Aviation industry short film (4 min) - critique

[Bruce Buck]

Since I know most everyone here does this professionally and are at a much higher level than me, I know I'll be able to get to good, frank feedback as to the things I need to improve upon, even if it is harsh. My main desire is to know the areas I'm weakest in so that I can focus on improving them.

I work in the aviation industry and wanted to create a piece that showcases what we do, but also tries to help people feel proud to work here (or if you don't work there, want to come work for a place like ours). This is my first attempt to really try and tell a story. In the past I've always been really good at throwing random clips to music, and I suspect there's still quite a bit of that going on here with this piece, but this was the first one I actually attempted to storyboard and try to fill in the gaps. Keep in mind the piece is still in-work so areas like the credits are still not complete. I'd like to focus feedback strictly on the main portion (the first 4-1/2 min).

Take Flight - No Titles
UPDATE: Links removed, see post #6

One thing I'm debating right now is whether or not adding titles with inspirational quotes and our company values adds to the overall impact or whether it distracts. Here is the version with Titles:

Take Flight - With Titles
UPDATE: Links removed, see post #6

Any and all feedback welcome. Here are a few areas in particular I'm curious about:

1. Was I successful in "telling a story"? If so, what was the story as you saw it?
2. Which shots contributed, or had the most impact to the piece, which were just fluff? (just note time in video)
3. Lighting - Any shots that stood out to you as well lit, or poorly lit, or just need post work?
4. Audio - I know my piece lacks audio elements that could add to the impact. Any particular areas where I could have/should have added in some audio?
5. Tempo/style - I know this style of editing isn't everyone's cup of tea. Do you think in general I could have had more impact by choosing a different style?
6. Technical - Any shots that stood out to you as too dark, too light, bad color, too shaky, etc.

 

[david berez]

Bruce,

I'll jump in here with a quick reply and simply a first impression. Overall, the program, though lovely, feels like an indulgence of the filmmaker. That is, its all eye candy and little soul. The shots are almost uniformly gorgeous, but it feels like simply a string out of beautiful shots. And even the most incredible shots strung together get a little monotonous without set up and rhythm. The audience becomes deaden to "eye candy" because that's all there is. I spent the better chunk of my career simply as an editor to some really fine directors and I remember working on a program not dissimilar to this one where we were drowning in shot after shot of beautiful footage. We off lined what I thought was a really gorgeous show, but when we went to the on line, we intentionally mucked up and desaturated many of the shots. I didn't really understand it at first, but then it became clear to me that we were deemphasizing some and setting up others. In the end the show became much more powerful, because there was a rhythm to the shots. The killer shots were infinitely better because we had "teed them up."
My second thought is that for the first several minutes this is a show about "things" and not people. And thats another reason the program feels a little soul-less. And when you finally get to the faces, it simply feels gratuitous like "OK, here come the people" . . . that was a bummer. Viewers make emotional connections with people, not things.

Finally, when I say "an indulgence" what I mean is all those gorgeous shots strung together says "look at me, aren't these shots cool" rather than "look at us, "Acme Aviation" (can't even remember the company). That sounds harsh and I don't mean it to be, but you've composed and executed really beautiful images, but as a viewer you've beat me over the head with them. And finally, the program is too long. By intercutting the people throughout the show, and trimming the overall length, this program will become much more powerful. Be ruthless.

One more thing . . . the lack of nat sound is a huge missed opportunity to immerse the audience in the place and contributes mightily to the "all eye candy" feel. "People are educated through their eyes, but romanced through their ears." The whole program deserves a serious and thoughtful nat soundtrack.

Great work. Can you share some of the slider/timelapse/moco rigs you used?

David

 

[Bruce Buck]

David, I really appreciate your feedback and insight. Looking at it again, I can definitely see now some of the things you point out, and it really makes sense. While I have a huge list of "reasons why" I did such and such, in the end I see where it still might fall short. For example, originally the end/climax of the piece was supposed to be the delivery of our first 747-8 plane; a huge undertaking for all involved, but because of production delays and proprietary nature of the project, it was decided last minute to be cut, so I then decided that would be replaced with the "people section". I agree that I should try and disperse those shots more throughout the piece. I also felt the build-up to everyone coming to work and getting ready to work dragged on a bit. I think my fear was that I wouldn't be able to properly edit the song length such that it still flowed well. I also tend to rely too heavily on the music to carry the piece in regards to sounds and rhythm of the piece.

The final presentation is not until this Friday, so while I'm stressed at the prospect of doing a re-edit (still have to do my day job), I do feel it might be worth the effort to at least try and incorporate some of the feedback to have a better impact. I know for sure after the first presentation (internally, in front of company execs), there will be additional feedback/re-edits before releasing to a public audience, in which I think there will be more time to try and improve the piece.

As far as equipment, I'm embarrassed to admit that gratuitous amounts of warp stabilizer were used throughout. I'd like to think I did the best I could with the constraints/resources I had available to me, but I know it's no excuse. Most of all the timelapse stuff was done with GoPros, with some help of Cam-Do schedulers for some of the longer-term captures (although I used such short snippets it didn't really matter). For motion it was mainly a Glidecam and RC car with some custom mounts, although the vibration was horrible on the RC rig and warp could only salvage so much. Oh, and forgot, scissor lifts from the production floor worked great. I'm assuming someone makes a mini one for film work?

 

[Thomas Koba]

60% of the movie is End Credits. That's about 55% too much, I would say

 

[Adam Rook]

Very interesting feedback. I'm taking that advice for myself, too. I love the shots but I have to say the inspirational quotes are distracting. I found myself more interested in trying to read as quickly as I could so as not to miss the footage. By then the quote had little to no impact and I shortly forgot about it.

I agree less is more. By 2 and 1/2 minutes I was ready for the big ending. I also agree that it ALL felt grand. I wanted to see close ups of work being done, then medium shots of the worker, then their portrait, then the giant shots of what they made incorporated into the plane. Like a firework… launch the scene with a little taste and let me anticipate what's going to happen next and then explode with how awesome their work is and how it contributes to these beautiful machines.

That said, I love the shots. They're beautiful. Nothing wrong with your camera work at all. I'm anxious to see the final cut.

 

[Bruce Buck]

Wanted to follow-up. Thanks everyone for the feedback, and while I was not able to incorporate much of what was suggested, I did at least try to cut some shots and re-order some others, and I will post a link to the version that was presented before employees and company execs. Despite this, the piece was very well received, and people had an enjoyable evening.

I guess this is probably something experienced by many here, where perhaps the "client" is perfectly happy, but you know that it could be a lot better. I reflected a bit on why this is; why it was so hard to get negative feedback from employees and execs, and part of what I think may be happening is the audience that views it. I think this piece is much more of an "insider" video, so everyone was familiar with the people and the significance/meaning of each shot (while to an outsider, much of the footage could easily be interpreted as simple b-roll or filler material). Part of it probably was that it was a reflection of themselves and an opportunity to pat themselves on the back for all the hard work they contribute to the company. As a video that would be presented to the public, however, I can see where it clearly falls short of really helping those not inside the industry understand who we are and make a connection to any storyline.

I look forward in the coming months to revisit this piece and see what things I can incorporate from what's been suggested. Again I appreciate everyone's feedback. Love coming here to learn from you all!

https://vimeo.com/113386959
pw: oactakeflight