AN OPEN LETTER TO DAVIS AURINI AND JORDAN OWEN UPON THE RELEASE OF THEIR FIRST SARKEESIAN EFFECT TEASER
Hey guys, big fan here.
Just watched your Sarkeesian Effect teaser video. An outstanding job! Even though this is, I know, a rough and unfinished trailer using raw footage from the first couple of days of shooting, it’s clear that this film β this epic journey into journalism, if I might coin a phrase here (you can totally use it!) β will more than live up to your earlier work.
And that’s saying something, as I don’t think I’ve ever seen a ten-minute libertarian suit-wearing-ninja parkour dance fight film better than Davis’ βLust in a Time of Heartburn.β And obviously β obviously β I’ve never seen such a gritty depiction of YouTube jackass despair as Jordan’s minimalist masterpiece βDude Lying On Couch in Messy Apartment Complaining That People Aren’t Giving Him Enough Money.β
I just wanted to give you guys some βnotesβ on it, as I know it is still early in your process.
First off, the production values are a-maz-ing. I realize that after spending money on airfare, hotel rooms, rent, samurai swords, white turtleneck shirts, and whatnot that you probably only had about $25 left to make the actual film. Well let me tell you this: every Canadian penny of that $25 is there on the screen. It’s RIGHT THERE.
Second, SOUND. I will admit you’ve made a bit of an unorthodox choice here. Most documentary filmmakers obviously go for βcleanβ and βcrispβ sound in which you βcan actually make out what people are saying.β
But you guys! You zag when everyone else is zigging!
Not since Birdemic: Shock and Terror and, of course, Davis’ own βLust in the Time of Carpark,β have I seen such an innovative use of sonic muddiness. You guys know that in real life you can’t always tell what other people are saying. Especially if you have a lot of wax in your ears. And fellas, listening to the interviews in your film I felt like I had a whole beehive’s worth of wax in my ears. And possibly a bee or two, though I think that might be a problem on my end.
Ok, I’ll be honest, that’s definitely a problem on my end. I might as well admit it: My apartment is full of bees.
Third, the CINEMATOGRAPHY. Again, the zigging and the zagging. In a time of cheap digital cameras, it is easier than ever for even the most incompetent filmmaker, or, say, any 14-year-old filming a friend lighting his farts, to achieve pristine image quality.
But, like David Lynch, who turned his back on the latest digital technology to make his confusing surrealistic masterpiece Inland Empire with a cheap, consumer grade standard definition digital camera, you have eschewed pristine picture quality in favor of well, let’s just say that it doesn’t look like trained professionals had anything to do with it.
I don’t know if that was what you were going for but if so, NAILED IT!
Oh, and I wouldn’t worry about the blurry white smudgy stuff in the edges of the shot in that Justine Tunney interview. NO ONE WILL NOTICE IT. Seriously, it’s like a five-minute static shot, why would anyone notice anything in the edges of the frames. Was that vaseline? I think Bob Guccione at Penthouse was known for his vaseline on the lens technique. You guys weren’t using the camera to film porn earlier in the day, were you? I kid! What a question! Of course you were.
Speaking of static shots, your choice to film most of the interviews as static two shots β another brave choice. Most people filming interviews would have given us closeups of each of the people in the interview, and cut back and forth, and thrown in some of what the snooty cinephiles call βreaction shots.β You guys boldly went for static shots of two people sitting in chairs.
And that time when you cut from one static shot of two people sitting in chairs to another static shot of the same two people sitting in the same chairs from a slightly different angle? YOU GUYS BLEW MY MIND WITH THAT ONE.
It was also super cool when you did one interview in one particular room with two chairs and followed that up with another interview in the same room with the same two chairs, almost as if you had booked the room for the day and were just running people through it without bothering to change anything up or even move the camera or anything.
That’s the kind of PURE FILMING EFFICIENCY that’s going to enable you to bring this masterpiece on budget. Like Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash used to say: REAL ARTISTS SHIP!
Some thoughts on the performances.
Jordan Owen was completely Jordan Owenish. I totally bought his character. Jordan, you are a MASTER of whatever it is that you do. Keep it up!
But Davis, you sly dog, I should have figured that someone who looks like a budget version of Anton LaVey would have some tricks up his sleeve! Or should I say βhis white turtleneck?β Yes, that’s my way of saying that the costuming was PER-FEC-TION. Not every Anton LaVey impersonator can pull off a shiny suit and white turtleneck but, wow! That’s all I can say: Wow!
As for the performance itself, again some counterintuitive choices here. Most interviewers try to react to their interview subjects a little in an attempt to show βempathy.β Your decision to instead sit stock still and stare relentlessly at your interview subjects was a little jarring β but a good kind of jarring. That’s how you get the good stuff out of your interview subjects! And murder suspects. Stare them into submission!
