|
|
This topic comprises 6 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
|
|
Author
|
Topic: my trailer for Desperado
|
Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002
|
posted 04-15-2007 02:08 PM
quote: Tim Reed
FWIW, SVA is a pretty darned prestigious institution, and a degree from there carries a lot of weight.
Yes, but to use that degree as the deciding factor on who's right or wrong in a case where it's very clear that there isn't even a right or wrong is just stupid. Bobby definitively stated that editing fake trailers (and apparently in general) is not art. I countered that it was a matter of opinion, but I think it is. Bobby agreed with me that it is a matter of opinion, but then, just like a bad trailer, added a "stinger" to the end of his post by saying that his opinion is more qualified.
When I was in junior high, I umpired T-Ball games. One time, a kid swung and completely missed the ball, but hit the tee so hard that it sent the ball into play. The rule book clearly stated that if the batter did not make contact with the ball, it was automatically ruled a strike. So I did that, and got into a huge argument with the coach. He didn't have much to go on, since I had the rule book in my hand to show him exactly why I made the call. When he realized that there was no way to win the argument with facts, he said, "Just listen to me, kid. I've been playing this game a lot longer than you have." I'll never forget that.
My point is, if Bobby wants to use the wisdom that he has acquired on the subject of art in his time at SVA, as well as his on-the-job experience, I more than welcome it. These debates are supposed to be educational. Darryl just schooled my ass last week in the GRINDHOUSE thread. But to use that experience as the reason why he's right and I'm wrong is beyond ridiculous, and I won't accept it for a second.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 04-15-2007 02:42 PM
quote: Brad Miller
One of my little hobbies is remixing music tracks from stereo into 6 channel audio. It takes a bit of time, but the end result is pretty cool and even on a 2 channel mixdown, it creates an entirely new mix of the song. What is that hurting? I think it's essentially the same thing.
Brad, you're actually doing something different with the material. There's a lot of very tricky interpretation that goes into transforming a 2-channel audio mix into a 6-channel surround mix. I don't think what Mark is doing with his trailers is any different from just another Desperado trailer.
quote: Mike Schindler
My point is, if Bobby wants to use the wisdom that he has acquired on the subject of art in his time at SVA, as well as his on-the-job experience, I more than welcome it. But to use that experience as the reason why he's right and I'm wrong is beyond ridiculous, and I won't accept it for a second.
I did that because all you seem to be doing is challenging everything I have written in knee jerk devil's advocate style (not just in this thread, but others as well). I end up having to repeat the same things over and over to you. And that comes off like you just don't think I know what I am talking about. Because of that, I felt perfectly justified in bringing up my credentials on that very subject. I do know what I am talking about when it comes to art and what kinds of things can be rightly complimented as true works of art. If you want to reject that, fine by me.
If you expect me to come around to your way of thinking on this topic, you're going to have to try a lot harder and come up with some actual statements that support your side of the discussion instead of just telling me I am wrong.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002
|
posted 04-15-2007 04:29 PM
Bobby, I'm sorry if you think I'm out to get you, because that's not the case. I think that perception comes from the fact that we tend to post in the same threads. When we agree on something, I'm not going to post, "Here, here, Bobby! ![[beer]](graemlins/beer.gif) ," because that's generally a waste of time. However, I am going to challenge you on stuff I disagree with. Just like you did in this thread and others. But I'm not singling you out. I'm an equal-opportunity debator.
Also, I'm not trying to simply tell you you're wrong, and I'm not optimistic in changing your way of thinking. As we both agree, this is a matter of opinion. I'm trying to figure out the reasons behind your way of thinking, because they go completely against what I believe. That's hard to do when you're not directly answering the questions posed.
Here's what I've gathered from this thread: You do not consider cutting trailers for pre-existing movies to be a worthwhile activity because you're working off of someone else's movie. In order for editing to be worthwhile, it needs to be an original work.
What I'm trying to say is that editing is its own thing. Where the source material comes from has nothing to do with the act of editing itself. From an editor's perspective, the origin of the footage used is irrelevant, and what that footage was used for in the past cannot invalidate the editor's work in the present.
You seem to disagree with this for the reasons stated above. An editor cannot claim authorship of the movie he's cutting a trailer for. That's true. But it's also true that he cannot claim authorship of the footage shot for, say, a student film. What he can claim authorship of, in both cases, is the cut of the footage that he makes.
After stating all this, it seems that you still disagree, and that in actuality, you believe that an editor can only claim authorship of a cut if someone else hasn't cut that footage first.
I disagree with that. It seems that the standard you apply to editors does not apply to actors performing well-known works. Why the double-standard? How is an editor's interpretation of previously released material any different from an actor's?
And what about something like TOUCH OF EVIL? Without really adding or subtracting any footage, Walter Murch, commonly considered to be a god among editors, recut the movie to better suit Orson Welles' original vision. This process has been fairly well-documented, including all of the creative interpretations that Murch had to make of Welles' notes. Do you consider this to be a new creation? Because the motion picture academic community does. And if this is a new creation, then certainly trailer-cutting, whether it be amateur or professional, is as well, because it has all of the elements present in Murch's work, while adding another dimension, time compression.
As far as what is art and what's not, our opinion certainly differs. I believe that art is defined by medium. If you start breaking it down further, bringing in things like content, intent, venue, length, etc., you run into some really sticky territory, and have to start drawing some really vague lines. If CITIZEN KANE is considered to be a work of art, then everything else in that medium, in this case motion pictures, is as well. That includes real trailers, Mark's trailers, commercials, music videos, surveillance videos, wedding movies, etc. Now, there's good art, and there's bad art. But it's all art. Though I would also say that "art" should not be put on a pedestal merely for being "art." As far as I'm concerned, there is no positive or negative connotation attached to that word.
I know that you don't agree with my viewpoint, but I've spent a good long time thinking about it over the years, and that's the conclusion I've come to. I'd also like to say that I reached that conclusion in spite of what I was taught in school, not because of it. What school taught me was how to think, not what to think (although it tried its damnedest to do that to). That's a very important difference, especially when it comes to art. Also, I'm not under the impression that I'm going to change your mind on the subject, and there's no way that anyone could change mine over the course of a 5-page thread on the internet. The subject is way too complex for that.
And to be fair to Mark, since this is his thread, I'd like to elaborate on my critique of his trailer. The trailer itself does not stand out, but that says something about it right there. It's not great, but it's also not at all bad. I was really quite impressed with the editorial skills you exhibited. It seems that you have a good sense timing, which is ultimately one of the most important traits in an editor. If I were to make a movie and needed someone to cut it, I wouldn't hesitate to ask you. It's certainly way better than most of the stuff that comes out of film school editing classes. That shit is usually painful to watch. I haven't watched your other stuff yet, but I will, and get back to you.
quote: Tim Reed
[yawn] Okay you win. You're right and he's wrong.
Tim, my whole point is that there is no right or wrong.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Strube
Master Film Handler
Posts: 322
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Registered: Feb 2007
|
posted 04-15-2007 04:32 PM
quote: Bobby Henderson
Brad, you're actually doing something different with the material. There's a lot of very tricky interpretation that goes into transforming a 2-channel audio mix into a 6-channel surround mix. I don't think what Mark is doing with his trailers is any different from just another Desperado trailer.
Hahaha wow it keeps getting worse and worse. I suppose nothing with video editing is tricky... getting those dialogue cuts just right, or making the video mesh perfectly with the audio cues. Or shit - even getting the encoding right. That's half the battle right there if you take a look at many other people's hackjob encodes. Have you not seen the world of fan-made trailers online? For the most part it's a wasteland... people adding different soundtracks to existing trailers or making up lame montages to their favorite Linkin Park track. I wonder what reasons Mr. Bobby would come up with as to why my DJ mixes are just like everyone else's, but that would take even more of our art major's time. Oh, and where's that other Desperado trailer that this is just like? I'd like to know the template I used for this, because apparently I forgot and somehow thought I came up with my own structure for telling the story. Silly me. (The basic structure of the trailer emulating other action trailers doesn't really count as a good point to me... that's what I was going for in the first place, because I love a well-made action trailer.)
quote: Frank Dubrois
Call me what you like. YOUR less important to me than what I flushed down the toilet yesterday ![[bs]](graemlins/bs.gif)
Makes me wonder what you do with your , if I'm even less important, yet you bother writing messages to me.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Strube
Master Film Handler
Posts: 322
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Registered: Feb 2007
|
posted 04-15-2007 04:49 PM
quote: Mike Schindler
And to be fair to Mark, since this is his thread, I'd like to elaborate on my critique of his trailer. The trailer itself does not stand out, but that says something about it right there. It's not great, but it's also not at all bad. I was really quite impressed with the editorial skills you exhibited. It seems that you have a good sense timing, which is ultimately one of the most important traits in an editor. If I were to make a movie and needed someone to cut it, I wouldn't hesitate to ask you. It's certainly way better than most of the stuff that comes out of film school editing classes. That shit is usually painful to watch. I haven't watched your other stuff yet, but I will, and get back to you.
Cool... thanks! I really wasn't going for anything more than that, and to surpass the official trailer, which is basically a montage set to music. I believe it has one line of dialogue, and then the narrator saying "Desperado" at the end, which I lifted for my trailer. This was my 5th or 6th video edit EVER. This was also the first time I edited using a full movie instead of other trailers or short clips as the source. I understand Bobby saying how I should try to do something "new" with the material, but as far as specifically Desperado goes - this is something very new for that movie, and very new for me. I guess when I become more of an ace editor I'll be making those breakthrough amazingly original trailers that make people go WOW. But, in the meantime... I think that's quite good for such a beginner.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Strube
Master Film Handler
Posts: 322
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Registered: Feb 2007
|
posted 04-15-2007 11:19 PM
Then just say that you're not impressed with the trailer and be done with it. I've not tried to make this edit sound amazing or anything, my only real beef with the criticism of the actual trailer is how it's emulating other action trailers and doesn't really do anything new... which is pretty much what I set out to do. That's why I don't see it as a criticism. Beyond that, attacking my reasons for being involved in such a hobby really does nothing for anyone but invoke endless pages of pointless debate. The same crap happened in my original thread that got locked -- I asked for advice on an interview to be a projectionist, I got a little good advice, but was immediately jumped on for thinking my interest in related home technologies might have anything at all to do with an interest in projecting. (Immediately jumping to an assumption that I think I'd be some projectionist gift from the heavens because I notice details, and already know plenty more about this than most ushers going in who will end up getting "promoted" one day. Damn me for actually having an interest!) That also was completely pointless, and helped achieve nothing but more pages of endless debate and animosity.
As for the claim that this trailer impresses my unimpressive friends... I'll link you to the first place I posted my trailer. These people are hardly new to the concept of trailers... that would be one the largest and most popular movie trailer sites online. They seemed to like it, but then again they actually like trailers to begin with, and don't feel a need to let me know that doing it in the first place was somehow pointless. In the larger scheme of things, if this ends up going nowhere, it just might be. I still enjoyed doing it, and enjoyed seeing the result. Plenty of people on that site enjoyed it quite a bit as well. That's far from pointless.
http://www.movie-list.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6739
Frank is for once almost correct, although I'm not exactly desperate for validation from you people. The whole reason I posted this trailer here in the first place was to get to know you guys better, and show you something else that I'm interested in doing that's a bit related to the industry. The other thread seriously derailed and I felt like I got off on the wrong foot here. I can now clearly see you people have no intention of actually being civil, and every single time I post here will end in an attack of some sort. Even when I simply added to the closings/openings thread with some pictures of the Majestic's construction, I get a snide remark about my job and end up having to defend myself again.
Go out and get some sun, I think the booth is making you guys grumpy.
| 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
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[sleep]](graemlins/sleep.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic