|
|
This topic comprises 6 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
|
|
Author
|
Topic: my trailer for Desperado
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 04-14-2007 01:04 PM
What ever people do for their own hobby is fine as long as they're not hurting themselves, anyone else or doing something illegal.
But when you want others to check out something made from that hobby, you're going to have to deal with criticism -even if it is pretty hard to digest.
My freshman year in art school (what we called "foundation year") was a pretty brutal transition. So many of my classmates, and myself, were all very used to the glory of being the most talented artists in our various high schools. When we got to art school we were met with this message: "Hey. Guess what? Your work is shit!" Various teachers as well as other classmates would pile on the criticism, often making very valid points in their arguments. I'd feel like a worthless idiot after that, but it made me try harder to come up with more creative solutions to visual problems.
quote: Mike Schindler
Yes, but the trailer you are creating is a new work. That finished movie is the equivalent of the raw footage you receive as the editor of a movie.
No, it isn't.
quote: Mike Schindler
But we're not talking about video production skills. We're talking about editing skills. And as an editor, I believe it is more educational to cut stuff that you haven't shot, because you don't enter into it with any preconceived notions. Hell, when I'm cutting a movie I don't even like to go on set. On the flip side, if we were talking about video production, I'd argue that it's best not to cut your own footage, because an editor can bring a different perspective to your footage which you may not have seen.
I don't buy that at all. It sounds a little like, "close your eyes and use the force, Luke."
Any camera person is shooting in blind ignorance if he doesn't realize what kinds of footage actually works in post production. Usually such conditions are not allowed to persist in any professional environment because anyone who has ever worked in a TV station or video production crew often has had to wear "multiple hats" and learns, whether he wants to or not, about what kinds of camera moves to make.
The same goes for editors. Just about any professional editor has picked up a video camera or film camera and shot his own material at some time or another for cutting purposes. Filmmaking is a very collaborative endeavor and you'll only benefit by knowing the perspective of as many crew members as possible.
Certain editors move from that job to directing movies. Start Baird is one name that immediately comes to mind. Or some guys end up doing both jobs, like Robert Rodrigquez. I don't normally agree with that practice on major productions, but I imagine Rodriquez has very specific ideas in his mind on how he wants the movie to play and if he has the time and drive to do both demanding jobs then more power to him.
quote: Mike Schindler
So what? You should just admit defeat and give up?
Yes. Because it's a complete waste of time.
It's not "art," it's not a new idea and it's not even something you would be able to use as a "reel" to get any kind of video production job (due in a large part you're dealing with copyrighted work owned by someone else).
I'm certainly not going to put artwork into a portfolio built upon what other people did. Only my own creations need to go in there. I can admire the work of others without feeling the need to waste any of my time trying to re-purpose it.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002
|
posted 04-14-2007 02:41 PM
quote: Bobby Henderson
No, it isn't.
How is it not? That seems like a pretty direct correlation to me.
quote: Bobby Henderson
I don't buy that at all. It sounds a little like, "close your eyes and use the force, Luke."
No, it's not blind luck. It's about approaching the material from a different perspective. I was cutting a movie for a friend of mine, and in one scene, he had shot this elaborate dolly shot, which looked great. But it didn't belong in the movie. So I showed him my cut, and he said, "You didn't put the dolly shot in there." I said, "Yeah, I didn't have anywhere to put it." "It took me, like, 2 hours to get that shot," he responded. I said, "Yeah, these things happen. I can put it back in, but I'll have to recut the entire scene." So I did, and he watched it, and said, "No, the first cut was better. Go with that."
And for every story like that one, there's another where the other way does work better, and you go with that instead. The point is not that a director is incapable of cutting together a scene. It's that there are different ways to go about doing things, and it's better when you're not locked into this myopic point of view.
When I direct, I like to have someone else make the first cut while I sit in the other room watching THE COSBY SHOW. Then I go over that cut with them, steal their best ideas, and recut the movie primarily by myself.
quote: Bobby Henderson
Certain editors move from that job to directing movies. Start Baird is one name that immediately comes to mind.
And he leaves U.S. MARSHALLS and STAR TREK: NEMESIS in his wake. ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
No, I see your point. But I'll also point out that Baird doesn't cut his own movies, either. Neither does Robert Wise, and he cut freakin' CITIZEN KANE!
