Warning: Spoiler Ahead!
Another example of lack of emotional input in the delivery is the scene in which the Corps is clearing the missile site toward the end. During this scene, Mueller joins the Russians to fight against the Panzer Corps he was a part of. It seems obvious that the PC Lieutenant recognizes Mueller as a traitor. However, even when Mueller’s shooting at him, the Lieutenant doesn’t seem particularly angry with Mueller. I can’t imagine another situation in which a commanding officer should be angrier with his subordinate.
Also, the opening movie slate states that the dialogue is in “German dubbed to English.” Obviously the actors are native English speaking Americans. Tone, inflection and pronunciation all support this theory, plus sync is always off in audio dubs from other languages. The simplest fix is to remove that text from the slate. The best remedy is to reconsider the vocals as they relate to the basics of the story (nationality, geography, etc.) and make broad changes based on that in an ADR studio. (To learn how to create your own home ADR studio, check out our article on that here. )
Finally, the opening historical slates need to be seen longer. Their short duration plus the small fonts make them very hard to read and retain before they fade out. These are very important because they contain essential audience information. If the audience misses the contents of these slates, they will be lost while they watch the rest of the film.
Let’s start with what went well in the “visual look” department. First, the general look of the film was very polished. Creating the film in black and white likely helped cover up some of the issues, like finessing the lighting, that would have had to be addressed if it were in color. The shots were well composed, camera movements were rather fluid, and the set was well dressed. One of the ways the filmmakers got hand-held style footage that wasn’t too shaky was with a Figg Rig. For those of you unfamiliar with this device , a “Figg Rig” (named for Leaving Las Vegas’ director/cinematographer Mike Figgis who developed it) is a circular camera mounting device that is designed help stabilize footage through centralization of mass. (For any filmmakers interested in building one of these from low-cost PVC, check out our tutorial on this here.) All this resulted in very compelling footage.
I couldn’t find a lot of elements that needed significant work. One area that needed a bit of improvement was the gaffing (lighting). Although shooting outdoors and mostly in sunlight helped tremendously, there were some instances where more light (and in some cases less light) was needed.
There were a couple of shots around the campfire that I thought at first were cuts to black. Upon reviewing the film a couple more times, I noticed some movement in the blackness. It seems that these shots were simply underexposed. If there’s no way to salvage them in post, it’s best to omit them.
It also seems that shooting some of the footage at the missile site occurred in very bright sun. On some of the wide shots, nothing more could have been done to offset the overexposure or underexposure. However, for some of the medium shots and close-ups, measures should have been taken to illuminate the faces of the soldiers and diffuse the bright light overhead. This could have been achieved by placing a grip with a reflector near the actors, but out of the camera’s view, to bounce light up onto their faces. In some instances, almost all facial features were lost due to the severe shadows. A diffusion rig could also have been set up overhead to help with overexposure on helmets and other costume elements.
Costuming also didn’t seem realistic enough to me. I realize that the costumes weren’t meant to be authentic for that period, but they still looked too modern…..much like what I’d find at a U.S. Army surplus store today. Considering this piece was set in 1953, the intercoms in the troops’ helmets seem far too futuristic. If there is research that suggests that type of technology was pervasive among Russian-issued uniforms in or around 1953, please ignore this. But for me, it created some cognitive dissonance. It certainly wasn’t what I would imagine I would find in that era. Also, if the actors weren’t using intercoms, it would have forced them to project their voices more which would lend itself to correcting some of the dialogue issues I spoke about in the Content section of this review.
Finally, Valuckas used over one hundred visual effects in his eighteen minute film. Most of these looked very nice. He used several programs that MicroFilmmaker has reviewed in previous issues including: FXHome’s Muzzle Plug, After Effects, Particular, Particle Illusion, and Trapcode’s Shine. These were utilized to create explosions, smoke, bullet hits, and light rays. Valuckas states that he spent a year in post-production. His film really reflects the time and effort spent here.
