Thursday, December 29, 2011

FILM SCHOOL ABRIDGED - THE CHEAT SHEET

A while ago I started a little side project called 'Lens Cracker'. I always liked the idea, but I never really did much with it save for a rough cut of the pilot. Consider this the magnum opus.

Early this October I set out with the lofty goal of the basics of Film School into a single 8x10 sheet of paper. This is what I came up with.

THE FILM TECHNIQUE CHEAT SHEET

I like it, frankly. The information on here, though certainly not all-inclusive by any stretch of the imagination, is indispensable in any on-set situation. It's designed as a tool. People to print out and keep in their pocket whenever their shooting. The problem is that it's only a reference sheet; it's only helpful to those who already know what everything means. Chances are good that most reading this blog won't.

So let's change that.

Starting next week I'll be posting bite-sized explanations of everything on this sheet. It'll take a while, but it gives me an excuse to post more regularly.

Cheers for now!

Oh! And post any comments or questions and I'll address them in following installments.

Monday, December 19, 2011

JUDGING THE GCA: NOMINATIONS PART 4

Someone brought up an interesting question to me; when judging the visual appeal of a series, do I judge the merit of a single episode, or the series as a whole.

I do try to take into account the series as a whole, but I use individual episodes to stand in. This is easier with series that I'm already familiar with, where I will look at the series at its most visually ambitious, but for those that I'm not I will look at the visual style from at least two episodes released at different times (i.e. a more recent episode and an older one). Essentially I watch enough to get a sense of why the show was nominated for its visuals.

I will admit this isn't always perfect, but I'm fairly confident in it over-all. An example of this I will absolutely admit to this limitation is Animated Analysis. I'd watched the most recent episode The Brave Little Toaster, and as a control group I looked at the framing and visuals in The Brony Phenomenon and Sonic Underground (not the full episodes, but I scanned through them). A later look at Top 8 Insane Animated Villains shows that the show does on occasion have strong cinematography.

But enough stalling. Ladies and gentlemen, the final nominations from the Visual Appeal category.



17. SPOONY - THE SPOONY EXPERIMENT

EPISODES WATCHED:
Final Fantasy X-2 - Part 2
Final Fantasy X Finale

BIAS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
I have followed this series for some time.

MY THOUGHTS:
The visual effects, when the show has them, are handled well more often than not. As with the green screen effect. The editing is solid. There are some moments of decent shot composition through the series, but it's not consistently strong visually.




18. SINDRA - KEEP PLAYING

EPISODES WATCHED:
Rewind - Sonic 20th Part 1
Rewind - Sonic 20th Part 2
Rewind - Diablo (PS1)

BIAS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
I had not heard of this series previously.

MY THOUGHTS:
Low production values with no distinctive visual style to speak of. Some interesting costumes.



19. ANGRY VIDEO GAME NERD

EPISODE WATCHED:
Dark Castle

BIAS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
I had not heard of this series previously.

Kidding.

MY THOUGHTS:
Set design is paid attention to. In the past lighting has tended to be a bit over-exposed, but has improved in more recent episodes (still no backlight, though). The show is frequently ambitious in its shots and action sequences. Very few shots pop.



20. DAVID A. ROSE - DVD SHELF MOVIE REVIEWS

EPISODES WATCHED:
Mask of the Phantasm
An American Werewolf in London

MY PROCESS:
I hadn't heard of this series in the slightest when I started this out. To be honest, I wasn't expecting much out of it going in with the fairly bland title.

Popping it on, after a short but promising title sequence I was greeted with this image.

Here the character feels drained of color, and the sharpied-on 'MOVIES!' didn't help the first impression. On the background, the note I took reads: Background, though appropriate, feels artificial. Not especially compelling.

I say that because I want to give a sense of where my mindset is at this point. I found the material surrounding the show, such as the screens for the show-trivia and the title graphic design were visually strong. The all-too short moments of animation were like-wise top notch.

And then, as the episode drew to a close, the background I'd taken as a bland Photoshop design suddenly became dynamic as the camera craned up and out into the credits. Seamlessly.

My jaw kind of hung open for a second. Further accentuating this were credits that actually imitating the credits of the Batman animated series, the subject of the review.

After it ended, I popped on another episode. The Halloween-themed American Werewolf review had its main frame looking like this.

David still feels washed out, but this time it's actually appropriate. Everything here is much stronger than the previous episode, visually. But suddenly the episode turned things up to 11.

This sequence is fully, skillfully animated. It's also funny, and is motivated by the material (the skit is an outlet for a commentary on the heavy number of horror reboots/remakes of late).

Everything he's doing visually is motivated by the material being reviewed.

Okay, this is the kind of thing that gets me excited about the DIY review scene; there are flaws, sure. There are limitations in the production, and the knowledge of composition. The pacing is a bit slower than perhaps it could be. But my god... This is a guy who's bringing something new to the table and pushing the boundaries of this style of videomaking and reviewing.

So, the assessment.

There is attention paid to the lighting, though some episodes are better lit than others. The green screen effect is pulled off decently. Composition isn't especially impressive. The backgrounds are appropriate, and frequently help to build a visual style distinct and appropriate to the material being reviewed. The title graphics, informational cards, and credits are all strong. The animation, when used, is strong.



21. TJ OMEGA - TJ TV

EPISODE WATCHED:
Heathcliff vs. Garfield

BIAS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
I have followed this series for some time. I have also been in contact with TJ.

MY THOUGHTS:
Very strong title sequence. The strength of this show is not really in its visuals, though.



22. THE BLOCKBUSTER BUSTER

EPISODE WATCHED:
Red Riding Hood

MY PROCESS:
I'll be shorter here, I promise.

I'd heard of this guy a year ago, and I'd written him off after watching an older episode. There was more ambition in the shots than most, but those shots didn't feel especially skilled in their execution. On more judging-a-book-by-its-cover notes, his title cards weren't especially skilled and his website... well, it's an Angelfire website with all the trappings that go with it.

In private, I've been outspoken against this show.

Today I'm eating my words with a side of humble pie.

The composition is overall solid, and the editing is tight. Lighting is well-exposed. I applaud the success he's had.

Sunday, December 18, 2011

JUDGING THE GCA: NOMINATIONS PART 3

I was talking to someone today who thought these were my nominations for Best Visual Appeal. Of course, if there's one person who'll think that then there's more. Let me clarify: these are all of the nominations in the category of Best Visual Appeal. The My Thoughts section is taken from the notes I took while evaluating them.

