Jump to content


Photo

Does this trailer get you excited to see the film?


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Kyle Cowgill

Kyle Cowgill

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Director

Posted 19 April 2008 - 04:18 PM

I shot a feature for under 10 grand and just cut the theatrical trailer. I'm pleased with it because the score (the composer is great) and it just feels a cut above the stuff I've previously made.



Any comments are appreciated. Thanks!
  • 0

#2 Walter Graff

Walter Graff
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1334 posts
  • Other
  • New York City

Posted 19 April 2008 - 05:01 PM

Far too long for me and a bit discombobulated. It has the mechanics of a feature trailer but not the interest. Hey for under 10k the acting isn't great, sometimes over the top, and the story seems very week, but a good attempt. Music is okay, but the story seems comical/farcical and doesn't fit the music throughout for my tastes.
  • 0

#3 Hemant Tavathia

Hemant Tavathia
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 23 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • New Jersey

Posted 19 April 2008 - 07:45 PM

Trailer is too long. The pacing in the first half of the trailer can be faster. Definitely agree with a lot of what Walter Graff has to say.
  • 0

#4 Chris Burke

Chris Burke
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1675 posts
  • Boston, MA

Posted 21 April 2008 - 11:52 AM

I shot a feature for under 10 grand and just cut the theatrical trailer. I'm pleased with it because the score (the composer is great) and it just feels a cut above the stuff I've previously made.



Any comments are appreciated. Thanks!



I think you should stick with the geeky guy who kidnapped the girl against his will. They are funny and there is something engaging about him. Otherwise, I agree with what has already been said. To be honest I tuned out, wasn't interested in it. For under ten thousand, you can get professional actors. SAG has many contracts that cater to the indie producer. To dispel any falsehoods you may have heard, having a SAG contract does not cost you money, just lots of paper work. Any money you do have to spend is already being spent on your production (copyrighting the script, production insurance...) No, you don't always have to pay the actors, depends upon the contract. Certainly at your price point you probably wouldn't have to. I have made many shorts and now am getting into features, cast all with pros, one with a name actor. Having been a union actor for over 15 years myself and now producing and directing my own material, I can tell you from experience, CASTING IS VERY IMPORTANT. If the actors are not believable, then you don't have a show that people want to watch. This may turn out to be an expensive film lesson, but don't let it stop you. YOu made a feature, which in itself is a feat. Bravo on your efforts, please let us know what you do next.

Chris

Edited by Chris Burke, 21 April 2008 - 11:52 AM.

  • 0

#5 Mark Williams

Mark Williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 811 posts
  • Director
  • United Kingdom

Posted 21 April 2008 - 01:00 PM

I shot a feature for under 10 grand and just cut the theatrical trailer. I'm pleased with it because the score (the composer is great) and it just feels a cut above the stuff I've previously made.



Any comments are appreciated. Thanks!


Hi Kyle

Yes I'd watch it. Looks very good. Well done for getting out there and making it.
  • 0

#6 Jonathan Bowerbank

Jonathan Bowerbank
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2815 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 21 April 2008 - 01:17 PM

Watched the trailer and the question remains, what is it about?
  • 0

#7 Nate Downes

Nate Downes
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1638 posts
  • Florida, USA

Posted 21 April 2008 - 01:35 PM

In a word, No.

I had a detailed answer, then realized it might come off as mean spirited, so I'll trim it down as such. I saw someone with not enough experience behind the camera, in over their heads. I can't recommend it, for while there were some gems, there were far too many points of confusion, or technical issues, to get me excited. If you'd like my more detailed answer, I saved it and can repost it if you'd like.

Edited by Nate Downes, 21 April 2008 - 01:39 PM.

  • 0

#8 Mark Williams

Mark Williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 811 posts
  • Director
  • United Kingdom

Posted 21 April 2008 - 01:57 PM

In a word, No.

I had a detailed answer, then realized it might come off as mean spirited, so I'll trim it down as such. I saw someone with not enough experience behind the camera, in over their heads. I can't recommend it, for while there were some gems, there were far too many points of confusion, or technical issues, to get me excited. If you'd like my more detailed answer, I saved it and can repost it if you'd like.

I'm not sure but I think Kyle knows its not a professional formulaic hollywood film and although we have a film language sound recordists who know how to record sound for film I think a filmmaker is someone who tells a story that gets people interested. It did interest me. I didnt know what the story was about but I wanted to. I could see characters who were not typecst who were unpredictable. The first mad max film was like that. Im not saying the film was going to be good it may not. But I found kyles own style of storytelling liberating original and probably lots of fun.
  • 0

#9 Mark Williams

Mark Williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 811 posts
  • Director
  • United Kingdom

Posted 21 April 2008 - 02:18 PM

I'm not sure but I think Kyle knows its not a professional formulaic hollywood film and although we have a film language sound recordists who know how to record sound for film I think a filmmaker is someone who tells a story that gets people interested. It did interest me. I didnt know what the story was about but I wanted to. I could see characters who were not typecst who were unpredictable. The first mad max film was like that. Im not saying the film was going to be good it may not. But I found kyles own style of storytelling liberating original and probably lots of fun.


