I think its a false comparison in most cases to look at an indie film or short and say “But they did it for so little money! Infringing and illegal how, exactly? Click here to report it, or see our DMCA policy. But it doesn’t show me one single thing that hints to there even BEING a story let alone making me want to “know what that story is”. A proof of concept for a feature film? Yes, it makes for a killer VFX reel, I agree.
It says only ‘Created by Nomad’. Nope, it doesn’t tell you much of the story but it shows me enough that I very much want to know what that story is. The only ‘edit’ in this is to actually include the full credit reel which you completely omit in the version on your site, making it look as though you did all the work yourself so people can see a full list of who did what. They chose not to, or couldn’t even determine that they hadn’t. I think its a false comparison in most cases to look at an indie film or short and say “But they did it for so little money! Wish I could say this trailer meant something besides: Subscribe to Screen Anarchy.
Underland, the Last Surfacer – IMDb
I think the answer is no. In most cases, including I think this one, WHAT the film makers did, if you counted up the services and sirfacer hours, would cost a bundle. They did it for so little money because they had the skill set to do it themselves and being tull a position where I get sent these sorts of VFX heavy promos on a daily basis I can say absolutely that these guys are doing something at a level of quality that almost nobody else out there can manage.
It doesn’t credit a single, actual human being who worked on it. Do you feel this content is inappropriate or movje upon your rights? It’s garbage for that.
Regardless of the budget and circumstances, in the end of the day, does the trailer excite me as a film?
Underland The Last Surfacer Videos
February 227: Just because the VFX is pretty, even well beyond the norm, that shouldn’t convince anyone to give the film makers a totally blank slate from which to consider their storytelling skills. At least, it’s not a big difference in terms of what they actually did and how they did it, just in how much they were forced to pay for it.
Oh, what, the actual filming of actual people?
Nope, it doesn’t tell you much of the story but it shows te enough that I very much want to know what that story is. And for each stolen element I see a few charming ones in there as well. You can see the official version www. If this was a calling card saying “We can do a production like that too”, I think it’s a success. I have a great appreciation for the ,ovie artist all over south America, they do amazing work in such a short amount of time!
Based on this trailer I don’t know if these guys can tell a story, but they sure prove movif they can make it look good. And to top it all off, the tag lines were just horrendous. If studios could make their tentpoles via non-union contracts and negotiate non-paying opportunities for everyone, they would. February 225: They had plenty of opportunity to inject story and narrative elements into the trailer.
This is kind of the stupidity of Hollywood choosing to adopt the CGI model for their tentpoles – they’ve opened themselves up to competition to anyone who surfacrr access to the same computer equipment and know-how, vs. February 22 Wish I could say this trailer meant something besides: Or worry about our trailer telling any sort of narrative? But it doesn’t show me one single thing that hints to there even BEING a story let alone making me want to “know what that story is”.
Infringing and illegal how, exactly? Besides which, we’re not actually hosting the video, YouTube is, so unless you can explain your position far more clearly than this and explain why it is that the rest of the people who worked on the short should not be credited for doing so, then I am perfectly happy to keep this version here until such time as you can prove to YouTube that you own the copyright and Gutierrez does not.
That’s a bit harsh I think. In fact, using lines like “Everything you believe Yes, it makes for a killer VFX reel, I agree.
That version does NOT include the credits. But the script, the unoriginal shots and the story that is shown to us did not raise my pulse at all.
Click aurfacer to report it, or see our DMCA policy.
Watch The Astounding Trailer For Argentinian SciFi UNDERLAND: THE LAST SURFACER
A proof of concept for a feature film? Nomad is fully credited here for their work, to the point of having a watermarked credit in the lower left of the frame for the entire duration of the video.
Gutierrez describes the rights situation here very differently than you do and given that you’re actively trying to squelch the only version out there that actually credits the people who did the work on the film I’m far more inclined to undrland him seriously than you.
The only ‘edit’ in this is to actually include the full credit reel which you completely omit in the version on your site, making it look as though you did all fulk work yourself so people can see a full list of who did what. Subscribe to Screen Anarchy.