|
|
Post by Eric T. Jones on Mar 18, 2005 21:57:41 GMT -5
AVERAGE RATING: 2.5/4.0 (2 votes)
Discuss the film "Julius Caesar - Act IV" here.
COMPLETE CAST AND CREW:
CAST
Anshul- Cassius
Parth- Lucius/Octavius
Aniket- Ghost of Caesar/Marcus Antony/Titinius
Dennis- Brutus
Jared- Lepidus/Messala
CREW
Camera Operator- Dennis (Scene 1)
Camera Operator- Anshul (Scenes 2 and 3)
Camera Operator- Aniket (Scenes 2 and 3)
Camera Operator- Jared (Scene 3)
Editor- Eric Jones
Director- Aniket
Aspect Ratio: 1.78:1 (letterbox, 4:3 master)
FUN FACT: The first Oleander Productions film.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eric T. Jones on Mar 19, 2005 15:59:45 GMT -5
My take-
As it is Shakespeare, I find it dull and overly long. Watching it again, to see how the RM file looked (it looks like shit), I felt like I had just wasted the last 10 minutes of my life. While I tend to have fun watching even the crappiest of the DMI and Nerd Network films (even "Fight Ultimatum" to an extent), this one just plain drags on.
The only real saving grace is some innovative camera angles and movements which, while they don't always work, are interesting to look at. However, plenty of other irritating things while editing this-
I notice most of the other people operating the camera don't know a single thing about cinematography. Constantly panning it back and forth makes an audience seasick; and there's plenty of that in here. The purpose of using a widescreen format is to be able to fit two people into a shot, without having to constantly pan back and forth.
The other thing, which Aniket insisted on doing which I absolutely HATE, is doing consecutive takes from the same angle, instead of switching it when you want to proceed. I see this mostly in Lars von Trier films, this appears in one part of "Fury of the Blade", and it irritates me like crazy. Looks just as tacky as those damned transititons that seem to be popular- with people who don't realise that they're supposed to be making movies, not slideshows. They're two completely different things.
Overall, I just don't see how doing the whole thing of Julius Caesar is going to work. I mean, what's the point?
** (out of four), for the innovative camera angles. Otherwise it's a *.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skywalker on Mar 19, 2005 19:22:07 GMT -5
I am going to say 3 due to the fact that the acting is at a quite high standard.
My personal favorite shot was "Cassius" holding the knife up to the camera. I directed that entire scene.
this is also the first movie in which i was not the main character but more the director/cinemtographer.
Results: innovative camera angles and good acting
|
|
|
|
Post by Skywalker on Mar 19, 2005 19:25:04 GMT -5
i'd also have to say that my group was probably the easiest group of actors i ever worked with...
that is sad because this is the 1st movie i have done with them.
I wish all shoots could be as easy as this one
|
|
|
|
Post by Eric T. Jones on Mar 19, 2005 19:30:54 GMT -5
Now, from what I saw in the shoot, actors fooled around less than usual. However, it was still irritating.
When I was in there, I saw cooperative actors. I really do wish our actors were that easy. Maybe we could use them sometime.
|
|
|
|
Post by namehacked on Apr 6, 2005 12:27:13 GMT -5
I resent that.
|
|
|
|
Post by MrMan on Apr 6, 2005 19:00:57 GMT -5
No. You REPRESENT that.
-MrMan
|
|
|
|
Post by madcat on Apr 7, 2005 11:06:55 GMT -5
Not always. Im a $@#%in DIRECTOR now.
You like traching other people now, dont u?
|
|
|
|
Post by MrMan on Apr 7, 2005 19:28:50 GMT -5
A director you may be. But Directors normally know how to spell. I assume that you meant teaching.
-MrMan
|
|
|
|
Post by kenny on Sept 1, 2005 19:22:41 GMT -5
It's a bit late for this but what I meant was "trashing." I was speed typing, and I apologise.
|
|
