RTE STORYLAND 2 Promos

BlitzKrieg

to give an idea of where 7 1/2 grand goes

here is one episode of the tv show

http://vimeo.com/7312776


actually the storyland pieces, only have to be about 7-8 minutes long, so 8 grand would stretch a bit further then it did in the above which is a full half hour.

johnfunk

Brendan Canty wrote: »

I thought it was very well shot, coloured and the locations and lighting were very nice. I thought the story was very slow moving. I thought it dragged things on a bit too much and I got bored. I would have taken the story and cut it down a lot either in the editing room or beforehand. But I understand that the film probably had to be a certain length for a college film yes?

No its this length because that's how long the director and his editor decided it should be. The college imposed no restrictions on us. It was shot on super 16 stock on location in Budapest in the summer of 2008. I believe that the idea behind the slow pace of the film is to help build tension, again this was a creative decision of the director. As producer I allowed him a fair amount of freedom and i believe he done a grand job. the film is currently being screened at a number of festivals

BlitzKrieg

whats the northen film school like btw?

johnfunk

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

whats the northen film school like btw?

It was good craic after i settled in and found my feet. I had done a HND in Ballyfermot before heading over so that had set me on the right track. i started in the final year of the degree which was a big class group which sometimes led to equipment shortages but all the projects where funded which helps a great deal and as much freedom as you needed. id recommend it. Also leeds is a cracking city

Brendan Canty

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

MOD BOOTS ON
Now out of curiosity Brenden what did you think of the other entries that have shown up so far?

Firstly I thought the two by Eekrebs were very well put together. For a promo they knew what they were doing structure wise and I learned from them.

I thought Punchline was a good idea. But for a show about a comedian trying to be a comedian the promo did not make me laugh nor did it tell me much about the show - the text did. I'll have to watch an actual episode and make a proper judgement then but I thought it was a bit dry.

The vampire preview was shot very well and I quite enjoyed it. But it's far from original and that type of thing has been done to death. A vampire looking for love...hmm.

The other preview episodes on youtube that I saw were pretty chronic to be honest. There is one that is just a Dublin Fashion Blog...this woman talking about clothes. Where's the story there? haha!

johnfunk wrote: »

You have missed my point completely. You where saying that when Brendan got the cash from RTE that he was going to transform bugbusters in terms of production value, i was pointing out that 8 grand doesnt go a long way in producing a film. Im sorry that my throw away comment about a previous budget i worked with offended you but i was trying to use it as a point of comparison. A film will be as good as the people who work on it. is brendan planning of hiring new actors and crew if he is successful? this will swallow the majority of the budget leaving a tiny amount for production value.

The production value will improve with the 8 grand for me but I understand it is not that much. I am definitely not be looking to hire new actors for the main roles. The actors we have are fantastic for the roles they play. For smaller roles I know plenty of good actors who would be willing to do it for free so to get some money for it would be a big bonus!

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

I wouldnt be surprised if how the budget was proposed will be one of the biggest factors in the final decision of who goes forward.

I can definitely see that happening too. Hopefully my budget was ok. I tried as best as I could to work it out but I don't have much experience with budgets and proper shoots.

BlitzKrieg

johnfunk wrote: »

It was good craic after i settled in and found my feet. I had done a HND in Ballyfermot before heading over so that had set me on the right track. i started in the final year of the degree which was a big class group which sometimes led to equipment shortages but all the projects where funded which helps a great deal and as much freedom as you needed. id recommend it. Also leeds is a cracking city

ahh funded projects how i'd long for those. My college films all had zero funding except for what I put in myself and almost got arrested filming two of them (goddamn british law about filming at train stations.) (college films are mostly left on my youtube account (http://www.youtube.com/user/connla)

I'm waiting on a response from the london film school at the moment, if it falls through I might add the northen film school to my lists of applications next year. Work has dried up into a part time puddle at the moment so I need to upskill myself or face the dole.

Brendan Canty

johnfunk wrote: »

Thanks for your comments. Sorry if i have annoyed you with my critic of your work but sometimes you cant win them all

Ya no problem, anytime...will try and watch your other shorts when I get the chance. Some of my other stuff is here if you want to have a look http://brendancanty.wordpress.com/

Apology accepted mate. Tip - Try and be more constructive when you criticise in future or else people will get annoyed.

johnfunk wrote: »

RTE do insist that everyone is paid for there time and signs a contract in order that they are able to broadcast

I say so to an extent. Can't see any problem with volunteers. Hardy Bucks had loads of volunteers.

