13/02/2025
如何让一个十分钟的短片变得值得一看
甚至一看再看, 看了又看?
特别是在现今时代
优秀视频比比皆是垂手可得
而且迅速进化成 “手机人” 的我们
早已经习惯只看90秒短视频
任何超过三分钟的视频都属于严重虐待观众的 “长片”
如果内容里头没有俊男美女没有鲜肉嫩模
没有劲爆热辣没有耍酷耍帅没有骚姿抚媚
甚至没有任何艺术水平
只是一群幼儿园小孩不足两个月的业余表演
这样一个幼儿园常年毕业典礼活动
能做出什么样独具匠心的视频呢?
更别说演出过程还出现失误,
甚至可以苛刻的说是历年最失败的演出
别误会, 千错万错都是大人的错, 小孩都是无辜的
而我们依旧开心的为演出喝彩为小孩喝彩
为大人的错误装作什么都没有发生过
然而影片的制作无法NG无法要求重新演绎
依旧企图尽最大努力去掩盖大人的失误
能做出这样一个片子即便不是仁至义尽
也早已经鞠躬尽瘁, 即便这只是导演预想的六成的好
却已经是最好的最好, 甚至好过历年的制作
(只因为导演累计太多用纸包火的经验而尽量铺设各种plan-B
然而 plan-B再好也只是 plan-B)..
然而支付费用的甲方对于导演的努力却莫名的不满意
即便导演耐心详细的解释, 由于大人的技术失误
纵然导演早已经准备很棒的音乐但是都必须惋惜舍弃
而导演对于在各种苛刻条件的限制之下,
这是最好的结果, 甚至可能还是历年来最好的作品
甲方一边感谢导演的付出
一边在一日之内私下组建了27人的影片试看团
28人一致认为影片前半部必须更换音乐重新剪接!
原本需要45个工作天才能完成的影片
在甲方的委婉要求之下, 20来个工作天就结案
间中的生病熬夜失眠一天工作20小时
导演都不想再深究, 然而对于28人一致否定
这伤害和羞辱真是20年也不曾遭遇过
因此导演提出先将影片公诸于世
让公众来评价这个影片是否有问题
甲方立即以DATA PROTECTION ACT为由
阻止导演公开影片
导演并不想将问题闹僵, 即便在服务条款中
清楚写明, 导演拥有绝对的创作权和影片版权
也清楚写明, 甲方如果有任何心仪的音乐
必须套用在MV的制作之中, 必须在第一个开镜之前
就提供给导演, 以便导演可以消化音乐
和设计拍摄画面, 然而甲方并没有事前提供任何音乐
本着服务客户的原则, 导演依旧给甲方一个妥协方案
只要甲方能提供一首好音乐来解决各种技术失误
导演可以免费为甲方剪出一个专属的版本
经过一周的等待, 28人无法提供一首音乐
并私下开会决定使用导演的原创版本
但是拒绝签署 Talent Release Form
因此, 如果您是这次演出的小孩的家长或者监护人
如果您希望可以获得一份导演的原创MV
请私下联系导演许永宝, 我会提供方法.
(影片早于21/1/25完成, 22/1/25完成文字矫正, 但是至今无法公开).
How to Make a 10-Minute Short Film Worth Watching—Again and Again?
Especially nowsaday, where outstanding videos are everywhere and instantly accessible, we—who have quickly evolved into “smartphone human”—have grown accustomed to watching only 90-second clips. Any video longer than three minutes is often seen as an exhausting test of patience.
Now, imagine a video that doesn’t feature handsome actors or stunning models, doesn’t rely on explosive action, sizzling visuals, or even artistic sophistication. Instead, it captures an amateur performance by a group of kindergarten children, some of whom have been practicing for less than two months. How could such a regular annual kindergarten concert be transformed into a truly unique and remarkable video?
To make things even more challenging, mistakes occurred during the performance—some of them serious, caused not by the children but by the adults guiding them. Yet, the audience still cheered with joy, celebrating both the performance and the children, because we all love and support our kids.
Nevertheless, since there were no second takes or opportunities for video retakes, the video’s production had to make the best of what was captured, doing its utmost to cover up the mistakes made by the adults. Even if the effort was not absolutely flawless, it certainly pushed the director to the limits.
However, the client, was inexplicably dissatisfied with the director’s work. Even after the director patiently explained that due to technical errors caused by the adults, some of the carefully planned great music had to be regretfully discarded, the client remained unimpressed.
The director believed that, the final product was the best possible outcome—perhaps even the best rendition of kindergarten event in recent years.
While the client expressed gratitude for the director’s efforts, in within a single day, he privately assembled a 27-member screening team and according to him, all 27 members unanimously agreed with him that the first half of the video needed a new soundtrack and a complete re-edit.
Despite what was originally a 45-day production schedule was compressed into just over 20 days at the client’s “polite request.” The director endured illness, sleepless nights, and 20-hour workdays without complaint.
However, to have the entire first half of the film rejected by all 28 reviewers was an unprecedented insult in 30-year career. As a result, the director suggested releasing the film publicly for an unbiased evaluation. The client immediately invoked the Data Protection Act to block director from making any public screening.
The director did not wish to escalate the issue, even though the service contract clearly stated that the director retained full creative control and copyright over the video. It also specified that if the client had any preferred music for the production, it needed to be provided before the first day of filming, so the director could incorporate it into the creative process. However, the client had failed to provide any music in advance.
Despite all these insults, the director still offered a compromise: if the client could provide a suitable soundtrack to address the technical issues, a special version of the video would be edited free of charge. After a week of waiting, the 28-member team failed to provide any music and ultimately decided to use the director’s original version—while simultaneously refusing to sign the Talent Release Form.
Therefore, if you are a parent or guardian of one of the children in this performance and would like to obtain a copy of the director’s original music video, please contact Hii Ing Poh privately for further details.
