Party Intro Video
- This topic has 26 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Cdes,
I am working on a video and would appreciate some input. Edit in and edit out. Things to remove or add.Any suggestions and any help would be appreciated.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/karz8zsqzhqtzce/SPGBVideo.mp4?dl=0
I would prefer if the interviewers were edited out of the Todays Politics two clips and you do what you did with Adam's …substitute text, instead for the whole video…You seem to drop that approach as the video develops but even if it means changing the questions and re-phrasing them so the text fits with Danny's and Howards statements.Bill rousing words is a good finale but the clip begins just that few seconds or so too early for me …i rather not see the venue Still have to choose from Mike Fosters short vid, very clear diction, Howard's Moss (shame he is seen reading a script),I prefer Danny's Big Smoke interview to his BBC appearance perhaps it can be added to Danny's appearance..he is more relaxed and less flustered sounding in bits..So my feed back is continue with the onscreen text questions rather than actual interviewers for the whole video…intersperse Danny's BBC with his Big Smoke replies…Add Mike Foster piece about leader to Danny's mention of it , and other clips from him can go alongside Clifford Slapper…End with the stirring Internationale …
Appreciate your comments Alan. We can always depend on your input.I think Andrew Neil gives a lot of accurate info about the Party before Howard comes in. Don't you think it would be a shame not to use it? He agrees with our opposition to leaders, the membership test and says that we do ' what it says on the tin. '. I know his questions to our candidate were a piss take and time wasting but I think Howard has a very engaging manner and shows us in a good light., Showing the full interview also adds credibility do you think. We have been on the tellyI can certainly shorten Bill's clip and have a look at the other clips you mention.
It is OUR intro video, not Neil's or whatshername's. Both try to steer us to say what they want us to say about ourselves. If both interviewers are edited out…you can phrase the questions more appropriately for the answers that we wish to present to represent our view of ourselves. And you can intersperse other speakers on the same subject to reinforce the answers. Was Adam's points diminished because she was deleted. (i know the reason was the inaudibility but you get my point)…I think you should be consistent all the way through the video in using text questions or text observations to introduce the speakers comments. I could make it more complicated that we do voice-overs ourselves but is that necessary?As you say, i'm a person free with my opinions …but hopefully not too opinionated
I think the inclusion of Andrew Neil et al adds a bit of credibility to the average viewer. the fact that it comes from a "serious politics" programme gives the message that we are a serious political party. I think it's an excellent piece of work, my only other thought is how well Cliff Slapper has aged, he doesn't look a day over 30.
Thanks for the comment Tim. Actually Cifford is only about 22 in the video.
Come on cdes! Some input so I can move on with it.
Had a look at 'Big Smoke' Could definitely use some of that
Vin wrote:Come on cdes! Some input so I can move on with it.What about something from capitalism & Other Kids Stuff? Or that rather good video by Spencer CathcartThe Lie We Live
I have been in contact with Spencer and he would prefer i didnt use his video, and he is not interested in producing a similar one even for payment! At least he replied and was very pleasant about it . Yes it is a great video and I told him so.I was thinking of starting the video with a couple of minutes along the lines of The Lie we Live but not sure I am capable: tho I have written some dialogue. Example below/I will have a look at 'capitaism and other kids stuff'My aim is to produce a video that introduces the party and its ideas and activities.Not necessarily deeply. I will be adding party pics and an advert showing the socialist standardVery much appreciate your input Robbo What does it mean to us as individuals to live in the Global Economy of Capitalism? Well if you are a capitalist then you are a free individual.You can do anything you wantget up out of bed any time you chosego on a cruisego anywhere in the worlddo whatever you wishInvest in a call centre, a factory, a supermarket chain. Buy expensive houses, cars, clothes etc.There is very little you can’t do as a capitalist in a capitalist society?In every sense of the word you are free But where does all this wealth and all this freedom for the capitalist come from? The airplanes, trains, flash cars, big expensive homes, clothes and foodCertainly not from the capitalist. Everything we need or desire is produced by the working classYou know which part of the class divide your on: you are mined of it every morning when your alarm goesIt reminds you that you are not a capitalistYou cannot do what you want to do.Go where you want to goBe who you want to beThis is because you are a member of the working class. Whether you are a doctor, manager brick layer, nurse, car salesman, brain surgeon or professorYou are a member of the working class because you have no choice but to sell your time and your abilities in order to feed, clothe yourself and pay the mortgage. That is if you are one of the ‘lucky’ ones and have a jobYou can’t invest in a call centre, factory, supermarket chain. You don’t have that choiceYou are not a free individual within the Global Economy of Capitalism
I like it Vin. There are a few small errors but it is on the right lines. Incidentally have a look at the youtube jondwhite posted under general discussion on "political language". An interesting analysis of Trumps style of verbal delivery which is very effective even if he is talking utter crapI think Tim makes a valid point about including a bit with Neill from the point of view of enhancing credibility.Some official facts and figurse would not go amiss either e.g. the number of empty homes compared with the number of homeless people. I have some data on that…
I note i am in the minority of one, (not for the first time but has that ever stopped me from harping on) but surely we should make a video that can be used for a long time.Apart from earlier criticism that it is interruptive to show TWO (not just Neil) interviewers presenting THEIR questions, it also dates the video…We should try to make it time-less. In 10 years time a new generation will be viewing the video and wondering…who the hell is that geezer…Andrew Neil will be as well known as Reginald Bosanquet is today. And i agree the text can consist not just questions but observations using statistics and quotes to prepare and introduce our members contributions.
alanjjohnstone wrote:..We should try to make it time-less. In 10 years time a new generation will be viewing the video and wondering…who the hell is that geezer…Andrew Neil will be as well known as Reginald Bosanquet is today.Surel we will have produced a new video by then? Would a televised debate between the party and others become 'dated'? Look at Clifford's video. Shows our case applies to capitalism regardless of when or where it existsTimeless lol get it on the bloghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oj0gPQwBAeY
Have you seen this?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM
jondwhite wrote:Have you seen this?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsMThanks – Seen something like it, downloaded it but copyright is always a problem
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.