There are a total of 22 nominations in the Visual Appeal category. I'm posting them in digestible chunks.

With that out of the way, let's continue.

11. COLOR THE GRAYSCALE - ANIMATION DOMINATION

EPISODE WATCHED:
Asterix and the Vikings
Cars

BIAS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
I was aware of this show and follow it. Karen and myself have been in contact and have collaborated previously. That and she wrote the first guest article for this blog.

MY THOUGHTS:
Nearly everything is done from a single angle. Strong lighting with a backlight. There's attention to color scheme that really makes the frame pop. Great intro. Shots other than the main camera angle often aren't as visually strong.



12. PAN-PIZZA - REBEL TAXI

EPISODES WATCHED:
My Little Pony Friendship Is Magic
Top 10 Disappointing Games [Part 1]
Top 10 Disappointing Games [Part 2]
Ned's Declassified Review [Reviews]

MY PROCESS FOR THIS NOMINATION:
I'd never heard of this show before the judging process. As with Jaimetud, I had some difficulty with this entry but for entirely different reasons.

There absolutely is skill present in the illustrations. Pan-Pizza himself has a great deal of character, and the main image is strong. Unfortunately, it doesn't leave much of an impression in the episode because it goes by so quickly and the videos so rarely cuts back to the character.

It actually took me a couple episodes to make the connection that tank Pan-Pizza's sitting in is actually the Rebel Taxi of the show's name.


Frankly surprised there's not more done with that concept. A taxi driver talking about the shows he's seen to his eccentric passengers would make an interesting framing device for a review show of this vein.

As with many DIY review series like this, there are several cut-away gags. Unlike those other series, I had difficulty identifying which were created for the show and which were taken from other sources. This isn't necessarily a bad thing from a viewing experience, but it does pose a problem in trying to evaluate the visual appeal of the show itself.


What is undeniably created for the show is undeniably high quality and visually compelling. Color schemes have strong cohesion and there is attention to composition.



13. MOVIE FEUDS

EPISODE WATCHED:
Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer

BIAS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
I'd not heard of this series before this series.

MY THOUGHTS:
The background and title sequence are polished, and there's attention paid to the lighting (yay backlight!). The green screen effect is solid, but there's a green tinge to the characters. There is very little variety to the shots, sticking largely to the single frame. It's effective for the show's purpose, but the frame's composition doesn't really pop.



14. NOSTALGIA CHICK

EPISODE WATCHED:
The Christmas Shoes

BIAS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
I've followed this show for some time.

MY THOUGHTS:
There's variety in the shots, and occasionally there will be a visually interesting image, but the strength of this show is not in its visuals.



15. PHIL BUNI - THE BUNNY PERSPECTIVE

EPISODE WATCHED:
The End of Evangeleon
Predator 2

BIAS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
I've followed this show for some time. I also have been in contact with the show's creator.

MY THOUGHTS:
There's attention paid to the color scheme and the set design. The puppet was custom-designed and built. Twice. Lighting doesn't jump out, but is intentional. Same with the framing. That's really what everything about this show feels like: intentional, approachable, with nothing so polished that it distracts.



16. THE SHADES - ANIME TAKEOVER

EPISODE WATCHED:
Top Ten Anime Theme Songs

BIAS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
I was aware of this show previously and have watched several episodes. We've been in contact in the past.

MY THOUGHTS:
This show has heavy technical limitations. John does a lot with what he has, but doesn't overcome those limitations.



Hey everyone! This entry is dedicated to Stephen from Animated Analysis for commenting on an earlier post (Because I do that. Comment, people!).

Something I feel I should mention in light of his comment; when I'm judging at a show I'm unfamiliar with, I will always watch part of a second episode to compare visual styles. If both have comparable visual styles, I'll only watch the one episode (generally the more recent of the two). If the style is substantially different, I will watch both.

For someone like Linkara, who I'm familiar with, I'll look for a more visually ambitious episode rather than his regular episodes.

Saturday, December 17, 2011

JUDGING THE GCA: NOMINATION PART 2

A bit of an update about the finalist choosing process before I go on with today's post.

FOR EACH CATEGORY
PRIMARY JUDGE is responsible for choosing the first 2 FINALISTS.
After this, the SECONDARY JUDGE chooses the 3rd FINALIST.
And finally ROBERT MILLION chooses the 4th FINALIST.

It is done in this order.

Okay, moving on to more of the nominees for Best Visual Appeal.

6. PHELOUS

EPISODE WATCHED:
The Human Centipede 2

BIAS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
I was aware of this show and have followed it in the past.

MY THOUGHTS:
The color pallet here really pops and the backgrounds are visually interesting. There is attention paid to lighting, though shadows are cast on the back wall. The camera work is solid, though occasionally there are some focus issues.
It is important to note this episode used a non-standard location.



7. JAIMETUD

EPISODES WATCHED:
ZOMBIE LAKE
PLANET OF THE APES
FROM PAGES TO PICTURES - STAND BY ME

MY PROCESS FOR THIS NOMINATION:
I actually had a bit of difficulty with this entry. I'd never heard of him and I couldn't see anything that would really warrant attention in visual appeal in the episode I'd chosen to watch... yet he'd been nominated by three separate people. I ultimately ended up watching several of the episodes.

And finally I found this sequence.

I can't tell if this was green screen or if it's filmed on a set. That's a good thing, either way. The composition in this sequence is competent, and I've seen material like this in decent short films.

It contrasts heavily with the episode's opening scene.

Or in a more recent Halloween episode, which has fairly bland framing in front of a decent green screen effect.

Compare the above two shots with the shot below.

The above was filmed for the 'Planet of the Apes' review. It's appropriate to the material being reviewed and appears right out of a low-budget 1970s science fiction film. The lighting is a bit flat, but is bright enough not to be distracting. The composition and editing are competently handled.

For the final episode I watched, from his 'Pages To Pictures' series, I have to admit there was a quiet, competent style to it. The colors were warm and the shots felt appropriate.


8. SOUTH JERSEY SAM
EPISODE WATCHED:
TOP 13 BEST FOXES

BIAS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
I've never heard of this show previously.