BlitzKrieg

Some of my other stuff is here if you want to have a look http://brendancanty.wordpress.com/

the war one was nicely shot, a bit too much exposition, but it certainly looked good, and the drained colour scheme (in camera or post?) certainly hid the fact its some field in the country for the most part. Nice pull focus at the start and the visual/audio effects worked well enough. Only one edit struck me as bad in the one watch (when the sniper turns at the start, he does it twice) otherwise it paced well enough.


But the exposition was painfully thick, I understand you were probably required by the course to have a conversation in it, but as a piece it didnt need most of it, or at least it didnt need to be about enemy positions and so on to start it off.

Brendan Canty

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

the war one was nicely shot, a bit too much exposition, but it certainly looked good, and the drained colour scheme (in camera or post?) certainly hid the fact its some field in the country for the most part. Nice pull focus at the start and the visual/audio effects worked well enough. Only one edit struck me as bad in the one watch (when the sniper turns at the start, he does it twice) otherwise it paced well enough.


But the exposition was painfully thick, I understand you were probably required by the course to have a conversation in it, but as a piece it didnt need most of it, or at least it didnt need to be about enemy positions and so on to start it off.

The colour scheme was done in post. ****...it's funny you noticed about him turning. No one has pointed that out before and I've watched it so many times it bypasses me. Yep, there had to be a conversation in it alright.

BlitzKrieg

.it's funny you noticed about him turning. No one has pointed that out before and I've watched it so many times it bypasses me.

I'm an editor by trade, have been for the last three years, so it is my curse that everything I watch the editing is the very first thing I pay attention to. You'd notice its something I'd bring up with any piece I look at, because its constantly whirring in my head counting the seconds and watching the cuts.

Might not seem much of a curse, but trust me, when you start applying the same eye to major hollywood films you sometimes get wonderful bits of euphoria at a brilliantly edited sequence.

But more often you suffer at the hands of some sadist like Micheal Bay who's films are so atrociously edited in parts (esp transformers 2) that you are screaming at the screen.

johnfunk

BlitzKrieg where did you go to college? I did get arrested for filming in a london trainstation. What fun that was

Brendan Canty

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

I'm an editor by trade, have been for the last three years, so it is my curse that everything I watch the editing is the very first thing I pay attention to. You'd notice its something I'd bring up with any piece I look at, because its constantly whirring in my head counting the seconds and watching the cuts.

Might not seem much of a curse, but trust me, when you start applying the same eye to major hollywood films you sometimes get wonderful bits of euphoria at a brilliantly edited sequence.

But more often you suffer at the hands of some sadist like Micheal Bay who's films are so atrociously edited in parts (esp transformers 2) that you are screaming at the screen.

Jesus...that is a cross to bare. And yes Transformers 2 is ****. I get so ticked off when people say that it's great! Grrr!!

Diarmsquid

Hey guys, hope you don't mind me butting in.

I've uploaded our 30 sec pitch too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPEscXWKkw0

Feedback please?

BlitzKrieg

Diarmsquid wrote: »

Hey guys, hope you don't mind me butting in.

I've uploaded our 30 sec pitch too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPEscXWKkw0

Feedback please?

Had a quick look over

Its not so much a pitch for a show but rather a quick explanation of the premise. Which is fine to an extent but its hampered that the viewer doesnt get any impression where you are gonna run with the idea. Which is a shame cause door to door salesman is a good premise and has been used numerous times and in a variety of genres.


I know there's comedy in there with the main one being the guy saying he's good at communication but is unable to actually say this but it wasnt until after a number of repeat viewings that I was able to piece this together. The first time through I thought he fubbed his lines. And there are still a few lines I didnt get, it sounds like he's saying *Jet tickets market easy* at 0:17. The editing is fine at the start (though it looks like the apature has a slight problem at one point) and the cuts are one the action which is what one wants but it falls apart halfway through it needed to cut back to the couch for the line *good communication skills* rather then halfway through it and after that there is one more major hiccup at 0:20 where there's a break in the timeline so you get a frame of black and the more serious issue of the sound, the sound from each individual cut is used during the final scene which causes the atmos to go up and down and back up high on the cuts, this draws the viewer's attention to the cuts more so then one would want especially in the last cheeky cut where you cut to a different shot of the door closing for the title, normally this would be ok cut which many people wouldnt notice too much, but with the change in audio it sticks out rather badly.

