|
|
All the news now and in your digital future
Teaser intended for submission to cable network producer
Posted by MalibuFrank
|
Re: Teaser intended for submission to cable network producer March 11, 2009 02:14AM |
I think it's pretty good. The music is unsurprising, but fits, and it's not overlong. My critiques would be:
- I don't think you mixed up the shots enough in the middle. There's a 20-to-30-second stretch where all I see are fairly generic medium wides on the side or top of the boat, guys holding fishing poles. Got boring after about eight seconds. You have some close-ups of them interacting after that; why not mix them? Also, I'd cast an eye over your footage to see if you have more specific moments. All I see are endless shots of guys at the edge of boats. Not very exciting. Also, don't you have more footage of the shark itself? I know you're not in the water with the thing or anything, but I don't see much that I can use if I were looking for shark footage. Maybe it's just me.
- The ending effects are cheesy. I think you did pretty well on tone on the rest of the piece, and the cheesy effects actually made the piece look cheaper than it was.
- Personally I'd kill the "Five cameras rolling" card. Let the footage sell itself. Then again, maybe stock-footage packages have a different protocol from what I'm used to.
www.derekmok.com
- I don't think you mixed up the shots enough in the middle. There's a 20-to-30-second stretch where all I see are fairly generic medium wides on the side or top of the boat, guys holding fishing poles. Got boring after about eight seconds. You have some close-ups of them interacting after that; why not mix them? Also, I'd cast an eye over your footage to see if you have more specific moments. All I see are endless shots of guys at the edge of boats. Not very exciting. Also, don't you have more footage of the shark itself? I know you're not in the water with the thing or anything, but I don't see much that I can use if I were looking for shark footage. Maybe it's just me.
- The ending effects are cheesy. I think you did pretty well on tone on the rest of the piece, and the cheesy effects actually made the piece look cheaper than it was.
- Personally I'd kill the "Five cameras rolling" card. Let the footage sell itself. Then again, maybe stock-footage packages have a different protocol from what I'm used to.
www.derekmok.com
|
Re: Teaser intended for submission to cable network producer March 11, 2009 10:57PM |
One thing you don't have to worry about...you will get honest opinions in here 
This piece could be much better:
The footage needs to be color corrected / matched and then in my opinion...treated. Crush the blacks / bump up the saturation
I would have gotten way more creative with the titles - cards are stagnant.
I am with Derek...the end FX are cheesy. Takes credibility away from the piece. Lose them. Go with something more organic. You spent the entire shoot outdoors in the sun...use Lens Flares / optics in a creative way.
The "stamp" sound FX on the cards - too harsh. I would have chosen something deeper (as in deep blue sea!). You are painting a picture in peoples' minds. Sometimes NOT showing something and dressing it with the right audio is scarier and more impactful than actually seeing a shark swim around (think JAWS...you never see the shark until more than half way through the movie). Make people THINK that the fisherman are in DANGER.
The "5 cameras rolling" title...4 of them are on deck / one up high so that's not really an impressive fact...all it does is call attention to the shooting and editing which needs tweaking. The editing choices could be better - from one side of the fisherman to the other. Angles are everything and there aren't that many to choose from. They have to be 5 very distinctively different angles to be able to sell that as a "feature". If one of those cameras was under water, then I would sell the cameras in the titles.
When life gives you dilemmas...make dilemmanade.
This piece could be much better:
The footage needs to be color corrected / matched and then in my opinion...treated. Crush the blacks / bump up the saturation
I would have gotten way more creative with the titles - cards are stagnant.
I am with Derek...the end FX are cheesy. Takes credibility away from the piece. Lose them. Go with something more organic. You spent the entire shoot outdoors in the sun...use Lens Flares / optics in a creative way.
The "stamp" sound FX on the cards - too harsh. I would have chosen something deeper (as in deep blue sea!). You are painting a picture in peoples' minds. Sometimes NOT showing something and dressing it with the right audio is scarier and more impactful than actually seeing a shark swim around (think JAWS...you never see the shark until more than half way through the movie). Make people THINK that the fisherman are in DANGER.
The "5 cameras rolling" title...4 of them are on deck / one up high so that's not really an impressive fact...all it does is call attention to the shooting and editing which needs tweaking. The editing choices could be better - from one side of the fisherman to the other. Angles are everything and there aren't that many to choose from. They have to be 5 very distinctively different angles to be able to sell that as a "feature". If one of those cameras was under water, then I would sell the cameras in the titles.
When life gives you dilemmas...make dilemmanade.
Sorry, you do not have permission to post/reply in this forum.
