July 2, 2003 at 1:33 pm #7036
tub-o-legosParticipantJuly 2, 2003 at 2:39 pm #7038
SecretAgentBobParticipantJuly 2, 2003 at 3:27 pm #7040
StefanParticipantJuly 2, 2003 at 4:10 pm #7042
The lighting was better, BUT again the camera work was bad.
Here is a part form an interview with Jay silver:
The camera angles are, in my opinion, the strongest thing about the movie. I find that most of the LEGO movies I see are shot from a single, high camera position. Unless you’ve got something REALLY fascinating going on, the viewer is going to feel very detached and lose interest. Bringing the camera down to the minifig’s level makes a huge difference. It makes you feel more involved, like a real film. You aren’t just watching little toys anymore – they’re as tall as you are. [JR. – This is an excellent point. If you take nothing else out of this interview, remember this.]
You should read the whole interview which can be found here: http://www.brickfilms.com/interview_silver.html
Hope that helps!July 2, 2003 at 5:02 pm #7045
I have mixed feelings about this one. Lighting was (slightly) better than in your first film, but the story is… erm… quite simple. :wink
You obviously know how to work with AlamDV (it was AlamDV, wasn’t it? ).
But you should work out a way to fix the camera, the images are quite jumpy as Antiggo pointed out.
I had a great laugh though when the torso-less legs went going after the light-sabre wielding maniac in the end. Perhaps someone should do a brickfilm-remake of the famous black knight fighting scene from Monty Python’s Holy Grail. Just a flesh-wound, hehehe.
After all i liked your first one better.
-MichaelJuly 2, 2003 at 5:20 pm #7047
strongest of the weakParticipantJuly 2, 2003 at 5:33 pm #7048
legotronnParticipantJuly 2, 2003 at 5:39 pm #7049
Michael, you might enjoy this film a lot.
As for the one being discussed here: I barely see an improvement. Ok, the light changes were not so obvious (though still present), several parts of the film suffer from over-exposure, and at one point a large shadow appears and disappears.
Furthermore, you should secure your baseplate! It jumps around quite a lot.
Finally, a film is not made in 5 hours. Even for my short “il est midi” (33 seconds, next to no credits), I needed 15 hours building the models, setting up the sets, determining camera angles, tweaking positions of lights, adjusting camera settings, and finally filming. The actual shooting took perhaps two or three hours.
My advice: invest some time into your next film. It will pay off! This one will be forgotten tomorrow, while people still watch “Also Thwacked Zarathustra” and “The Mummy”.
As for the story: you do seem to have enough creativity to come up with them. But I’d recommend to let your stories develop for a while. Write a script, let it run through your head, add some more, and come with a movie that will blast us away! I know you can do it, so go ahead!
I’m sorry if I sound too negative here, but I hope that you will become a very good animator, and am merely giving some directions.
Stefan, who’s reminded of “Saber Oops”.July 2, 2003 at 5:46 pm #7050
SenseLess_ProductionsParticipantJuly 3, 2003 at 3:21 am #7096
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.