This is my first music video. I certainly feel I have room for improvement, and I'd appreciate anybody's comments on it.

high quality WMV: www.blumpy.org

low quality MOV: www.blumpy.org

         

WELL, WE KNOW WHO THE ASSHOLES ARE! Obviously the artist who submitted this piece had the balls to ask for criticism. If you have the gall to just rip them to shreds, lets see some of your work jack ass!! if you have some things than can be worked on, as we all have them, provide some type of positive comments. In fact, no, dont provide any comments. You are an asshole, so you shouldn't speak.

I thought this video had some good points. The artists was expetimenting with some cool visual fx, seeing what looks good and what doesnt. I am sure that they know what can be improved. for me i would provide more continuity, a common theme that ties even the fx in there. If you have a story about a fmaily in the 1800's you dont use modern fx, you keep it simple. The fx can be thematic. I thought that this would help. It seemed to me that the stuff was thrown in only for the sake of being weird, which can work, but than everything has to be weirder, you have to skew things even more. Great experimentation though. The polaroid stuff looks great and cna be used again in a story or thematic piece, youve got that down nicely! Don;t listen to ass holes you liek to hear themselves fart. You had the guts to ask for advice, which takes mor courage than to rip someone apart. Great start!!

         

sweet

         

Hi Lusk! I'm glad my "nothing piece" inspired you to write for 40+ minutes. I'll start making Chris Cunningham videos this weekend!

killakillafornia, thank you so much for your reply; I truly appreciate your feedback.

         

Lusk, you can hide behind the mask of art school/film school jargon all you want. because you can used big words doest make it right. it still comes down to how you deliver the criticism, not what you re saying, you can have your say and it can be negative but do it in a nice gracious way and that means a lot more. also, you missed my point about vfx. youre right open range looked great, the fx fit the theme. I am taking about stuff like "bullet-time" and fast and slow-motion. to me they dont thmatically fit into certain pieces. i am glad you apaologized, and i to apologize for calling you an asshole. and lets get away from the nerds creed of "oh no! he's yelling in all caps!" seriously.

lets try to be gracious here. how about those who know help those who don't. lets turn it into a community of people who are encouraging each other to get better. not attacking each others work. if you write a negative piece try to find at least one positive thing to say.

         

rivals unite.

lusk, lets see some work

         

and did you get my point about the vfx?

         

End of the month my friend. I promised to post work and still will.

I did get your post about vfx and don't really agree. Just because I think it's up to the filmmaker to use said tools any way they feel fit. It would be rediculous to see a cowboy dodge various bullets via timeslice, but who says the same tool can't be used for a different kind of syntax?

I know what you mean, you're saying I like classy shit classy, but who says you can't

1. break those rules -and/or-
2. Find ways to work within an older aesthetic with a new school sensibility.

I'm sure people had the same argument concerning jump cuts years ago. But they work great in an eisenstein film. Period or otherwise.

Again, it's all about how it's used.

And another thing, fast/slow motion has nothing to do with vfx. Said motion is achieved via shutter speed. Don't confuse this with style, even if they work harmoniously at times.

         

LUSK is right

jjakob asked for critique and he got it - sorry it's a pretty lame video.

But what happened to Cex? 2 years ago he was a one-man glitch-rap superstar - now he sounds like a Staind B-side.... so there's your first problem - I think on a no-budget (this was spec, right?) video the director is partly responsible for the song choice -

And yeah, it's bad bad bad looking video - and it looks like you wanted to shoot on a better medium (as opposed to embracing the lo-fi) -

the polaroids are well done but we've seen it a billion times before.

My thought is CEX (even when he has a lame song); is one of those energetic artists who seems willing to do ANYTHING - there was really nothing stopping you from doing any concept.

         

lusk,

just out of curiosity, what do you consider "an extremely small budget"? what's up on the site doesn't make it look inexpensive. i'd be curious to know what the figure for it was, if you happen to know.

         

I'll interject:

an extremely small budget is under $200 - like you just meet up and start taping; and the budget that goes towards things like tape stock, gas, food, maybe some art direction - no different than what you would spend working on a class project.

anyone who spends $1000-2000 on a video and it looks like shit is stupid or lazy. I don't know why people don't get it; if you don't have enough money, you need to scale back or change your concept!

         

okay - we're talking about different things: "specs" and "real videos"

A "real video" is when a label contacts you, you put together a budget & treatment, and shoot - the lowest I've heard for this is around $2000-$5000.

A "spec" is when you contact an artist or label, saying you want to build your reel and arrange to do a video where you cover the budget.

Based on the tone of many in this forum, I assume most are aspiring directors and fall into the spec category - this CEX video is obviously on that end.

---

So, doing a real video for $2000 is very low - the director will most certainly not get paid. BUT if you're starting out, $2000 is awesome - use it to make a fucking dope video and get a bigger budget next time. That's pretty much how it works. Anyone interested in being a director who passes up any opportunity with money is an idiot. And anyone who can't make a good video for $2000 is a bad director. Bottom line.

Also, insurance and permits are for pussies.

---

Here's what I'm talking about in regards to scaling back:

Let's say you've got $2000 to do a video for CEX; and you get the track, and you instantly imagine CEX as a matador, bullfighting at a stadium in Spain. Now, you can either A) spend all your time and resources putting together a half-assed stadium, with a fake bull scene which will never come across and screw up your whole concept, OR: B) come up with an idea that is much more realistic to pull off - say have him be a matador, alone on a farm among a field of cows.

a cheesy example; but I feel too many people come up with ideas that are out of their means and therefore BAD. And they make bad videos and blame it on a low-budget.

A GOOD director will take the limitations of the budget and work a concept around it.

         

Cex is cool i have seen him in Paris one year ago. It's great to do a video for him. Now the video: maybe it need some structure and just one simple idea. I ve just quickly seen it like many people do, and i figured at the end that it was maybe something about happiness and pills and being in the norm/shopping in a mall etc. if that was your point you should have made it already clear quickly from the beginning and then develop it. Simple ideas with a deepness are the best. Often when im trying ideas i try to "kill" my idea just by saying it short and flat and then i look if i can go deeper and if that still be understandable/interesting/etc. At least your video don't fall into the "artist-sings-performance" and that's ok. That's my 2c.

Btw lusk don't bother to write novels many people like me don't read them.

         

I watched some vids on blumpy.org in the past. But I was just to see your short films of a daily life. I suppose your shooting style is quite documentary touch.

Maybe you have to dig more about music videos, not only Chris Cunnigham as you refer to it.