Dragonball Z: Saiyan Saga - Help make this happen!

[DerekPadula]

Good points, and I'd like submit to Example B into evidence:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AGFDXAf_fM

If K & K had made a film with Oolong (or Krillin) using Nunchaku's and an exploding power ranger, would you think it was better, or worse? With a few small exceptions, in my mind they made a pretty faithful recreation.

[Avenged]

I enjoyed the first two Dragonball live action films. Surprised nothing other than Evolution has been made recently with how popular the series was.

[DerekPadula]

I enjoyed the first two Dragonball live action films. Surprised nothing other than Evolution has been made recently with how popular the series was.

Agreed. Just trying to make the point that perception is everything.

[ShinRogafuken]

To KaiserNeko: Opinions are subjective. You're basically saying "The project was crap because it was, and don't pretend that it's not". Well, on what basis are you saying that from? Your subjective perception of the trailer being bad? That's fair enough, and it's fine to express your opinion. However, I don't see anything wrong with anyone who enjoyed the trailer and thought that it was good. Yes, there may be legal issues issues involved, but that's a different topic than actual enjoyment of the product.

For me, it was a bit disappointing, but I still enjoyed it overall. In fact, it appears that the vast majority of feedback to the trailer has been positive on YouTube.

[Hellspawn28]

This movie had a budget around 15,000 which is the same budget that Birdemic had and this movie looks much better then that movie did .

[Ringworm128]

For those of you who don't know what that is here's a video explaining. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzV8Q2fsN0o

[SparkyPantsMcGee]

To KaiserNeko: Opinions are subjective. You're basically saying "The project was crap because it was, and don't pretend that it's not". Well, on what basis are you saying that from?

He's given quite a number of valid reasons steaming from the direction; the editing; high level vision versus low level budget and skill level; using fighters as actors...I suggest going back and reviewing his posts again. His reasons are there and they are pretty valid. Yes, the opinion is subjective and everyone is entitled to their own but that shouldn't have to be explained. Frankly I'm on his side when it comes to the final product.

I also want to make it clear that I'm not attacking their efforts so much as I am just critiquing the final product. DerekPadula, if this was done with their own money and budget I'd be with you defending their efforts and the fact that they went out there and did something for the fans. But, the fact they got money from fans(even if the fans willingly gave it to them) kind of skews things for me. I feel like because of this fact they should be held to higher standards whether they like it or not. Ultimately I want them to grow from this; and I'm sure they did. So mission accomplished, and I hope they have best of luck in future endeavors. However, I don't feel like this was as good as it could have been given the time and budget it had.

This movie had a budget around 15,000 which is the same budget that Birdemic had and this movie looks much better then that movie did .

The difference being is that Birdemic was a movie where as this was just a trailer on the same budget. Of course it's going to look better. And just because it looked better than Birdemic(not something to really brag about honestly) doesn't mean it's good...although yes it's better than Birdemic.

[Ringworm128]

Also I don't think stuff like "Kayoken" and "Tri Beam" are really worth complaining about since they were clearly targeted at dub fans and is really only a problem to hardcore purists yes there was a bit of inconsistency with stuff like 'Kienzan" but I'm pretty sure they did that on purpose to try and please both sides of the fandom.

[Saiga]

I don't see how it'd be any different if they used their own funding rather than donations.

[ShinRogafuken]

To KaiserNeko: Opinions are subjective. You're basically saying "The project was crap because it was, and don't pretend that it's not". Well, on what basis are you saying that from?

He's given quite a number of valid reasons steaming from the direction; the editing; high level vision versus low level budget and skill level; using fighters as actors...I suggest going back and reviewing his posts again. His reasons are there and they are pretty valid. Yes, the opinion is subjective and everyone is entitled to their own but that shouldn't have to be explained. Frankly I'm on his side when it comes to the final product.

