At the End of Cul-De-Sac
What makes this short film impressive is that - technically it is brilliant.
It is a single shot 10 minute short film and it is amazing.
I was perplexed when I saw the film for the first time and wondered how the director has managed the cinematography?
It made me inquisitive to later read that it was taken by a camera- drone.
The Director Paul Trillo researched Google map to find a perfect Cul- de-sac and made an animated version of the whole 10 minutes of shoot.
The most difficult part according to me must have been the placement of drone at appropriate time during a particular happening in the shot that synchronizes with the dialogues.
I read that the whole team rehearsed to make the take "perfect"
The story is simple - it is a classic tale of societal judgment on an individual they see as unfit to live with them. Instead of helping the individual - by the end of the short film - they throw stones at him.
The story goes like this:
In a peaceful Cul-de-sac neighborhood, a drunk and mentally disturbed man pulls over in front of the house and blabbers things that draws attention of neighbors who become by-standers and spectators to the proceedings. As the man's antics become more bizarre, a woman who knows the man comes and tell everyone that this man is "A good man", yet the neighbors start throwing stones at the man who is crying for help.
It is very touching and to a certain extend disturbing to see the world's reaction to an individual's agony - mental or otherwise.
Only thing they did in post-production was dub the entire dialogues, as the syn-sound had drone sound, that had to be over-recorded with sound mixing.
I read that what the Director did as a final cut for the movie, was actually the rehearsal shot of 10 minutes, which came so perfect (better than the final shooting) that they kept the rehearsal shot as a final version of short film.
A lot of things to learn while seeing it - especially if one is interested in the technicality of movie making.
For the sheer brilliance of the attempt to do something different I will give this movie 7 out of 10.
What makes this short film impressive is that - technically it is brilliant.
It is a single shot 10 minute short film and it is amazing.
I was perplexed when I saw the film for the first time and wondered how the director has managed the cinematography?
It made me inquisitive to later read that it was taken by a camera- drone.
The Director Paul Trillo researched Google map to find a perfect Cul- de-sac and made an animated version of the whole 10 minutes of shoot.
The most difficult part according to me must have been the placement of drone at appropriate time during a particular happening in the shot that synchronizes with the dialogues.
I read that the whole team rehearsed to make the take "perfect"
The story is simple - it is a classic tale of societal judgment on an individual they see as unfit to live with them. Instead of helping the individual - by the end of the short film - they throw stones at him.
The story goes like this:
In a peaceful Cul-de-sac neighborhood, a drunk and mentally disturbed man pulls over in front of the house and blabbers things that draws attention of neighbors who become by-standers and spectators to the proceedings. As the man's antics become more bizarre, a woman who knows the man comes and tell everyone that this man is "A good man", yet the neighbors start throwing stones at the man who is crying for help.
It is very touching and to a certain extend disturbing to see the world's reaction to an individual's agony - mental or otherwise.
Only thing they did in post-production was dub the entire dialogues, as the syn-sound had drone sound, that had to be over-recorded with sound mixing.
I read that what the Director did as a final cut for the movie, was actually the rehearsal shot of 10 minutes, which came so perfect (better than the final shooting) that they kept the rehearsal shot as a final version of short film.
A lot of things to learn while seeing it - especially if one is interested in the technicality of movie making.
For the sheer brilliance of the attempt to do something different I will give this movie 7 out of 10.