BlitzKrieg where did you go to college?

Anglia Ruskin University Cambridge, I also spent 3 months in New York with the school of visual arts on an editing course and a cinematography course.

The SVA course was more like a film school course, while Anglia was this strange hybrid of film studies and practical film courses. Which worked to an extent I thought, it allowed anything learnt in theory to be applied practically on a regular basis and encoruged different approaches. Where it failed as a course I would say is that it wasnt designed with a profession in mind so rather then a group working together fulfilling different roles, pretty much everyone was a director and it worked on one man crew filmmaking unless you convince friends to help out. Hence why I intend to go back for some more education to get more group dynamic experiance. Though I wouldnt say the small crew element was completely useless, my current employment tends to always be purpetually shorthanded so being able to see a project through predominantly on your own has proven benefitial. I think the last piece I did, my name shows up in the credits about seven times.

I did get arrested for filming in a london trainstation. What fun that was

I knew it was illegal to film at a trainstation, thats why I went out to the middle of nowhere, some station called beachwood or something I think. No staff, nothing, very desolate. Sadly two things worked against us. One was the British love for CCTV and secondly a train pulling up halfway through the shoot and two ticket inspectors getting off.

Pleaded ignorance to the inspectors and rushed the remainder of the shoot (had to go elsewhere for the last shot of a train leaving) we had packed up and the inspectors had left on a different train when a cop car pulls up and two cops strolled onto the platforn, thankfully we had put the equipment in the car and I was literally getting in as they arrived.

Diarmsquid

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

Had a quick look over

Thanks

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

Its not so much a pitch for a show but rather a quick explanation of the premise. Which is fine to an extent but its hampered that the viewer doesnt get any impression where you are gonna run with the idea. Which is a shame cause door to door salesman is a good premise and has been used numerous times and in a variety of genres.

Yeah, what I did was took the opening scene of the first episode and tried to cut bits here and there to fit it into 30 seconds.

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

I know there's comedy in there with the main one being the guy saying he's good at communication but is unable to actually say this but it wasnt until after a number of repeat viewings that I was able to piece this together. The first time through I thought he fubbed his lines. And there are still a few lines I didnt get, it sounds like he's saying *Jet tickets market easy* at 0:17.

Yeah, audio is a bit patchy. Put down to our unfamiliarity with the audio equipment we used. He was actually saying "Jack Jacobs. Marketing Executive." but on listening again, I can see how that's hard t make out.

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

The editing is fine at the start (though it looks like the apature has a slight problem at one point)

This was us trying to create the effect of a flickering TV screen in front of them.

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

and the cuts are one the action which is what one wants but it falls apart halfway through it needed to cut back to the couch for the line *good communication skills* rather then halfway through it

Damn 30 sec time constraint

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

and after that there is one more major hiccup at 0:20 where there's a break in the timeline so you get a frame of black

Wow, you're good. Didn't pick up on that.

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

and the more serious issue of the sound, the sound from each individual cut is used during the final scene which causes the atmos to go up and down and back up high on the cuts, this draws the viewer's attention to the cuts more so then one would want especially in the last cheeky cut where you cut to a different shot of the door closing for the title, normally this would be ok cut which many people wouldnt notice too much, but with the change in audio it sticks out rather badly.

Thanks for your feedback. If commissioned, we would have a better skilled production crew alright. Hope not to make those mistakes.

The footage there was shot on the morning of the deadline as well, so retakes etc were out of the question. i know it's a long shot that we'll get through, but it's better to have something submitted at least.

johnfunk

Diarmsquid wrote: »

Hey guys, hope you don't mind me butting in.

I've uploaded our 30 sec pitch too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPEscXWKkw0

Feedback please?

I think you would have been better just pitching directly to the camera as your pitch doesnt really give enough info about the the story will progress. Just my opinion

Diarmsquid

johnfunk wrote: »

I think you would have been better just pitching directly to the camera as your pitch doesnt really give enough info about the the story will progress. Just my opinion

You mean just a 30 sec video of me talking to the camera saying "This is where the story goes..."

Really?

I kinda thought the pitch was so that RTE can see what our scripts would look like on screen.

johnfunk

Diarmsquid wrote: »

You mean just a 30 sec video of me talking to the camera saying "This is where the story goes..."

Really?

I kinda thought the pitch was so that RTE can see what our scripts would look like on screen.