Fair enough man and thanks for being polite. I just think that one of KaiserNeko's posts came across as kind of snobbish and felt like replying to it. While some of his points are definitely valid, here's my spin on them:

- The editing: Yes, it could've been better. However, I sure know that I would not be able to edit something as well as K&K did so I really do not have the right to complain.

- High Level Vision vs. Low Level Skill Level & Budget: Ironically, their actions were very similar to Shonen protagonists such as Goku, Luffy, and Naruto. I definitely understand where this complaint is coming from, but would a "lower-level" vision even work? I feel like the effort they made to go out of their league was better than if they had made something even smaller and more limited. (Besides, it's not like making a less ambitious version would solve any copyright issues).

- Using fighters as actors: As the vast majority of the characters in the trailer were fighters, would it have really been a smart idea to use actors as fighters? That sounds like a bigger fail to me. I do agree the acting was weak, especially considering that the acting parts were quite easy. Some of the dialogue was unnecessary and could've been cut out to focus more on what I personally felt was a strength of the trailer: the martial arts choreography.

That's just my personal opinions; feel free to disagree!

[AgitoZ]

The difference being is that Birdemic was a movie where as this was just a trailer on the same budget. Of course it's going to look better. And just because it looked better than Birdemic(not something to really brag about honestly) doesn't mean it's good...although yes it's better than Birdemic.

Define "better". If we're simply talking production values then, yes, the 5 minute trailer looks better than a low budget movie. Entertainment value? Birdemic wins by a long shot.

I don't see how it'd be any different if they used their own funding rather than donations.

The difference would be that instead of it being a crappy trailer funded through shady business practices it would be just a crappy trailer.

- The editing: Yes, it could've been better. However, I sure know that I would not be able to edit something as well as K&K did so I really do not have the right to complain.

I stopped reading right here. No one can have a legitimate discussion if arguments like this keep getting pulled out. Roger Ebert does not make movies for a living, does that mean he can't criticize them? Does that make his points any less valid? No.

[SparkyPantsMcGee]

I'm on the fence when it comes to their attempt to go for a big scale. It's admirable to want to go as big as possible and to push your skills but I don't think they used their strengths.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gnucUwj ... Ex&index=2

Those shots were actually really good, and they should have done more of that instead of hiding behind the green screens. I was fine with them hiring fighters at first because I wanted to see their skills utilized but again I think the green screens and wire work took away this element. The stuff that was their was nice but very limited. It's hand to do a DBZ project and not use Wires and crazy effects but I think in this case less is more.

The difference being is that Birdemic was a movie where as this was just a trailer on the same budget. Of course it's going to look better. And just because it looked better than Birdemic(not something to really brag about honestly) doesn't mean it's good...although yes it's better than Birdemic.

Define "better". If we're simply talking production values then, yes, the 5 minute trailer looks better than a low budget movie. Entertainment value? Birdemic wins by a long shot.

Mostly production value in this case. However, Birdemic can be very entertaining.

I stopped reading right here. No one can have a legitimate discussion if arguments like this keep getting pulled out. Roger Ebert does not make movies for a living, does that mean he can't criticize them? Does that make his points any less valid? No.

This. I'm an artist, but I do the things I do for everyone not just other artists. If someone who isn't an artist thinks my work is bad and can give me a reason why(other than something like "you suck!") I don't mind listening to their opinion. Your brain knows what you do and don't like and you're allowed to voice your thoughts;hell I encourage it. However, I might take another artist's opinion more closer to heart. Doesn't mean your points invalid though.

[Shoryuken]

Once more this argument is being brought up and it is of course utter fallacy. That would be analogous to you demanding a gamer to be able to program and produce a game better than the one he is berating or a car enthusiast to assemble a car greater than the one he is commenting on.

This is a product that has been released for the sake of us, the viewers, to give our earnest opinion and verdict on.

