How to save a turkey and still enjoy Thanksgiving

I know FCP 5 can do wonders, but I really have a turkey on my hands. The movie is eh ... okay, but it needs spiffing up or something. With all the filters under the filter tab, isn't it possible to take a movie that is shot (let's be charitable, shall we?) that's been shot in workmanlike fashion and turn it into an artistic or if that's not easy to define, let's say stylized movie ... even abstract will do.

What procedures can you conjure up if it were your turkey's neck on the butcher's block? LOL

Happy Thanksgiving by the way! We're having salmon -- our adopted tradition. Fish have no brains, did you know? Fish have only a central nervous system -- which isn't exactly a brain. I mean fish have no feelings -- like turkeys for example -- they swim even when they're asleep.

Well, back to cutting my movie; there must be a way to create a no-brainer by some fancy FCP editing tricks?

Turkey is turkey. In a pot pie, in a sandwich, still turkey. You might make it taste a little better but it's still turkey.

I wouldn't look at filters to save your bird. It will be in the cutting and the choice of non picture elements. Music, narration, the overall quality of sound. If there's ever going to be any improvement on your turkey that's where it's going to come from. People are willing to accept workmanlike pictures but not poor sound.
Brevity is also your friend. Be ruthless if the footage stinks. Don't torture your audience any more than you have to, they won't forgive you for that.

So much more one could say but why not...
...Choose your own punchline!!!!
If what you can eat is only about feelings then I am having a
a) lawyer
b) politician
c) vulcan
for thanksgiving next year.
Ba dum dum. Don't forget to tip your waitress and try the buffet, I'll be here all week.

ak
Not a vegetarian because I love animals, but because I really hate vegetables.

I agree with Andrew. Vic, I believe you're looking about this the wrong way. You keep asking how you can stylize your film, but I don't think you have a basis for that kind of design yet. If you did, your questions would be more specific. For example, if you knew that you were going to make this film (whatever it is) in a nouvelle-vague style, then you'd be asking us how to get that black-and-white look, how to achieve film flicker, jump-cutting etc. You need to first do your directing homework and figure out exactly what visual tools you want to use to, well, cook your turkey.

Until you've done that work, your cut isn't good or bad, it isn't flat or stylish. It's just directionless. And until you've explored the editing options, not only are you not ready to move on to effects and filters, but you don't even know whether it is a turkey. Many a time I've taken on a film that looked like a turkey, with a director who's depressed about the results, and we've managed to make the turkey into soup, pie, casserole...so that the people eating it aren't thinking it's a turkey.

If you look at your film with the concept that it's a turkey, it'll probably stay that way. When a film doesn't work, you have to be able to rethink it in a way that works, then shape the footage with that in mind. Focus on the strengths, figure out ways to emphasize them. Focus on the weaknesses, figure out a strategy for hiding them, or turning them into strengths.

> People are willing to accept workmanlike pictures but not poor sound.

I agree with Andrew on principle, but there are many films that prove technical finesse isn't everything: Clerks and The Blair Witch Project, for example. Both films with bad photography, little to no coverage, choppy editing, noisy sound. Clerks remains Kevin Smith's best film despite being the most technically inept one, while the commercial success of Blair Witch speaks for itself, especially compared to the flaccid performance of the sequel. And most modern horror classics are rough around the edges: Halloween, Dawn of the Dead (the 1978 one, of course), and the grungy granddaddy of them all, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Smooth out that whirring chainsaw sound and the dialogue, and the film will actually lose some impact. The cackly sound and 16mm photography added to the grimy feel, and the obnoxious sound design actually gained power from its sonic roughness.


www.derekmok.com

Quote

The movie is eh ... okay, but it needs spiffing up or something.

Here we go again.Try THIS before shooting next time

When life gives you dilemmas...make dilemmanade.

filmman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fish have no brains, did
> you know? Fish have only a central nervous system
> -- which isn't exactly a brain. I mean fish have
> no feelings -- like turkeys for example -- they
> swim even when they're asleep.

Why are we only eating stupid or unfeeling animals? We need to start eating the smart ones before they take over and force us to live in the ocean...Who wants a nice dolphin filet????
I know Matt Groening is with me!!!

Mike, are you suggesting I turn my movie into a Simpsons cartoon? Which filters will do that? LOL

Although I agree with you, Joey, but next time won't help me now. By the way, I didn't try for a turkey, I went for a cinema verite style of filmmaking. I think the film can be saved, it's just that I don't know what's the best approach to take.

Derek, your suggestions as always are very well reasoned. Are you willing to look at the movie?

