It has some flaws but I went for the emotions rather than story.

I hope you enjoy it. Please visit my website at http://www.nightfallsfilm.com

thanks a lot,

Kris

http://www.guyinhisbasement.com/misc/night_falls_large.mov

Oh my God that looks beautiful! Stunning cinematography!! it looks like you found an incredible child actor as well.

I am amazed. So good.

now i REALLY hope that this baby will get me into AFI

The last 8 months were so hard....what I learned on this film....is that directing is hard...so damn hard...im still burned out

I`ve downloaded a small version...
And I like it! Trailer is almost "Hollywood type"!
I almost cried to the end of the trailer...
Well done!

The cinematography looks amazing, I'm way impressed, what did you shoot it on? Aside from that, from what I saw in the trailer you seem to have pulled some good performances from your actors.

My only criticism is the trailer makes no sense; I can't tell what the film is about. It's good to get emotional shots into a trailer, but without story to back that up, I can't see why I would pay eight bucks to see it. I highly recommend you work on the trailer; the film looks great, once you back that trailer up with a storyline people will be blown away. Great job with everything else.

Nathan Fackrell

Plenty of initial trailers don't always give the plot right away. Hell, M. Night's new trailer certainly didn't at the very least.
But Hoeks, that was a very cool trailer, I think of myself having a pretty critical eye and especially when you come out and say there are flaws, but nothing rubbed me the wrong way in this trailer; what got your panties in a bundle?

elliott...

In the "Lady in the Water" trailer we know that Paul Giamatti's character Cleveland Heeps is a maintenance man, he leads a very simple life, he lives alone, he has a very monotonous job, etc. His character is set up in the first minute of the trailer. Suddenly there is something that interrupts all of that, something that throws his life out of balance; what is it that throws his life out of balance? The audience wants to know, that’s what they will pay to go and see. Very simple and effective.

What I'm saying is there needs to be something that will grab the audience’s attention. What is the theme of this film? Who is this child? What is his purpose in the film? Who are all these characters we see? The film looks great, and I think Hoeks deserves to be congratulated. Now, “panties in a bundle” is so sophomoric, come on. I gave a fair and honest criticism. That’s what we, as filmmakers should do. How can anyone learn or progress if people can’t get out of their comfort zone and be honest. I don’t know if any of my projects would have turned out the way they did, if not for the positive criticism and suggestions from fellow filmmakers.

nono I totally agree...what bugged me is the missing story...or a clear missing storyline in the trailer. At this point, I just dont know how to put it in really and keep it exciting. The storyline is so simpel and the film only 13 minutes...ah well. Illl take another shot

Thanx for the criticism.

ps: the film was shot full gate 35mm (which is really super35mm) but we exposed for 1:85 frame which really is regular 35mm.
Also, if you think that shooting super35mm is crazy and way more expensive than regular, its not. Most of the time its even cheaper.

Were you shooting 3-perf, or just cropping it to 1.85 in post? What kind of transfer did you use for the rough cut?

I liked the imagery, especially the fire sequences. The rest of it had a very classical, softly lit look that could work well with the material. I know I would have a hard time directing a 13m short with dialogue on 35mm - aside from the technical aspect, which is easier to handle with an appropriate budget, it seems like it would be very difficult to make something that felt complete and self-sufficient - usually 35mm and high production values imply a feature running time..

we shot 4 perf, and I am still hitting myself over the head for it...I think the reason was to have the option to reframe in post...but I would have safed 1/4 with 3 perf.

we cropped it to 1:85 in post (the trailer is really something between 1:66 and 2:35) and also framed it for 1:85

the transfer is a one light transfer and we will go into a supervised HD transfer (selects) as soon as the cut is done...so it will look better..but I am pretty happy so far

Yea...directing was so difficult...because of the high budget and pressure...people think the more money u have the easier it is...its the opposite

quote:

Originally posted by suspectx:
What I'm saying is there needs to be something that will grab the audience’s attention. What is the theme of this film? Who is this child? What is his purpose in the film? Who are all these characters we see? The film looks great, and I think Hoeks deserves to be congratulated. Now, “panties in a bundle” is so sophomoric, come on. I gave a fair and honest criticism. That’s what we, as filmmakers should do. How can anyone learn or progress if people can’t get out of their comfort zone and be honest. I don’t know if any of my projects would have turned out the way they did, if not for the positive criticism and suggestions from fellow filmmakers.

Sorry man, I was actually asking Hoeks what had his panties in a bundle about the trailer.
About the "Lady in the Water" trailer though, the most interesting thing about that was M. Night's name on the screen. Up until that point it honestly looked like your average dull Paul Giamatti film such as "American Splendor" or "Sideways." A boring janitor with a boring life doesn't look like an intriguing plot. Now it's true, Hoeks trailer didn't even have the luxury of M. Night's name on the trailer, but I felt it worked quite well. Actually it all might just be a bias on my part knowing it's a student film, for which it looked above and beyond average. Had it been a feature film by Joe Schmoe, you're right, I probably wouldn't have given two ****s.

elliott...

Hey, thanks for being cool about it MeGrimlock. Yeah I do agree that without M. Night's name attached, people wouldn't be as into it. Yeah and Hoeks film is above and beyond average...I mean, Super 35mm, that's pretty darn swell.

The trailer for lady in the lake is garbage. Most likly the movie will be garbage too.

That is all.

I'm seeing Lady in the Water on the basis of M. Night's ability to piss off an entire theater of people in one beautiful moment. I'm not completely sure that can actually be repeated, but at the very least he might actually have another cool twist. That, and no matter how much I dislike that bald, fat ****, Giamatti, I can't not watch his movies.

elliott...

"M. Night" is a terrible hack, but what's the problem with Paul Giamatti? The guy's a character actor, not a leading man, but he's apparently where he wants to be. I had lunch with him while working on a film. Nice, down-to-earth guy. (I still haven't seen Sideways.)

I never really would've thought he was anything else but down to earth, it's just his movies, they suck. He honestly has not starred in a single movie a truely care for. He's just a bald, fat, depressing ****. You're right about being a good character actor though, he has been that guy I've seen pop in movies and made me go, "Hey I know him from that one part of that one movie."

elliott...