Robert Rodriguez is this totally anomolous super filmmaker who can apparently do everything. He doesn't count. But again, I see your point, though I think someone like Steven Soderbergh is more of what I consider to be a great editing director. His movies also support what I was saying before about having multiple viewpoints. He has a regular stable of editors, yet all of his films are cut relatively the same way. It's a great example of director and editor working as a team.
quote: Bobby Henderson
Yes. Because it's a complete waste of time.
Then why is it an exercise which is practiced in film schools around the world? I've cut scenes for TV shows and movies in editing classes, I've also adapted short stories into screenplays in writing classes, and directed scenes from movies in production classes. The value is in having all of the elements in place in order practice whatever the specific craft at hand is without compromise. Fully producing your own material is very educational, but once you mess one thing up (which you inevitably will), it makes it a lot harder to even try to do the other things.
quote: Bobby Henderson
It's not "art," it's not a new idea and it's not even something you would be able to use as a "reel" to get any kind of video production job (due in a large part you're dealing with copyrighted work owned by someone else).
Obviously, people's definition of art varies, but I would consider it to be art. What's to stop you from making it a new idea? And don't quote me on this, but I'm fairly certain that you can use copyrighted material on a reel.
quote: Bobby Henderson
I'm certainly not going to put artwork into a portfolio built upon what other people did. Only my own creations need to go in there. I can admire the work of others without feeling the need to waste any of my time trying to re-purpose it.
By this rationale, an actor should not be allowed to put a scene from HAMLET on their reel. Wouldn't that be a re-purposing of Shakespeare's work? Should Stuart Baird not be allowed to cite his work on CASINO ROYALE on his resume, since he didn't direct that movie? Better yet, should the guy who cut the trailers for CASINO ROYALE be allowed to put those on his reel?
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Strube
Master Film Handler
Posts: 322
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Registered: Feb 2007
|
posted 04-14-2007 02:49 PM
Bobby, I found your response mostly interesting and somewhat agreeable until those last 3 paragraphs. I couldn't use something like the Desperado trailer as a reel? Really? What do you think club DJ's do to get gigs? They have mixes full of copyrighted material, even on their public websites! Granted, it's gray area, but for the most part they aren't hassled since they're not directly selling those mixes (they're up as an example of work, to get gigs), and because they're not straight up posting full songs. Same applies to this.
I'm not going to argue how this is in fact an art, since it seems your mind is pretty made up about this. I will however point out there's even a yearly trailer awards show for the most creative and well-made movie trailers (you can see it if you have HDNet). If you'll admit that a well-edited film is a work of art, then I don't see how the same can't apply to a well-edited trailer. It's editing for a different method of delivery and to a different point - to get the plot across and make you want to see the movie in 2 min 30 sec or less.
Judging by your earlier post, I think you've just been made bitter by all the crummy trailers out there. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
quote: Mike Schindler
Then why is it an exercise which is practiced in film schools around the world? I've cut scenes for TV shows and movies in editing classes, I've also adapted short stories into screenplays in writing classes, and directed scenes from movies in production classes. The value is in having all of the elements in place in order practice whatever the specific craft at hand is without compromise. Fully producing your own material is very educational, but once you mess one thing up (which you inevitably will), it makes it a lot harder to even try to do the other things.
I've got a friend going to Purdue who's already had plenty of assignments just like this. Guess who he came to for trailer music help.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002
|
posted 04-14-2007 03:33 PM
quote: Bobby Henderson
I already explaned those differences earlier.
Your explanation was that the movie is not your creation. My counterpoint was that a trailer editor is not claiming the movie as his creation any more than a film editor would claim the raw footage as his creation. Finished Movie is to Trailer as Raw Footage is to Movie. This is a very basic concept. Am I making sense to anyone else?
quote: Bobby Henderson
Show me where they're making students do this.
I've heard of this many times. One example off the top of my head is Boston College. My friend's girlfriend had to do this for a class.
quote: Bobby Henderson
Normally you only get to cut original footage you shot or stock footage as part of editing projects.
