AWA 2011 Pro Video Discussion Thread

[Ileia]

Yeah, I got it, jackass. I said I didn't like the video and why, get over it. Subjective also means that *gasp!* I can have an opinion.

[Mr Pilkington]

I saw a lot of scene selection beyond just a lip sync haha video. I can see a lot of time/effort put into this video, and use of tools beyond just the basic NLE.
In my opinion I saw a great deal of merit and effort.
Also to me the audio wasn't a crutch as is indicative of comedy video to begin with. I think the work as equal to the song's humor.


But again, that's my take.

[Mr Pilkington]

I saw a lot of scene selection beyond just a lip sync haha video. I can see a lot of time/effort put into this video, and use of tools beyond just the basic NLE.
In my opinion I saw a great deal of merit and effort.
Also to me the audio wasn't a crutch as is indicative of comedy video to begin with. I think the work as equal to the song's humor.


But again, that's my take.

[l33tmeatwad]

Yeah, I got it, jackass. I said I didn't like the video and why, get over it. Subjective also means that *gasp!* I can have an opinion.

Ehem...I'm not the one calling names here, and I'm also not linking to threads with subjective opinions about how certain people execute things to make my point either. Perhaps you should check YOUR tone before you start reflecting on other.

[Ileia]

Yes, yes, subjective, you said that, move along.

[l33tmeatwad]

I saw a lot of scene selection beyond just a lip sync haha video. I can see a lot of time/effort put into this video, and use of tools beyond just the basic NLE.
In my opinion I saw a great deal of merit and effort.
Also to me the audio wasn't a crutch as is indicative of comedy video to begin with. I think the work as equal to the song's humor.


But again, that's my take.

#15 is another video I think used a funny song yet didn't use it as a crutch, I just wished they had tweaked it a bit more as it was quite rough around the edges. #30 on the other hand, it's source and song didn't really match at all, but it still made me laugh.

[Mr Pilkington]

15 was to me only funny because the song was, and seemed like AMV cruise control.
30.... that one has a HUGE hurdle because the PV sets an enormous standard. To me it wasn't bad, but I am not sure I'd consider it for this level of competition.

[SailorDeath]

One of the hardest things when making comedy videos is overcoming the cruise control factor. Looking back at a lot of mine, there are only a couple where I've sucessfully done that. My best example has got to be the army of darkness trailer. In that case it was more of getting source that compliments an audio source that is funny. In fact 90% of comedies out there rely on the audio. The only case I can think of where I saw something that was funny and the audio and the video by itself wouldn't have worked was Doki's "Piracy is cool" video he did a few years back for awa. The one still makes me chuckle when I see it. As for this year's entries, I thought it was a shame to cut "Ask Milly" in the case of that video, the editing was superbly done to the audio source. It was cut though because the organizers felt it was a bit too sexually explicit, so thems the breaks.

As for the pony videos I can only say one thing, next year they better be ready for a bunch of care bear music videos.

[Mr Pilkington]

Retractions are regrettable but after hearing the director's side of things it makes a lot of sense. (And you know I fought that one hard.) I too had a video cut from Pro, but because it was questionable I did pose the question to the VAT staff prior to entering. In the future that's really the best bet to prevent said issues.

The one major redemptive quality to that is those videos will be judged along with the expo swill. A quality pro level entry may contend better, so all is not yet lost.

[SailorDeath]

Retractions are regrettable but after hearing the director's side of things it makes a lot of sense. (And you know I fought that one hard.) I too had a video cut from Pro, but because it was questionable I did pose the question to the VAT staff prior to entering. In the future that's really the best bet to prevent said issues.

The one major redemptive quality to that is those videos will be judged along with the expo swill. A quality pro level entry may contend better, so all is not yet lost.

Yeah, promptness with questioning about content is important. As an organizer every year I would get one or 2 people asking whether a video might be too much for the audience. There was one occasion where it was a just a little too much for a public showing and I told him that the video was excellent and stood a chance at winning. He made an alteration to the video and submitted it and it ended up winning an award (sorry I can't remember the specifics, I can't remember what year it was let alone what video) but the point I'm making is that I told him that as it was it'd be dq'd long before the deadline so he had plenty of time to fix it. Personally, if I have a video one might find questionable I'll make the extra effort to find out if it would violate the rules with the ones in charge, if they told me it was too much I'd either enter it elsewhere or make adjustments so that it would be permissible. Especially for a contest like Pro, where if it was too much I'd want to submit another entry in its place.

I was a bit peeved about what happened to #6 and #20, I don't know the circumstances with those who submitted them (from the sound of it, one of them was yours, though secrecy doesn't matter now since it was cut) If you had asked them to look at it before the deadline and said you could make changes and they told you it was okay, I'd have been furious if they later reneged on that.

I think part of the other problem was the R-restriction. R-ratings can really push the line sometimes, and before one decides on a rating, I'd suggest a movie that is controversial with that rating. Watch it, ask yourself "Would I be fine showing this to an audience that might have minors in it" if it's too much bump it down a notch. For instance, Scarface is an excellent movie, but there is a lot of cussing and violence. That movie came very close to getting an NC-17 rating which would make it a good example of what the limits are for that rating. I wouldn't show that to an audience with minors. So, I'd move down to PG-13. That rating is what we made the acen amv contest, anything higher and we'd ask them to censor it, or submit it to the hentai contest. I found this on a website that describes PG-13 and R:

PG-13 is a strong warning to parents that the film may contain content inappropriate for under-teenaged children. Any drug use will require at least this rating, as will the use of the F-word as an expletive (using this term in a sexual context will garner an R rating). Nudity is permissible in a non-sexual context and violence may be more intense and persistent than in a PG film.

A rating of R indicates that a film contains some material for adults. Strong language and violence may be prevalent. The R rating also includes films with drug usage and other elements most parents would find suitable only for adults.

I knew the removal of hentai from pro was a long time coming, so I wasn't all that surprised when it did happen. Though I was surprised that they said the worse it can be is an R-rating because one can really do a lot within those boundaries.