Skip

Final Moments of Karl Brant
July 31, 2013 8:28 PM   Subscribe

The Final Moments of Karl Brant. "In the near future, a neurologist and two homicide detectives use experimental brain taping technology to question a murder victim about his final moments." [Via]
posted by homunculus (33 comments total) 21 users marked this as a favorite

 
With Paul Reubens!
posted by ian1977 at 8:38 PM on July 31, 2013 [2 favorites]


So if John Hodgman and Gary Oldman have a baby....it will come out as middle aged Paul Reubens.
posted by ian1977 at 8:41 PM on July 31, 2013 [3 favorites]


First they have to find the neurologist's son so that he can get his crazy but unfathomably brilliant father out of the mental institution he's been in for 17 years.
posted by shivohum at 8:48 PM on July 31, 2013 [2 favorites]


Glarg! I was just about to post this one. You beat me to the punch, homunculus.

I'd really love it if Paul Reubens got to spend the rest of his career taking these kinds of unsettling yet sympathic character roles. Pee-Wee Herman may be comic genius made flesh, but I've always felt that Reubens had dramatic chops to spare.

Between the memory construct featured in this, and the luxury space station in next month's Elysium, there may not be anything left to adapt from Neuromancer before long.
posted by Strange Interlude at 8:52 PM on July 31, 2013 [6 favorites]


I really liked this, and Paul Reubens character was perfect.
posted by selenized at 8:53 PM on July 31, 2013 [1 favorite]


What was this created for? It obviously had a substantial budget, so who paid for it and why?
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 9:04 PM on July 31, 2013


This is like the future version of Four Flies on Grey Velvet. Or at least the conceit is somewhat similar/far fetched. I liked it.
posted by to sir with millipedes at 9:07 PM on July 31, 2013


That was excellent. Really well done.
posted by Joey Michaels at 9:09 PM on July 31, 2013


I thought this was an excellent Max Headroom reboot.
posted by bicyclefish at 9:18 PM on July 31, 2013 [1 favorite]


David Bowie did a concept album about this in the mid 90s
posted by Teakettle at 9:27 PM on July 31, 2013


Using the word concept as loosely as the jncos he was probably rocking at the time
posted by Teakettle at 9:28 PM on July 31, 2013 [1 favorite]


I saw this the other day and what I love about it is the "twist" ending. And it's not like... hit you over the head twist. Just a subtle little. A ha! That's clever. Punny, perhaps. I don't want to spoil it, but I hope y'all know what I'm talking about...

Speaking of spoilers... I think we should have a spoiler tag like Reddit so we can post stuff without ruining it.
posted by symbioid at 9:38 PM on July 31, 2013


What was this created for? It obviously had a substantial budget, so who paid for it and why?

Youtube monetization -- I assume that Nerdist Industries probably paid a certain amount to feature it on their channel.
posted by Strange Interlude at 9:39 PM on July 31, 2013


Wasn't there a PKD story about this?
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 9:51 PM on July 31, 2013


David Bowie did a concept album about this in the mid 90s

When Philip K. Dick did it, he called it Ubik.
posted by Ironmouth at 9:52 PM on July 31, 2013 [1 favorite]


Torchwood
posted by b1tr0t at 11:11 PM on July 31, 2013


I saw this the other day and what I love about it is the "twist" ending. And it's not like... hit you over the head twist. Just a subtle little. A ha! That's clever. Punny, perhaps. I don't want to spoil it, but I hope y'all know what I'm talking about...

I... don't think I do, actually. If there was a punny twist, I didn't get it. Can you maybe put it in mouseover spoiler text, or something? I feel like there's a solvable little mystery in this piece, but I need a hint.
posted by painquale at 11:21 PM on July 31, 2013


What was this created for? It obviously had a substantial budget, so who paid for it and why?

Youtube monetization -- I assume that Nerdist Industries probably paid a certain amount to feature it on their channel.


Thought experiment/Just out of curiosity, how much would something like this cost?

And what would be the most challenging thing about making a production like this, besides securing the actors. Also what roles would an org like Nerdist play in this type of project?

Just trying to wrap my head around someone making such a high quality production for YT, and to understand how the whole Nerdist (machine? empire?) works.
posted by nondescript at 11:21 PM on July 31, 2013


I... don't think I do, actually. If there was a punny twist, I didn't get it.

spoiler alert (c'mon it's 15 minutes, just watch it)

I was all set to be disappointed by the twist being that Bennett had actually murdered Karl and framed his wife with information he'd gathered before. Instead the twist was basically that the detectives investigating his murder murdered virtual-Karl a second time (and seemingly more brutally) for the sake of cleanly wrapping up their case.
posted by crayz at 11:24 PM on July 31, 2013


OK, well, I definitely got that much.