A bit of an aside, but there really is no reason the average length of his episodes should be approaching an hour in length. The information is decent for each entry, but a 13-part list like this would probably have been better served being 13 separate videos.

MY THOUGHTS:
There is a charm to the Machinima style of presentation. The slide-show approach helps to minimize animation limitations of earlier episodes (well, at least of the first episode). There's a rough classically animated segment which seems to have been done specifically for the episode which is very well handled.



9. SOME JERK WITH A CAMERA

EPISODES WATCHED:
CAPTAIN EO PART ONE
CAPTAIN EO PART TWO

BIAS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
I'd heard of the show before but hadn't really given it a chance.

MY THOUGHTS:
This is a series about the attractions of Disneyland and it's filmed entirely at Disneyland. Every shot is a different location. The hand-held camerawork doesn't distract and there's strong editing. There's a documentary charm to it, but this show's strength is not in it's visuals.



10. COUNT JACKULA

EPISODES WATCHED:
HALLOWEEN SPECIAL #4: GARFIELD
UNREST

BIAS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
People had mentioned him to me previously.

MY THOUGHTS:
The costume and set design create an interesting horror esthetic. There is attention paid to lighting is some episodes. There's little variety in the shots, but the framing does what it's supposed to.

Friday, December 16, 2011

JUDGING THE GCA: NOMINATIONS PART 1

Starting today I'm going to do something a bit different. A number of people have asked about who was nominated. While it's not my place to release the whole list it doesn't mean there's nothing I can do. There are two categories I'm the primary judge of; Best Visual Appeal and Best Writing. It's these I will be posting on.

I'm decided on doing this for two reasons:
  1. Further transparency, as I'll be talking about some of my reactions to it.
  2. Just maybe it will introduce people to some shows they otherwise wouldn't give a chance to.


NOMINATION #1 - Apollo Z. Hack

EPISODE WATCHED:
DAMN! - Watcher In The Woods

BIAS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
I was aware of this show and have followed the show since its inception. Matt and myself have collaborated in the past and plan to do so again.

MY THOUGHTS:
There is an identifiable visual style which is consistent despite changes in locations and image filters. The post production elements are effective more often than not. The lighting is competently handled and visually interesting.


NOMINATION #2 - The Game Show Reviewer

The Game Show Reviewer

EPISODES WATCHED:
The Many Themes Of Jeopardy
The Price is Right - Part 1

BIAS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
I have never watched this show until judging these awards. Before this, I hadn't heard of this show.

MY THOUGHTS:
There are technical limitations to the physical production, but the green screen effect itself is pretty seamless. The shots themselves are varied and sometimes visually interesting (if dark). Each episode seems to have a CGI environment custom built. At times the presentation rivals that of Angry Joe.


NOMINATION #3 - Animated Analysis


EPISODE WATCHED:
The Brave Little Toaster

BIAS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
I was aware of this show previously and had watched an episode previously.

MY THOUGHTS:
The animation is well handled. The framing isn't particularly interesting. There doesn't seem to be attention paid to the lighting.



NOMINATION #4 - Atop The 4th Wall


EPISODE WATCHED:
Pokemon: The Electric Tale of Pikachu

BIAS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
I was aware of this show and have followed it for some time. This episode was chosen because its his most recent visually ambitious undertaking.

MY THOUGHTS:
This show's effectiveness is not in its visuals. What Linkara is good at is building atmosphere though pacing and sound design. The editing is solid.



NOMINATION #5 - Angry Joe Show


EPISODE WATCHED:
Saints Row: The Third Angry Review

BIAS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
I was aware of this show and have followed it for some time.

MY THOUGHTS:
The color scheme of the show lends a cohesive look to the show. The green screen effects are generally very effective and the lighting is well-exposed.
Little variety to the shots. The CGI background is visually interesting.

Monday, December 5, 2011

JUDGING THE GCA: JUDGING VISUAL APPEAL

A question was raised about how I'm going about evaluating my categories. This point is as good as any to mention that the two primary categories assigned to me are Best Visual Appeal and Best Writing.

I'm working my way through Best Visual Appeal right now, so let's start with my process there.

Because of time, I obviously can't watch all videos a reviewer has made, so I watch their most recent video. If I'm unfamiliar with their material, I will cue up a second video and scan through it to see if the visual style is consistent. If the second video has a different style than the first, I'll watch it as well. I'm looking for lighting, shot composition, the color scheme and the general aesthetics.

Shot composition:
  • Are shots constructed with care or are they haphazard?
  • Do they follow the rules of compositions?
  • How effective are they at conveying the intended message?
  • Is there consistent quality between shots, or do separate shots contrast with the overall tone?
Lighting:
  • Is there attention paid to lighting?
  • Is the lighting flat and lifeless, or does is there a style achieved with the lighting beyond 'make the subject visible'?
  • Are there multiple shadows projected on the wall? (bad)
  • Is there a backlight?
Color Scheme:
  • Is there attention paid to create a distinct color pallet?
  • Does it compliment the show's concept?
General Aesthetic:
  • How does everything work together?
  • How does the editing impact the viewing experience?
  • If there are effects, how effective are they? Are they distracting to the experience or do they add something?
  • And yes, how do I feel when watching this? Seriously, something may break every composition rule and still pop visually.

Because of the visual nature of this category, I will actually take screenshots of certain shots for later reference.

I will take notes in point form for each nomination in a Word, and then I will put a 'Yes', 'No', or 'Maybe' in brackets beside the title based on whether I could see it a genuine contender for the top slot. 'Yes' and 'No' are obvious, even if reasons are on a case-by-case basis. 'Maybe' means that though I feel it's strong, this nomination has elements that bring it down. If I don't get four 'Yes' votes, I will be revisiting these nominations.

Thus far, I've only gotten one 'Yes'.

Sunday, December 4, 2011

JUDGING THE GCA: ON THE JUDGES

The fourth day! Short one today.

ZOMBIFICATION ASKS: Who got the podcast section?
Um... This is going to come across as more flippant than I'd like, but Judge #4.

I'm sorry I can't be more forth-coming at this point; the person who's judging that has not made it public that they're judging these awards and it's not right for me to take away their right to privacy.

Though I won't reveal the identities of any judge who's not already explicitly announced their involvement, there are more things I can say about them without violating any rights, implied or otherwise.

