Is FrameForge worth buying for storyboarding?

[Pete Cofrancesco]

No the point I believe others were making was the pacing is too slow and things shouldn’t be explained to the viewer, we should be thrown into the action learning as we go along. For this genre there always a time element, a race to solve the case.

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay, but I felt some things should be explained verbally though. For example, when someone is arrested and they want to know their criminal history, something like that, should be explained in dialogue, rather than action, shouldn't it?

[Paul R Johnson]

We don't know Ryan. We really don't because we don't use rules like you do, we go with our guts, so it's based on experience, and a good understanding of context. Court room dramas are good examples to consider. You can have a movie with virtually nothing except e dialogue in a room with mostly identical repeated shots and have it a real gripper. A poorer script would die, wouldn't it? If you want to explain with words in a realistic manner, and that is absolutely vital, then go for it. We're just warning you it sounds dull, very, very dull.

[Brian Drysdale]

In films or even TV drama they won't give a full criminal record in the dialogue, they'll use short cuts like "he's got form" or "just out after 8 years for armed robbery" "a busy boy this, highlight was the Brink-Mat gold job at Heathrow". Just throwing a thick file onto a table can say all you need,

You may create the criminal record as part of your character profile as a writer, but you don't have to use every detail in the script.

Having been at a few briefings, I can tell you that they are mostly pretty dull affairs, unless the person giving them is a bit of a character who knowingly or unknowingly injects some humour into it.

As Kubrick used to say *It might be real, but is it interesting?"

Here's a real life bond hearing, how much of this is about the non verbal communication?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/miami-j...-dade-florida/

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay thanks. One example, when it comes to how much information to convey to the audience, there is a scene in my script, where the main character cop, wants to talk a witness into testifying. The scene starts out in a pub, where she is hanging out with her friends, and he buys her a drink and wants to talk to her about the case, why he feels she should testify.

Some readers didn't like this, cause they thought, why would a cop buy her an alcoholic drink, when they are not allowed to do that, when talking to witnesses?

So I wrote it so she specifically asks why he chose to buy her a non-alcoholic one. But then after I wrote it that way, some readers asked why I bothered to mention that the drink was non-alcoholic, as it seems like unnecessary information.

So do you give the readers those details, because some of them can be real sticklers for little details on why a cop would do this in the line of duty, etc, or do you only feed the reader the details that are absolutely more necessary and vital to the plot?

I guess my gut tells me that if a good amount of readers were bothered by the drink being presumably alcohol, then I should mention that it's not, if it's a problem with some then. But that is what my gut tells me more. I guess I listen to the people who have a problem with something rather than the ones who don't.

But that is why I also have background information in the briefing of the case. When readers ask things like why didn't they search the suspect's trash, I feel that maybe I should mention it, because they are thinking the police are not doing everything then?

[Brian Drysdale]

Well it depends if this particular cop bends the rules. Not all police follow the rules, some well known film cops are known to sail close to the wind. There are also corrupt cops, undercover cops who have sex with members of the group they're running a surveillance operation on and other crimes.

You have to set this police character up so that it's not unexpected.

[Ryan Elder]

Well I don't want the cop to be a rule bender at first, not until the villains get away with things and go too far, then he bends the rules later. But I wanted him to start off as an honest cop, and this is early in the story, with this witness situation. So I can mention that the drink is non-alcoholic then if that's better. Some reader's thought it was unnecessary and random, that I mentioned that, but I could specify why he did it then if that's better.

Also, I am wondering how much needs explaining cause the same readers who were bothered by the alcohol, were also bothered by how I didn't explain how the cop knew she was going to be at a bar, since the sequence starts out in a bar.

But you see this in movies all the time, where the police know where someone is, and it's not explained. In The Dark Knight for example, the police arrest Maroni in a restaurant. How did they know he was going to be there? Why didn't they just arrest him at his home, and wait till he got back? It's not explained how they knew.

So do I really have to explain little things like that, like how the cop knew she was going to be at the bar?

[Brian Drysdale]

That's for you to work out. Things can be explained in the script and then that hits the cutting room floor.

May be while out on patrol the cop sees her regularly going there. iI they've been out doing inquiries, who know what other people have said, May be she's known to be a big jazz fan and that's the place to be.Films have coincidences that solve story problems, "Doctor Zhivago" is full of them,"L.A. Confidential" has quite a few.

You should be able too work these things out yourself. Readers come with all kinds of stuff and it's your job to sort out the important stuff from details that in the greater scheme of things don't matter,

[Brad Kraus]

Ryan, I can't help but think that one of the biggest mistakes you are making here is trying to please everyone. It is great to put your script out there for feedback but when you do that, you will, of course, get critical feedback. This doesn't mean that you need to address every single point that is brought forward. Hell, it doesn't even mean that the readers are correct in their criticisms.

it is YOUR script. As Brian points out, you need to sift through all of the feedback and decide how much of it is important to YOU and which criticisms may be minor points that really won't matter to the viewers (or even to you as writer/director/etc.).

