This short was very "Ha ha" funny. I have seen something similar to this on the "Chappelle Show", so the punch lines were not as strong to me.
The setup of the shots were extremely simple. They were just like the five shot exercises. The set was not expensive at all either. I can imagine that it did not take to much time to shoot this short and even edit it.
One thing that did bother me about it was the vignette that was overlayed on it. It took away some details that I would have preferred viewing.
Kaitlin Smith: I thought Consent was very funny! The dialogue was very natural and comedic at the same time, but what made it best was the lawyers were able to keep a straight face. I also thought it was funny how Jason Reitman placed a women lawyer with the boy and a man lawyer with the girl. That added more humor. I like how this short film had a message to it and was trying to tell viewers something. The lighting was really good on the actor’s faces and because it’s a bedroom, so it’s dim to begin with. The cinematography was okay, because there weren’t that many camera angles, just one wide shot the entire film. It was just was very simple, there was nothing special to it. I believe the director did that on purpose to get the message across. I actually enjoyed this film, at first I thought I wasn’t, but I guess the dialogue did it for me. As we all know films with great dialogue succeed!
Bonnie Gross: Overall I thought that “Consent” was very funny. I think that the dialogue kept the short very funny as the punch lines kept coming. What made the short were the actors and how they took everything in the scene so seriously. The writer of the script for the short did a good job.
The shots themselves were not complex, and neither was the set. It probably did not take them much time to shot or edit. Even though the shots were not complex, I think that the simplicity was fine. The short was more focused on the dialogue than the cinematography.
The only thing that I didn’t like was the vignette over the screen. I didn’t really understand why it was there and it felt unnecessary. The lighting scheme was a little dark and created deep shadows under the characters eyes at times. Although it was not my favorite set up I think it worked in the short. In all I really enjoyed the short. It kept my interest and even made me laugh.
I thought "Consent" was very funny. As a story line, it had a beginning middle and end very clearly. The story was easy to follow and the unsaid words were easy to pick up on. The lighting was basic but dim enough to propose sort of a romantic atmosphere.
I thought the lawyers were the funniest part, as they were the characters who really took this joke far. The acting got the point across although the two people on the bed's lines were a little cheesy and not as natural as they could have been, except in the parts about seeing the whole "formality" with the lawyers totally normal.
I thought this film had a strong idea and executed it well. It was very simple but it was very entertaining.
"Consent" is a wonderful short that lightens the subject of sexual intercourse. I love when people can comfortably and openly talk about sex just trying to let people become aware of what "doing it" involves. I feel that every high school sex education class should show this video because they cover almost every aspect of sex. I also enjoyed the fact that they showed the audience that sex is a mutual and consensual activity in which both people make compromises but are rewarded with pleasure at the end of the night.
I liked that the character were average Jo's and Jane's which does not glamorized the situation because this happens to people all around the world.The lighting was appropriate focusing on using the practical light which creates a more intimate atmosphere. It was also smart to have a female attorney represent the male and a male attorney to represent the female, it was a very balance argument.
There was not a lot of variety in terms of shot composition. The only shots that were used where a medium wide shot of the couple, medium close ups of the girl and the guy, and medium close ups of the lawyers.
Overall I really enjoyed it because this successfully got a message across about a controversial subject amongst young people.
The most hilarious short thus far. The entire short circulated between two people, their lawyers, and a ridiculous contract. The camera work and the sound was unnoticeable, most of the entertainment came in through the narrative. Different people would take different things away from the humor.
Some may look at it as more of a comedic cautionary tale: that people should make sure they are protected and have outlined what they want before getting into anything serious. Others may take away a joke at the inundation of laws, lawsuits, and binding contracts pervading our modern society, making even something as private as their private business become formal and stilted.
Consent, short and sweet. Seems like Dave stole this from Jason or vice versa or they both met at a party and decided to do there own thing with the same idea but I did enjoy this bit. Unlike our recent screening of "He Wanted It" the short to a gag, tweaked it, and then threw it right back without being to repetitive. Having the lawyers come from no where and automatically know what they want helped add to that comedic sense of it, assuming everyone has a lawyer for this specific purpose. Not listing the all the details really let the viewers' imagination decide what he would never do in his wildest dreams.
The lighting confused me at first because of the black circle border around everything but then I reminded myself of the setting. Very simple short.
Consent is funny. I didn't really no what to expect from the title but it was clever and obnoxious. Obnoxious being that they have their layers show up to go over a very detailed consent form or I guess it just really ridiculous. The dialogue was very humorous. I especially like the bit about "his public castration" and "her underwear for the trophy case in the frat house". I liked that the character facial expressions went along with the conversation between the lawyers.
I didn't like how dark the footage was. It did set the mood for a romantic bedroom make out scene but it was still to dark. Also, the quality of the video was awful but then again it's Youtube.
As it appears most everyone else did, I thought Consent was funny although I believe if the narrative had not been so on point then the rest of it could have seemed very dry and ordinary. The actors seemed to be very comfortable with their roles and did a good job conveying the emotions it seemed they were supposed to.
The lighting was slightly disconcerting because of how dark it was mixed with how bad the resolution was. I can't figure out the cause and or reason for this. In addition, the shots seemed very basic and easily attainable, but it helped add to the normalcy of the film.
Calvin Ross:
ReplyDeleteThis short was very "Ha ha" funny. I have seen something similar to this on the "Chappelle Show", so the punch lines were not as strong to me.
The setup of the shots were extremely simple. They were just like the five shot exercises. The set was not expensive at all either. I can imagine that it did not take to much time to shoot this short and even edit it.
One thing that did bother me about it was the vignette that was overlayed on it. It took away some details that I would have preferred viewing.
All in all, a very successful short.
Kaitlin Smith: I thought Consent was very funny! The dialogue was very natural and comedic at the same time, but what made it best was the lawyers were able to keep a straight face. I also thought it was funny how Jason Reitman placed a women lawyer with the boy and a man lawyer with the girl. That added more humor. I like how this short film had a message to it and was trying to tell viewers something. The lighting was really good on the actor’s faces and because it’s a bedroom, so it’s dim to begin with. The cinematography was okay, because there weren’t that many camera angles, just one wide shot the entire film. It was just was very simple, there was nothing special to it. I believe the director did that on purpose to get the message across. I actually enjoyed this film, at first I thought I wasn’t, but I guess the dialogue did it for me. As we all know films with great dialogue succeed!
ReplyDeleteBonnie Gross: Overall I thought that “Consent” was very funny. I think that the dialogue kept the short very funny as the punch lines kept coming. What made the short were the actors and how they took everything in the scene so seriously. The writer of the script for the short did a good job.
ReplyDeleteThe shots themselves were not complex, and neither was the set. It probably did not take them much time to shot or edit. Even though the shots were not complex, I think that the simplicity was fine. The short was more focused on the dialogue than the cinematography.
The only thing that I didn’t like was the vignette over the screen. I didn’t really understand why it was there and it felt unnecessary. The lighting scheme was a little dark and created deep shadows under the characters eyes at times. Although it was not my favorite set up I think it worked in the short. In all I really enjoyed the short. It kept my interest and even made me laugh.
Lauren Musgrove
ReplyDeleteI thought "Consent" was very funny. As a story line, it had a beginning middle and end very clearly. The story was easy to follow and the unsaid words were easy to pick up on. The lighting was basic but dim enough to propose sort of a romantic atmosphere.
I thought the lawyers were the funniest part, as they were the characters who really took this joke far. The acting got the point across although the two people on the bed's lines were a little cheesy and not as natural as they could have been, except in the parts about seeing the whole "formality" with the lawyers totally normal.
I thought this film had a strong idea and executed it well. It was very simple but it was very entertaining.
Nia Barnes
ReplyDelete"Consent" is a wonderful short that lightens the subject of sexual intercourse. I love when people can comfortably and openly talk about sex just trying to let people become aware of what "doing it" involves. I feel that every high school sex education class should show this video because they cover almost every aspect of sex. I also enjoyed the fact that they showed the audience that sex is a mutual and consensual activity in which both people make compromises but are rewarded with pleasure at the end of the night.
I liked that the character were average Jo's and Jane's which does not glamorized the situation because this happens to people all around the world.The lighting was appropriate focusing on using the practical light which creates a more intimate atmosphere. It was also smart to have a female attorney represent the male and a male attorney to represent the female, it was a very balance argument.
There was not a lot of variety in terms of shot composition. The only shots that were used where a medium wide shot of the couple, medium close ups of the girl and the guy, and medium close ups of the lawyers.
Overall I really enjoyed it because this successfully got a message across about a controversial subject amongst young people.
Hampton Bradshaw:
ReplyDeleteThe most hilarious short thus far. The entire short circulated between two people, their lawyers, and a ridiculous contract. The camera work and the sound was unnoticeable, most of the entertainment came in through the narrative. Different people would take different things away from the humor.
Some may look at it as more of a comedic cautionary tale: that people should make sure they are protected and have outlined what they want before getting into anything serious. Others may take away a joke at the inundation of laws, lawsuits, and binding contracts pervading our modern society, making even something as private as their private business become formal and stilted.
Overall, I found Consent immensely entertaining.
Joel Jarvis
ReplyDeleteConsent, short and sweet. Seems like Dave stole this from Jason or vice versa or they both met at a party and decided to do there own thing with the same idea but I did enjoy this bit. Unlike our recent screening of "He Wanted It" the short to a gag, tweaked it, and then threw it right back without being to repetitive. Having the lawyers come from no where and automatically know what they want helped add to that comedic sense of it, assuming everyone has a lawyer for this specific purpose. Not listing the all the details really let the viewers' imagination decide what he would never do in his wildest dreams.
The lighting confused me at first because of the black circle border around everything but then I reminded myself of the setting. Very simple short.
Ellen Schwartz
ReplyDeleteConsent is funny. I didn't really no what to expect from the title but it was clever and obnoxious. Obnoxious being that they have their layers show up to go over a very detailed consent form or I guess it just really ridiculous. The dialogue was very humorous. I especially like the bit about "his public castration" and "her underwear for the trophy case in the frat house". I liked that the character facial expressions went along with the conversation between the lawyers.
I didn't like how dark the footage was. It did set the mood for a romantic bedroom make out scene but it was still to dark. Also, the quality of the video was awful but then again it's Youtube.
Otherwise, it was short, simple, sweet and goofy.
Matt Leddo
ReplyDeleteConsent was very funny. The cut to the guy's face when they mentioned "bra removal with his teeth" was hilarious.
The acting was very mediocre for the two characters on the bed. The lawyers did a good job. The cinematography wasn't mind-blowing.
This is one of my favorite shorts that we've seen this semester.
Steven Hiott
ReplyDeleteAs it appears most everyone else did, I thought Consent was funny although I believe if the narrative had not been so on point then the rest of it could have seemed very dry and ordinary. The actors seemed to be very comfortable with their roles and did a good job conveying the emotions it seemed they were supposed to.
The lighting was slightly disconcerting because of how dark it was mixed with how bad the resolution was. I can't figure out the cause and or reason for this. In addition, the shots seemed very basic and easily attainable, but it helped add to the normalcy of the film.