My personal opinion is that it is awful, just a horribly ostentatious mess of bad acting, stilted computer effects and a fight-scene choreography that doesn't seem to take full advantage of the actors' martial abilities. Some of the characters come off as either weird (Chaozu) or just plain goofy (Piccolo). However it seems that most of my points have already been mentioned by other members of this forum in regards to its badness.

Suma sumarum we have the right to judge this trailer without having the need for a degree in movie making.

(Also why isn't this in the Fan-Created Works section rather than the General Franchise Discussion section?)

[Pafupafu]

$15,000 is chump change for film making. No, I'm serious. $15,000 for five minutes? You do know that Evolution was $45,000,000, right? At 100 minutes?

That's $450,000 dollars a minute. That's on average. Remember how meh a lot of that looked?

I'm also dumbfounded to hear anyone say this was better than Evolution. Evolution was a total pile, yes, but the choreography and cinematography here are barely up to par with it at all and the special effects were trash in comparison.

No, I can wholeheartedly believe this was $15,000 worth. They just had lousy direction, lousy actors (to anyone saying, "Well, they're not actors, they're fighters!" I say, DON'T LET THEM ACT THEN. I'm sick of hearing excuses), and no real scope. They needed to make something smaller, more personal; not this over-ambitious trash-heap of a trailer. If you can't make something good, then -don't-.

And before anyone tells me, "But if they don't try, how will they ever succeed?" I wouldn't care if they'd spent their own time and money on it. Then they could definitely say, "Well, it was practice." They asked for OTHER people's money for this. They wanted to make a full, legitimate production... and I think they legitimately failed at that.

I agree with you wholeheartedly. But I definitely think they didn't spend ALL of the funding on this 5-minute result. Keep in mind the total funding was actually over $20,000.

K&K used the general fan reaction of Evolution to their advertising advantage but in reality, they were never capable of producing something of more quality than that film, even at 5-minutes.

Derek seems to be in the minority group of giving K&K a "pass" for this because it was such a learning experience and they grew from it. But unfortunately, K&K made it appear as if they were capable to provide the financiers with an outcome MUCH BETTER in quality than the turd they put out this week. It's just a shame. They made idiotic decisions in a multitude of production aspects and the result reflects that.

And Derek, I will be PMing you some time this weekend once I set up a Skype. Thanks.

[Pafupafu]

To KaiserNeko: Opinions are subjective. You're basically saying "The project was crap because it was, and don't pretend that it's not". Well, on what basis are you saying that from?

He's given quite a number of valid reasons steaming from the direction; the editing; high level vision versus low level budget and skill level; using fighters as actors...I suggest going back and reviewing his posts again. His reasons are there and they are pretty valid. Yes, the opinion is subjective and everyone is entitled to their own but that shouldn't have to be explained. Frankly I'm on his side when it comes to the final product.

I also want to make it clear that I'm not attacking their efforts so much as I am just critiquing the final product. DerekPadula, if this was done with their own money and budget I'd be with you defending their efforts and the fact that they went out there and did something for the fans. But, the fact they got money from fans(even if the fans willingly gave it to them) kind of skews things for me. I feel like because of this fact they should be held to higher standards whether they like it or not. Ultimately I want them to grow from this; and I'm sure they did. So mission accomplished, and I hope they have best of luck in future endeavors. However, I don't feel like this was as good as it could have been given the time and budget it had.

This movie had a budget around 15,000 which is the same budget that Birdemic had and this movie looks much better then that movie did .

The difference being is that Birdemic was a movie where as this was just a trailer on the same budget. Of course it's going to look better. And just because it looked better than Birdemic(not something to really brag about honestly) doesn't mean it's good...although yes it's better than Birdemic.

Exactly. They should be held to a higher standard because A) they advertised themselves as being capable and B) There have been more quality fan films done for SUBSTANTIALLY less than $20,000+.

People did not donate because of K&K's name, but because of the DragonBall property. K&K was given substantial funds and time and still delivered something that shows they were never capable of doing this in the first place.