You need to stop giving even weight to every single comment that is made about your script and have the confidence to stand behind the decisions that you make and shoot the movie that YOU want to make. Remember, when all is said and done, the only feedback that really matters is whether the audience likes it or not.

Like others here have said, you may need to spend more time working on other people's movies to gain the experience that you need to be confident in your own vision and abilities. Just a thought...

[Paul R Johnson]

Brad's right. You are the CEO, we are your advisors - some of our advice is what we 'think' you want to do, some is way off the marek, some is likely wrong fro your context. Your job is to sift it, weight it, discard the chaff and keep the wheat.

[Pete Cofrancesco]

I wouldn’t worry about Ryan he seems immune to our advice. Despite asking every conceivable filmaking question he seems to be only seeking confirmation for what he has already decided to do. What he lacks in skill and experience he makes up with unwavering determination. I’m not sure if it’s a blessing or a curse since I’m not convinced he’s well suited to be an indie filmmaker.

Someone summed it up best as trying to talk someone through landing a Boeing 747 with no flying experience. We also are in agreement that it would be better to gain experience working for someone else’s.

[Ryan Elder]

Oh sorry, I don't mean to not take the advice, I have taken some of the advice before. It's just sometimes I find some of the suggestions may cause more complications or problems, so I feel that maybe there is a solution out there that might be a solution I am missing, or want to cover all bases, therefore, that's all :).

As for directing this project, I actually thought it would be probably a good idea to get a co-director, so that co-director can concentrate on areas that I am not as familiar, where as I concentrate on directing the portions of the movie, I feel I am more familiar with. I asked other filmmakers and the were split, with some saying co-directing worked well for them in the past, and others saying it's a terrible idea, and it could very well ruin the movie and be a waste of money. What do you think?

[Brian Drysdale]

Writing a good script, never mind a great script, is always full of "complications or problems" if it isn't the script is probably not that good because you are unaware of them. You may be lucky and have a straight run without having any issues, but that's unusual, especially for an inexperienced writer.

It's impossible to cover all the bases, Kubrick attempted to do this later in his career and I doubt he managed it, even through he was driving people around him crazy.

I'm not sure what directing areas you are familiar with. since, based on your threads here, even the basic stuff seems to be causing difficulty or you are unsure about. Good directors tend to be focused and even if quiet in their approach, strong characters, who can think on their feet, so there are pretty of areas for possible conflict with an unsure co-director.

[Paul R Johnson]

Yep - rather brings us back to the basic question - he's unaware of how good or bad he is at everything he tries. I tried to get him to do an audit - to produce a quality statement for himself, in the hope he'd end up with a list of things he's excellent at, or OK with or needs to improve - with the intention that a lightbulb would come on and he'd see where to focus his effort. I don't think he gets it at all.

I've had somebody angling for a job. Their teacher at college tells me how wonderful they are, and twenty minutes on the phone revealed HUGE holes in their knowledge that because of their qualification they were unaware of. However - they sounded really shocked, almost horrified they got really good grades yet didn't know some really basic stuff. They've just asked if they can work on a production next week for some real world experience. I was honest - I told her I was actually short of a number 3 sound, but I hadn't been able to find a girl - something I cannot do without. If she could commit to 3 dates she's in. I was very blunt and said that letting me down would be totally unacceptable. There was a pause and she said in a considered voice - I won't let you down. Good enough for me. It's also a test for her. She will be expected to use her own judgement and minimal experience to make it happen. No supervision, no seeking advice from others. She will have to cope from day one, or sink. I don't expect her to go on a forum and seek advice because she will discover a problem and solving it immediately, on her own is the only path that will work. From the phone conversation, I think she's a good risk.

Our friend Ryan could not manage this kind of circumstance from what I have realised here.

You get a feel for people who will be 'managers' - no matter what, in anything they turn their mind too. I've sadly come to the conclusion Ryan will be an eternal planning phase person. Never quite ready to carry out the roles he wishes to experience. Wanting something guarantees nothing.

"OK, right" seems to be a very common response, as if it means fully understood, then like politics, the follow up question appears - "so you mean.......?" Which we rarely do.

[Pete Cofrancesco]

Ryan reminds me a bit of my aunt who was always unsure if she made the right decision. Years later I read an interesting article that talked about the role of emotions in the decision process. While you would think logic and reason would be the primary driving force, it turns out it’s not.

For example if I offer you a choice between an apple or an orange, a hot dog or a hamburger, they are both equal in value, without an emotional and irrational reaction it’s difficult to choose. It’s like asking a computer it’s favorite color. All the intelligence and knowledge in the world can’t help it answer this question. Logically speaking red, green, and pink have the same value.

It makes me think this is why he needs a co-director to handle subjective decisions or why he relies on rules or classic movies to help make decisions. Maybe I’m wrong but I thought I’d throw that out there.