|
I'm not so up on the technical stuff but I agree with Symbols, the production values are a big improvement (not saying a film needs to be expensive or even 'professional' to be any good but I think the more 'invisible' style works much better here). Don't get too hung up on it either way, though. You can buy technique when the time comes. Despite the hype, it still costs a lot of money to get anything up to real mainstream standards and beyond the basics, it's great characters and good writing that ultimately makes or breaks any comedy, rather than a familiarity with the 180 degree rule. And if things get to another level (assuming you even want them to) you just get the right people in then. Your style is coherent, which at this stage strikes me as fine. If you're interested in some kind of broader, bigger audience, all it takes is for some guy at a station seeing it, thinking it has the potential to be a success and give you some money and the crew to make it broadcast standard. I'm not saying you're thinking of anything like this level, but judging by the earliest pilot scenes for The Office, you're Tarkovsky next to Ricky Gervais.
But yeah, I'd say just really concentrate on the writing and casting and characters at this stage. With all the kit in the world, without those things, any comedy's dead in the water.
EDIT: Having initially said I agree with el symbols, that reads like a total dismissal of his points. I wasn't trying to undermine technique so much as priorities the areas I think really count at this stage. So more of the old guy, loved the final shot with the balloon, the woman reading the warning card at the beginning was genius, still don't like the main guy but load up with more characters like the old guy and you could be a bit like Seinfeld, where people end up watching it for everyone besides its star. Seriously, you're funnier than that guy, and all you did was deliver a pizza and throw up. You could be George to his Jerry.
|