|dementomstie - 2009-12-10 |
|kiint - 2009-12-10 |
|kennydra - 2009-12-10 |
Don't steal, or you'll be locked up.
Thanks for that.
|Explodotron - 2009-12-10 |
5 stars for stealing candy before money.
|Rovin - 2009-12-10 |
A good short.
|Longshot- - 2009-12-10 |
|fluffy - 2009-12-10 |
Could have sworn this was on here already. Maybe not. Still good.
|Rodents of Unusual Size - 2009-12-10 |
Comeuppance is a bitch.
|j lzrd / swift idiot - 2009-12-10 |
Nelson laugh-&-point goes here!
And here's Ralph saying "when I grow up, I want to wear Future Shorts!"
|finespunabstract - 2009-12-10 |
he could have sold the hole for so much more than that. short term thinking was his downfall.
|Robin Kestrel - 2009-12-10 |
The core idea and the technical execution (in terms of camera work, sound, lighting, and so forth) are fine. Yet I must give this but two stars, because of a more glaring hole... one in the story.
I find it objectionable that the properties of the hole are inconsistent:
1. First, when placed horizontally, it appears to be an extra-dimesional space... the man's hand & forearm extend past where the glass and innards of the photocopier would be, and retrieve his un-crushed styrofoam cup from some unseen space.
2. Next, it appears to also lead to an unseen space in the vertical position as well, as we can see the man's hand & forearm disappear when inserted into the hole.
3. But in the very next scene, the hole --still in the vertical orientation-- becomes a simple 2-D breach in the front of the candy machine, allowing a candy bar from inside to be pulled back out.
(Or did it? Maybe that was a totally different and unrelated Snickers from *inside* the extra-dimesional space. That's the logical assumption, given the hole's operation up to this point. Why would the man assume that this spooky eldritch candy-bar-looking thing is a Snickers from inside the machine, so sure of this that he begins to EAT it? It makes no sense.)
4. We continue to see the hole used as a 2-D breaching device to gain access to the other side of a locked door, and then to the contents of a safe. I won't spoil the ending save to say it also shows that the hole operates as a temporary breach.
Why take up the first 1:15 of a 2:21 film (52% of the movie!) to establish the primary characteristics of your title character and sole plot device only to completely contradict those in the brief remainder of the film?
I can't believe this won the Grand Prize in the Virgin Media Short Film Competition, and was was described by the judging panel as ‘beautifully crafted’ and exhibiting ‘perfect story-telling’. What film were they watching?!
I must agree with this post. The film was clever and had great potential, but for the energy expended to put it together, it should have been consistent.
Do you know why 90% of everything is crap?
Because it only has to be just good enough to appeal to people like you.
|Koda Maja - 2009-12-10 |
It's funny until he suffocates to death.
|pastorofmuppets - 2009-12-10 |
In case anyone else was wondering, the Winnie the Pooh episode where this happens is called "Bubble Trouble" and yes, it is in the hopper.
The "Bubble Trouble" example suffers from this exact same inconsistency, even demonstrated in the same order.
Looks like they ripped off Winnie the Pooh. Binro was right: cartoon logic.
can you please go have a party and watch Dancer in the Dark or something
| Register or login To Post a Comment|