PDA

View Full Version : Season of the Dead (my short zombie epic) now on youtube



axlish
02-Feb-2008, 12:03 PM
Part 1 of 3
DAQJpkYz92Y

Part 2 of 3
AKyalL_jmnI

Part 3 of 3
FYRDiJwo8D4

Check it out if you have 30 minutes to kill!

MinionZombie
02-Feb-2008, 12:54 PM
That thar is rather nifty, old bean. Done well, Sir. :)

You found some good locations there, or utilised what you had at your disposal well, there's some rather nice shots in there too. Over all a thumbs up from me. :thumbsup:

Mike70
02-Feb-2008, 03:39 PM
nice film. i enjoyed that quite a bit. i really liked the music at the beginning, it reminded me a lot of some of the early 80s john carpenter scores.

i also agree with MZ - you found some really cool locations to shoot this.:thumbsup:

Mutineer
02-Feb-2008, 06:32 PM
That was pretty fun. I wanted more zombies though and less jibber jabber.

But fun anyways.

capncnut
03-Feb-2008, 05:29 AM
Okay, I'm the first to bring a negative criticism I'm afraid. I don't mean to come across like I'm a troll or anything but I gotta call it how I saw it. Admittedly I only watched Part 1 and I thought it was bad, really bad. The acting was dull, especially the lead, the music was a bargain basement Alan Howarth, the dialogue was 'meh' and the whole thing cheap and unprofessional.

However, the scenes with the zombies were alright and implemented rather well. They shone in the midst of what I felt was a very unexciting experience. I think this would've been a whole lot better if it was more gung-ho with lots of zombies and gore. Sorry to say it like this but that's what I felt.

Feel free to throw rocks at me! :D

kortick
03-Feb-2008, 05:46 AM
I watched the whole thing
and I agree, the zombies were the
best part but they were
not used really at all.

Some of the acting was not
very good, the locations were interesting.
It was a good visual production, but it
fell short in other areas.

Major complaint is that there
were really no zombie attacks in it.

Mutineer
03-Feb-2008, 06:06 PM
Okay, I'm the first to bring a negative criticism I'm afraid. I don't mean to come across like I'm a troll or anything but I gotta call it how I saw it. Admittedly I only watched Part 1 and I thought it was bad, really bad. The acting was dull, especially the lead, the music was a bargain basement Alan Howarth, the dialogue was 'meh' and the whole thing cheap and unprofessional.

However, the scenes with the zombies were alright and implemented rather well. They shone in the midst of what I felt was a very unexciting experience. I think this would've been a whole lot better if it was more gung-ho with lots of zombies and gore. Sorry to say it like this but that's what I felt.

Feel free to throw rocks at me! :D

I'm sure I could ramble on for hours about the technical deficiancy in this one; from camera coverage, sound, acting, coloring and every other film story telling technique;

But I just wanted to have fun.

capncnut
03-Feb-2008, 08:13 PM
But I just wanted to have fun.
Well most girls do. Juuust kiiidding Mute! :D

But yeah, I do know what you're saying about the fun factor. Thing is, it was posted in the filmmakers section and the word 'epic' was attached so I gave an honest opinion and didn't wanna blow smoke for the hell of it.


The acting was dull, especially the lead...
Okay, just found out that the lead is the man himself. I had no idea and this comment was not a personal attack of any kind. Just thought I'd clarify that.

axlish
03-Feb-2008, 08:27 PM
Thanks for the feedback folks.

The word epic is used lightly. I'm not delusional, just thought I'd clarify that.

I have no intentions of climbing in front of the camera again. Sometimes I had help, but most of the time, if you see me on screen, the camera is on a tripod.

DubiousComforts
04-Feb-2008, 05:08 PM
What the heck, the story was better than the DAWN remake and could easily be expanded to an hour or more to develop the characters and ideas. What would be the point of more action and/or gore?

kortick
04-Feb-2008, 05:47 PM
I dont know Dub.

who would ever want a zombie movie
to be too exciting and full of great effects?

what kind of wierdo wants that?

DubiousComforts
04-Feb-2008, 05:58 PM
who would ever want a zombie movie
to be too exciting and full of great effects?
Because it would be boring, and the story being told in this video doesn't require it. Obviously, axlish was working on a zero budget.

Special effects don't automatically make for good living dead movies. In the original DAWN, for example, there was actually a point to the special effects outside of simply being eye candy. That's why the film still works even though the effects can be crude at times.

kortick
04-Feb-2008, 08:12 PM
Oh I see
You are refering specifically to this video
in particular

I didnt say for this video i wanted more gore
I said there wasnt enough zombie attacks
doesnt mean you have to show them eating people
they just have to be an ever present danger

part of romeros dawn was "the utopia sequence"
where he lulled you into a sense that things were ok
then he brutally reminded you how the zombies were still there

totally removing the threat of the zombies
ruins the sense of tension
even when logan had bub as a pet
you still knew there were more zombies outside
trying to get in
the presence of the zombies was always felt if not seen

And I know he didnt have a budget for it
I liked his use of locations, he found some great places
And I did like how his clock read 4:20 LOL

I am merely stating and I stand by it
he used the zombies very effectively in the beginning
and i think it was a mistake to totally remove them
as the story went on.

axlish
04-Feb-2008, 09:15 PM
I am merely stating and I stand by it
he used the zombies very effectively in the beginning
and i think it was a mistake to totally remove them
as the story went on.

I only had the location and the zombies for one day, so I packed it all at the beginning. My theory was that if there wasn't going to be a lot of action, then pack it in in the beginning, and hopefully folks would retain interest long enough for the story to kick in. I've seen a lot of SOV independent films and the most common error that I have encountered is a boring intro.

The locations that I used for Reilly's place, and heck, most other places I used, were private property. I really wanted to use the locations, but bringing zombie extras along was not a possibility. In the end, I decided that the locations were more important than the zombies.

In my defense, I did try and explain the lack of zombies in the radio DJ's address. He explains that severe hurricanes throughout the area had cleared many zombies, but when you do encounter them, there will be a lot of them because they had been amassed in hordes, indoors.

C5NOTLD
05-Feb-2008, 12:06 AM
Nice Job. I enjoyed it.

Yojimbo
09-Feb-2008, 12:58 AM
I have heard what the folks have said, but I for one liked the film, and as zombie films go I have seen flicks with a high budget that this one blew out of the water.

So it's not a perfect film, but the problems I see are primarily budgetary and not one of vision.

Well done sir! As Kortick said, that lingering 4:20 shot was hilarious.