Gracepoint After Five

Good artists copy, great artists steal, as the saying goes. It’s not news to anyone that we, as artists — nay, as human beings — are constantly being inspired by something. I’ve already written two posts on videos that were inspired from elsewhere (check out 1 and 2), and why they worked. Unfortunately, it is more often the case that the derivatives are worse — sometimes far worse — than the original. In this post, we’ll look at two different music videos covering the exact same thing: a song dedicated to John Williams (and, I suppose, to Star Wars).

Good Idea: Corey Vidal version

First, let’s set the record straight. Moosebutter (below) is the group that wrote and sang the song, even in the version above. Corey himself claims that he is merely lip-synching. However, his video came first — the concept and execution are originally his. It should be rather apparent why so many people loved this video instantly. What really sets him apart from the crowd is made evident by the other version:

Bad Idea: Moosebutter version

Before we go into the specifics — the technical nitty-gritties — as to why this is inferior to Corey’s, let’s begin with the larger picture. Fundamentally, Corey’s video is neat because he’s in each of the four subscreens, “playing out” the various parts. In this version, the band members are in each screen, and even though they’re singing the song live, it is already far less impressive. In addition, there’s one part in the video when it is (accidentally) revealed that they are standing next to each other. This fact further diminishes this video, because much of what makes Corey’s version so attractive is the amount of work he had to put in it. At the very least, he had to record himself four times. Not so for this video.

A screenshot is worth a thousand words

I originally wanted to capture multiple screenshots of the Moosebutter video, detailing when and where something went wrong. I will save myself the trouble (and save you from the pain) by just limiting myself to this one. Not only do you see a mysterious elbow enter frame (circled), but so much more could be said just from this frame alone.

First, nobody here is fully in frame, except the Top-Right Guy. In other words, their edges are cut off — this is most apparent with Top-Left Guy. If you’re going to stand next to each other, at least give one another enough room so you can utilize the full frame.

Second, lighting is flat for everybody, save for Bottom-Right Guy. I know this isn’t supposed to be a professional video, but even Corey’s lighting was much better, mostly because it was consistent. What Moosebutter saved in time (doing everything at once), they sacrificed for visual quality.

Speaking of visual quality, did you notice their edges are blurry? This is more apparent in the beginning of the video when they’re standing behind the white wall. That was my initial reaction when I first watched this clip — why does it seem like a Gaussian blur was applied to each of them?

Well, this screenshot gives the answer: they’re standing in front of a greenscreen in order for them to pull off this special effect. I would then ask this question: why have this effect? It doesn’t add anything to the video, other than that it’s a special effect. This flies against my philosophy in filmmaking: Don’t do special effects for the sake of having special effects. Rather than wowing the audience, it has the opposite effect: it ruins the video a bit. Corey’s video is amazing because the audience realizes that he’s doing everything in-camera; everything is done during production. This video, on the other hand, lost some credibility because it raises questions as to how much was done in post-production. When this “star field” comes up, immediately another layer of credibility is lost – they could’ve done anything and everything in post. Now, having done some film myself, I know that this is not true (post-production cannot accomplish everything). Yet, this is the emotional feeling that I get once this special effect came up. Bottom line: this effect did more harm than good.

Truth can be harsh

Inevitably, someone out there will wonder why I’m dogging on Moosebutter so harshly. I would like to respond to that with three points. First, though I admit that this is rather harsh, I hope it doesn’t come across as mean-spirited. In fact, I have more things to say about the video, but I’ll leave with just the four aforementioned points. Second, even though Corey is an amateur, his video comes across as somewhat professional because of the lack of mistakes. The inverse proves to be true with the Moosebutter video. Oftentimes, the difference between a professional video and an amateur one is not the big things; it’s the little things here and there that separate the two.

Finally, I put my videos under the same level of scrutiny. In fact, when I ask for feedback, I expect nothing less than people being dead-honest with me. Those are the most difficult comments to bear — yet those are also the best. Here are two critiques I’ve provided for my crew on one of my latest videos: one for the cameraman and stage helpers, and the other for the actors. (Post about the video itself soon to come.)

Tagged as inspiration + Categorized as Design