domnita-1
Joined Oct 2005
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see ratings breakdowns and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews1
domnita-1's rating
Hello there, I went to a film screening of this project and even though I had a great time....Flowers just did not deliver.
When it comes to a dialogue driven piece, the director faces a bigger challenge than with any other film genre. The pacing, cinematography, blocking and overall exploration of the scenes have to be interesting or at least follow a particular style. None of these elements were apparent in this project, and all of this had nothing to do with low budget issues, usually what the filmmakers point to at first.
Flowers is a film with a lot of potential, lots of it, for starters it has some precious small moments of great dialogue, but unfortunately it is watered down by clumsy, flat directing (pacing goes from slow to slower), ultra flat and uneven cinematography (I've seen 24p video projects look beter than this), slow scenes cut to more slow scenes, and so on, and so on.
Good writing alone is always great, but a defined directing style, good pacing and good cinematography will make it better.
At 70 minutes plus, it felt like 2 hours.
Again, lots of potential, but next time the writer should just write, let a more experienced or at least "visual" director take over, and hire a DP that knows how to make 16mm look great.
Still, OK film but it could have been so much more.
When it comes to a dialogue driven piece, the director faces a bigger challenge than with any other film genre. The pacing, cinematography, blocking and overall exploration of the scenes have to be interesting or at least follow a particular style. None of these elements were apparent in this project, and all of this had nothing to do with low budget issues, usually what the filmmakers point to at first.
Flowers is a film with a lot of potential, lots of it, for starters it has some precious small moments of great dialogue, but unfortunately it is watered down by clumsy, flat directing (pacing goes from slow to slower), ultra flat and uneven cinematography (I've seen 24p video projects look beter than this), slow scenes cut to more slow scenes, and so on, and so on.
Good writing alone is always great, but a defined directing style, good pacing and good cinematography will make it better.
At 70 minutes plus, it felt like 2 hours.
Again, lots of potential, but next time the writer should just write, let a more experienced or at least "visual" director take over, and hire a DP that knows how to make 16mm look great.
Still, OK film but it could have been so much more.