Why do so many moviemakers put an opening credit on the front of their movies?
You know the sort of thing: "A Chris Smith film in ChrisSmithOvision from
ChrisCo" complete with fireworks, mountains cleaving, thousands of dancing
girls, swirling clouds, elaborate fanfares and so on.
In the golden days of Hollywood cinema the MGM logo might indicate a glamorous,
glossy colour movie with a high feel-good factor, the WB logo stood for grittier,
black-and-white movie, while the PRC logo meant you could concentrate on
snogging in the back row.
But no amateur, however prolific, has that kind of brand recognition.
The only function I can see for such credits is to let people know the movie
has begun - not an inconsiderable service given all the potential for problems
in presenting a show sometimes. It is especially suitable if the film starts
with black screen and no or low sound level.
But for that purpose there is a simpler answer ... put the main title at
the beginning of the movie rather than 2 or 3 minutes into it. In fact ideally
incorporate the main title in the opening shots of the film: the warden paces
a corridor and in one corner of the frame appears the title "Death Row" in
plain characters whose colour contrasts well with the background.
Or am I missing something?
Dave (McBlinkered) Watterson
Opening credits
-
Michael Slowe
Re: Opening credits
"Dave Watterson" <forums@theiac.org.uk> wrote:
the logo/dancing girl/graphic movement etc. But I, as a film maker, always
either precede or follow the actual title by my name in some form or other,
merely to claim some title to the film. Surely as the producer one is entitled
to that? As for the timing I always take great care with this since the
whole atmosphere of the film is set by the opening seconds. Personally I
usually include some sort of pre credit sequence to set the mood and to get
an audience settled as quickly as possible. If they are perhaps a bit puzzled
as to what might follow so much the better. You have seen and commented
on (in public and in private) many of my films and have never raised the
questions that you pose in your post. What has prompted your comments just
now? They are not personal to me I am sure but I feel a little guilty on
reading what you say.
Michael Slowe.
I think that you may have a point Dave, especially if the producer has overdoneWhy do so many moviemakers put an opening credit on the front of their movies?
You know the sort of thing: "A Chris Smith film in ChrisSmithOvision from
ChrisCo" complete with fireworks, mountains cleaving, thousands of dancing
girls, swirling clouds, elaborate fanfares and so on.
In the golden days of Hollywood cinema the MGM logo might indicate a glamorous,
glossy colour movie with a high feel-good factor, the WB logo stood for
grittier,
black-and-white movie, while the PRC logo meant you could concentrate on
snogging in the back row.
But no amateur, however prolific, has that kind of brand recognition.
The only function I can see for such credits is to let people know the movie
has begun - not an inconsiderable service given all the potential for problems
in presenting a show sometimes. It is especially suitable if the film starts
with black screen and no or low sound level.
But for that purpose there is a simpler answer ... put the main title at
the beginning of the movie rather than 2 or 3 minutes into it. In fact
ideally
incorporate the main title in the opening shots of the film: the warden
paces
a corridor and in one corner of the frame appears the title "Death Row"
in
plain characters whose colour contrasts well with the background.
Or am I missing something?
Dave (McBlinkered) Watterson
the logo/dancing girl/graphic movement etc. But I, as a film maker, always
either precede or follow the actual title by my name in some form or other,
merely to claim some title to the film. Surely as the producer one is entitled
to that? As for the timing I always take great care with this since the
whole atmosphere of the film is set by the opening seconds. Personally I
usually include some sort of pre credit sequence to set the mood and to get
an audience settled as quickly as possible. If they are perhaps a bit puzzled
as to what might follow so much the better. You have seen and commented
on (in public and in private) many of my films and have never raised the
questions that you pose in your post. What has prompted your comments just
now? They are not personal to me I am sure but I feel a little guilty on
reading what you say.
Michael Slowe.
-
Ken Wilson
Re: Opening credits
This will be part of the series in FVM. Titles I mean. I think I know what
Dave means:
"A FRED SMITH" film. Written and Directed by FRED SMITH. Camera FRED SMITH.
Based on a story by FRED SMITH... and so on. I have actually seen a film
like this in a competition which we judged. I would guess that the same name
appeared around 7 or 8 times. However, I agree with Michael that you deserve
(as the film maker) to have your name prominently at the start of the film,
as long as it is not overdone. I likewise always put my name at the start
PLUS it also always has a PHASE 4 logo. I think that this is distinctive
and people DO KNOW who this is when they see it. Not quite as well known
as 20th Century Fox or MGM, but amongst the British Amateur film movement...
some people know what it means.