One of my cats has a similar technique when she wants food, or attention, or, well, let’s just say she’s gotten me to confess to a couple of murders, if you know what I mean, and what I mean is NO I DIDN’T MURDER ANYONE WHY DID I EVEN SAY THAT, CRAP, HOW QUICK CAN I PACK, IS THERE GAS IN THE CAR?
Also I think it was a good idea to mix up the sitting and staring stuff with that whole “erupting into unnatural and exaggerated laughter” schtick. Totally sold your character as some sort of primitive cyborg trying to pass as a human.
Also, amazing prop work with that disposable coffee cup. You gripped it so hard I really BELIEVED that if you let go of it you would have flown off into space — you know, like George Clooney in Gravity. Oh, whoops, SPOILER ALERT.
This is how good your film is: I’m comparing it to freaking GRAVITY. I’m comparing it to freaking Davis Aurini’s βLust in the Timer of Clambake.β
Oh, and the foley work was spot on as well. That … sound that happens at about 6:10 in? You know, the thing where it sounded like someone was dragging a large rock over cement just out of shot, or maybe like you had swallowed your microphone and your stomach was having troubl edigesting it? That sound is going to haunt me for weeks. I don’t even want to know how you did that. Sometimes mysteries are best left unsolved.
Anyway, outstanding job. I really can’t say anything about any of what your interview subjects were saying, or even remember any of their names except for Justine Timberlake the Slavery Lady. I think it was a combination of that wax-in-ears sound quality and their complete inability to say anything interesting in response to your stupid questions.
But with everything else going on in this film β the static shots, the white turtlenecks, that white stuff at the edge of the shot in that one interview that NO ONE WILL NOTICE, I PROMISE THEY WON’T EVEN SEE IT β¦ well, anyway, with all that going on in the film no one is even going to care what any of your incredibly boring interview subjects said or who they are or why on earth you decided this was a good subject for a documentary or why you even thought you were remotely capable of making an actual professional quality film.
Anyway, I’m sure all of the people who gave you literally thousands of dollars of their own money because they assumed you might actually come up with something that looked vaguely professional will be very proud of you.
I’m assuming, of course, that your final film will be about 4 minutes long, and that half of it will be libertarian suit-wearing-ninja parkour dance fighting to the sounds of Yakety Sax. If not, yeah, no one is going to be able to sit through this crap.
In other words LOVE IT!
Sincerely,
Your Biggest Fan
tinyorc:
Maybe they think they’ll get $$$ for product placement. Red Bull is so desperate for advertsing space, after all.
@kittehserf,
There is advertising, and then there is anti-advertising, and considering that even other Sarkeesian-haters think this project is a sack of flaming dogshit…
wordsp1nner, I’m laughing at what it’d be like if these arsewits really were stupid enough to try getting money from Red Bull. Oh to be a fly on the wall!
That oughta give em a good blurb to put on posters at their luxurious Vegas casino movie premeire, to which they’ve promised tickets to their $1,000 backers. Or perhaps just print on their DVD liners.
I replaced the video in the OP, which Jordan made private, with the one from Aurini’s channel that’s still public. He’s added a disclaimer at the front about the terrilble sound; I haven’t watched it to see if he made any other changes.
That videobombing cat is hilairous!
Also, on proper interview camera angles, it’s as if they never watched television news interviews.
Even if they couldn’t afford three cameras, if they had two –which they obciously did — they could film some establishing shots and then roll the cameras with closeups of interviewer and interviewee.
If they only had one camera, they could just film the interviewee close up and leave themselves out of it. How many times does Erroll Morris appear on camera in his documentaries? How hard is it to film a single talking head and have it look ok?
Oh, wait, they interviewed that woman on her porch, and they managed to fuck that up with terrible lighting and awful background and the least flattering camera angle possible.
@tinyorc
The mention of Miyamoto in this whole thing, as a life-long Mario fan myself, it’s practically the only thing that make me KIND of understand GamerGate as a personal experience. But I have to agree with Sarkeesian at the end. I do understand how adverse to complex stories Miyamoto is, so the player can understand what to do quickly and overcome the how to do it, instead of having no idea what’s going on, so “Save the Princess” is easily the most economic, easily understandable and most epic goal for a game which can be explained in 3 words (Not only touches masculine impulses but have an extra bonus of geopolitical problem!). Since how economic the story is in terms on function and I come to understand how big in function he is, I do understand how he got that “story”.
The only thing that make me feel kind of better is, despite Miyamoto doesn’t seem to have got the memo, the rest of Nintendo apparently did. At the moment, the only series at Nintendo with save someone plots are the Mario and Zelda series, and the Zelda ones barely. (I think is because Miyamoto appointed a “successor” for oversee the Zelda series already, which he hadn’t done with the Mario series and spinoffs yet) and they are adding female characters with agency, like Rosalina from Mario Galaxy, who’s really popular basically for been a female character with power and agency. (They are also very proud of the amount of women in Smash Bros, which quite frankly I don’t know what to think about that).
I know those are baby steps, but at the same time, it’s a giant, almost monolithic Japanese company which still works as a Japanese company with more than 100 years of existence.
