Invitation - 3 Minute Short Film (PV-GS65)
 

I am fairly new to filmmaking, only been involved with it for 3 years now (the first two of which were focused mainly on screenwriting). I just completed my first ever short film, it is a 3-minute narrative with no dialog. It was shot on a consumer 3-CCD Panasonic PV-GS65 and edited with Sony Vegas Video 5.

You can view the film here:
http://www.narrowroadentertainment.c...tion_final.wmv

Thanks for taking the time to view this, I'm looking forward to hearing your thoughts/comments/criticisms so I can grow as a filmmaker.

Thanks,
Larry

Very nicely done. Just a few questions/observations.

1. You need to deinterlace your footage for the web...it detracts from the quality of this piece. It's just a check box during the wmv encode. I'm guessing Vegas will do this for you too, on export.

2. I'm guessing you were intentionally striving for the "blown out" surrealistic look as the little girl walked through the trees?

This is yet another great example of how the camera does not make the video. The look is very professional and the message is artfully communicated.

Hi Larry,

Little off topic, do you know where I can learn about screenwriting?

TIA

Regards
Leigh

The PV-GS65 (and the guy behind it) seem to be very capable. Thanks for sharing!

Thank you!

I used a plugin for Vegas to do the overall color "look" and one of the options in there was to "Reduce Interlace Flicker". I chose that and thought it cleared up the interlace problem, but I guess I was wrong. I didn't see a "deinterlace" option when rendering to WMV, but last night I made some modifications to the project and I think the final render looks better. However, I don't always see the interlace effect on video that others do, so would you mind checking the new file (same link) and letting me know if the interlace effect is gone?

Yes, I wanted a "dreamy" look. I wanted to really play up the idea of this being a parable, so I thought the glow helped make this more a tale than just a movie.

Thank you, again!

Thank you!

I'm glad you all liked the film, I appreciate all the praise and I also appreciate the constructive criticism/comments/questions as it makes me think about what I did, or what I should have done, so that my next film will be that much better.

Thanks again,
Larry

Definitely you need to get books on screenwriting like SCREENPLAY by Syd Field or The Screenwriter's Bible by David Trottier, but the best teacher for screenwriting is to read as many scripts as you can get your hands on.

You can go to places like http://www.joblo.com/moviescripts.php, www.simplyscripts.com, or www.dailyscript.com and download hundreds of popular hollywood movie scripts. Read them, study them, see what they look like and listen to what they say and how they say it.

It's kind of like when people learn to identify counterfeit money, they do so by studying real money. They become so familiar with what real money looks, feels and smells like that when they come across a counterfeit they "know" it isn't real. The same with good writing, if you study professional scripts then you will "know" bad writing when you see it, or write it.

Another good site to visit is: www.scriptsales.com there are several articles there, but the best part is the message board (www.scriptsales.com/boards/) where many professional and amateur writers get together to discuss writing and there are many helpful people who will answer your questions. You can also post samples of your writing and get high quality critiques and suggestions for improvement.

Hope this helps,
Larry

Hi Larry,

Thanks for the detail answer. ;-)

Regards
Leigh

excellent film
 

that is amazing , the camera and editing work . I would have done the story a bit different but, still a great piece of work . that film is better than most I see on the panny dvx site

Wow. Excellent piece. Great look, nicely constructed and paced. A little gem there, Larry. Loved the fluid tracking shot of young Brooke posting her invitation on the tree. Did you use a stabilizer of some sort for that?

And as referenced elsewhere, here's more proof that "it ain't the tools", right?
Superb job!

I agree! Love it! ;>