We're used to seeing things like Daniel Kanemoto's homemade The Walking Dead title sequence and Tyler Stout & Mike Saputo's Iron Man 2 posters and dozens of other fan-made materials eclipsing the quality of the real things, but rarely do we come across an amateur production that so brutally puts a professional product to shame as Lazy Teenage Superheroes. Directed by Michael Ashton and budgeted at just $300, the 13-minute short film is far and away the original live-action superhero thing we've ever seen. The first three minutes alone feature better (and far more) special effects, acting and story than the entirety of Heroes, The Cape, No Ordinary Family, etc. -- and we say that quite nearly without any hyperbole. It's actually really, really good.
As made plain by the title, Lazy Teenage Superheroes is about a group of young metahumans more interested in getting drunk and stoned and looking at pornography than they are in saving the world. Unfortunately for them (and their hapless, non-superpowered friend Tyler), the group's enemies -- which include a giant space robot with a penchant for sick burns -- won't let them veg out in peace. You can watch the whole film -- which contains NSFW language -- below.
This can quite easily be done for less then $300. Given that they already had a camera, software and "actors". I would have to disagree with the statement made by Mr. Khouri that the effects and acting are superior to that of actual productions. Really the only part I personally found impressive was the end shot of the frozen time walkthrough of the active powers (though you could see quite a bit of bilboarding/2D elements in it). This stuff is a lot easier to do then you think it is.
The lightning is a very simple effect to achieve, the teleportation sort of effect can be done fairly easily (and it looks quite similar to something that Andrew Kramer did a free tutorial for on videocopilot.net). The energy sword/arms is likely a rotoscoped effect, the fire appears to be mostly stock footage, as are several other portions of the video.
Though I am not trying to say that it is a bad video, I would be saying that it isn't absolutely amazing, or that a $300 budget is really that low, or that it takes a professional to produce something like this.
Keep in mind that this is the perspective of a visual effects artist who does things somewhat similar to this, and know how most of it can be done very cheaply.
As someone who has studied film, it's hard to believe that something of this quality was made with $300. Unless they used a lot of highly skilled level volunteer hours (editing, camerapeople, cinematography, etc.) and free equipment.
I'd be interested in knowing where that figure came from. Maybe the budget was $300 but they exceeded it by quite a bit, hollywood style.
Still, awesome. And even awesomer knowing it was made for next to nothing.
For most people it lessens the appeal when something is conspicuously clean.
"Cool" is a subjective concept. Film is a work of art like any other. It's not in there to offend you; it's there because they felt it was important. It's a reflection of their cultures and ideals. It's the same as saying, "man, that movie would have been far more enjoyable without all those strong Christian and family undertones", or, "I really like that painting, but I wish there wasn't so much yellow in it".
Life is a lot more enjoyable when you focus on appreciating peoples' extensive experiences and perspectives without taking them personally or getting offended. And what better or safer way is there to appreciate someone else's perspective than through a work of art.
Very cool, but also very three to four weeks ago...
Also if you like this you might like the BBC series Misfits. It's like this but less fighting... I actually like this as much because it has some fights
15 Comments