EPT
"Liquid Rising" Documentary - Page 37
| Forum Index > News |
|
Arghnews
United Kingdom169 Posts
| ||
fusefuse
Estonia4644 Posts
| ||
|
Chronos.
United States805 Posts
Anyway it was really cool, definitely feel like a now Liquid a bit more than i did an hour and a half ago. | ||
|
TeslasPigeon
464 Posts
On June 23 2012 07:19 Krukar wrote: You bring up several interesting points which are well thought out, so I'll do my best to defend the picture and my thought process. Cool, nice to see that the director is willing to take and respond to criticism no matter how harsh or misattributed it may be. On June 23 2012 07:19 Krukar wrote: Exit through the gift shop is a mockumentary. It hardly counts as a documentary, it's a well crafted story in the style of a documentary. There is debate whether it's real or not. You say documentaries are meant to convey reality, yet you bring up Exit through the gift shop, which does a great job of completely blurring reality. I used Exit Through the Gift Shop as an example of narrative, which yours completely lacks. It has no emotion. It does not captivate. Also, whether the events surrounding Exit Through the Gift Shop is irrelevant for your documentary. Whether Exit Through the Gift Shop is exaggerated or not, is the whole purpose of the film. When art exceeds genres and becomes a persona, driving sales and relevancy. Is what it is about, a critique on the current state of the art community. I mean for fucks sake, it is called Exit Through the Gift Shop; a pathway that nearly all museums make you take when you want to leave. Your jab at dismissing Exit Through the Gift Shop because it might be fabricated is ill thought. Should we dismiss your documentary because it could of all been read on Liquidpedia? Of course documentaries are used to convey reality, and depending on the documentary and the filmmaker these realities all have biases. It is the human experience. It's what allows people to create art, write poetry, incite hate, or commit murder. Michael Moore is a highly successful documentarian because he knows how to form narrative, create conflict, and portray a reality that he sees as important. Then you have someone like Ken Burns who creates elaborate worlds, describing the inner machinations of someone's life by zooming in a fucking picture all while using historically accurate accounts and records as sources when narrating. Whether this be done through serendipitist means or misaligned notions, the idea that a documentary must be completely objective is laughable and goes contrary to the more successful documentaries of the last 20 years. On June 23 2012 07:19 Krukar wrote: Your idea to focus on Jinro is a great idea for a Jinro themed documentary. It would hardly work in a documentary about a 9 man team. It was a documentary about Liquid members and it never even mentioned his GSL run, his early dominance, or how he even felt about achieving these things. Instead we heard a few anecdotes describing his personality, that he hit a wall, and gave DjWheat's wife a drink. Nothing of the emotion he felt in his early career or the conflict he faces now. Even his rage was glossed over. Of course what I can described can be mentioned and even done in your style of documentary, easily within 10-30 minutes or even a full blown 80 minute film. This is why filmmaking is such an amazing thing to partake in and why creative minds are drawn to it. On June 23 2012 07:19 Krukar wrote: You mention Fistful of Quarters (one of my favourite documentaries), that it painted a clear good vs evil story line. Well that movie has also been exaggerated, the relationship between Billy Mitchell and Stevie Wiebe was not that hostile. The film maker made it seem like that by distorting the truth, something I did not do. Of course it was exaggerated, but that didn't stop the narrative of the film or the emotions that it conveyed. You're documentary didn't illicit anything, it was a massive circle jerk. Your questions weren't well thought out nor did they allow for interesting responses to form. This lead to an incohesive narrative and did not allow for an overarching theme to form. The Liquid players talked about bonds and friendship that the team has, but I saw nothing to show me this. They talked about whether they would take Huk back, why didn't you have any supplement footage showing Huk acting friendly or in Liquid uniform. Why didn't you ask Huk questions regarding his loyalty to his old team (one way to build emotion and tension). You say Fistful of Quarters is one of your favorite docs, you could of done the whole Huk segment as a homage. Describing Liquid as a team where lifelong friendships and strong intimate bonds form. You could of built Huk as a person whose skill can be attributed to the management of Liquid, only to be taking away at the sight of more money and a stable future. What does Huk choose friendship or financial stability? Of course some of this could of been exaggerated, which is what your job as a filmmaker should be. Discerning between how the realities of the situation are to be interpreted for your audience. As a filmmaker you need to come to terms that if you want to create good content or not. Creating good content comes at an expense, you might need to exaggerate to the truth in order to do so. Every documentary does this. They all exaggerate; it is what good filmmakers do, it is how you create emotion, drama, narrative. If you want to tell truthful stories become a journalist, and if you want to become a good journalist ask hard hitting questions. You need to stop lobbing softballs and throw with some tenacity. On June 23 2012 07:19 Krukar wrote: If you were looking for some kind of epic give one for the gipper monologue followed by a shot of a Liquid player raising a trophy amongst a crowd of fans, that's now what happened. I didn't distort the story. I filmed what happened and put it together. From the start I said this is a piece for Team Liquid fans about a team. Something that the fans could enjoy and something that people who are following