Aaron Faulkner at 2010-04-25 11:26:36:

It's funny you posted all three of these videos. Funny because I saw Raven the other day and made a comment about this new trend on my FB account. Here is what I wrote...

" so it's interesting to see all these slick digital shorts coming out like crazy after the success of Alive in Joburg.

We had Panic Attack by Alvarez, The Gift by Rinsch, and now The Raven by Montreuil.

Here's the thing, they're spending like 5-7 thousand bucks on these shorts, right? A lot of money for a short.

Funny how directors like Christopher Nolan spent the same amount of money on a FEATURE-film that was BETTER than these concepts and...AND!!!! it was on FILM!!!!!!!!"

Thoughts?

Peter Dwight at 2010-04-25 13:04:48:

This is my favorite one yet. But I think more because of the sci-fi theme reminds me of similar favorites like Blade Runner, Fifth Element, Judge Dredd even.

But Aaron makes a good point about the concept. It has nice cgi, but there's nothing unique/abstract enough for me to remember the characters or premise. It's definitely something I've seen numerous times before. Still fun though.

Dave at 2010-04-25 14:25:41:

I thought The Gift was a little better than the rest -- and better than Alive in Joburg. But yes, it's style over story -- more like a clip from an FX person's reel.

Sadly, I think many feature films take the same approach. Maybe that's why these offerings lead to studio deals. If you can make cool looking stuff, that's enough. The Transformers sequel made over 400mil domestic, right?

Frank at 2010-04-30 14:12:01:

I kind of tried to do the same thing... for $500 bucks. I did it as a sci-fi web series, though, and only got two episodes in before it was optioned... and that was without a gazillion views, I just sent some links around after pitching a full length feature based on the same concept. Anyway, it worked, but not as much as it seems to with these big productions where you spend most of the money on digital effects... like I hear about these guys getting agents, talking to the studios, etc., but I do think it's a problem when these things don't really show any talent with actors. I'd think a studio would still be scared off letting one of these guys deal with a name actor because they might have zero clue how to deal with that part which, if the actor has clout, could lead to disastrous results for the director... like getting kicked off the movie. I think with Blomkamp, the true test will be anything after D9 in working with someone who isn't as obviously a "give him the lines and let him go off" type of genius as Sharlto Copley.

Also, I think the Nolan comparison doesn't work here, because festivals have become all but useless for people with any real raw talent who just want to hop the fence and work in Hollywood. They only want to let in absolute, navel-gazing garbage and then wonder where the distributors went. There's almost nothing that doesn't have much beyond an extremely narrow, limited audience of sadomasochists. Even the good genre stuff only gets in if you have some kind of connections, and because they know they need a few horror and sci-fi films to draw the crowds into the more dramatic stuff. Honestly, when is the last time a film as interesting as Primer, Pi, or Following played Sundance, let alone won any awards? In my opinion, what you're seeing is the people who can put something really great looking together responding to the lack of interest at festivals for stuff that might, heaven forbid, entertain someone. But don't get me wrong, these things could use just a bit more substance, even in their short running time.