That sounds pretty lame. In my time at Columbia College Chicago, in addition to cutting student films, I also cut scenes from EARLY EDITION, HIGHLANDER: THE SERIES, LAW & ORDER, FALCON CREST, and this movie called TEMPTATION starring Jeff Fahey and Alison Doody, from the director of MIGHTY MORPHIN' POWER RANGERS.
quote: Bobby Henderson
You're entitled to your own opinion. But as someone with a four year art degree and many years of experience doing graphics work I feel my own opinion on what can be defined as "art" is a little more qualified.
Well, you certainly have the required amount of pretention.
quote: Bobby Henderson
Good God, Mike, you're really reaching there. An actor's performance is his own work. That kind of example just isn't comparable or even logical to this movie trailers thing.
Again, I see it as a direct correlation. An Actor's Performance = An Editor's Cut.
As a side note, I was just discussing this thread with a friend of mine who teaches film at DePaul University, and he said that every year there is a competition held by the Assistant Editor's Union to cut together the best trailers. I don't know if this is true or not. I didn't even know there was an Assitant Editor's Union. But it makes sense.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 04-14-2007 07:37 PM
quote: Mark Strube
I couldn't use something like the Desperado trailer as a reel? Really? What do you think club DJ's do to get gigs?
That's opening a different can of worms regarding the lack of originality in lots of rap and hip hip music in that it's largely riding on the coat tails of previously released music (sampling, remixes, etc.).
And yes, I would advise you not to use something like that Desperado trailer as an example of your work to use in getting an editor's job. You'll always have to explain that it was not actually used in the film's marketing campaign. And that will risk getting a negative reaction similar to mine. You would be better off using material they've never seen rather than something familiar. That will also work to allow the person to actually see your editing style, rather than have it masked by some Hollywood movie made by other people.
quote: Mark Strube
I'm not going to argue how this is in fact an art, since it seems your mind is pretty made up about this. I will however point out there's even a yearly trailer awards show for the most creative and well-made movie trailers (you can see it if you have HDNet). If you'll admit that a well-edited film is a work of art, then I don't see how the same can't apply to a well-edited trailer
You're trying imply that I think ALL movie trailers are bad? Wrong.
I'm talking about the differences between a real, legitimate movie trailer actually used in a movie's marketing campaign versus something someone else did years after the fact without any kind of official capacity or practical purpose. The Golden Trailer Awards show you mention hands out awards to real movie trailers that were used in support of a movie release.
I do find some movie trailers to be pretty entertaining. But many of them are forgettable and certainly don't qualify as "art." With that condition existing among real, legit movie trailers, how can I go along with someone calling a home-spun unofficial trailer that doesn't bring anything new to the table "art"?
quote: Mark Strube
Ha sorry dude, but nobody's opinion on what "art" is can be qualified.
That's only going to work in a "Utopian" society where everyone has equal levels of intelligence. We don't live in any such world. Some people will have opinions that are more plausible because they are supported by things like education and experience.
quote: Mark Strube
Here's an idea - go and add that degree and experience information to your forum signature, so we know to take everything you type here even more seriously, since your opinion counts so much more.
Here's a better idea. Be prepared to take criticism when posting something for everyone to see and asking for feedback on it. Don't expect everyone to kiss your ass.
On top of that, you should be glad people like myself have bothered to spend time offering the feedback. You'll learn more from that than people just saying, "yeah, it's great."
I think Brad had it right on the critique of your trailer. There's nothing new happening there. It looks like any other movie trailer I've seen a million times. And that underscores my reaction of "what's the point?" I'm not the only one saying that in this thread either.
quote: Mark Strube
I don't mean to be an ass here, but really? You're going to use the "I'm more qualified" thing to add weight to your side of a debate that's purely based in opinion?
I think I have a better idea than Mike of what qualifies as "art," having actually studied the subject. Some expert art historian or film historian could certainly weigh in on this subject and teach me a thing or two.
quote: Mark Strube
There's nothing more subjective than art - someone with all of your experience should know that more than anyone.
That's the popular defense I hear from no talent hacks in the graphics business trying to justify their presence in that field. They can't do the work to professional standards. So they fall back on that "all art is subjective" crutch.