It is not to tell the audience that the film has started! No more than they
need to know when it is finished; hence, none of my fims has "THE END" on
it, which is old fashioned and unneccesary.
It is in truth very difficult to know how to title your film to tell the
audience who was involved and what was done by who (whom) if you are a small
group. Titles are therefore kept as brief as possible.
Ken Wilson (PLUS LOGO and fireworks.)
Dave means:
"A FRED SMITH" film. Written and Directed by FRED SMITH. Camera FRED SMITH.
Based on a story by FRED SMITH... and so on. I have actually seen a film
like this in a competition which we judged. I would guess that the same name
appeared around 7 or 8 times. However, I agree with Michael that you deserve
(as the film maker) to have your name prominently at the start of the film,
as long as it is not overdone. I likewise always put my name at the start
PLUS it also always has a PHASE 4 logo. I think that this is distinctive
and people DO KNOW who this is when they see it. Not quite as well known
as 20th Century Fox or MGM, but amongst the British Amateur film movement...
some people know what it means.
It is not to tell the audience that the film has started! No more than they
need to know when it is finished; hence, none of my fims has "THE END" on
it, which is old fashioned and unneccesary.
It is in truth very difficult to know how to title your film to tell the
audience who was involved and what was done by who (whom) if you are a small
group. Titles are therefore kept as brief as possible.
Ken Wilson (PLUS LOGO and fireworks.)
-
Ned C
Re: Opening credits
"Dave Watterson" <forums@theiac.org.uk> wrote:
get is in the credits, in a short film it is better to put all the credits
at the end, for a feature length film then it is reasonable to put the main
credits at the front. I have seen some short films where the credits run
almost as long as the film, this seems to be particularly the case with student
films where even the sandwich makers expect recognition, and why not? How
many people actually stay in the cinema to see all the end credits? Not many
I suggest.
Ned C .
In films both amateur and professional the only recognition most of the participantsWhy do so many moviemakers put an opening credit on the front of their movies?
You know the sort of thing: "A Chris Smith film in ChrisSmithOvision from
ChrisCo" complete with fireworks, mountains cleaving, thousands of dancing
girls, swirling clouds, elaborate fanfares and so on.
get is in the credits, in a short film it is better to put all the credits
at the end, for a feature length film then it is reasonable to put the main
credits at the front. I have seen some short films where the credits run
almost as long as the film, this seems to be particularly the case with student
films where even the sandwich makers expect recognition, and why not? How
many people actually stay in the cinema to see all the end credits? Not many
I suggest.
Ned C .
-
Dave Watterson
Re: Opening credits
1. I was only referring to the opening "production company" caption at the
start of many movies and not to the end credits. For end credits I agree
that it is appropriate to recognise all the contributions, though you should
either do that quickly or build in entertainment like out-takes, or even
the final shots of the film if these can stand the distraction ... e.g. the
fruits of a craftsman's labours if you have been making a documentary about
him or her.
2. I did not have any specific movie maker in mind, just that I have seen
umpteen movies in the last 12 months whose openings are grandiose and pretentious
... all too often being followed by an indifferent movie.
3. I do like a film to have some clear start and end, whether by way of caption
cards or otherwise. It is not always easy for a projectionist to know whether
the movie has started or not if the opening scenes are very dark and have
very low sound. Equally it is not always easy to know when it has finally
ended. There are lots of ways to make those points clear besides titles
of course.
Dave (McMathematic) Watterson
start of many movies and not to the end credits. For end credits I agree
that it is appropriate to recognise all the contributions, though you should
either do that quickly or build in entertainment like out-takes, or even
the final shots of the film if these can stand the distraction ... e.g. the
fruits of a craftsman's labours if you have been making a documentary about
him or her.
2. I did not have any specific movie maker in mind, just that I have seen
umpteen movies in the last 12 months whose openings are grandiose and pretentious
... all too often being followed by an indifferent movie.
3. I do like a film to have some clear start and end, whether by way of caption
cards or otherwise. It is not always easy for a projectionist to know whether
the movie has started or not if the opening scenes are very dark and have
very low sound. Equally it is not always easy to know when it has finally
ended. There are lots of ways to make those points clear besides titles
of course.
Dave (McMathematic) Watterson
-
Cinema For Thurso Group
Re: Opening credits
Perhaps we feel it's an obligatory part of a movie. Every film in commercial
cinema or even low budget has the format- dot presents a dash production
starring dum and dimwit written by hobnob directed by big Dick! etc.
