EPTOn June 23 2012 06:53 TeslasPigeon wrote:
I disagree, there have been many documentaries that make for amazing movies. A few examples are: Dear Zachary, Hearts of Darkness, or Bus 174. You have to remember that documentaries are suppose to tell a story, Liquid Rising had none. These are fluff pieces that could be intertwined into any SC2 media.
Let's take a recent documentary, Exit Through the Gift Shop. The reason why this documentary is so critically acclaimed is that the story is very engrossing. The rise of an overnight street artist (Thierry Guetta) buying his way into fame and fortune from the misinterpreted advice that he received from his idol (Banksy). This is done through non traditional means of interview various street artists asking their opinions and experiences with Thierry while building upon the overall story, which the audience doesn't know of, until 2/3s of the way into the documentary. There is a high level of emotional attachment to the story and the payoff is worth watching the film.
Documentaries are not a series of interviews, that is a news segment. Documentaries are suppose to convey reality through the means of a story.
Liquid Rising is just a series of very specific interviews dealing about a very distinct subject. While there is nothing wrong with this if it is done in small segments, this type of format fails to draw in the audience after a set amount of time.
A good example of this is during the Huk segment where at 1:14:50 they talk about the EG-Liquid rivalry. As someone who has only been following the scene for a few months, I don't know anything of this. Why should I believe it? Or better, why should I care? There was nothing in the documentary that foreshadow this. Am I suppose to just accept it because some people say so? This medium is video, you're also suppose to show your audience what you want them to feel not explicitly state them through a series of basic interviews. It just wasn't done well.
There could of been so much that could of been done if you want to introduce an emotional element. Like Liquids dominance through the beta and first year of the game, but as SC2 became more developed they slowly slipped out of the spotlight as their players fell from the pillars where they once stood. It could of ended with Liquid players going to Korea to recapture their past glory.
Take Jinro, a player who has an amazing story line and the director/creator completely missed it. Here you have a player that WAS one of the best during the early years. He had the experience and results to prove it. He was the foreigner hope in the GSL. He had amazing games and captivated whole rooms of people. He has the dedication of a true Olympian athlete. Then he slowly started to not make top finishes as the new wave of professionals came. Yet he still practices, he still has the mind of a champion. I mean fuck, he is still in Korea giving everything he has at a game he loves. This is a classic story line of a past champion that is still trying to make it with the new wave of talent. You can go in many different directions. You can make it depressing and talk about how as a once accomplished professional, he should step down now before he further embarrasses himself. Or you could go in a different route and talk about a player who was at the top and still continues to strive for the top, despite of the current wave of the top contenders.
At the end of the film they are talking about how they foresee their futures, as someone who is into the scene I care about these people. I want them to succeed. But as a viewer of the film, I feel like I know none of them and aren't interesting in their storylines because the film failed to provide any. Contrast this with a film like Fistful of Quarters where the documentary sets clears good versus bad between the characters
There was just so much potential to make a great compelling story, but fails so hard. This is depressing to see, on Reddit the creator said he has 700 gigs of footage. That could either be 20-45 hours of footage depending on the quality. If this is the best attempt, a series of interviewers. Then most of the footage is b rolls at various tournaments failing to capture anything of interest. As someone who is trying to make it in new media production, I find it incredibly sad that someone was given the opportunity to do this and squandered it.
I disagree, there have been many documentaries that make for amazing movies. A few examples are: Dear Zachary, Hearts of Darkness, or Bus 174. You have to remember that documentaries are suppose to tell a story, Liquid Rising had none. These are fluff pieces that could be intertwined into any SC2 media.
Let's take a recent documentary, Exit Through the Gift Shop. The reason why this documentary is so critically acclaimed is that the story is very engrossing. The rise of an overnight street artist (Thierry Guetta) buying his way into fame and fortune from the misinterpreted advice that he received from his idol (Banksy). This is done through non traditional means of interview various street artists asking their opinions and experiences with Thierry while building upon the overall story, which the audience doesn't know of, until 2/3s of the way into the documentary. There is a high level of emotional attachment to the story and the payoff is worth watching the film.
Documentaries are not a series of interviews, that is a news segment. Documentaries are suppose to convey reality through the means of a story.
Liquid Rising is just a series of very specific interviews dealing about a very distinct subject. While there is nothing wrong with this if it is done in small segments, this type of format fails to draw in the audience after a set amount of time.
A good example of this is during the Huk segment where at 1:14:50 they talk about the EG-Liquid rivalry. As someone who has only been following the scene for a few months, I don't know anything of this. Why should I believe it? Or better, why should I care? There was nothing in the documentary that foreshadow this. Am I suppose to just accept it because some people say so? This medium is video, you're also suppose to show your audience what you want them to feel not explicitly state them through a series of basic interviews. It just wasn't done well.
There could of been so much that could of been done if you want to introduce an emotional element. Like Liquids dominance through the beta and first year of the game, but as SC2 became more developed they slowly slipped out of the spotlight as their players fell from the pillars where they once stood. It could of ended with Liquid players going to Korea to recapture their past glory.
Take Jinro, a player who has an amazing story line and the director/creator completely missed it. Here you have a player that WAS one of the best during the early years. He had the experience and results to prove it. He was the foreigner hope in the GSL. He had amazing games and captivated whole rooms of people. He has the dedication of a true Olympian athlete. Then he slowly started to not make top finishes as the new wave of professionals came. Yet he still practices, he still has the mind of a champion. I mean fuck, he is still in Korea giving everything he has at a game he loves. This is a classic story line of a past champion that is still trying to make it with the new wave of talent. You can go in many different directions. You can make it depressing and talk about how as a once accomplished professional, he should step down now before he further embarrasses himself. Or you could go in a different route and talk about a player who was at the top and still continues to strive for the top, despite of the current wave of the top contenders.
At the end of the film they are talking about how they foresee their futures, as someone who is into the scene I care about these people. I want them to succeed. But as a viewer of the film, I feel like I know none of them and aren't interesting in their storylines because the film failed to provide any. Contrast this with a film like Fistful of Quarters where the documentary sets clears good versus bad between the characters
There was just so much potential to make a great compelling story, but fails so hard. This is depressing to see, on Reddit the creator said he has 700 gigs of footage. That could either be 20-45 hours of footage depending on the quality. If this is the best attempt, a series of interviewers. Then most of the footage is b rolls at various tournaments failing to capture anything of interest. As someone who is trying to make it in new media production, I find it incredibly sad that someone was given the opportunity to do this and squandered it.
Mmmh, some good points there. My experience was similar in that after a few minutes into the 'documentary', I missed the off-commentary. There was indeed no storyline to feed viewers with the necessary background information. This film is apparently directed (pun intended) at people who already know the website's history and much about the players.
The film does not, however, cater to people who know little about the site and little about the players. The only thing that very briefly informs viewers about the history is a Prezi-like animation with pillar events on the timeline of Liquid.
What I expected was a work that is self-contained, that explains almost everything to allow people to get a more complete picture of Liquid as a team, a guided tour through the Liquid museum, but instead the film is like the stage for a play. You have the setup, illuminate it in different ways and wave a camera around to allow for different perspectives.
It's still enjoyable to watch, but it could have been way 'more'.
I don't want to have to babysit the volume
