Science fiction movie produced in 48 hours


21 Responses to “Science fiction movie produced in 48 hours”

  1. Anonymous says:

    Directed by Nathan Barley.

  2. The Mudshark says:

    Unable to pay any attention to the film. All I can think of is how bad I want to snuggle the actress.

    • penguinchris says:

      She is indeed very attractive… but that doesn’t *quite* make up for the bad acting :) I have a feeling it was a problem with the script and the direction and not her, though.

      When it ended I felt like I must have missed something, such as the middle and end of the story. Not sure if it’s because there wasn’t a middle or end, or if I lost track because I was paying attention to the actress ;)

      Also it felt extremely Doctor Who to me, especially the drawings at the end, except with a gun :)

    • simonbarsinister says:

      You’re welcome.
      She reminds me of the beautiful Stephanie Jacobsen (from Terminator: Sarah Connor Chronicles).

  3. Anonymous says:

    Cool film. Well done, especially in that time frame. One thing, that made me cringe. Quick shot, she fires the gun, then sticks it back in her pants. Now, I’m sure that could be explained away as gun from the future no muzzle heat. I cringed when I saw her put the gun back down her pants. Those things are super hot right after you fire them. My only issue, and I know I know, no gun accuracy in movies anyway so why start now.

  4. sapere_aude says:

    Really hard to follow the dialogue. I hate it when the background music drowns out the voices.

    Besides, why are Mike Sizemore (the writer) and Haruka Abe (the actress) making shorts like this when they ought to be making the TV series they’ve been promising us since 2009: Slingers.

    Is Slingers even happening? I fell in love with the idea for the show just from the “sizzle real” they put together back in 2009; but I haven’t heard much about it since then. This sci-fi short film is okay; but it’s no substitute for Slingers.

  5. Zandy says:

    For more SF short films from previous 48 hour film challenges see the Sci Fi London website. The winner of this years competition will be revealed on this site during the festival itself.

  6. Editz says:

    48 hours? Why not 48 minutes? I just don’t get these contests.

  7. serraphin says:

    I also entered the 48 hour and (tho im not watching any other entries yet to preserve my ego) I’d like to point out to detractors that this whole thing is harder than you’d think.

    You not only have to script the thing, but try and get the appropriate cast, the right props and costume, let the talent learn their bit, light and film it…THEN you have to edit, composite, sound grade and render + burn it to DVD.

    If you’ve ever tried to make a short film then you’d know how many things can go wrong, even when you have time.

    Are there ‘errors’? Hell probably, but maybe you should try entering next year and see how well you do eh?

    Props to all the kings horses, and Nathan.

    Paul – variant 313

  8. The Mudshark says:

    She is indeed very attractive… but that doesn’t *quite* make up for the bad acting :) I have a feeling it was a problem with the script and the direction and not her, though.

    the bad acting makes her all the more adorable :)

  9. Anonymous says:

    Its an interesting concept to make a film in 48 hrs. The films I work on take 1 to 2 years. With the advances in digital cinema workflows, it is possible now for indie filmmaker to make the film, and with the advances in social media – distribution of the film is achievable. I commend you on taking on the 48 hr challenge. I always said that in order to make movies one has to make movies. Not talk about making movies, but getting out there and making it happen. With the 48 hr challenge – the challenge is finding the right people to work with. From my experience thats the hardest part of filmmaking. Here’s my thoughts on the subject:

    Anyways, thanks for your effort, good job, and keep shooting!

  10. Anonymous says:

    It’s visually very nice, just too bad I couldn’t understand a word the actress was saying. Should’ve come with closed captioning. It seems to be popular in modern moviemaking to have mumbling, quiet dialog, and loud incidental noise.

  11. Canary Girl says:

    Here’s another entry from this year’s SciFi London 48 hour challenge; Temporary Status

    This was made by my friends (I had a small job in the art department but can’t claim much credit)

    title: Temporary Status

    prop: A plain white cup with a broken handle, in the cup us some blue or purple liquid – we see a character put some powder (or granules) in it

    dialogue: “In half an hour we won’t be able to see our hands in front of our faces in this”

  12. optuser says:

    Where was the red or green liquid? Was it the scotch?

  13. shiftdelete says:

    I liked the film for the most part. If it was a full length movie, I would totally go see it….

    My few gripes: the computer girl’s voice didn’t work for me.

    Also, Scotch doesn’t “age” in the bottle like wine. It only ages in the cask. So the comment about a 100+ year old scotch doesn’t work.

    I also noticed the just-fired gun down the pants.. but with buzz she probably had, she may not have felt it.

    The time warps seemed odd. They may need something subtle to notify the viewer when they happen.

  14. spool32 says:

    Dialog was far too quiet to be easily followed, and the whole thing was… flat.

  15. Mr Belm says:

    She jammed a just-fired gun barrel down the back of her pants. That’s gotta hurt.

    • Mister44 says:

      Nah – it shouldn’t be hot after one round. Though one would think a time traveling alcoholic would have a holster.

  16. Church says:

    C.f. this time travel short, also produced during a 48 film slam.

Leave a Reply