Someone with my kind of experience also knows when some things fall into the category of "craft" instead of "art." There is lots of "bad art" out there as well as poorly executed dreck that doesn't qualify as any kind of art at all.
I'll also add there's lot of respected art critics out there who are not afraid to judge lots of different works on their levels of merit, innovation and success. They don't pull punches when the work fails, isn't innovative, is parroting style and fashion or just isn't inspired at all.
quote: Mark Strube
In a discussion like this it really needs to be kept to a debate where points are made as to why it does or why it doesn't count as art... you're turning it into a pissing contest.
You're only interpreting it as a "pissing contest" because I am firm in my point of view and also having to endure the circular track in Mike's responses.
If I just wanted to be pissy about it, I could have just kept things brief and used Mike Heenan's popular response:
![[sleep]](graemlins/sleep.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002
|
posted 04-14-2007 09:20 PM
quote: Bobby Henderson
I think I have a better idea than Mike of what qualifies as "art," having actually studied the subject.
If we're going to use those ridiculous standards as "qualifications" for what is or is not considered a valid argument, then shouldn't mine have some merit too, seeing as how I have a degree in film?
Also, how are my arguments circular? Here's how I see them going down, correct me if I'm wrong:
Mike: Here's what I think.
Bobby: I disagree with that. Here's why.
Mike: That's true, but it doesn't apply to what I'm saying.
Bobby: Yes it does.
Mike: How?
Bobby: I already told you.
Mike: You already told me your point. But you haven't told me how it applies.
Bobby: Now you're talking in circles.
You say you're firm in your point of view, but when you try to defend it, it becomes clear that you're either not understanding what it is I'm trying to say, or being intentionally vague. It's really frustrating. It's like talking to my uncle about the difference between letterbox and pan & scan.
But I also want to say that I'm not taking this argument personally, and I hope you're not either. The debates that we seem to always have here are valid and fun. And you know they've reached a certain level of legitimacy when Heenan feels the need to chime in.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Mark Strube
Master Film Handler
Posts: 322
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Registered: Feb 2007
|
posted 04-15-2007 12:00 AM
Exactly! As interesting as this is to read, I didn't post this trailer to validate myself as some amazing editor, or ask all of you how worthwhile you think that activity is. I find it interesting that's the first thing many of you jumped to, while only a few people actually bothered to write their thoughts on the trailer edit itself - and very short thoughts at that. (Oh and for the record, I was referring to electronica DJ's, which I am, I cannot stand hip-hop for the most part.)
quote: Bobby Henderson
You would be better off using material they've never seen rather than something familiar. That will also work to allow the person to actually see your editing style, rather than have it masked by some Hollywood movie made by other people.
Are you sure about that? Seems to me if they saw an edit I made from a movie that they're familiar with, then they could REALLY see my editing style, since they could see more of my thought process in arranging cuts and such. If it's from some nebulous student film that nobody knows about, how is the craft I've applied to that going to stand out? If I were to pursue this, I would not be getting into the actual feature length film editing position, I'd be more interested in the advertising portion of that - for which making edits of existing movies is perfect. Sorry.
quote: Bobby Henderson
how can I go along with someone calling a home-spun unofficial trailer that doesn't bring anything new to the table "art"?
Second time now, so listen really carefully. I never called my trailers art, and openly admit to them being far from perfect. I was referring to trailer editing as a whole being an art - in fact I even specified some less than others.
quote: Bobby Henderson
Be prepared to take criticism when posting something for everyone to see and asking for feedback on it. Don't expect everyone to kiss your ass.
It's also not feedback on the trailer - at all. I really am not very interested in explaining WHY I like to do these trailers... your argument, overall, is that since it's not from an "unseen" work, and since it reminds you so much of other action trailers (which I consider an achievement), it's pointless. That affects me how? You're not going to instantly change what I like to do in my spare time, or how good I feel when I've finished a nice edit. How about instead of wasting your time critiquing the reasons I'm doing this in the first place, spend some time on telling me what you would've done differently, what you like to see in trailer edits, how you think a particular edit should've been done. If you would've done nothing at all in the first place, just go on and post that, and be on your merry. Actually add something useful to the conversation instead of just belittling my hobby.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 6 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[thumbsup]](graemlins/thumbsup.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic