Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Short Film- 'Electric TV. Static Light. Ebullient Man.'

Comments

  • #2
    Cianos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Cianos


    you obviously have a bunch of ideas in there but nothing that actually lets the viewer understand what you're trying to say. it may make sense to you, but maybe not to anyone else.


  • #3
    jed490
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17 ✭jed490


    Cianos,
    Thats a very good point. Some people have however come to a conclusion of their own. Some ideas are more ridiculous than others but every one of them are correct. Whether it makes sense to me is completely irrelevant to you. The fact that you didn't understand anything means that you understood something. Maybe you understood more than you thought.


  • #4
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    As a simple experiment in camera work it's ok but other than that it's all style no substance. What ever happened to stories?

    To be honest it's like a montage of stock footage.


  • #5
    jed490
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17 ✭jed490


    ScumLord wrote: »
    As a simple experiment in camera work it's ok but other than that it's all style no substance. What ever happened to stories?

    To be honest it's like a montage of stock footage.

    Thanks for watching. But there is a story and by if by "substance" you mean message, there's one of those too. What could it be though?


  • #6
    Paleface
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,971 ✭✭✭Paleface


    jed490 wrote: »
    The fact that you didn't understand anything means that you understood something.

    I'm sorry but that doesn't make sense to me. It sounds like your just being vague for the sake of it.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    beans
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,886 ✭✭✭beans


    The fact that you didn't understand anything means that you understood something.

    One could have interpreted the OP's last comment to mean that there is nothing to actually understand from watching the film. "If you didn't get it, you're right on the money" kind of thing.

    It's a nice little film. Edgy and cold. The title is odd... I suspect some kind of play on words? If there's a message in there, I'm finding it pretty evasive. But I'm no Jay Sherman.


  • #8
    jed490
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17 ✭jed490


    Paleface,
    Beans seems to have answered your question for me. What he said is certainly a valid interpretation.

    Thanks for the kind words too Beans.


  • #9
    Paleface
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,971 ✭✭✭Paleface


    jed490 wrote: »
    What he said is certainly a valid interpretation.

    OK first let me say that I liked the way it was shot.

    However if what beans said is a valid interpretation i.e "that there is nothing to actually understand from watching the film" then what's the point of watching it other than just to admire how it looks?

    That is my conclusion.


  • #10
    jed490
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17 ✭jed490


    Paleface wrote: »
    OK first let me say that I liked the way it was shot.

    However if what beans said is a valid interpretation i.e "that there is nothing to actually understand from watching the film" then what's the point of watching it other than just to admire how it looks?

    That is my conclusion.

    You are right. All interpretations are valid though. Is it the messsage I was trying to show, who knows?

    Thanks for the complement on the cinematography as well.


  • #11
    Paleface
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,971 ✭✭✭Paleface


    Your welcome. Keep it up I guess! :)


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    D-Generate
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,946 ✭✭✭D-Generate


    So in effect this video is shallow tech demo? Wow...... It might be arty but it ain't art.


  • #13
    jed490
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17 ✭jed490


    D-Generate wrote: »
    So in effect this video is shallow tech demo? Wow...... It might be arty but it ain't art.

    All I said is that it could mean nothing, not that it actually did. I will say that it is certainly not 'shallow' and certainly not a 'demo.'

    Anyways, what exactly would you consider to be 'art?'


  • #14
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    jed490 wrote: »
    All I said is that it could mean nothing, not that it actually did. I will say that it is certainly not 'shallow' and certainly not a 'demo.'

    Anyways, what exactly would you consider to be 'art?'
    I always think art needs to say something. This doesn't say allot and you saying you don't even know what it's about is just plain strange.

    I don't mean to put you down it looks good but it goes nowhere and it won't effect a person either way if they watch it or not.


  • #15
    jed490
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17 ✭jed490


    ScumLord wrote: »
    I always think art needs to say something. This doesn't say allot and you saying you don't even know what it's about is just plain strange.

    I don't mean to put you down it looks good but it goes nowhere and it won't effect a person either way if they watch it or not.

    If it's important for you to know, I know exactly what it means. If I tell you what that is, then no one can really interpret it any more. The only interpretation that would matter would be mine. And let's face it, who would want that?


  • #16
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    jed490 wrote: »
    If it's important for you to know, I know exactly what it means. If I tell you what that is, then no one can really interpret it any more. The only interpretation that would matter would be mine. And let's face it, who would want that?
    Not much of a storey teller then? People like to hear a good storey teller tell a storey as they see it. All human conversation is like that, you talk to people to understand their point of view.


  • #17
    Magic Eight Ball
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,420 ✭✭✭Magic Eight Ball


    I'm sorry but it's nothing more then typical film student rubbish.
    no substance and zero creativity.

    Now if you want to see how a short should be done, watch this!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnCoMwWYr-c


  • #18
    jed490
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17 ✭jed490


    ScumLord wrote: »
    Not much of a storey teller then? People like to hear a good storey teller tell a storey as they see it. All human conversation is like that, you talk to people to understand their point of view.

    That's just a load of garbage in my opinion. A film and a conversation are completely different. Instead of just telling you my 'point of view' I decided to show it using the visual medium of film. It's abstract, which I know some people don't like, but it's the way it had to shown (in my opinion).


  • #19
    Fysh
    Moderators, Arts Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators Posts: 11,138 Mod ✭✭✭✭Fysh


    So this film is designed to let people form an interpretation of an abstracted representation of your point of view?

    This may explain why it's got a bit of a Damien Hirst vibe in my opinion. A self-consciously clever title, a couple of interesting short scenes and apparently a terror of making its intent in any way clear for fear of people deciding it's just not very good.

    I admire the absence of dialogue and the coldness of it, but it doesn't say anything to me.


  • #20
    jed490
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17 ✭jed490


    Fysh wrote: »
    So this film is designed to let people form an interpretation of an abstracted representation of your point of view?

    This may explain why it's got a bit of a Damien Hirst vibe in my opinion. A self-consciously clever title, a couple of interesting short scenes and apparently a terror of making its intent in any way clear for fear of people deciding it's just not very good.

    I admire the absence of dialogue and the coldness of it, but it doesn't say anything to me.

    Thanks for commenting.

    One thing I will say is it's not an abstracted representation of my point of view, it's more my pov is kinda abstract.

    Anyways, I enjoyed reading what you had to say. It certainly gave me something to think about.


Advertisement