Judges were chosen on a few set criteria.
  1. Judges cannot have been nominated in any category.
  2. Judges must be familiar with the online DYI style of reviewing.
  3. As much as possible they must not be seen as being biased in their selections.
Three of the judges have made videos critiquing review series and/or the state of online criticism in this community. At least three have written extensively and intelligently about the subject, whether it be on blogs or forums. Oh, and I'm not the only judge with a background in film theory.

But who can I actually confirm? Well, as stated in a previous post, Robert is the only judge to be associated directly with CriticTV. Aside from myself, only MartialHorror of Critiquing The Critics has made his involvement public.

I believe many of the judges will be made public when the winners are announced.

Friday, December 2, 2011

JUDGING THE GCA: HOW IT WORKS

Well the first two days of judging is over. Time for another blog entry!

I might as well talk a little bit about the slightly daunting task the judging task is and how we're doing it. There are two basic steps judges have to take. The first step, of course, is to narrow each category down to 48 finalists (4 per category) and 12 winners.

This poses some complications of its own.

There are 315 individual nominations between 12 categories. Assuming an average of 20 minutes a video/nomination, that's 105 hours of raw episodic footage. More than 4 and a half straight days, or 5 hours a day for 21 days. That's not including any additional time spent on the evaluation process. Everyone involved is a volunteer, so this isn't exactly realistic.

So let's talk about the process.

As mentioned in the previous post, there are 7 judges, including Robert. I want you to break that down mentally as 6 and 1, as Robert's a special case.

Each of the 6 judges will be charged with 2 Primary categories each. In these, the judge will watch and evaluate every entry and narrow down to 4 finalists. In addition, each judge will be charged with 2 Secondary categories (which are another judge's Primaries). Again, 4 finalists each.

At this point, every category will have been reviewed separately by 2 separate judges. There will be somewhere between 4 and 8 finalists. At this point, these 2 judges will debate and narrow these down to 4. If an agreement can't be reached, (i.e. each judge had 4 entirely different finalists) then the finalists could be extended to a maximum of 6.

Now, Robert has decided to watch all 315 nominations himself and weigh in on the finalists as well. In this way, the effects of any one person's bias will be minimized.

The second step is voting. Most votes wins. Second most becomes the runner-up. Simple as that... Okay, so not quite so simple as each judge now has to watch any entries they hadn't already in order to make the vote, but that's how the cookie crumbles.

Do you have any questions about this process? I'm planning quite a few more of these, so hit me up! I'll do my best to answer any questions or criticisms you might have.

Thursday, December 1, 2011

JUDGING THE GOLDEN CRITIC AWARDS: THE TRANSPARENCY PROJECT

For those not aware, the Golden Critic Awards are an independent award show intended to celebrate and recognize the work of the homebrew reviewer community.



As you can imagine, it has a bit of a PR issue right now.

The perception many have is that the show is little more than something intended to give more praise to the people of TGWTG. Or to give awards to people who really don't deserve any recognition for their work, people who's work is so sloppy as to be practically unwatchable in any other circumstance.

When Robert Million approached me to be a judge in mid-November, those were chief among the concerns I raised. You can be assured that if I didn't like the answers I got, I would not be willing to have my name associated with this thing. I did, and I am.

Though the tone coming across in the above video is flippant, the idea behind it is not.

Not including Robert himself, there are six judges who've been selected from many different backgrounds. In order to appear as unbiased as possible he is the only judge associated with CriticTV, through which the GCAs are organized. The rest where chosen from a myriad of different backgrounds and social circles, some of whom I personally recommended. Out of respect for those judges who want to remain anonymous, I won't divulge names; however I can say that I'm not the only person with formal training in film theory.

I've made the decision to be transparent about my judging process. In this way I hope to show these awards in a better light; to bring to light the process and perhaps counteract the hesitations many people have of these awards.

Wednesday, November 30, 2011

GUEST ARTICLE: HOW TO MAKE AN INTRO (CTG TV)

I approached several people about using their intros after the last article for a follow-up and a possible video tie-in.

Karen Demsko of Color the Grayscale TV blew my away by writing the following about the approach she took to make her very effective intro.

Coming up with the CTG TV intro, was an interesting experience, in that I was able to come up with an idea myself, without any outside interference.


Meaning I had free reign, creatively. Boo ya.


However, though I had the creative freedom to fly like an eeeeeeeeagle, I still followed the same process of creation that I always do.


The first was to ask myself “What am I looking to see?” I jotted down design ideas and thought about what CTG TV represented to me and how I wanted to convey my feelings and ideas to my audience.

From there, I took these ideas and made about four to five rough drafts, sketching out ideas and doing very basic storyboards.

More times then not, I buffet style through my ideas and come up with a Frankenstein of a project that I am truly proud of.


Something to note as well: I had to be aware, at all times, of my tools, abilities, and time.

As much as I may have longed to have a professional grade intro sequence, I may not have had the time (due to work or other priorities), the tools (such as certain computer software), or general artistic ability to create what my imagination might have cooked up.


Next was to figure out what music I wanted to use.

This seems like an odd one to add, but it’s one I feel I need to add. The likelihood that my intro would be silent was slim to none.

Music and/or voices can be one of the more challenging aspects of the creation process. I say this from my own personal experience, as I am not musically inclined. Places like istockphoto are a great for finding music that you can use (though it will cost you), but if you happen to know somehow who plays or creates music ask them for help! Having such a valuable resource should not be overlooked.


The next step was to storyboard.

People tend not to do this and I’m not exactly sure why.

Laziness perhaps? I can’t be entirely sure, but this process always, always, ALWAYS helps me further down the line (when shooting footage and animating).

This helped me organize my vision and the music down into one coherent idea.


Last, but certainly not least, was to actually get down to the nitty gritty and start production.

With my preproduction out of the way, it was time for me to get cracking on the intro.

I set up my camera and lighting so that the first two shots would have the light needed in order to look good in the gray-scale color scheme I was going to make. The third shot, in retrospect, could have been lit better, but I’m still pleased with the results.


That was the easy part. Now came the hard part. Animating.