I don't think any of us have major levels of public recognition but it's
got to start somewhere. Many young film makers are looking to break into
the industry (and some old ones like myself too) so if the name isn't there
at the start it may be missed in the end title.
That aside it may be that if the film is any good whoever is watching might
make a point of reading the end titles to find out who did what (some films
should explain their plot/point this way too).
In the golden era it was the case that all the titles were at the start
and as much as was at the end was "The End" and parhaps a reprise of the
main cast list which isn't always worth repeating.
They say in hollywood, "you can always make a great trailer out of a crap
film". Now that's just not true and I wish could remember the film trailer
that proved otherwise.(It was a film starring Robert Vaughn.)
cinema or even low budget has the format- dot presents a dash production
starring dum and dimwit written by hobnob directed by big Dick! etc.
I don't think any of us have major levels of public recognition but it's
got to start somewhere. Many young film makers are looking to break into
the industry (and some old ones like myself too) so if the name isn't there
at the start it may be missed in the end title.
That aside it may be that if the film is any good whoever is watching might
make a point of reading the end titles to find out who did what (some films
should explain their plot/point this way too).
In the golden era it was the case that all the titles were at the start
and as much as was at the end was "The End" and parhaps a reprise of the
main cast list which isn't always worth repeating.
They say in hollywood, "you can always make a great trailer out of a crap
film". Now that's just not true and I wish could remember the film trailer
that proved otherwise.(It was a film starring Robert Vaughn.)
-
animato
Re: Opening credits
"Michael Slowe" <michael.slowe@btinternet.com> wrote:
commercial ones, where 15 minutes after the film starts yet another credit
may appear. As long as the title sequence adds to the film and dose not get
in the way,then it is usually fine.
I have noticed that the really good amateur film makers use the opening title
sequence to enhance the film, and not detract from it. Most of the info can
be at the end of the film anyway, where the titles won't have such a noticeable
effect anyway. And yes, I'm against the accountants and tea makers getting
credits, even if thay may deserve them.
Animato
I rarely have a problem with opening credits with amateur films, ony with"Dave Watterson" <forums@theiac.org.uk> wrote:
Why do so many moviemakers put an opening credit on the front of their
movies?
You know the sort of thing: "A Chris Smith film in ChrisSmithOvision from
ChrisCo" complete with fireworks, mountains cleaving, thousands of dancing
girls, swirling clouds, elaborate fanfares and so on.
In the golden days of Hollywood cinema the MGM logo might indicate a glamorous,
glossy colour movie with a high feel-good factor, the WB logo stood for
grittier,
black-and-white movie, while the PRC logo meant you could concentrate on
snogging in the back row.
But no amateur, however prolific, has that kind of brand recognition.
The only function I can see for such credits is to let people know the
movie
has begun - not an inconsiderable service given all the potential for problems
in presenting a show sometimes. It is especially suitable if the film starts
with black screen and no or low sound level.
But for that purpose there is a simpler answer ... put the main title at
the beginning of the movie rather than 2 or 3 minutes into it. In fact
ideally
incorporate the main title in the opening shots of the film: the warden
paces
a corridor and in one corner of the frame appears the title "Death Row"
in
plain characters whose colour contrasts well with the background.
Or am I missing something?
Dave (McBlinkered) Watterson
I think that you may have a point Dave, especially if the producer has overdone
the logo/dancing girl/graphic movement etc. But I, as a film maker, always
either precede or follow the actual title by my name in some form or other,
merely to claim some title to the film. Surely as the producer one is entitled
to that? As for the timing I always take great care with this since the
whole atmosphere of the film is set by the opening seconds. Personally
I
usually include some sort of pre credit sequence to set the mood and to
get
an audience settled as quickly as possible. If they are perhaps a bit puzzled
as to what might follow so much the better. You have seen and commented
on (in public and in private) many of my films and have never raised the
questions that you pose in your post. What has prompted your comments just
now? They are not personal to me I am sure but I feel a little guilty on
reading what you say.
Michael Slowe.
commercial ones, where 15 minutes after the film starts yet another credit
may appear. As long as the title sequence adds to the film and dose not get
in the way,then it is usually fine.
I have noticed that the really good amateur film makers use the opening title
sequence to enhance the film, and not detract from it. Most of the info can
be at the end of the film anyway, where the titles won't have such a noticeable
effect anyway. And yes, I'm against the accountants and tea makers getting
credits, even if thay may deserve them.
Animato