It's great on its own, and must be delirious when contrasted with the "slow and romantic" portion.

Almost makes me want to renew my vows !

Pierre

I'm sure Alabama 3 will enjoy the royalties too.

Hi, :-)

I like it a lot.

What camcorder did you use?

Bertie,

My oh my. Excellent. Darryl

Was this shot/edited for a client...family....I REALLY like it..
David Bird

I guess I'm the only one who finds the words "woke up this morning, got myself a gun" a little at odds with the wedding imagery? Nevermind the innevitable Sopranos associations -- I wouldn't exactly want people to juxtapose images of my wedding with thoughts of Tony and Carmela...

Apart from the utter shameless parody, who WAS that scary Lady who had more than just a passing resmblance to Liz Taylor? See ZZ Top have found Jesus and gainful employ in one of your movies.

Seriously? Would like to have seen more cutting to the beat with more non-repetitive shots. But hey, what do I know?

Best regards,

Grazie

Very nicely shot and put together, but ...

The "horizontal sync loss" transitions are very unsettling! Things like this happening to a picture are, or at least used to be, the bane of an editors life, so I get no pleasure from seeing them used deliberately!

I also found the theme of the music very "down" for the occasion, but I guess it meant something to the people involved.

Like your last piece, the video is very much driven by strong commercial music.
How do you go about getting permissions, and how much does it cost?

the "horizontal sync loss" transitions, etc. Is this something you created?.... or are there more transitions available somewhere.

PS: Outstanding videos!

I will second the opinion that the music selection is HORRIBLE. Especially the G-d, reference followed by the chapel and cross. This will wear about as well as some of our "ladies" tattoos will 20 years from now. Rethink, (unless you can be certain all of the party and their families are perennially without taste, and that is a longshot).

Z

The artist said he had "Something a little different to share," and it definitely was different, but also excellent. Outstanding piece of editing. The song with the thumping bass and constant energy was just right for the pure fun / mysterious energy the players were delivering. The music needed to be out of character because the people were. It's like they said
enough "ceremoniousness" for the moment... let's have some fun with the credits, and they damn sure did! Great job GmElliott.

Well, the last comment goes to the question "What is art?" -- and in many cases, what might be considered good craft is mislabeled "art." Also, 'edginess" for its own sake is not what I would call the epitome of artistic vision or acumen. Usually it is standing in for the same. The edits here are really quite good, and so for me the musical selection is the real problem.

If the couple likes this selection -- and one might say there is no accounting for taste, or again, no argument where taste is concerned -- and I can somewhat go with that -- still there are a couple of issues here. First, to a lot of folk, the lyrics to this song are surely offensive, and to that group who may indeed be viewing this they would, in many cases, really want to leave the room; that is real. Second, all of that aside, the couple themselves might not like this "edgy" kind of treatment when they look back years from now -- or they might. My suggestion would be to make a second version for posterity.


"What is hip today may some day be passe."

-- Steven "Doc" Kupka and Emilio Castillo

Z

I think you guys are missing the darn point here. A wedding video captures a moment in time, in this case somewhere around 2005, so using pop music is okay since it will remind them of this moment in say 20/30/40 years from now.

As far as the lyrics... hey it's just a song that doesn't happen to be totally PC (and thank f*cking god for a change). That song, which I'm sure they like and I'm sure they are forward thinking enough to appreciate the irony of playing it, is perfect since it has such a cool edgy feel and juxtaposes perfectly with a wedding. Irony people!!! Humor!!! It makes the world go around... gees-us!

Awesome work, GM, I liked it. I like how you cut on the beat at certain times, and didn't at others. I struggle with when to cut on the beat and when not to. What I like here was that by skipping certain beats, the viewer starts to anticipate the next cut and it leaves them wanting or waiting. I feel I cut on the beat too much and it becomes almost too mechanical, like watching a machine. That doesn’t always work.

I think the TV effect should be used only for a few frames at a time, sometimes it goes too long. (And to the person who asked, it's merely the Sony TV Simulator.)

I would NOT like to know the guy who wouldn't stop punching his palm. I can understand that you probably told him the idea for the credits, and he took the direction to think that's the ONLY thing he should be doing while being recorded. Which left you with no other footage of him. It just looks kinda dumb and a bit overly violent for my taste (I love the Sopranos, but I don't want to see someone threatening me - however humorously - in a wedding video).

Hmm.. then I'm a bit bothered by the guy with sunglasses doing the same "hey there, homeboy" pose 3-4 times, followed by the girl who only has one "dance / model" pose in her arsenal of poses. To me, these shots should have been limited to ONE of those little "spontaneous" poses, mixed with some straight shots without them trying to look cool.

The quick / slow motion on the mother was really cool - that's the kind of motion and editing I like.

Overall, very good. I have to assume the parts I didn't like were due to the PEOPLE you were shooting, and less about your skills or talents. Maybe it's too soft to quite have the Sopranos look. I wonder if the credits would completely clash if they were effected to look more like washed out grainy film. Perhaps the video effect doesn't match the look of FILM, which the rest of your work seems to simulate.

Glen,
Just excellent, as usual!

Great fun, I smiled all the way throught this 'E-Ticket' ride.

