Why 98.9% of all YouTube videos are garbage!

What's the fastest way to make your YouTube upload suck? Well, if I could only limit the list to five:

5. Gimmicky transitions.

4. Unreadable or cheesy fonts.

3. Complete disregard for copyright.

2. Crappy Tribute/Slash videos.

1. Using the prepackaged title cards from Windows Movie Maker as is.

Let's take a short, but detailed look at all of them.

5. Gimmicky transitions:

The Simpsons said it best. NO MORE STAR WIPES! For that matter, let's get rid of page wipes, pixelated wipes, sliding wipes, block wipes, any type of wipe. Unless you are Star Wars or some 1980s sitcom, only two transitions really matter: the clean cut and the dissolve. That's it. Anything else and you risk looking like a 12-year-old with too much time on your hands (please see #2).

4. Unreadable or cheesy fonts:

Titles or captions should not be in Curlz, Tempus Sans, or Comic Sans. They should be in a readable text, like Arial or Verdana. That also means your dark-colored title or text should not have a dark-colored background. And I have no idea why the YouTube developers decided annotations were a good idea.

Comic Sans strikes again.

3. Complete disregard for copyrighted music:

Hey, I'm all for public domain or fair use. But at least cite from where you got the copyrighted material. Biggest offenders: home videos that must have Ying Yang Twins accompanying your dog chasing his tail. They both have nothing to do with each other; which brings me to...

2. Crappy Tribute/Slash videos:

If it's been on television, odds are a tribute video exists, regardless of how obscure. Growing Pains? Yep. Family Matters? Covered. Dawson's Creek? Duh. Wuzzles?(Off topic: every person born after 1988 is scratching his or her head right now.) You bet your sweet tail!

Even worse are those videos that hint at some type of sexual relationship, usually between two characters of the same gender. I'm not a homophobe, but yeah, some of these videos exist because homophobes exist. Well, some--like Spock and Kirk--are quite good. Others, not so much. But come on, you know Olivia Benson and Alex Cabot were meant for each other! Elliot who?

You know you want it, Benson.

1. Using the prepackaged title cards from Windows Movie Maker as is:

Oh. My. God. I really don't have any words for this. Wait. Yes, I do. Stop it. At least change the background color from that VHS blue to black or something. And no more double-superimposed titles or spinning newspapers. But seriously, Windows Movie Maker can only take you so far. Buy Final Cut Pro or Avid. If you want to go all out, create your titles with AfterEffects. Or if you are broke, download one of these Ubuntu Linux editors.

Gotta love clichés that are dated even for Windows.

Bonus: Booty clapping videos.

I'm pretty sure this one borders on child pornography. All 14-year-old girls everywhere: this is not cute!

See you in Trig, Becky.

Happy Filmmaking.

Dumb and Dumber, blame the internet?

Is the internet really making us dumber? Of course there is some argument there: I'm one of the faceless millions who uses Google to spell-check. But is it really making us dumber? Or worse, is it killing professional film criticism?

Clarence Page of the Chicago Tribune seems to think so. With the democratic approach that is the internet, Page concludes that time-honored critics like Roger Ebert, Elvis Mitchell, or Leonard Maltin are losing their shirts to the "amateur" critics of imdb.com or Netflix.

He has a point. There seems to be a lot of people out there that would give Soul Plane a 10 on imdb.com because it was "hella-crazy, fo' sho!". You also have the trolls who believe every popular movie despite its critical and/or commercial successes is "the worst movie, ever." But, I think Mr. Page gives too much credit to these folks, and not enough to the folks between Ebert and norbitlover_92.

There are some great critical analysis on the internet that come from non-professionals who know what constitutes a great film. Some might be Team Goodfellas versus Team The Godfather, but can ultimately conclude both are considered "good films". It's safe to assume choosing between Team Amadeus and Team Santa Claus Conquers the Martians is not purely based of personal preference.

Some viral professionals gladly use the internet to their advantage. Like the super-funny guys at spill.com. I'm a big fan. Their analyses balance everyman rhetoric with a hint of professional criticism.

I would take the internet with a grain a salt. Like television before it, it can be used for good (PBS!) or it can be used for evil (Jersey Shore).

Happy Filmmaking!

The Science of Filmmaking

I came across an interesting article in the LA-based free street periodical Brand X today. Under the title “Quantum Filmmaking,” there was a woman filmmaker named Valerie Weiss. Weiss transitioned from a biophysicist with a Harvard PhD to a filmmaker, currently in pre-production for her first film.

Many filmmakers have a “day job,” but this article demonstrates how one can use aspects and experiences in that day job in order to shape their creative streak. Weiss explains how scientists use creativity in order to form theories and hypotheses and take risks. She believes science and filmmaking should coincide, based on their career similarities. In that sense, Weiss used her background to her advantage.

When it comes to science, however, most filmmakers wing it. There are plenty of websites dedicated to so-called “movie physics.” Everything from warp speed, to flashing bullets, to window glass that shatters on impact, to mid-90s era Macbooks taking down alien motherships, to living blobs with a taste for human flesh. Even recently, Cracked readers played homage to film science. One cannot really blame filmmakers for the misconception since most audience members will suspend their disbelief for a good story.

Because of the overwhelming stereotypes of science and scientists in cinema, many foundations issue grants and awards to filmmakers who portray the field in a positive and groundbreaking light. The two career fields benefit from such a marriage because the filmmaker will receive the support needed for a project, and the scientific industry will receive a renewed interest from aspiring scholars. The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation Grant, for example, grants current film students production and screenwriting funds in exchange for a non-stereotypical depiction of a scientist or engineer:

The one condition of all submissions is that they portray science and/or scientists in realistic, non-stereotypical ways. They do not necessarily have to be sympathetic characters, and the story does not have to be strictly about science. Sloan is interested in reading about scientists as human beings whether they’re fallible or heroic. The stories can be totally fiction or based on an actual event or person.

For accuracy, the scripts have to be approved by an actual scientist, such as a faculty member of the awarding university. Weiss joined a program called the Catalyst Workshop, sponsored by AFI. The program only takes professional scientists interested in filmmaking and is partially funded by the US Department of Defense.

One thing is for certain, real or not, you can always count on cinema to make science cool. Think about all the times CSI must have blown your mind.

Happy Filmmaking!

A great (and cheap) concept

Recently, I came across this website called 5 Second Films. The site, as well as the videos, are created by two USC film school graduates (shout out to my fellow Trojans!). Not counting the titles, each film is exactly five seconds each.

I believe this would be a great exercise for any filmmaker. So much has to be conveyed in such a short amount of time, that it forces the filmmakers to get to the point. The 5 Second Films (or 5SF) usually consist of some type of joke concept easily conveyed in the time given. Some of the films seem pretty out there, but overall, not a bad idea.

You should make your own five or ten-second film. Come up with a concept and plan accordingly. As long as you have some type of camera, willing friends--I mean--"actors," some type of editing system, and interesting props, sky's the limit!

Kudos to the filmmakers for their editing skills. I had to post one of my favorite here!



Happy Filmmaking