And, Andrew, yes ... I'm already tired of the music I created in Soundtrack Pro. I wish I could afford a composer who would write something incredible for my movie -- like a Dr. Zhivago music track. LOL ... or seriously, something more subtle or dynamically right for my movie. I'm at a total loss as to what that might be, as you can imagine.

Narration? Too bad Orson Wells isn't around anymore. I could've asked him to narrate it :-) I knew someone who had his movie narrated by Orson. He was able to sell it after that.

> I went for a cinema verite style of filmmaking.

OK, that's a big one. If you want cinéma vérité, then I'm 90 per cent certain that you shouldn't be messing with stylizing filters at all. Vérité requires very dry, naturalistic cinematography and editing. Just look at Cassavetes. For example, Mean Streets
is a gritty film based in reality, but the filmmaking style isn't vérité -- it's too stylish to be. I've done a film like this where the director and I even went for a no-music approach. Worked like a charm; increased the tension in the story and drama rather than weakening it. But that's only because the overall stylistic decision of the film was very clear, and all the elements supported that approach.

> Are you willing to look at the movie?

Sure. Maybe post it on your www.releasing.net website. I'm assuming this one is a different one from the two trailers on there.


www.derekmok.com

filmman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I know FCP 5 can do wonders, but I really have a
> turkey on my hands. The movie is eh ... okay, but
> it needs spiffing up or something. With all the
> filters under the filter tab, isn't it possible to
> take a movie that is shot (let's be charitable,
> shall we?) that's been shot in workmanlike fashion
> and turn it into an artistic or if that's not easy
> to define, let's say stylized movie ... even
> abstract will do.

I do not want to be pessimistic about the content of your movie, but I have also watched you through every painful phase of this film (video) and it would seem that you don't really have the experience to create a film equal to the masters that we are talking about. They, themselves didn't make a good first film. It comes with experience and mistakes.
>
> What procedures can you conjure up if it were your
> turkey's neck on the butcher's block? LOL
>
If you see this as a turkey, at this stage of the film, them you probably need to rethink the entire costruct of this project. Does the edit tell the story that you intended it to do? Music can be made to fill in the slow parts of the visuals but if the emotion of the story is not plain and outspoken, you have missed something.

> Well, back to cutting my movie; there must be a
> way to create a no-brainer by some fancy FCP
> editing tricks?

FCP is a tool. In the hands of a master editor the same footage can tell different stories. It's about the way the sequencer are cut. Timing is everything for visuals. Music makes or breaks a film's presentation.

How many people laughed when George Lucas used classical music in sci-fi Star Wars. John Williams made it work! (nope, don't think Soundtrack can make the same impact)

I don't know, John; what did you have for Thanksgiving? I had Salmon, my daughter had turkey -- we both got sick, and it was an expensive restaurant :-) I'm allergic to salmonella.

I was hoping someone would come up with some helpful suggestions. Andrew suggested narration, music -- I'm inclined to accept that as the best possible approach. I haven't given up on image manipulation though -- not yet; it's too big an element to discard -- not with FCP 5 ... I mean the tool is just too great to ignore. This is what this forum is about -- well, not entirely -- but as far as I'm concerned what's exciting about this forum is that it has the potential to unleash great potential (beyond the immediate expectations of some members). I've seen some interesting trailers and definitely have heard some brilliant remarks. I think that's how it should be.

But, Derek, do you mean I should post the 100 minute movie as an mpeg4 ? We're both in LA; why don't we get together. Although it's a 100 minute movie and if we watch it and talk, it will be a marathon day. Do you want to do this?

> We're both in LA; why don't we get together. Although it's a 100 minute movie and if we
> watch it and talk, it will be a marathon day.

I don't really have time to give free consulting on a feature. Trying to fix a feature-length narrative film is a full-time editing job; just the assessment will take a lot more than a day of watching. Not to mention actually watching the raw footage and the cutting.

If you want to reap the full benefits of a fresh professional eye, I think you need to officially hire an editor instead of trying to do it all yourself. I've gone through the exact same thing in film school -- student filmmakers who hold on to the editing credit for themselves but can't quite take their film to the necessary level. They can get all the notes they want from the editing instructor and their colleagues, but without taking the step to get an actual editor, there's always something missing -- a lack of incentive to take a radical approach to fixing their films. If the film really needs reconstructive surgery, you need someone merciless, and very few directors can be that merciless.


www.derekmok.com

What can I say? When you're right, you're right.

And you're right.

-- Jack Nicholson as Giddes in China Town (Robert Towns, writer/Roman Polanski, director).

Sorry, I didn't mean to be flippant.

I appreciate your comments.

You're right, it takes a strong approach, to rethink the whole movie, and find a restructuring scheme.

I think it's necessary to do that with any film. However, if a film is shot very well, there may be exceptions. I don't want to give examples (they may be misconstrued to mean that I'm comparing myself to this and that) and get into a big discussion.