[Hellspawn28]

Chaozu did look terrible though. I feel like he is the very few characters that I don't want to see in live action.

[DragonBalllKaiHD]

I'm on pafu pafu's side here. They had more than enough money to make a 5-minute trailer. And what do we get in return? I can tell from the first viewing on the trailer that they did terrible job of it. I face-palmed when Kuririn yell for Goku to come back. The special effects are so underwhelming. Bad acting. Using dub terms. It's embarrassing to watch.

Derek, I don't know why you are defending them, but it doesn't change the fact that they stole the DragonBall properity from Toei. They had more than enough money from the fans to make a decent trailer. They didn't. Now they are asking FUNimation for approval right after they released the trailer. It's wrong. It's illegal. Period. As an artist myself, I would be very upset if they stole my work without my permission, even if it's not for profits. I'm glad I didn't give them my money. I wouldn't give my money to the people I don't even know who. How would I trust them to handle my money?

Speaking of handling the fund, I really hope for the fans' sake that they show the receipts of what they spent while in production. It certainly didn't look like they used them all to make a 5-minute trailer. For a 5-minute trailer, they could have easily finished it in a week. It doesn't cost much to stay in one location. The camera didn't look expensive. The special effects are pretty cheap (it's obvious from the trailer). They didn't even pay for the actors (or martial artists). It makes you wonder what they did with the rest of money.

I don't care if the reponses were positive on Youtube. They promised to make it better than Evolution. They didn't and failed on every level.

[Pafupafu]

I'm on pafu pafu's side here. They had more than enough money to make a 5-minute trailer. And what do we get in return? I can tell from the first viewing on the trailer that they did terrible job of it. I face-palmed when Kuririn yell for Goku to come back. The special effects are so underwhelming. Bad acting. Using dub terms. It's embarrassing to watch.

Derek, I don't know why you are defending them, but it doesn't change the fact that they stole the DragonBall properity from Toei. They had more than enough money from the fans to make a decent trailer. They didn't. Now they are asking FUNimation for approval right after they released the trailer. It's wrong. It's illegal. Period. As an artist myself, I would be very upset if they stole my work without my permission, even if it's not for profits. I'm glad I didn't give them my money. I wouldn't give my money to the people I don't even know who. How would I trust them to handle my money?

Speaking of handling the fund, I really hope for the fans' sake that they show the receipts of what they spent while in production. It certainly didn't look like they used them all to make a 5-minute trailer. For a 5-minute trailer, they could have easily finished it in a week. It doesn't cost much to stay in one location. The camera didn't look expensive. The special effects are pretty cheap (it's obvious from the trailer). They didn't even pay for the actors (or martial artists). It makes you wonder what they did with the rest of money.

I don't care if the reponses were positive on Youtube. They promised to make it better than Evolution. They didn't and failed on every level.

The problem with the positive responses on YouTube is that they exist solely because majority of the viewers are oblivious to the origins of the video. Think about it. If this video was released without a public origin/funding, it would be much more well-received. The problem is that there is a list of people who were essentially "scammed" by a company using not only a property they do not own, but also a Hollywood film's poor reception and promises to succeed it, to capitalize on this opportunity.

It's sad to think what a talented company with professional experience, especially in visual effects, could have accomplished under the same conditions. Just sad.

[ShinRogafuken]

- The editing: Yes, it could've been better. However, I sure know that I would not be able to edit something as well as K&K did so I really do not have the right to complain.

I stopped reading right here. No one can have a legitimate discussion if arguments like this keep getting pulled out. Roger Ebert does not make movies for a living, does that mean he can't criticize them? Does that make his points any less valid? No.

What I said is not a fallacy, as I actually do professional video editing to an extent. It's a part of the small business I run.

[Pafupafu]

What I said is not a fallacy, as I actually do professional video editing to an extent. It's a part of the small business I run.

[/quote]


You really don't think you could do a better job editing than K&K? Jeez dude, you need some self-esteem...that video is a mess.