Latest Short Film

[Mark Kenfield]

Hey fellas,

Here's one of the most recent short films I've worked on, it hasn't been graded or mixed yet, but it's fairly close to complete.

I'd be keen to hear any feedback and constructive criticism people could offer.

Cheers,

"Somewhere To Call Home" on Vimeo

[Mark Kenfield]

Anyone?

Any feedback/criticism would be much appreciated.

[Alan Melville]

Mark,

I must've missed something...... :) What the hell was that about????

Well shot & acted BTW.

Al

[Buba Kastorski]

I liked it,
but I would use more fixed shots, faster lenses AND proper lighting;
thanks for posting

[Ken Diewert]

Interesting piece. I kind of thought that the shot around 4:08 (staggering, soft focus) was unnecessary, and it might be too ambiguous for anything other than an art-house audience. Well acted though as Alan says. Good luck with it.

[Mark Kenfield]

Originally Posted by Alan Melville

Mark,

I must've missed something...... :) What the hell was that about????

Well shot & acted BTW.

Al

Haha, thanks Alan. Well the basic premise is that the guy is interviewing potential flatmates, and then a very strange and intriguing one comes along I suppose the subtler elements are open to interpretation, but the piece was largely a trial run for a longer version (currently in pre-production) where the male character keeps getting awkwardly involved with his flatmates (the extended script provides some context, so it'll be less ambiguous than this one).

Originally Posted by Buba Kastorski

I liked it,
but I would use more fixed shots, faster lenses AND proper lighting;
thanks for posting

Thanks Buba, I'm inclined to agree. It was shot on a Sony Z7(?) without manual lens controls so I had considerable fears for how it would work out (in what was a very low-light location) but it turned out alright I think, it's far from polished, but feels fairly 'real' I think.

Originally Posted by Ken Diewert

Interesting piece. I kind of thought that the shot around 4:08 (staggering, soft focus) was unnecessary, and it might be too ambiguous for anything other than an art-house audience. Well acted though as Alan says. Good luck with it.

Thanks Ken, I don't quite understand the shot at 4:08 myself, we didn't shoot it on the day, so I assume it must have been added in after the fact.