Suffice it to say that you've been helpful to the extent that you commented, so thank you.

Hi Filmman

the Best thing I can tell you is to --Keep it short --

Shorter is Almost always better--especially with a turkey--

Do it like a good comendian dose-- In a few words and some expersions
They tell you a very short story --

100 min is real long- so set a goal to wack out 30 min--
Take that cut and then trim out 10 to 15 min more -

Then take that cut and wack out 5 to 10 min more --

After you think you have wacked out All you can--
wack out 5 more minutes a couple of times--

You will be surprised how much you can cut out
and still tell the story -- a better story --Jay--

Cut it in half? Arbitrarily?

Of course, the movie can be edited as a one hour, half hour, 5 minute short -- technically.

This was a 100 page screenplay.

A turkey with stuffing and all the trimmings can feed a family of 10.

I know, but it's still turkey :-)

What criteria, approaches will allow me to follow the path of creativity?

Narration and music have been suggested.

How about the addition of graphics? What program would you suggest I learn, Motion or Shake. I know Photoshop.

How about an underground filter? I could invent it :-)

Thanks for the suggestions. I've been told: less is better. But a slice of turkey is still turkey.

Filmman,

using a turkey analogy before Thanksgiving is humorous, but ultimately it doesn't give any real clues to what is wrong with your film, so it's difficult to suggest anything.

Can you be more specific? Is it bad acting, bad camera work, bad script, incomplete footage? I don't even know if your film is a comedy or drama or thriller or horror flick.

"Cut it in half? Arbitrarily?"

Exactly. You don't cut arbitrarily. And you don't apply filters or add graphics or music or narration arbitrarily. Everything is done for a reason. If you can't explain the problem(s), then you can't know which action is a solution.

"What criteria, approaches will allow me to follow the path of creativity?"

Others may have their own ideas, but for me, creativity needs to be organic, coming from the inside out, not from the outside in. Here are the three approaches I would take:

1. Stick with fundamentals. Tell a good story. When you come across a specific piece that has something specific missing, then address it. Don't forget, story goes a long long way.

2. Go back to the very beginning. Why are you making THIS film? What compelled you to want to tell this story. Keep that in the forefront of everything you do. It's that passion that will guide you.

3. Most important - immediately stop thinking of your film as a turkey and stop telling people it's a turkey. I'm not saying to be Pollyannaish and not recognize any problems it has, but you have to respect your film if you are going to edit it. Calling it a turkey, even humorously, does it a huge disservice. And if you don't respect it, no one else, especially an audience, will.

Anyways, those are my .02 cents from high up in the cheap seats :-)

I know I'm stepping in here late in the game but....... Filmman, it seems like you are forever on the quest to find out what "magical filter" is going to make your project an instant hit. I think you need to step back for a moment, walk away from the project and come back with a fresh perspective. You're too close to the picture.

From an audio analogy when I was making records, I used to have artists trying to make their songs more interesting by piling on different effects without paying attention to the SONG. Pardon the expression but you cant polish a turd. No amout of radical soloing or the 10 second delay is going to help a bad song. On the other hand, I have recorded some spectacular pieces with just the singer and a guitar. A GOOD song will always shine.

The same with a film. Work on telling the STORY FIRST. If the story alone is not worth watching, no amount of filters, graphics or fancy titling will save it.

Also take Derek's advise, get some outside assistance away from a forum. We cant see the project as a whole, and without spending time with you, cannot tell you where to go "artistically" with the project. Personally, I never mixed records that I produced and never produced records that I mixed. (ok can't say never, but I tried not to especially on projects that were for sale)

My 2cents
Steve

Boyd, Steve -- thanks! Okay, this is beginning to make sense. It's what I needed to hear ... for the umpteenth time :-) I heard that you have to say something six times before someone hears it.

Okay, well, maybe in my case it's more than that...

I made the film because I liked the characters. It's somewhat of a feminist movie but it was the kind of story that I couldn't write myself. At least that's how I feel about it. If you've seen my trailer at [www.releasing.net] you'll notice that it's about a lady who meets a streetwalker and decides to help her.

So now I have to go back and find out how to bolster that relationship. I'd like to deal with the narrative, the unfolding of the story between these two characters. I may have looked at and concerned myself with too many other characters in the story. If I cut out some parts altogether that might be a way to go. At least I can do it and see how it works. The movie will be more like half an hour but if it works I'll be pleased.

Or I could intercut the different characters and their business a bit more organically, and not worry about "logic" or strict continuity.

But I'll definitely put the movie aside for at least two weeks. I think that is good advice and I may end up working with a different perspective.

Thanks again everybody.