Just watched part of the movie and yes, I have to agree with Chock. I did not find the camera that bad, but the voice acting and machine-gun sounds were just terrible. The machine gun sound effects were not synchronized with the firing of the machine guns, and the people talking were utterly unenthusiastic. It was litterally like watching the replay of an FPS with VOIP chatter between players. Maybe the developers though bomber gunners really were this calm after long experience with battle, but I sincerely doubt they really were. Also, after
Faith, Hope and Charity, I really thing movie-makers, me included, should work more on bringing different character traits into the movie.
Quote:
|
Those familiar with film-making (and this is apparently one of many films by the same guy) ought to know some simple rules for it, yet this film ignores all the basic principles of action directing: the four-second sequence rule, cutting on the beat, cutting on movement, starting with establishing shots, not crossing the camera line etc, etc - the film-maker disregards (or is unaware of) all of these. Since most of this can be learned by simply studying a few action movies, again there is no excuse for not knowing about -and using - these tried and tested basic film-making techniques.
|
I've been making RTS scenarios and movies for a long time, and I've got zero clue as to what you're talking about. Most of us, I imagine, are self-thought from scratch,
sans a few tutorials, and use few or none of the techniques used by professionals. The only tools I ever used to make cutscenes and in-game movies in RTS games was a notebook (so that I'd remember what needed changing and adding after test sessions) and a watch (so that I could time things better). While some film-makers, such as the team behind
Faith, Hope and Charity, seemed professional, I'd assume most are not. As such, expecting them to know professional terms and techniques is asking too much of them, with all due respect.
I can't speak about the large number of inaccuracies of the movie, and so I'll have to take Chock's word that it takes major liberties. If it does, it clearly clashes with its opening message that it's very accurate.