Whoa, did not expect to get the writer's choice after some of those reviews. I must say I am surprised and grateful. Some very interesting and unusual stories this time around.
Holy hell, Ray, you wrote three? Three?? Along with those reviews, you are one prolific s.o.b. Although I do foresee a "Ray Rule" in all future owcs. |
First, congratulations, Ryan.
You are a d@mn fine writer.
I'm always impressed with the quality of your work.
Whassup with the three stories?There has been a notable SS exodus lately.
Regulars have become increasingly surly and unpleasant in their self-naveling.
It kinda reminds me of that scene in THE PATRIOT where the few survivors returned to the swamp after getting their a$$ shot all to h3ll for the first time.
You may recall there was a fair undercurrent of concern regarding low-almost-no participation in this delayed OWC.
I think this site is wonderful.
I didn't want those that did work to feel like they were participating in a token effort.
I didn't want readers to think they were wasting their analysis on a pittance of entries.
I wanted to contribute to creating the illusion that maybe six entries rather than just four indicated the SS Samurai were not ghosts.
There was no way to know what budget level anyone else was turning in, so I submitted all three to satisfy different budget and execution demands.
DENIED - Indie low budget, common locations and props, minimal SFX
GEN - Indie low budget, common locations, heavier on props and would also require some serious blocking planning and/or Adobe After Effects work. I think this was the only SciFi entry, BTW.
LUMBERJACK - Studio low budget, self directed run at horror which I don't like because I can easily see this sort of sh!t really happening. People scare me.
Don acknowledged there was no entry limit posted as has been done in the past, asked me why I had submitted three entries and understood the reasons I gave.
He asked me to prioritize the stories; I did and said that he could allow any one or all that he wanted to. His call. 100%.
Don's a straight up good guy.
Believe me, if I thought there was going to be a healthy turn out and everyone wasn't so foul and grumbly DENIED woulda been the only entry I submitted.
No need for any "Ray Rule".
"One entry per member limit" is the only line needed.
Some of the things being routinely flagged here are fairly irrelevant.
"I didn't understand. I had to read it twice. It didn't flow".
Whoopee-doo.
Doesn't matter.
Can someone figure out the story and shoot it? Yes/No?
I think we all need to be more cognizant of how films are actually produced.
I'm learning myself that vehicles in any way involved drive up cost.
Locations mean a bunch of people have to get a truckload of equipment there and set up for hours to shoot what may be only a few minutes on the final edit.
That costs money.
How much does it cost to do stunts and wirework?
Insurance? Hire a stunt coordinator?
Machine gun this, pistol that, uniforms with accouterments.
Greenscreen this or make a practical prop?
Sh!t adds up PDQ!
Pie in the sky writing is great to begin with.
Writing as if it's your own money being spent is... something a little different. Ha ha ha!
IMHO, next OWC should be a refinement of this exercise.
-
Indie low budget action.
- Three major locations, (INT/EXT).
- Four or fewer actors, not characters.
- Story is subordinate only to action.
- Minimal props and SFX.
A single location for BROKEN TEETH was the winner.
That was brilliant, Ryan. Hat's off to you.
Second best was A THIEF NEXT DOOR with two interior locations and one outside. Very nice.
HER CHEATING HUSBAND: McMansion INT/EXT + Racetrack INT/EXT. Easy as pie. Sorta.
Three major location changes for a few others also woulda worked out just fine.
For a ten page/minute short that's about enough to start blowing a budget.
You guys are great!
C Ya... !
Pages: 1
Author
Final Word on the June, 2011 OWC
Logged
Locked Board