The entire animation was done in Flash (yes I know what your saying: “what were you thinking?!” this was before I could acquire Adobe After Effects) and took about two solid weeks to complete. Making sure every patterned ribbon (there were four), every ball (there were eight), and every swirly line (there were three) was exactly the way I wanted it to be and matched the part of the music when the animation would appear. This intro was to encompass my entire brand in one short, complete burst and I knew it needed to be just right. I wanted the colors to be vibrant (representing the vibrancy that my shows would hopefully be), the logo to be revealed over a small period of time (building a small amount of anticipation that something awesome was just about to start), and, most importantly of all, to leave just as quickly as it came. I wanted it to be a small burst of something, but nothing that lingered too long on the screen.


After this was finished, I went into postproduction and I took both my live action shots and my animation and lined them up with the music in Final Cut Pro. And viola! The project was done!

Thanks so much to Karen for agreeing to do this. Check out her show, Animation Domination, if you haven't already.

...I have no idea why the formatting is so wonky.

It's at this point I should dedicate this to Montag for a talking about his own minimalistic approach to making an intro... does that even work with a guest article? Oh well.

Monday, November 14, 2011

SEVEN DEADLY SINS OF THE HOMEBREW VIDEOMAKER: TITLE SEQUENCES

Hey all, welcome to the second installment of my series on the common mistakes in Homebrew videos. In case you missed the last one... you should check it out.

Blatant self-promotion? Eh, why not.

A note about this article; though this could certainly be applied to a variety of different internet video series, this issue is most apparent in reviews.

J
oin the conversation below and suggest your own deadly sin!

DEADLY SIN NUMBER TWO: REGARDING TITLE SEQUENCE
I don't care how much you like that song, there is no purpose served in having a two minute intro to a ten minute video. Every second spent playing clips from previous episodes is a second the video is making an audience wait for fresh content.

Though it would be easier, I can't advise against title sequence universally; the reality is while a great title sequence can keep an audience interest sustained in an otherwise average review series a bad title sequence can turn the same audience off in their first episode.

The real problem is that most of those who use them don't actually understand the purpose of a title sequence. If you've got a show, be honest; do you actually know why you have a title sequence, or are you just including one because everyone else has one?

The Purpose of a Title Sequence
Guild regulations require that the key creatives be credited near the beginning of a film or television show. In all likelihood, this is where the practice would have originated.

Though movies had them in some form or another since the early 1900s, the title sequences of the homebrew scene really have their origins in television if only because episodic television, like serialized reviews, use the same title sequence in each episode (where a movie's will only be seen once). We can begin there. The following list should not be considered all inclusive, but is a start.
  1. A title sequence is intended to set the tone for the show.
  2. Every episode of an average TV series will have different writers, directors, and in the case of shows like The Outer Limits cast and settings. The title sequence gave a sense of cohesion and familiarity to the series.
  3. A title sequence gives a buffer of time for those people coming in late to the program.
The third entry, as you can imagine, is the one that absolutely doesn't apply to videos for the internet.

Common Misteps in Homebrew Title Sequences
On the internet, the audience always starts the video at the 00:00 mark. Unlike the makers of Buffy or Batman, you know absolutely where the audience starts your video. Add to that the acceleration of attention spans and well... The reasons for a long title sequence on the internet are greatly diminished. There will always be exceptions, but think in the neighborhood of 30 seconds as a maximum.

Some other practices which diminish the effectiveness of a title sequence include but are certainly not limited to:
  • REPETITIVENESS. Doing a montage of clips from previous episodes where each shot consists of the host talking or gesturing from the same camera angle. This highlights the limitations of the show. It also can send the message that the host is trying too hard with even having a title sequence.
  • BAD MUSIC CHOICE. More than anything else in an intro, the music chosen becomes tied with the show. Choosing something that's over-used or something that's at odds with the tone and concept of the series really will leave a bad taste in the mouths of your audience. Plus, you know, that whole copywrite thing.
  • BAD CUSTOM MUSIC. Commissioning a song for your video to avoid Copywrite issues is very admirable. Unfortunately most often a videomaker will go with the first musician who's willing and not the person who's the right choice for the role. This often leads to a song that's painful on the ears because of the musician's limitations or a song that's a sharp contrast to the tone of the show.
  • HAVING A TITLE SEQUENCE. Not every show needs a full title sequence. Sometimes a title and a music sting is enough (What The Fuck is Wrong With You), and sometimes a video doesn't need so much as a logo (Nostalgia Critic).
Tips for Making a Good Title Sequence...?
There's not much I can say here, really. The reality is there's no magic formula because every case is different. To do it justice, I'd have to do some case by case looks at title sequences which work (and which don't).

Honestly, that may well be something that needs more than just an article. At this point I turn it to you, guys: is there any reviewer or videomaker who'd be willing to let me publicly do an analysis of their title sequence? Any volunteers can contact me in any way they can find to do so, including by posting in the comments or by e-mail: bdmacdonald.films@gmail.com

To be continued...?

This article is dedicated to Darren Maher for being an awesome dude and posting intelligently on a previous article.

Because, I do that. Comment people!

Saturday, October 8, 2011

SEVEN DEADLY SINS OF THE HOMEBREW VIDEOMAKER: MICROPHONES

I spent a lot of time thinking about the most noticeable mistakes made by those in the Homebrew scene; this is the first of a series of seven articles looking at that. Or eight. Or twenty.

My blog, my rules baby.

Feel free to join the conversation and suggest your own deadly sin below!


DEADLY SIN NUMBER ONE - USING THE CAMERA MICROPHONE
Regardless of the quality of your camera, the attached microphone is not designed to give you good audio.

No really.

See, microphones are designed for different purposes. There are different pick up patterns and frequency ranges, each designed to record in specialized ways. The more expensive the microphone, the more specialized its use. A microphone designed for a drum set isn’t going to work as well in recording a trombone, and vice versa.

And your built-in camera microphone? It’s designed to pick up everything indiscriminately. You, the dog in the next room, and even the motor of the camera itself are all picked up with equal importance. Even in a best-case scenario, you’ll end up with a permanent hum from the camera’s mechanisms.

But there is a way to optimize the sound you get from any microphone: placement.

Makes sense, right? How close the microphone is to the subject effects how well that sound is recorded.

To give you some idea, your average directional shotgun microphone used on professional movie sets is at optimized distance at 2 feet from the actor’s chin. It’s not a perfect comparison, but it’s a decent ballpark.

The basic set up for reviewers is more likely to place the camera at least 6 feet away from the subject. Other videomakers will often go further. Are you beginning to see the problem here?