It still feels like there is a hidden story here. (Spoilers...) We are supposed to accept the detectives' conclusion, but it's never really confirmed for us as viewers, and the details are presented perfunctorily. When saving his memory, Karl mentions that the process "felt different this time", almost as if it didn't happen at all. And then there's the machine turning on again at the end. I thought that these might have added up to something I was missing.
posted by painquale at 12:39 AM on August 1, 2013 [1 favorite]


I couldn't figure out why the detectives were so committed to turning the machine off. If it's just a program then who cares? Let the dude walk out with his friend attached to a car battery.
posted by 1adam12 at 1:21 AM on August 1, 2013 [1 favorite]


Yeah, I was almost expecting them to have some kind of Turing/technological status quo enforcement motivation.
posted by mikurski at 1:33 AM on August 1, 2013


I thought it was implied that the detectives were up to some tomfoolery, and leaving the construct alive puts them at risk of being found out. I also thought it was implied that the researchers were up to something. Don't both pairs say something like "if they ever find out..."?

I assumed that [hovertext spoilers].
posted by lucidium at 3:42 AM on August 1, 2013 [1 favorite]


I'm curious about the somewhat prominent scar on the female detective's right temple. It's never remarked upon, but placed more-or-less dead center in at least one shot that I can recall.
posted by Strange Interlude at 5:15 AM on August 1, 2013 [1 favorite]


Thought experiment/Just out of curiosity, how much would something like this cost?
A lot less than you probably think.

The actual production budget can be extremely variable, an off the cuff estimate could be anywhere from 200-600k, depending on who the creators know - production facilities, including equipment, effects processing, audio production, etc., can be had for a fraction of regular prices, especially for shorts, with the right connections, reputations, and salesmanship.

For example, the VFX is listed on the site was being developed by the producers with a combination of a Kinect and a DSLR camera, and polished and other effects added by a large VFX house, with mention of some promotional consideration, and no doubt want to try and be the producer's choice for future projects that will have larger budgets. so that takes a big chunk out of the cost.
And what would be the most challenging thing about making a production like this, besides securing the actors. Also what roles would an org like Nerdist play in this type of project?
Securing the money. All things flow so much easier after you have the money.
Also, Nerdist is most likely just the distributor, not the initial investor. Someone with an imdbpro account would be able to find out.

Shorts like these, with high production values, can be an extremely good way to secure larger projects by not only showing they have good ideas and skills, but can handle the whole messy process of film making, from getting investors to production and, securing distribution. As good as this looks, I have little doubt that this short will pay off well in the form of future opportunities for these people.
posted by chambers at 5:29 AM on August 1, 2013


What was this created for? It obviously had a substantial budget, so who paid for it and why?

I think this is what they call a Proof of Concept film. It's something the filmmakers want to make into a feature-length movie, and they already have some backers (although perhaps not studio backers), and they are demonstrating what the film will eventually look like by making a demo version.

Actors can be surprisingly inexpensive if they have the free time and are willing to work for scale -- and many are willing for a proof of concept film, hoping to get a bigger payout later if the film goes into production. It's sort of like stage actors volunteering to do staged readings. For a microbudget film, SAG-AFTRA will let you pay them $100 per day.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 7:55 AM on August 1, 2013


I couldn't figure out why the detectives were so committed to turning the machine off. If it's just a program then who cares? Let the dude walk out with his friend attached to a car battery.

The male detective isn't sure shutting down the program is the right thing to do, but he's not going to undermine his partner's decision in front of a civilian, much less allow the civilian to physically interfere with his partner's actions. The female detective is just small-minded and impatient with obstacles to doing her job, which, as she sees it, is getting convictions; to her, the construct is just trouble.
posted by stebulus at 8:03 AM on August 1, 2013


to her, the construct is just trouble.

I think it's (slightly) more than that. IIRC, just before entering the interrogation room, the cops talk about having to explain where they got the evidence. Imagine the field day a defence lawyer would have with the testimony of a sentient memory dump! They're just trying to cover their tracks. It's a great little film, but I did find that part of the plot a bit weakly justified - especially as given the central role it plays.
posted by Popular Ethics at 8:27 AM on August 1, 2013 [1 favorite]


I did find that part of the plot a bit weakly justified

Yeah, a brief mention of the legal evidentiary problems would have gone a long way.
posted by stebulus at 8:39 AM on August 1, 2013 [1 favorite]


They were so interested in shutting it down and hiding it because it is implied that they secured "evidence" from something that, to the rest of the world, might as well be a ouija board.
posted by basicchannel at 9:16 AM on August 1, 2013 [3 favorites]


Paul. Fucking. Reubens. That is all.

No, wait, that's not all: MAX HEADROOM 2013 STARRING PAUL REUBENS PLZ KTHX
posted by Mooseli at 11:01 AM on August 1, 2013


(No, seriously. Someone please scrape together the resources it would take to expand this into a whole series. With Paul Reubens.)
posted by Mooseli at 11:02 AM on August 1, 2013


Imagine the field day a defence lawyer would have with the testimony of a sentient memory dump!

The makers of the film should do a Law & Order style sequel with this premise.
posted by homunculus at 11:22 AM on August 1, 2013 [1 favorite]


« Older Arachnophabulous   |   The Commodore 64: it's a... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post