Link?

RJSchwarz
San Diego, CA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUGuoKHXNng

it was a video I made for a new type of gas, only problem, teh oil companies wont air it on any tv station in Utah. Its wierd

You've got to cut away from those static shots or your audience is going to get bored.

Also, it probably can't be aired because it is so very long.

First thing is first. He goes on too long. You should cut the history stuff and put it on a scroll or pop-ups or something. Replace some of his info with graphs and show text on screen while he talks.

Second thing, get your spokesman to wear something that will make him look more respectable. The hat in the first shots shades his face and the shirt looks one step away from a wife-beater. If you want the message listened to you need to make the messenger less-distracting.

RJSchwarz
San Diego, CA

these are all great ideas but I didnt edit the film, and as far as the look of the guy? Well, he's the chemist genius that came up with with the idea and this is EXACTLY how he wanted to film it. I made those recomondations but he didnt want them, he wanted it simple and thats what I gave him.

Now when I said the oil companies wouldnt air it, I didnt mean my video exactly. I meant clips of the video with the chemist talking in between. Just 4 hours before it was supposed to air an oil company representative called the tv station and told them if they aired anything about this product they would lose all advertising.

IT WAS NUTS! The oil companies are very affraid of this product cuz it will change everything and they wont feed their pockets as much.

If the product is real it should be shown on National News programs not local ones. Perhaps a presentation sent to the staffs of Presidential hopefuls. Maybe sent to the US military for testing and adoption.

Something just seems sort of squirrelly and too good to be true about the whole thing.

RJSchwarz
San Diego, CA

Ive used the product myself. I mean its been tested by 1000's of cars, and it has worked on all of them. The reason its not being implemeted is GREED. Oil companies would lose millions if we only produced 20% of what we used to.

If I could get it on national telivision I would... Plus the president has looked into it and so are both presidential candidates BUT what keeps them from going through with it? Well, who do you think funds both parties? Oil companies protect their investment very well.

You may be right but blaming the oil companies makes it sound conspiratorial and those types of people tend to be somewhat unhinged. I would do my best to avoid any connection.

Talk to Ralph Nader and see if he'll help spread your message. What about Al Gore, surely he's not too deep into the pockets of big Oil. Or be really bold and talk to the Japanese. THey are an ally and no threat, they have a huge reliance on oil. If they were to adopt the stuff that would be proof enough for most Americans to take a look.

And again, I suggest the military which has been trying blends of biodiesel and other non-oil solutions in order to simplify supply and logistics concerns.

This isn't a political forum so I'll step back and let you worry about the distribution. If the guy really insists on wearing what he's wearing, and stumbling through his speach perhaps you want to put a graphic up showing his credentials for those that don't know who he is.

RJSchwarz
San Diego, CA

Now that I have had the time to watch the video I question if TV
stations won?t air it because of pressure from oil companies. Of
course that makes a much more interesting story, but as RJ has
said, you sound like you?re one of those conspiracy theory kooks.

I know you?re not - but you sound like one.

Everything the ?chemist genius? wanted you to include in the video
are really poor decisions. You gave him what he wanted even
though you knew it wouldn?t work. You shouldn?t allow the ?chemist
genius? to tell the filmmaker how to shoot or edit.

That?s a lesson that sometimes takes a while to learn. I know it
took me several times working with clients before I was confident
enough to tell the client that I know production as well as they
know their product and that I was going to shoot and edit in a
way they stations would air the final product.

I suspect the primary reason TV stations aren?t airing the video
is because of its poor overall quality - not its message.

I know news stations that would air this is the quality was
acceptable. Not the entire 10 minutes, but the essential parts.
And there are plenty of cable access stations that would air the
entire video if it was presented better.

In my opinion the bottom line is this guy has a very important
message and you - the filmmaker - should have presented this
message in a way that is interesting and accecable and not like a
boring lecture - which is what the chemist genius is used to doing.