Of course, it’s always possible to place the camera to optimize sound quality, but then you’re highly limited in what shot’s you can get. Essentially, you’re being held hostage by the microphone. And even with the most optimized placement, you're still not going to eliminate the hum from the camera’s motor.

MICROPHONE TIPS
No getting around it, anyone wanting to make the jump into video making of any kind needs a separate microphone if they want good sound quality. There are several approaches you can take to get better sound. I’ll avoid the more obvious options such as lapel or hand-held microphones and get into more outside the box suggestions.

- Remember, it’s more about microphone placement then microphone quality. And just because a microphone is more expensive, doesn’t mean it’s best for your needs. I’ll reiterate what I said previously; as microphones get more expensive, they get more specialized. Do your research, and don’t be afraid to talk to an expert.

-You can take a page or two from the big boys. That carbon fiber extendable pole holding the microphone is called a boom. If you’ve a friend you can rope in, duck tape and a broom handle will give you the same function.

-Going back even farther, in the late 1920’s filmmakers would hide microphones in various props such as flower pots and have the actors perform the scene around them. This would likely have to be built into the concept of the show, but this can help to improve the audio quality while keeping the microphone invisible.

-Record the sound separately and after the fact. When filming the highly influential El Mariachi, Robert Rodriguez would have his actors re-do their lines immediately after he cut. In this way, the rhythms and pacing would be fresh in their minds. In editing, he would cut to another shot when the dialogue started to go out of sync. No reason you couldn’t do the same.

-Godzilla dubbing. Similar to the last tip, except the videomaker makes no attempt to sync the audio. Again, this has to be incorporated into the show concept, but in the right hands this could have a lot of potential.

Friday, September 30, 2011

TRIBUTE TO THE HOMEBREW SPIRIT

I have and will continue to be critical of many individual elements connected to the Homebrew Videomaking scene, but that should never be confused as disdain. I support this movement and what it represents. Beyond the obvious idea of the underdog and burgeoning filmmaker, my reason is simple: nearly every important movement in film history has it's roots in a rebellion against the status quo by someone embracing the same spirit I see in the Homebrew Videomaker.

THE BROTHERS LUMIERE AND EDISON
It's hard to say who got to it first, but these were the people we owe for the medium of film. And while the Lumiere Brothers created far and away the most interesting shots, it was Edison who embraced the medium as a way to tell stories. Also Edison was the first to make home movies.

So here I solute the innovators, the craftsmen, the insane entrepreneurs who got out there with their crazy inventions and laid the groundwork for an entire medium.

EISENSTEIN
At the birth of Communist Russia, and at the time when Communism was still full of idealsim, this guy had the crazy idea that editing was as important in filmmaking as the writing or the shot composition. This guy's theories, and the films he employed them in, are still used in film classes.

A toast to the revolutionaries.

THE FRENCH NEW WAVE
Rebelling against the vapid glamour of Hollywood productions, the leaders of this movement set out with micro crews and smaller budgets and broke every rule in the book. Hand-held camera? These guys did it first. Jump-cuts? Right here. Not everything they did worked, but the homebrew scene owes much to these guys.

Respect to the rebels.

MTV AND THE MUSIC VIDEO
The early days of MTV, music videos weren't exactly reknown for their artistic prowess. Prominent working directors weren't exactly knocking down the doors of musicians to make a music promotion vehicle. That role went instead to the guys who did. People like Spike Jones and Michelle Gendry weren't especially skilled in the technical department, but they had ideas and broke many-a-rule to make them happen on shoe-string budgets.

In one famous case, Spike Jones wrapped the camera lens in a sandwich bag so he could do an under-water shot. Ballsy.

Props to the ballsy gentlemen of the MTV age.

HOMEBREW IN THE INTERNET AGE
There is a quote that someone made; an artform can't be considered an artform until it's available to everyone. This, they proposed, was as true with paint as with music. If that's the case, then it's only been in the last 10 some odd years that we've seen the artistic legitimization of both animation and movie-making.

It's an exciting time.

It's a time when more videos are uploaded online than produced for television (at the 2008 rate of upload, it'd take 60 days to upload to youtube what American television stations took 60 years to make).

It's a time where ideas matter more than production values.

And yes, it's even a time where a reviewer can be a bigger draw than the media they review.

So here I celebrate the spirit of the Homebrew.

Author's Note
Why hey there! As stated in the previous post (part 2 of which is coming at some point), this article is dedicated to Pugsly6338 for being the only person to actually post a reply to my last article. Good for you, Pugsly6338!

Monday, September 5, 2011

CRITICAL TIMING PART 1: WITH APOLOGIES TO BILL WATTERSON

With my magic marker, I've turned this ordinary cardboard box into a TIME MACHINE! It's filled with some of the most high tech gizmos corrugated paper products can build, and it's built for two! Now, if you'll indulge your own child-like imagination, the two of us are moving backwards through the churning and wildly unreliable mists of time.

And we've arrived at our first destination, 1716.

That wonderful aroma is the smell of rotting fish. I landed us in the wrong part of town... um, sorry.

If we go instead to a concert you'll notice something unusual; you're at a live performance!

That's not too unusual, come to think of it. What is, though, is that this will be the only place you can ever hear music. In 1716 if you want to chill out and listen to music it'll be a full evening and a pretty penny.

Obvious, yes, but a couple things you should notice:
  • At no time can you pick and choose the song to listen to.
  • Every song you're guaranteed to hear from it's intended start point.
  • Your average composition is going to be upwards of 10 minutes on average.
  • Bach was pop, if you can believe it.
Well, okay, sure you could also listen to the bard playing on the corner, but *pfft* who goes to 1716 to listen to a 2-bit ukelele player?

Back into the time machine and forward a bit to 1915. A boring year, to be honest. Just avoid Europe. Films exist, of course, but these days you'd still be discovering music in the live concerts... but wait! Now you can actually take the music home with you on a record! Or on the radio!

Well, if you're rich at least.

Aaaaand 1956. Mind the smoke, I think we dropped a carburetor over New Mexico, there. Oh well, it's not like anyone ever goes to Roswell anyway... wait, you hear that? Music!

What do you mean this is getting predictable?

Radios are in cars and as an indirect result radio is now the prominent way people discover new music. Teenagers got to choose away from their parents what they wanted to listen to on a mass level for the first time. And, of course, the music itself has had to change because of this. Always does, mind, but this is the time where it gets fun! Well, for me at least... I'm a weird duck like that.

Music producers of this era have a lot riding on the music they make. In this era, it isn't unusual for some of the smaller music producers to bet everything they had on the next single (and then do it again on the next, and the next...). These guys couldn't fight with the unlimited resources of the big labels, so they fight smart. First though, what's the biggest thing this radio revolution means?
  • Unlike live performances, there's no guarantee you're going to turn into any song at the beginning. You turn on the radio, you change the station, and it's just as likely you'll land halfway into a song.
So knowing that, here's what these producers did.
  • Limit song length to less than 3 minutes to maximize rotation.
  • Structure the song with the hook repeated as many times as possible to increase the chance you'll hear it when scanning the channels, catch the catchy bit, and stay to hear the rest.
Now isn't that cool? Now buckle up that corrugated seatbelt, it's home to the present! Huh, it's not starting.

That's not good...

Tell you what, you go ahead; I'll catch up in a bit!

TO BE CONTINUED...

Author's Note:
All dates are approximate and entirely unresearched. Inaccuracies are not only possible, but to be expected!

In fact, let's make this into a contest.

The first person in the comment section to correctly identify an error or expand significantly on a point from the article will have the next article dedicated to them.

And the person who brings up the most interesting idea related to the subject will have the one after that dedicated to them.

Thursday, August 18, 2011

THE ANTI-CRITIC BREAKDOWN: WHY SUBURBAN KNIGHTS FAILS AS A FILM

The Anti-Critic Breakdown was written for Busy Street, a satirical blog which is known for being heavily critical of the homebrew review community. My motivation for doing so has been questioned, but I have no regrets. It was a chance to go outside of my comfort zone and, frankly, I liked the irony of contributing to a site that twice directed it's gaze negatively in my direction.

A couple weeks ago, the owner of the site did a purge of nearly all of it's archived posts.


My article was among those on the chopping block.

I was debating re-writing parts of it before posting, but that feels... I don't know, dishonest somehow. So I'm presenting it here pretty much in it's unedited form. Though I did fix the formatting.

THE ANTI-CRITIC BREAKDOWN
All too recently the last entry in the Suburban Knight mini-series/movie was posted, thus ending the 7-part TGWTG anniversary event video. As is becoming a yearly tradition, each part has been matched with a corresponding Busy Street article by the peerless Classy J and Jordon.

Fitting that my first entry as an honorary Street Urchin should be on something so thoroughly dissected already. But then, I always was late to the party.

It seems the trend of most entries on the Street to keep the poster anonymous. Jordon certainly doesn’t sign off the posts he makes with a “This is Jordon saying ‘All the fanboys in the world won’t make you less of a douchebag.’”. And while this approach is admirable in the way of putting content above ego, in light of my chosen subject today, I think it’s actually better to tell you a little about myself.

WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU?
My name is B. D. MacDonald and I have applied to ThatGuyWithTheGlasses.com three times. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, I am a so-called TGWTG reject.

I’m also a filmmaker.

Not a filmmaker from the Robert Rodriguez school of filmmaking (“You’re a filmmaker the minute you decide you’re a filmmaker.”) which has allowed many people who’ve no business behind a professional camera to stamp the same label onto their doors as those who’ve spent decades earning it though mastery of the craft.

No, I’m from the John Ford school of filmmaking (“This photo has the horizon near the bottom and that one has it near the top. Only when you can tell me WHY, can you call yourself a filmmaker.”) where the designation requires more than just a camera and some editing software.

I’ve been actively studying the craft since 2003.

Now let me tell you about my stamp collecti-

…Yeah, okay, I’ll stop stalling.

Taken as fan service for the TGWTG community, both Kickassia and Suburban Knights are solid. But these aren’t being treated as fan service, are they? They’re “Films”, each rumored to have budgets higher than El Mariachi, Primer and Clerks combined.

So held up to that standard, do they stand up?

Let’s find out.

PRELUDES AND NOCTURNS - GETTING STARTED
In any movie the opening scene is among the most important. It sets the tone for everything that comes after. And what better place to start with Suburban Knights than at the beginning?

The first shot, coupled with the desolate sound of wind is actually really effective at setting the atmosphere of archetypal lonely desert road. This shot is strong composition-wise, with a low horizon emphasizing the emptiness and, again, the desolation of the environment. This is strong enough to last a while and build up-

Um… Well, that was abrupt.

Right, so this type of shot is called a “Dutch Tilt”. Its traditional use is to give a sense of discomfort in the viewer and will often make an appearance in horror films. However modern directors often use it as a way to make a shot more visually interesting. The danger with this style of composition is that it often calls attention to the camera.

In this instance it sets a sharp tonal contrast to the previous shot, thus losing that sense of setting and atmosphere so effectively built up.

Maybe they’re trying to build a sense of unease? Foreshadow the danger of the events to follow. Even then I don’t think-
SON OF A…! *Ahem.*

This, again in sharp contrast to what’s come previously, is a flat shot with low energy. This means the lines of action, subject, and the set itself all face side to side in relation to the camera (think 16-Bit era Mortal Kombat). This kind of shot is traditionally used in slapstick comedy… which admittedly is appropriate, but doesn’t mesh cleanly with what it’s cutting from. This is a very boring shot with weak composition.

And is that the sound of a motorbike?

…I’m sure a better sound effect could’ve been used for that.

I should point out that there’s no reason at all why the car couldn’t have entered in the first shot after a good 10 second build up for atmosphere. Then the shift in tone actually would’ve felt intentional and may’ve even earned a laugh.

Before we move on to the next shot, pay attention to the direction the car is facing.

As you’ve already noticed, the driver is facing in the opposite direction than his car is traveling.

Ladies and gentlemen, let me introduce you to the bane of the home-brew filmmaker’s existence: The Axis. They just crossed it.

The shot itself is nothing special, but it does at least adhere to the rule of thirds.

Our modern hippy friend picks up a hitchhiking Malachite and they carry on a conversation.

Now, in shooting a conversation between two people there certainly is no requirement to have both subjects in the same shot for the entirety of the scene. That said, having both physically appear together at some point in the scene gives a sense of the relation between the two characters and helps to better sell the idea that they’re actually in the same room together. Or car.

As you can probably guess from the lead up, there is no such shot.