Probably they would work faster if GamerGate and friends leave people like Sarkeesian alone.
OMG I just looked at the video-bombing cat after seeing David’s comment – that’s perfect!
Every crappy manosphere video needs to have kitties wandering in front of the camera, preferably blocking the view entirely.
Ugh. I know this has been covered, but this really is shoddy work and didn’t have to be. Seriously fellas… sound is important and needs to be captured clean, you can’t rely on post to handle it. Boom mics are not that expensive to rent, nor are clip-on mics if you want to go that route.
I’m no professional, but have done better filming sketch stuff with my comedy friends – hell, we had reflectors and everything! π That said, I have shot for actual television (a magazine-style skateboarding show, all on-location interviews and skate shots – it was awesome) and there’s actual thought that has to go into things, you don’t just point a camera at someone and start shooting and hope like hell it’ll all turn out great in post. Do some research! Compose a shot, for chrissake! Have at least SOME coverage!
But you know, I could forgive all that if they had AT LEAST managed to put together a coherent teaser that established their main argument and then supported it. This was a mish-mash of people chatting about random shit, with no through-line or thesis or stated position. If I didn’t already know what this was supposedly about, I’d have literally no clue what their point was. Guys, even documentary films are about storytelling. Have a frickin arc. At least, tell me what you’re going to tell me, support it with some choice quotes from your interviewees that relate to and reinforce your point of view.
2 thumbs up for the turtleneck though, super flash. π
Hubby is currently picking Cat #7’s nose. It is far more entertaining and informative than what I just watched.
Did anyone else notice the big cut/burn in the right side of the red guest chair? Zero attention to set, framing, or background.
I still don’t understand what the Sarkeesian Effect is. Can someone explain this phenomenon to me? All I got from the video were cherrypicked talking heads.
Protip SE dudes: if you want to make a documentary, and you want it taken seriously, then you should interview the heavy hitters (games studios, gaming review companies, games journalists) and not the people who agreed with you that you could rustle up at short notice.
Also, and even Michael Moore does this, show some facts. At the moment we only have the opinions of random people – this is not evidence. It’s also not clear why their opinions matter any more than the opinions of other random people.
Second protip: if one of your key arguments is that your opponent cherrypicks, countering with your own cherrypicking isn’t a winning strategy. We can all cherrypick if we like, so what? It teaches nothing.
Third protip: you have to prove your premises/conclusions. If your contention is that SJWs are ruining videogames, show which videogames have been ruined and how. Describe how this matters.
Oh, but all that would require evidence, wouldn’t it.
I’m watching this with the sound off and it’s really interesting – interesting in the way LaPUA’s body language is. It looks like he’s not listening at all, like he’s waiting for his line. I can almost hear the feint buzzing of the fluorescent light of his brain unable to contain his boredom. Maybe that’s what’s going on with the sound?
LOL
And they just keep going, and going, and
I assume you meant “unsaLvagable”, since you seem to have done a pretty good job of savaging this piece of steaming monkey excrement.
Am I detecting some sarcasm here? π
…Is it just me, or have they now posted 3 followups, totaling almost an hour of footage, defending their six-minute trailer?
Either three or four. They are quite shockingly bad and they just cannot stop talking about it and on by the way sendmoney
Would “yeah, we know about the sound problems and intend to fix them” not have been sufficient?
If anyone wants some actually-intelligent social commentary, Dear White People is in theaters.
no worries about it taken down, ive archived it and spreading it in as an example of how not to not use social media.
And the bald/shaved guy has it still open π
… The followup that therealmac linked to. That was on purpose, right? The video was horridly underexposed with terrible sound on purpose, right? I mean… hot-damn I could barely understand a word even with my speakers blasting. This is all some super-meta performance art, right?
Totally called that they’d start calling the people criticizing the sound quality and stuff trolls.
Oh my lord, I watched Jordan’s two videos, the angry one and the abashed one, and now I’m watching Davis. Yeah, the best way to convince people you know what you’re doing as a film director is to film yourself in a room that’s so dark your viewers can barely see you and with muddy sound with an audible hum. Amazing.
Maybe I should make a feature length documentary made up of clips of their videos talking about this project. I mean, their meltdowns are more entertaining and informative than their actual footage.
“β¦ The followup that therealmac linked to. That was on purpose, right? The video was horridly underexposed with terrible sound on purpose, right? I meanβ¦ hot-damn I could barely understand a word even with my speakers blasting. This is all some super-meta performance art, right?”
it must be a super meta-performance done by them. Or is he really trying to explain to us how to film when his resume is a train wreck of rather large propotion?
@David:
Need a patreon for that? π
(BTW, I think it was on purpose… I’m watching Davis’s video now, and he’s spent the last 5 minutes talking about apertures and cameras, noting that he’s using a laptop camera that doesn’t let in much light. I literally have no idea why, he hasn’t gotten to the point yet.)