comments and critisicm are welcome 
Good editing but lousy timing (too long). Looked like a school video project.
Was it supposed to be funny?
yeah, it was a school project, and no it wasnât supposed to be funny.
I wasnât allowed to go over 2 minutes, so I actually cut it pretty close.
Watterson would be spinning in his grave.
If he were dead.
Do really want everyone to tell you how bad that is?
I put it in white so you can ignore it if you donât want my harsh film school critique
Other than the name Calvin and Hobbes, and the red striped shirt this had zero to do with the comic, but clearly you were trying to parody, destory the reputation ofâŚ? the original. The music was inappropriate and setting a completely wrong tone for your material. Your script was terrible and didnât emulate the style of the original at all. Your performances were terrible. And despite what John said the editing was not good. It was clearly shot without editing in mind. Itâs a series of poorly framed shots, not a cohesive seamless structure. And unmotivated jump cuts should be avoided at all costs.
If it was an English class youâll get a good grade for putting in more effort than anyone else, but if itâs for any type of film production class itâs nothing more than a good learning tool for how to do better in the future.
Um⌠good story board at the end?
I want my 118 seconds back
For those that want the comparison
Agreed it had some good editing. I have no idea what it takes to do that black and white with color thing.
Can you give a quick explanation?
Thatâs pretty close to an actual Calvin and Hobbes strip I read the other day. What worked in a 4 panel cartoon strip with brilliant art work and characterisation did not really translate to a video with two live actors, making no real effor to be in character. I also donât think Calvin would have said âbe-atchâ (bitch) which is what I think I heard in the video.
Iâve been an admirer of C&H for many years, and recently a friend has lent me the hardback complete collection.
Bill Watterson was a genuine artist, and felt passionately that his cartoons should stand on their own as works of art. He refused all offers to merchandise Calvin and Hobbes. You can buy Simpsons merchandise, Disney merchandise, Garfield merchandise, etc., but you canât buy Calvin and Hobbes merchandise. Watterson felt that âcommercialisationâ would take something away from his art. A rare man of integrity in a cynical world.
For similar reasons, although he did seriously consider it, Watterson refused to allow an animated version of Calvin and Hobbes. He felt that putting actual voices to the characters would spoil the voices people heard in their minds when reading the strips.
Thanks, thatâs exactly the kind of response I wanted to hear. I should have made it clear in the original post though, I wasnât aiming to make a accurate representation of the original comics. This was done for a school assignment where the requirements were: base it on a comic strip, video no longer than 2 minutes.
I basically chose this strip as an excuse to add that chase scene and the tackle at the end. The music and dialog is completely wrong for the original Calvin and Hobbes, but then again, I wasnât really basing it closely to the original strip.
âIt was clearly shot without editing in mind. Itâs a series of poorly framed shots, not a cohesive seamless structure. And unmotivated jump cuts should be avoided at all costs.â
I did have editing in mind when I shot it, but clearly Iâm not very good at it. I donât know anything about framing shots or what jump cuts are. Can you please enlighten me?
MuniOrBust, the black and white effect is called the âPleasantville effectâ which I used in the editing program Final Cut Pro. It was pretty difficult to do, because the reddish dirt tried to match up with the red and orange on Calvin and Hobbes. You can see blotches of reddish color in some parts that arenât on C&H because I didnât have time to get rid of them.
Tomahawk, what a refreshingly frank response to harsh critique.
A few ideas that crossed my mind as I was watching it - and setting aside the Calvin and Hobbes purism of my earlier post:
Set up some character early in it - I would have had the kids running into the sportsfield full of enthusiasm, and jostling each other. Probably seen running towards and past the camera for the first 5 seconds or so, then disappearing into the distance, with a low camera angle and wide angle lens to exaggerate the size of the sports area.
Possibly a short dispute over the outcome of the coin toss - one of them demanding âbest of threeâ and then after the result, the next one demanding âbest of fiveâ. A bit of jostling, and close ups of the faces.
I did like the camera shot of them from the coinâs perspective.
As they separated, I would have had the camera cutting from the âHobbesâ to âCalvinâ and back several times - no more than 3 - 5 seconds for each.
I would have had a super wide angle shot of Calvin, possibly from a high angle (step ladder) to emphasis his extreme distance and smallness.
Something that did jump out of your film was the flight of the ball - this is a difficult one to do, but the flight arc shown was consistent with it only being kicked a small distance, whereas the idea of the earlier scene was to put Calvin a really really long way away from Hobbes.
After Calvin had run past Hobbes, I would have had the camera behind Hobbes, showing both characters, with Hobbhes standing casually, and Calvin running into the distance.
Maybe the camera then moves to Hobbesâ point of view, and drops suddenly to an even lower point of view - as if he is crouching.
You then need a series of cuts from Calvin seeing Hobbes charging towards him (zoom in to emphasise) and from Hobbes seeing Calvin first standing transfixed, then running.
And during the tackle, I think the camera itself should gave been âtossed and rolledâ somehow, with some stripey cloth flashing across the image to give a general impression of being in the middle of the action. (In the cartoons, C&H always roll and tumble in their fights.
Then the camera focuses on Calvinâs dazed face, and gradually pans back giving a wider and wider image, showing Calvin stretched out, and then Hobbes sitting upright laughing, and then panning wider to show the ball, then Calvinâs socks (scattered on the ground) , and then Calvinâs shoes, scattered even wider.
Then the two characters hug and laugh and the camera zooms right back and swirls into fade.
And I would probably have done it with no dialogue at all - which is in the spirit of many of the original Watterson cartoons.
Continuity editing is too hard to explain in a forum post. But if you donât know what a jump cut is you also donât know about the 180 degree rule either. Look for a book or website on continuity editing there are many. You actually did do okay in some places, but others youâre just all over the place without any scene motivation to be. Truffaut used jump cuts intentionally, you did not. (and Iâm not talking about your usic video style jump zooms at the end). You need to know the rules before you break them.
As far as content you should have stuck at least stuck to the dialogue from the strip. Your dialog changes just gives it an âI donât really give a crap about this projectâ attitude that youâre just screwing around. As well as the fact that you donât capture the mood and style of the comic at all.