To be frank and honest, I think you blew it by allowing this guy
to tell you how to shoot it and not doing the editing yourself.

=============================================
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert, essayist (1754-1824)

Hey

I havent watched your video all the way through yet, but my first thought is that it isnt really a good idea to conseal your face as your body language suggest to me that you have some thing to hide. I can see that it was a bright day out when you were shooting the video how ever atip for the future is to make sure that you can be seen in full. As your audience may associate this fact with negative imagry as I did.

Cleary.

www.myspace.com/b31_film_productions

Okay having read through the previous comments I agree with the CI and RJ.

I realise that RJ also picked up on the fact about the presentation of the chemist genius, and for me and my understanding of film production and generally all aspects of the media is that its all about representation. So if the chemist wishes to dress casually for the video then that is how he will be perceived by his audience, and add the fact of his bad body language and bland presentation and you get negative results.

My advice to you is to learn from the experience as CI said, I would suggest re-shooting the presentation in a more formal and authoritive way that his audience would engage with.

Personally I feel that you could do a lot better, so no doubt you would agree. I wouldn?t personally be happy with this if it was my work, but we?ve all got productions that don?t quite cut the grade, so the best thing that you can do is to learn from it.

Cleary.

www.myspace.com/b31_film_productions

I would suggest shooting the video in a plant where they would make the fuel. Cut-aways of various chemists doing their thing. Graphics popping up showing things so that the chemist doesn't have to talk them out combined with the chemist in a suit, or lab coat, looking authoritative.

YOu might also consider making multiple versions, each a different length. You'd find the tv shows are more likely to only want 30 second clips. I'm not sure commerical length but it's not much longer than that, and of course the info-mercial length of ten minutes or more.

You might also consider youtube and other sites as a distribution source. They are free and the point is to interest people. Create the video and then send a note to different bloggers and see what they think (they can be brutal). You just might end up with an internet buzz that news couldn't avoid talking about.

But even then it's gotta look really nice. Sad as it is to say people judge everything and if they come up wanting they change the channel or surf to another site.

RJSchwarz
San Diego, CA

Visual graphs (This might have been what RJ was referingto with regards to graphics, how ever I say it any way even if its just re-iterating his point) and statistics of your research would also support you claims.

I find that I can tell people all day long about what I want to achive and what I'm doing it, but it isn't untill people see things happening that they start to take real notice of what your doing.
Which can be applied to your case, it just makes it more interesting for your audience.

No offence to my audience beucase I see my self as an audience's filmmaker, but some times you just have to assume that people are stupid and make your point as clear as possible. Its easy to cofuse an audience belive me, so when ever you make some thing position your self in your audiences position and view it from a different perspective, as the video sends out mixed messages. If you are unable to do this how ever I would suggest that you take RJ's advice and find your self an un-biest audience as you can learn a lot more from posetive critercism than you can some one licking your ass.

Hope this helps?

Cleary.

www.myspace.com/b31_film_productions

Oh, I agree with all of this 100%, BUT again, I wasnt the editor nor the creative one behind the writing. IF I had edited it, I would have cut away from the chemist as much as possible, but in some shots of gasoline oriented things(gas prices, gasoline, oil companies info). Thats what I would have done.

But the point was Channel 4 news had no intentions on showing my video, it was the guy and president of future haul they were going to show and have a segment about. If I could do the video again I would, but I was just their recording and throwing out suggestions, I was brought in because of my twin. He has the control. I just wanted peoples opinion about the video. I do agree that its not very interesting. It does seem kind of lecture-ish.

All of what you guys said I couldnt agree more about BUT I dont have the authority to make those decisions, but I do appreciate the help.

One company is curently looking at it and they may buy the product by the end of the month...
Also, and no one has to, but if you could just tell someone about it, I'd really appreciate it. Thanks

ps I'm glad you guys didnt think i was a conspirecy nut, Ive been part of these boards for awhile, havent been active but this site is one of the best for constuctive critiscm.