OK If you insist......
I watched a few minutes. It looked well shot, well put together. Good soundbites although the audio in much of the early stuff sounded like it had been recorded in a steel drum.
The problem was nothing technical, but a serious case of not appearing to be aimed at anyone.
It is, I'm sure, very worthy. It tells some tragic stories. And it may offer hope - I don't know - I didn't get that far.
(OK OK for fairness, I'll look at it again)
I don't know who it's aimed at. After about a minute I'm looking and seeing there's just under 18 minutes of this. Do I really want to be made to feel guilty for 18 minutes about not having been made homeless?
Finally at 3:15 we get to learn what Project Invoke is and at 3:30 we get to learn the purpose of this video. We have a context in which to place it. We know what we're expected to be looking at/listening to (even though we don't know whether we're going to be expected to dig into our pockets, volunteer some time or just understand thare are many reasons for homelessness)
This is far too late. Unless this is being played to a captive audience everyone will have switched off, changed channel, or left the room. How many people on this forum made it that far (before reading my post and knowing something happend there)?
This section needs to be right at the beginning of the film. Possibly 3 5 second clips before it, no more.
The fact no-one else has commented yet leads me to suspect that I'm right as I'm guessing hardly anyone has bothered watching all 18 minutes, but no-one dare criticise something done in the name of a worthy cause.
Once we got beyond that it became more interesting. The interview with "Jake" was shot quite well with the rule of thirds adhered to throughout. There was enough camera movement to keep the static subjects interesting, but not so much it became distracting. Contrast this with the static shot of the Mayor later where she was sat dead center of the frame throughout. There were a few obvious jump cuts which a cutaway would solve easily. Jake himself was an intereting character who spoke well, fluently and very naturally. The only other problem here (as with most of the interviews) was the amound of background noise.
You MUST get a mic close to the talent. It will improve the quality no end.
Trent was shot from an interesting angle, but sadly the camera was static and there were again no alternate angles.
The silhouette shot was good although I think the explanation as to why is was shot in silhouette was unnecessary.
The linking shots and shots beneath the poem , the "artsy" and "creative" shots and editing were pretty good.
I still don't know what the message or intention of the film was.
As I was left wondering why people, especially young people didn't want to crash at the mission. It may have been obvious to Jake, but not to someone like me who's fortunate enough never to have been in that position.
So, in summary, it's not a bad effort - especially as it's been made by or at least with a group of young homeless people who presumably aren't movie makers - but it is not clear who it's aimed at or what it's trying to achieve.
It's far too long and not punchy enough to be a "begging letter" and even a documentary should have some sort of opinion or slant if it's to be interesting to anyone other than those immediately involved.