Shot on 16mm this is my second film submission on the site, and the fourth film I shot at NYFA this summer. I hope you enjoy it. I would like to hear your thoughts as well. Make sure to watch with the sound up. Obviously the quality isn't great on youtube.

After Hours with the Black Angel

any thoughts?

Oooo looks interesting. I will watch it once I get back home.

some sort of feedback would be nice.

When I watched it I was a little confused as to what specific events transpired during the film. It felt like a few different events surrounding this "Black Angel" but I didn't see the link in the stories. Because this film is silent the seemingly random choice of shots seemed to take away from the story.

I think one thing that will help you in future films is to use the camera to tell the story, meaning using each cut to a new shot as a way to tell your film's story or plot. I think it was David Mamet that suggests telling a story through cuts. Also I'm not sure what equipment you had available but the use of the tripod would have made many of the shots look a lot better.

Overall, I can say the film was ok. A good effort and enough reason to keep making films if you enjoy it and keep improving on your skills.

Not to belittle your thoughts of my film, but in actual honesty, on a side note:
David Mamet should stick to writing plays. He really isn't a very creative film director. Glengarry Glenross was enjoyable in the way a play is enjoyable. He refuses to allow the freedom of filmmaking to enter his films, and therefore creates an atmosphere with absolutely no fun whatsoever. That's not the kind of filmmaker I want to be.

Hey congrats on getting your fourth film done! I'm not going to comment on very specific aspects of the film as it wouldn't stand up to a nitpicky review. But i will say that it felt very much like a 60's film student project, and please realize that is a compliment! Like the film Jim Morrison showed the UCLA class in the Doors movie. The music and 16mm obviously informed alot of that, but if you're intent wasn't to create simply an atmosphere then I'm dissapointed because that where it was successful!!

Anyway filmmakers make film and you sir made a film!

I agree with laudy in that there didn't seem to be much semblence or coherence to the film. And, while you may have been going for a more basic, emotional reaction, there isn't enough for a viewer to hold on too.

On the other hand, I liked how you created the overall tone, even if that tone is cloudy. The particular songs and some of the shots did register an effect somewhere in my mind - I can't pinpoint it (see above), but it's definately there, which means you struck a cord (no pun intended).

On the subject of camera movement and style...I understand the artistic choice to use shoulder/handheld shots. But if you choose to use that style, you really need to know what you are doing. The majority of the shots did just feel like somebody holding a camera. Very well done hand/shoulderheld shots make the viewer forget that there is a cameraman holding the camera. The techniques are subtle, and I myself am nowhere near to fully grasping them yet (I happen to like the style, when done well). A tripod might have helped...then again, it might have gone against the feeling you were trying to create.

quote:

Originally posted by REDking:
Like the film Jim Morrison showed the UCLA class in the Doors movie.

Nah. I think he used tripods.

I don't know, I had trouble sitting through the entire thing, which is not a really good thing.

There was a good technique, and I did like the hand held camera, but I don't know what you were trying to tell. I may come back with a more complete critique tough.