V

"girl who only has one "dance / model" pose in her arsenal of poses"

That was my favorite part. Looks like she's trying to do her version of an Egyptian type dance. Very real, very attractive.

zdogg,
"What is hip today may some day be passe." - I agree. For the most part my weddings are shot/edited to be more timeless and less "fad". However that isn't to say there's anything wrong with shooting a wedding with ALL hip, popular music. Sometimes it's good to date the content using things that are popular today. Just like if I watched my parents wedding video they'd surely be playing music and dancing in the style of their era.

I feel it behoves me to stay flexable and open minded. Not all clients are the same. Being flexable in your shooting style and editing makes you more marketable. I also like to challenge myself. The slow, romantic stuff is the norm for me- it's exciting to do something a little different once in a while. I feel it only helps you grow as a videographer to step out of your box every so often.

I think you guys are missing the darn point here. A wedding video captures a moment in time, in this case somewhere around 2005, so using pop music is okay since it will remind them of this moment in say 20/30/40 years from now.
Agreed. See my previous post to zdogg.

As far as the lyrics... hey it's just a song that doesn't happen to be totally PC (and thank f*cking god for a change). That song, which I'm sure they like and I'm sure they are forward thinking enough to appreciate the irony of playing it, is perfect since it has such a cool edgy feel and juxtaposes perfectly with a wedding. Irony people!!! Humor!!! It makes the world go around... gees-us!
People don't always have such an open mind. They envision what a video is SUPPOSED to look like and if it deviates from their expectations they sometimes react negatively to it. There's nothing wrong with that- everyone is entitled to their opinion. In fact it's what makes this world interesting. If we all had the same mindsets and opinions it would be rather boring would it not?

Awesome work, GM, I liked it. I like how you cut on the beat at certain times, and didn't at others. I struggle with when to cut on the beat and when not to. What I like here was that by skipping certain beats, the viewer starts to anticipate the next cut and it leaves them wanting or waiting. I feel I cut on the beat too much and it becomes almost too mechanical, like watching a machine. That doesn’t always work.
Thank you. Yes- I find this style of editing more challenging for me. I don't know if it's because I'm not accustomed to editing this style or just the fact that it requires even more rythm and timing. I do the same thing as you- by editing to the beat TOO much. While I "do" feel it's important for your video to "breathe" with the music- it's important not to become entirely too predictable. Likewise I feel the same way about editing style in general. If you continue to edit the same style all the time you'll never grow as an editor.

I would NOT like to know the guy who wouldn't stop punching his palm.

I agree- I had much more content with some people than others. It depended on their comfort in front of the camera. The guy punching his hand was very uncomfortable I could read it in his body language so I didn't shoot much of him.

Overall, very good. I have to assume the parts I didn't like were due to the PEOPLE you were shooting, and less about your skills or talents. Maybe it's too soft to quite have the Sopranos look. I wonder if the credits would completely clash if they were effected to look more like washed out grainy film. Perhaps the video effect doesn't match the look of FILM, which the rest of your work seems to simulate.
I wan't going for a Sopranos/film look, ironicly enough I've never even seen the show.

Well, the fact that he's a brawler... that kinda makes it sit better with me. I suppose someday everyone can look back at that footage and it'll "fit" him so perfectly, eh?

Good stuff.

GM:

I had to rethink some of this thread after I went back and re-read that the couple picked out the song track. So some of what I have to say that follows goes sometimes more to them. But still, for you to put this up as, I suppose, an example of something for which you had hoped to garner praise, (and some of it is indeed praiseworthy) well, some still holds for you as well, although maybe to a lesser degree, and so, I left my original as it was -- and so here goes:

I get your justifications for doing the piece this way, i.e. 'why do always the same treatment' regarding the wedding video genre. Fine. Your language in your response, and some of that inclined in connection with the video, is just offensive to religious people and especially Christians, who like me usually just shrug and bite tongues when we here these "now P. C." exclamations in your retort such as "gees-us" (Jesus, of course, why not write it out for what it is you are really saying, that is, if you are comfortable enough saying it in the first place) -- or godddamned, in a wedding video part of which happens to play out in a church or chapel related to "holy" matrimony. If these people or their families don't really care about this aspect, why are they marrying in a church? That is just an obvious first question one would ask. Your last retort, " f'ng god," well, that just speaks for itself. It just doesn't sync for people who's first priority is not just to want to be, above all else, less predictable. It is great to not be predictable, I applaud that - we all should stretch -- your choices here though , at least lyric wise, just lack a certain sensitivity, I am presuming, to at least some who would be viewing this piece.

To all of you who think it is kosher to use this kind of language in front of everyone, regardless of their beliefs, well you are just tacky - and I dare say you would most likely not be throwing Mohammed's name around the same way - and why not? You answer that yourself.

Lastly you wanted opinions, and sincere ones, I would presume. You really don't have to explain the obvious, i.e. what effect you are going for. That is clear - and this piece really does work on a certain level, but is to me, and assuredly many others, patently offensive, for the inclusion of parts that are really just incongruous. If you don't like that answer, fine. But there it is. You may not deal with too many like me but I am not alone in this rejection of what some have called the coarsening of society. Your audience is your audience. If you are not worried about offending, that is your choice, but again, this is my response, sincerely.

Your honest response to this is either 'fine, but I don't really care about offending, especially the group you are describing -- and by the way, get a life, Z.' (or something along those lines) OR 'gee, I hadn't thought about it in those terms, maybe I should rethink.' But no further explaining the piece itself. That we get.

Z