a really fun idea.
I wanted to include a simple title card, but the list was too long to fit on one card. However if I get rid of my name (It also kind of bothers me to have a long list of my name, seems a bit too egotistical) It might be short enough.
The star wipe/Black and White segment was something I wasn’t sure about putting in. I’ll take another look at them, but my thoughts was that these two are a nice lead in-lead out to what I’m calling the “Playful sequence”. Because I feel what makes this space so sad is the fact that we know there should be something fun or something kind of life there, but instead it’s empty and dead with the squirrel being the only living creature who can step foot into the space.
I’ll take another look at those two, also at the rhythm and make some changes if I’ve got the time (I probably do). Thank you.
Very nice. You establish a cohesive editing rhythm, although there are a couple cuts that go by just a few frames too quickly.
I love the superimpositions, especially the zoom out/zoom in shot and the shot with all the numbers.
I don’t buy the star wipe or the B&W shot because they seem ungrounded in the shot vocabulary you have established. Oddly enough, I do buy the freeze-frame/vignette-in on the squirrel, I think because we’ve seen a freeze-frame once before in the piece, and because the squirrel seems undeniably important.
Finally, I’d suggest that you keep the end credits to a minimum; don’t list your own name more than once (right now you’ve got it at the beginning, you don’t need it twice again at the end, especially since “A Film By” covers pretty much everything). Additionally, title cards might work better than a credit roll for such a short list of end credits.
I’d agree that it is entirely possible to make a horrific murder playful with camera movement and editing. And it would, indeed, be very fun.
If you can’t fit it on a single title card, maybe just flash two on screen instead of scrolling them past. It was the movement that got to me.
For what it’s worth: the only two shots in the film that strike me as ‘playful’ are the zoom in/zoom out composite shot and the squirrel vignette. I think that it’s tough to produce something playful from that subject matter by only modifying your form rather than your content. (Is there any way to imbue horrific murder, for instance, with a feeling of playfulness using only camera movement and cutting?) Actually, that’s a bad example, as it sounds entirely possible and furthermore, like a really fun idea.
I didn’t realize that you still have squirrels there.
I wanted to include a simple title card, but the list was too long to fit on one card. However if I get rid of my name (It also kind of bothers me to have a long list of my name, seems a bit too egotistical) It might be short enough.
The star wipe/Black and White segment was something I wasn’t sure about putting in. I’ll take another look at them, but my thoughts was that these two are a nice lead in-lead out to what I’m calling the “Playful sequence”. Because I feel what makes this space so sad is the fact that we know there should be something fun or something kind of life there, but instead it’s empty and dead with the squirrel being the only living creature who can step foot into the space.
I’ll take another look at those two, also at the rhythm and make some changes if I’ve got the time (I probably do). Thank you.
Very nice. You establish a cohesive editing rhythm, although there are a couple cuts that go by just a few frames too quickly.
I love the superimpositions, especially the zoom out/zoom in shot and the shot with all the numbers.
I don’t buy the star wipe or the B&W shot because they seem ungrounded in the shot vocabulary you have established. Oddly enough, I do buy the freeze-frame/vignette-in on the squirrel, I think because we’ve seen a freeze-frame once before in the piece, and because the squirrel seems undeniably important.
Finally, I’d suggest that you keep the end credits to a minimum; don’t list your own name more than once (right now you’ve got it at the beginning, you don’t need it twice again at the end, especially since “A Film By” covers pretty much everything). Additionally, title cards might work better than a credit roll for such a short list of end credits.