On reflection and seeing how the shots were staged I was perhaps influenced by other remarks actually most of the shota were well staged perhaps more use of a dolly though. The acting looked like it had legs too.
  • 0

#10 Nate Downes

Nate Downes
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1638 posts
  • Florida, USA

Posted 21 April 2008 - 03:20 PM

On reflection and seeing how the shots were staged I was perhaps influenced by other remarks actually most of the shota were well staged perhaps more use of a dolly though. The acting looked like it had legs too.

Oh agreed there, the acting itself looked interesting.

I saw nothing technically wrong with it, just rough, unfinished, needs more post work. Trimming down of the edits, some bits were kept for too long.
  • 0

#11 Sherri Johnson

Sherri Johnson

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Chicago

Posted 22 April 2008 - 09:21 AM

After about 1:30 I was wondering what it was about...
  • 0

#12 Paul Bruening

Paul Bruening

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2858 posts
  • Producer
  • Oxford, Mississippi

Posted 22 April 2008 - 09:56 AM

Hello Kyle,

Trailer cutting is a specialized craft. In Hellywood, there are companies that only cut trailers.

You may be too close to the project to get the needed detachment to create a more effective trailer. You see, trailers don't even have to be about what the movie is actually about. A trailer cutter takes what's available from the movie's footage to create a coherent mini-movie. That mini-movie has to achieve two goals:

1) Be coherent and sensible enough to engage the viewer's psychological processes. To do that, there has to be a recognizable pattern to the unfolding elements. If you study trailers, you'll get a sense of loosely repeated forms. I'm guessing that the cutters have some kind of in-industry lingo for those patterns. Within those patterns, you want to plug in available elements that compel the viewer to invest themselves in the mini-movie. Even when the content is slow and predictably boring, the shape and pieces of classical story telling are often enough to draw the viewer in. That leads to the second goal:

2) Give them beginning, middle, but not end. You tell them everything they need to get strongly invested. Then you imply or indirectly promise a wonderful end that you don't let them have until they go to the movie (paying for the privilege first, of course).

A trailer might seem like it has something to do with movies. But, that's a deception that viewers believe. Your job, as the trailer cutter, is to be the psychological equivalent of a c**k-tease. Your job is to get those butts into the seats for the actual movie. If you can't do that, then you're not making a trailer.
  • 0

#13 Kyle Cowgill

Kyle Cowgill

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Director

Posted 27 May 2008 - 01:22 AM

Thanks for the comments guys. Overall, not just this site, I received very mixed opinions. I know I'm going to have to cut a new trailer. For where I am as a filmmaker, I liked the effort of the first trailer. But I was too attached to all the various elements of the film to really focus on the most important stuff.

The geeky guy who kidnapped the girl against his will is the main character. The movie follows him more than the trailer does. He's also an unbelievable actor so the final trailer will follow him more.

I think if you guys saw the final movie you'd think it's fun. At least I hope so. One guy here said it looks like I'm in over my head, and there might be a little truth to that, but I learned so much that I'm ready for the next one. I just graduated from college and put all the small amount of money I had into a movie and this is the result. I don't really have an ego about it so if you hate it I understand. I just wanna learn, and I'm sure many people here are more experienced than me.
  • 0

#14 Kyle Cowgill

Kyle Cowgill

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Director

Posted 27 May 2008 - 01:30 AM

I tried to edit my above post, but oh well. Here's what I meant the last paragraph to say:

I hope that the movie is at least fun. One guy here said it looks like I'm in over my head, and there might be a little truth to that, but I learned so much that I'm ready for the next one. I just graduated from college and put all the small amount of money I had into a movie and this is the result. I don't really have an ego about it so if you hate it I understand. To be brutally honest, although I love the movie and worked really hard on it, it's pretty much an elaborate exercise for me and my friend. I did all the visual and story stuff (write, direct, edit, color correct, etc..) and he did all the sound stuff (foley, effects, score, etc...). We both knew getting into it that's it's a stepping stone to doing what we really want to. But I don't mean to give an excuse for the movie - we both tried our best and hope people enjoy it.

I just wanna learn, and I'm sure many people here are more experienced than me. So thanks for helping me out.
  • 0


CineLab

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Metropolis Post

Technodolly

The Slider

Visual Products

Ritter Battery

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Willys Widgets

Paralinx LLC

Tai Audio

rebotnix Technologies

Opal

Aerial Filmworks

Abel Cine

Glidecam

FJS International, LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineTape

Wooden Camera

Metropolis Post

FJS International, LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

The Slider

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Tai Audio

rebotnix Technologies

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Aerial Filmworks

Ritter Battery

Visual Products

Technodolly

Wooden Camera

CineTape

CineLab

Glidecam

Abel Cine

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Opal

Paralinx LLC

Willys Widgets