AWA Pro video discussion

[CrackTheSky]

What's so wrong with #35 anyway?

In my opinion it wasn't funny and there wasn't really a whole lot of editing to speak of. Whatever redeeming qualities it had lay in its video source, not in the pairing of video and music. And since in my eyes, the two didn't gel, the video failed.

[Ileia]

I disagree.

[Snowcrash]

According to the rules of AWA Pro, the judgment must be blind (then the videos don't have to contain any nickname).

But I remember Ileia explain us (on AMV-France forum) that the videos don't have to be exclusive. So does it mean I can send a video I made in June (for example) and already presented on internet/streaming/org and just remove my nickname for the AWA Pro contest ?

I mean the rule of blind judgment implies that the video has to be exclusive, doesn't it ?

[Pwolf]

According to the rules of AWA Pro, the judgment must be blind (then the videos don't have to contain any nickname).

But I remember Ileia explain us (on AMV-France forum) that the videos don't have to be exclusive. So does it mean I can send a video I made in June (for example) and already presented on internet/streaming/org and just remove my nickname for the AWA Pro contest ?

I mean the rule of blind judgment implies that the video has to be exclusive, doesn't it ?

There's no rule that says you can't submit a video that's already been released, but it can't have any identifying marks in the video itself. Just because a video has been released doesn't mean everyone who participates in the contest knows who made it.

[Prodigi]

According to the rules of AWA Pro, the judgment must be blind (then the videos don't have to contain any nickname).

But I remember Ileia explain us (on AMV-France forum) that the videos don't have to be exclusive. So does it mean I can send a video I made in June (for example) and already presented on internet/streaming/org and just remove my nickname for the AWA Pro contest ?

I mean the rule of blind judgment implies that the video has to be exclusive, doesn't it ?

There's no rule that says you can't submit a video that's already been released, but it can't have any identifying marks in the video itself. Just because a video has been released doesn't mean everyone who participates in the contest knows who made it.

2 years ago I entered at the last minute and didn't receive feedback saying my entry was valid (by last minue I mean 48 hours after the final deadline), so I released the video. Then I found out I was in the contest >.>

Whups?

I also won Drama that year. Win.

[kikai_saigono]

In my opinion it wasn't funny and there wasn't really a whole lot of editing to speak of.

There could have been a lot of editing, but if one has never seen the source they wouldn't be able to tell that well, right?

[Pwolf]

In my opinion it wasn't funny and there wasn't really a whole lot of editing to speak of.

There could have been a lot of editing, but if one has never seen the source they wouldn't be able to tell that well, right?

It's not the viewers fault if they don't understand whats going on in the video, it's the editors. While the video in question was edited ok, IMO, it didn't make any sense. doesn't make the video or the editor terrible, just means the video didn't make any sense to me, just a bunch of semi-random scenes strung together. Now, to someone who might have known what the source is, it might make sense and might also be a better video in their eyes because they know whats going on. It's like expecting someone to know an inside joke, unless you were there or know the situation, you wont get it.

[SailorDeath]

It's kind of sad how much people insult their friends with out realizing it through these anonymous reviews D:

You think realizing it would stop everyone? I know who made like a dozen of these, not I'm guessing but I know for a fact who made it. I have yet to feel the need to apologize for any of my comments. That's the idea about pro, it's all about the videos rather than the creators. Personally I find it interesting to read the various comments people have made. Not even the comments on my videos, I already knew what the reaction would be to those before I entered, but the comments on others and how different some of our taste and judgments are.

Nor should you, I have no problem telling a person to their face what I've said in my reviews. Hell asked outlawed what I thought about his Evangelion Shaft amv he won with back in 1999. I think it won best comedy and I told him (when I first met him none-the-less) that I didn't think it deserved the award, but then that's what opinions are all about. Besides, I think my chances of winning anything in pro this year are close to zero. Had a couple of positive comments about the 2 videos I entered and none were too positive.

[Ileia]

In my opinion it wasn't funny and there wasn't really a whole lot of editing to speak of.

There could have been a lot of editing, but if one has never seen the source they wouldn't be able to tell that well, right?

It's not the viewers fault if they don't understand whats going on in the video, it's the editors. While the video in question was edited ok, IMO, it didn't make any sense. doesn't make the video or the editor terrible, just means the video didn't make any sense to me, just a bunch of semi-random scenes strung together. Now, to someone who might have known what the source is, it might make sense and might also be a better video in their eyes because they know whats going on. It's like expecting someone to know an inside joke, unless you were there or know the situation, you wont get it.

I haven't seen the source, but I don't think there's anything to "get" about the video. There's no "in" joke to get, it's just a fun montage-type video.

[Moonlight Soldier]

Yea, I thought of #35 as shenanigans, fun, goofily synched shenanigans. oO I kinda want to watch the source now too >>