It doesnt say that anywhere on the website that they want to see what its going to look like, but the general idea with a pitch is to convey your idea in a couple of sentences that engage with potential funders.

You could do this in any number of ways, ie hire an actor to deliver the pitch or do it yourself. The important bit being that its clear and concise

Brendan Canty

Any idea when they will let people know if they're in the final 20? Must be fairly soon if the interview is at the start of December.

johnfunk

Nobody seems to know but i wouldn't be surprised if they got far more applicants than they expected so it could be a while

AnonoBoy

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

Oh gods I retract my support of punchline...Its the crowd that did the roaring twenties by the look of it. I return my support to bugbusters.

Much as I disliked the Roaring Twenties I think Punchline is a decent idea but what I took from the pitch was that it's a drama about comedians not a comedy. That's what made me think it could be worth watching. I want to see something dark and serious about stand-ups.

BlitzKrieg

AnonoBoy wrote: »

Much as I disliked the Roaring Twenties I think Punchline is a decent idea but what I took from the pitch was that it's a drama about comedians not a comedy. That's what made me think it could be worth watching. I want to see something dark and serious about stand-ups.

I got the same impression. And it is a good idea (hence why I supported it)

But have you watched the roaring twenties???

It is some of the worse script writing I have ever heard, its up on youtube now and god it physically hurts when I listen to it.

fataldanja

Posted this in the wrong thread - so moved it here (Sorry Blitzkreig)


Hey guys,

I'm not too sure if many people watched last years storyland videos on the RTE Website, but the second series is underway..

here is a video for Maccana Teoranta's submission pitch.

I think it is hilarious, i cant wait to see more.. what do you guys think??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WM4cYgfaVA8

AnonoBoy

fataldanja wrote: »

Posted this in the wrong thread - so moved it here (Sorry Blitzkreig)


Hey guys,

I'm not too sure if many people watched last years storyland videos on the RTE Website, but the second series is underway..

here is a video for Maccana Teoranta's submission pitch.

I think it is hilarious, i cant wait to see more.. what do you guys think??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WM4cYgfaVA8

Don't like it myself. 'Starfeck' as a name itself isn't hilarious and it doesn't look too well put together.

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

I got the same impression. And it is a good idea (hence why I supported it)

But have you watched the roaring twenties???

It is some of the worse script writing I have ever heard, its up on youtube now and god it physically hurts when I listen to it.

Yeah it was bad alright. But eh.... maybe they'll be better at drama?

BlitzKrieg

Yeah it was bad alright. But eh.... maybe they'll be better at drama?

Still need to write a script for drama (most of the time) which is where the main issue is. Look at their other entry which has an awfully bloated chunk of dialogue to sell it and you know the problem still persists.

On star feck, I thought as a pitch it mostly worked, it wasnt a 30 second highlight from the show, it was actually a direct pitch, but at the same time it summed up the absurd humour of the show in the pitch.

technically it doesnt stall anywhere, which is a sign of good editing (though there is a broken frame in the timeline between the cafe scene and the *smock* scene and the audio tends to jump a bit at parts.

THe idea itself may not be the most original (even for ireland, I recall a number of other little star trek shorts filmed by irish trekkies on the same notion, I think a few of them were boardsies too.) but you did get the idea of innocent enthusiam across very well, it works alot better because of the cheap sets and costumes put together.

Though I have to ask, are they eating beans and jaffa cakes at the end???

AnonoBoy

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

Still need to write a script for drama (most of the time) which is where the main issue is. Look at their other entry which has an awfully bloated chunk of dialogue to sell it and you know the problem still persists.

You're right. I'm trying to be upbeat, nice and optimistic for them but I don't know why. I disliked everything about their Storyland entry last year except for the visual effects which were quite decent.

BlitzKrieg

which one was theirs last year?

AnonoBoy

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

which one was theirs last year?

Pubworld.

super_furry

Marianna is the one that stands out for me. Well shot with a popular premise given a local setting. Just hope they don't become too reliant on the special effects which I felt they did with Pubworld.

AnonoBoy

super_furry wrote: »

Marianna is the one that stands out for me. Well shot with a popular premise given a local setting. Just hope they don't become too reliant on the special effects which I felt they did with Pubworld.

Personally I'm not gone on the jumpcuts, they don't work with the pace of the dialogue. Also - it's too long of a pitch, a few lines from her and the vampire face effect would have been much punchier. A lot of the pitches seem to have gone far beyond RTE's requested 30 seconds.