the scene can enjoy. Those people were the target audience and it looks like they are enjoying it I understand that this task must of been hard for you and perhaps it might help you score a few other gigs in the e-sport scene as a result. You should be proud of that, this will surely lead you to another project in this community and I'm happy for you in that regard. But you easily squandered an opportunity for this to make rounds in the film festive circuits. You say you wanted to create something where largest audience resides, this isn't the esport scene it is everyone who isn't into esports. It is the general audience, everyone. Would you watch a documentary about middle age men who play arcade games? Of course not, sounds too bland and could never be attributed as successful. Oh wait, it's called Fistful of Quarters and you said it's one of your favorites. How about a film about two men who become friends in prison? Boring right? Well disregard the Shawshank Redemption, a film that is regarded as a top contender of all time. How about a different documentary, one where the audience follows two poor HS minorities that want to play in the NBA. A likely story that most people would guess the end before they saw it and surely not interesting, well then you are missing out on Hoop Dreams a complete tour de force of raw emotion. The point of this exercise is to show that it doesn't matter how mundane or boring a story may seem, what matters is how you tell the story. How you convey emotion. And a story with no conflict, will not be interesting or engaging. Filmmakers who are able to captivate people will always be successful. | ||
|
zuperketla
Norway212 Posts
| ||
|
oBlade
United States6275 Posts
| ||
|
ShatterZer0
United States1843 Posts
On June 23 2012 10:44 Heraklitus wrote: Final thought: I've been sort of gently nudging my wife to try out SC2 for two years and she never bit. But today, after the movie, we had the following exchange: Wife: Is it possible to create a free extra SC2 account? Like a trial account or something? One of these days, I need to just play it just in case it turns out I'm a mega gaming genius. It would be sad if I am and never knew it. Me: Sure. But you can just play with my account if you want, it's fine. What race will you play? Protoss. They're the prettiest. Tossgirl began playing Protoss because they were pretty and sparkly and pylons gave her an aspiration for the awesomest wedding ring ever. Hahahahaha, most women try to play Protoss first! The emo ones play zerg though... in my limited experience of trying to get girls to play SC xD | ||
|
EleanorRIgby
Canada3923 Posts
| ||
BisuDagger
Bisutopia19368 Posts
LIQUID TYLER, I love you. Stay strong because you have the best fans!!!!! ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Ypu4H.png) | ||
|
Arranx
1 Post
That said, I was disappointed with the documentary in some technical aspects. As others have mentioned, a documentary must be more than a series of profiles/interviews. There must be an arc to move a film forward whether that impetus is thematic (an underlying, essential idea(s) the moviegoers learn by the end of the documentary), goal-based (players wants to win a championship and we watch their struggles/triumphs) or temporal (e.g. tension builds until a major tournament at the end.) The lack of a driving force makes viewers feel listless by the half-way mark. A deeper flaw is that the movie does too much telling and not enough showing from a cinematic, not literal standpoint. What I mean by this is that in any film, the most effective scenes are when we shown not told who these people are. Or to borrow an old saying, a picture is worth a thousand words. Thus for me, the most powerful player profile was Hero's for precisely this reason. After Hero discusses the pressure he felt to fill Huk's shoes, we come to understand how deep these feelings run when we see Hero devastated by a loss in a major tournament to none other than Huk himself. If that doesn't pull on our heartstrings enough, our emotions whipsaw to the other extreme as Hero stands in front the crowd overcome with elation, his hands trembling in front of his face after he has just won Dreamhack. No amount of interviews from other players describing how competitive Hero is could replace the image of Hero with his head in his hands after losing to Huk. Unfortunately, these moments are too and far between--not in the emotional sense, because a documentarian cannot create his own story--but in giving us an in-depth understanding of these players. Over and over again, we are told in interviews that this Team Liquid player is nice or lazy or crazy or creative or hardworking, instead of shown it. Probably like most people, I was surprised how few behind-the-scenes, day-to-day film made the final cut because that is the kind of footage that 'Team Liquid Rising' desperately needs more of. Let us see Jinro working his ass off; let us see his success at GSL and his frustration in latter tournaments. Give us some sense of what it is like to be a pro-gamer, to live in the Team Liquid house, to give up school or work for something that the average person might believe is a childish hobby. What about family and girlfriends and how does a non-traditional career affect those aspects? What motivates them to risk everything for a newly-growing sport that is unlike anything before it? None of those topics is touched upon at all. So in the end, was I happy I watched it? Yes, because I am sc2 and TL fan, but not necessarily because I felt I got to know these people beyond a shallow surface level. | ||
|
carloselcoco
United States2302 Posts
| ||
|
Russet
United States48 Posts
| ||
|
niuage
United States175 Posts
Still, I really like it. | ||
|
Snuggles
United States1865 Posts
| ||
|
Snijjer
United States989 Posts
IMO Huk had the most interesting, genuine comments about the other players. | ||
|
lac29
United States1485 Posts
| ||
|
juicy
Australia145 Posts
| ||
|
TigerKarl
1757 Posts
| ||
|
FalleN!
8 Posts
| ||
|
Karthane
United States1183 Posts
| ||
| ||
