Inundate (T2i Short Film)

[Michael Rees]

Hello everyone, my name is Michael Rees. I am a 16-year-old aspiring cinematographer/director. I recently finished working on my latest short "Inundate." Please comment and leave any constructive criticism below. Thanks.

Inundate

[Rusty Rogers]

Here's the link...
Inundate By Michael Rees On ExposureRoom

[Predrag Vasic]

The short has a nice look. I also must say that you took good care of your audio. Not many young (and not even a few experienced) filmmakers make enough effort to produce good quality audio.

I'm not sure if the 180-degree rule and 30-degree rule were purposely broken, or if this was unintentional. Whenever it happened, it did confuse me a bit. I saw it both in lake scenes, as well as in the dialogue scenes. Same thing with the use of straight-on shot in the dialogue scenes (which ended up looking like a POV shot from the psychologist's angle).

Otherwise, nice work. Keep learning and doing!

[Russ Ivey]

First of all, I want to say that I am VERY impressed with what you've done here. For someone who is 16 years old, you have a bright future with this line of work. I think if there is anything that I would suggest for future projects, try to limit switching angles back and forth when you're framing shots. It seems like you may have gone just a hair overboard with that. However, the actual framing of your shots, the music, the audio, and the overall artistic idea that went into it was outstanding. Great job!

[Michael Rees]

Thank you, thank you, thank you. It feels nice to hear such good comments on something that I put so much effort into! I love getting feedback (even if it is negative). It keeps the learning process flowing...

[Stephen J. Williams]

Yeah... I would have to agree in saying that this was put together very well (regardless of your age). Keep up the good work!

[Michael Rees]

Thank you again!

[Brian Brown]

Nice work. A valiant effort.

Here's my niggles:
As mentioned, I would look into framing and lighting the big dialogue sequence. The lighting change and framing change on the lead was quite dramatic, and pulled me out of the scene. His close up made his beard so much redder than the medium shot, that it almost looked like a different actor. And the lighting was dramatically different, shot to shot.

Also, as mentioned, violating the 180-degree rule, leaves the viewer confused. Sometimes, that's perfectly OK, but just make sure you're doing it on purpose. Moreover, their session seemed to take place in a super dimly-lit gym, rather than the prototypical antiseptic counselor's office. The super-contrast made it look like an espionage flick. Rules are made to be broken... just break them intentionally, when you choose to do so.

Another thing to watch out for in flashback sequences is not to show modern cars and vans in something supposed to represent 1990. This is difficult, if not impossible to do on a no-budget film, so just keep your shots tight to avoid showing anything modern.

The best advice I can give you, is watch similar films and genres that you intend to make, and take cues from them. Break a scene down shot-by-shot, and then think how you would shoot and light a similar one with the kind of kit you have.

Another good test, for an editor, is to drop the music track out, render down the film... and then try to make it shorter by 1/3, then 1/2, and see if the same story can still be told. This will be like pulling teeth (especially if you wrote the screenplay), but you'll learn a lot about pacing and "beats". You may not use the shorter film, but you'll sure as heck know what can be cut out and still retain the story.

I really look forward to your next production.

[Michael Rees]

Once again, thank you lots. I take EVERY review into consideration for my next projects!!!