But enough of the play by play minutia or we’ll be here all week.

BLAST FROM THE PAST AND OTHER OUTDATED POP CULTURE REFERENCES
One of the central plot elements is the disappearance of D&D gamer Chuck Jaffers in 1981. This time period plays a huge role in not only many of the gags but the backstory of most characters.

Given the central motif of Dungeons & Dragons in the movie, close association with this time period makes a lot of sense. It was the early 80’s in which the negative press was reaching its zenith, spurred further on by the publication of Mazes and Monsters. Given contemporary views on the subject, there’s a lot of comedy potential here. Not to mention the thematic parallels with the persecution of geekdom against the story being told.

I’m going to give the benefit of the doubt to the Walker brothers and assume all that was on their mind when they worked this date into the story.

Where they dropped the ball is in actually establishing this period and following through with unstated implications. In the selected examples below I’m going roughly in order of most minor to most major rather than their chronological appearance in the film.

- In Part Six it’s revealed that the gauntlet everyone’s searching for was replaced with a NES Power Glove by Jaffer. The NES was released stateside in 1985. The Power Glove wasn’t introduced until 1989. Jaffer was imprisoned Myst-style(1) since the early 1980s so how could he get a hold of a peripheral device that wouldn’t be released for eight years? One could excuse this as creative license, though.

- An old photo of villain Malachite is non-glossy with horizontal faded strips, indicating that this particular ‘30 year old’ photo had actually been printed off a color printer with minor ink issues. A dusty polaroid would’ve been perfect in this case.

- The mystical book of magic, presumably untouched for 30 years, not only has collected no dust it looks like it was purchased yesterday. Sigh… All they would’ve needed to give this an aged look is Earl Gray tea and a sponge.

- In Part One, the Nostalgia Critic shows a pre-recorded News Report covering Chuck Jaffer’s disappearance. Though supposed to be from the early 1980s, many people thought this was supposed to be a modern news report. Why?
  • The News Logo Graphics feel digital instead of analogue.
  • The image quality is indistinguishable from the rest of the movie.
  • There’s a lack of period specific references beyond 'Mazes and Monsters'.
  • The music is classical rather than something period-authentic such as synth.
You can’t always blame the audience for not ‘getting it’.

- Jaffer set up this convoluted protection system 30 years ago, and got his friends to be the guardians of it. Yet only two of the six of them look like they're not in their mid-20s. Um… math’s not adding up here, guys. And again, there’s a real untapped comedy well of having Jaffer face his friends who’ve grown old while he’s stayed young.

There are many more examples I made note of while watching the seven parts, and likely far more that I missed. Honestly though, most all of these complaints are issues relating to limited production knowledge and experience.

There are far bigger underlying flaw in this film than continuity issues or popcorn logic.

IF YOU WANT TO DESTROY YOUR SWEATE- UH, FILM
Our band of heroes encounter three sword-carrying cloaked figures. Fully believing the whole quest to be little more than an elaborate Live Action Role Play-style game, the leader confidently approaches them and “casts a spell” by throwing bird seed at the center figure in accordance to the rules of LARP. The figure then forms a glowing ball of blue power in his hands and our heroes run away in terror.

This scene actually is one of the high points of the film. The group’s leader, Spoony, is acting within his established character as an RPG player. It’s actually quite funny to see a character approaching a situation as an expert only for the reality to slowly dawn how completely out of his depth he is (and by extension the group). More than that, it effectively establishes the cloaked figures as being genuine threats.

So, how to they follow this up?

Do they break their adopted roles and have a moment of questioning the quest before accepting the call to action (a story beat which is actually in line with Joseph Campbell’s model of mythic storytelling)?

No, they stop at the nearest fucking park playground and start a Year One Brawl-style fight with the three highly powerful sorcerers.

There is no point at which the characters make that critical decision to stand for what they believe in and fight. They just go from running for dear life to clashing swords on swing sets. No overcoming fear. No character growth.

Movies live and die on the strength of their characters and the choices they make under duress. Neither Night of the Living Dead or The Thing would have the lasting power they do without understanding this. Nor would Aliens, Star Wars, Dr. Strangelove or National Lampoon’s Vacation.

Here, that opportunity for choice is stolen.

Worse, the cloak figures’ threat is undermined by having Spoony’s crew able to hold their own in their first conflict. There’s not so much as a wooden sword being sliced in half when faced with the steel of a real blade.

By characterizing these antagonists as being unable to dispatch a group of internet reviewers playing dress up it trivializes their eventual defeat at the hands of Malachite (spoiler). That story beat, supposed to reinforce the threat of the main villain, instead feels like a lazy, ham-fisted way of disposing of now superfluous characters.

And ultimately by making the villains a joke it makes the heroes’ victory feel empty and unearned. The entire movie becomes little more than an exercise in playing dress up.

FINAL FANTASY – BRINGING IT ALL TOGETHER
Suburban Knights falters at some of the most basic levels of storytelling and character development. The film is largely sloppy in it’s editing, camerawork and writing. Running gags are extended beyond the point of being effective and the Brawl-style fight scenes are a narrative mess with too many characters and not enough choreography.

The most frustrating thing about this movie is how much potential it had.

No, really!

The core elements of a decent story are there, even if those elements are ineptly handled. It really would’ve taken very little to turn this into something genuinely entertaining.

I also have grudging respect for their production turn around. If it’s anything like Kickassia, and I think it’s fair to assume it is, they were able to shoot a feature length movie averaging 20-30 minutes a day. To compare, a low-budget film or television production might shoot 7 minutes in a day. At a stretch, 10 minutes. And on top of 12+ hour shooting days, the cast shot crossovers in their hotel rooms every day.

Further, I actually question the rumors of the film’s $50,000 budget. Doing a very rough budget breakdown, I came to a figure in the range of $20,000 to cover travel, hotel rooms, food, costumes, and props over a five day period for 30 people. Yes it adds up quickly but even then it could’ve been done for less.

But do production limitations excuse bad filmmaking? Hell no!

Do pop culture references replace the need for solid writing and character development? Not on your life!

And does being ignorant of basic film theory excuse not knowing how to make a film? Um… Probably, now that you mention it…

That’s it for this time, fellow street urchins! Until the next breakdown, I’m your friendly neighborhood Anti-Critic.

(1) Myst had characters imprisoned in books. But you already knew that, didn’t you.