Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Old School Sci-fi Short Starring Keir Dullea Utilizes Classic Effects

timothy posted about 2 months ago | from the we-call-them-godzilla-strings dept.

Movies 91

New submitter Wierzbowski85 (2852925) writes Indie Kickstarter-funded sci-fi short HENRi features classic visual effects and storytelling – with a twist. As detailed in Cinefex magazine (issue 134), the film itself utilizes a mixture of the old and the new — combining live-action sequences with puppetry, quarter-scale miniatures, and modern CGI. Speaking with Wired, the film's director said: "The goal was to seamlessly integrate these different techniques to create the world. My philosophy is that effects are merely a tool to help the story, and that in mind, we used pretty much every trick in the book." The film also stars genre legend Keir Dullea, of 2001: A Space Odyssey. In a making-of video for the film, Dullea says, "Having done 2001, [HENRi] was a wonderful homage to Stanley Kubrick and that film." The short is now available for free viewing online at Hulu.

cancel ×

91 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

US people only (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47638631)

> Sorry, currently our video library can only be watched from within the United States

It's nice that it's free and all, but it's unwatchable if you're not a resident of the finest country in the world.

Re:US people only (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47638705)

I'll just leave this here: http://www.guidingtech.com/170... [guidingtech.com]

Re:US people only (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47639277)

I think I'll just wait for the torrent. I don't have any qualms about torrenting something free.

Re:US people only (1)

lennier1 (264730) | about 2 months ago | (#47639963)

The film itself came out quite a while ago and their official page has a hassle-free pay-to-view feature at a normal price (people can either rent it or outright buy a digital download):
http://www.henrithefilm.com/ [henrithefilm.com]

The only thing that has changed since then is that it's now also available on a streaming site that requires workarounds if you happen to live anywhere else than one certain country on this planet.

Re:US people only (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 2 months ago | (#47641205)

It should have read "I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that."

Hulu sucks. (5, Insightful)

headkase (533448) | about 2 months ago | (#47638635)

Went to view the Hulu link and it tells me I'm not worthy because I'm not in the USA. That is just douche-baggery.

Re:Hulu sucks. (1)

Ikester8 (768098) | about 2 months ago | (#47638739)

Get a VPN with an end-point in the US. That might work.

Re:Hulu sucks. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47638741)

Consider yourself lucky. I went to Hulu and got several minutes of commercials before giving up on the film ever playing. Just wait a few hours for a torrent to show up. That's what I'm doing.

Re:Hulu sucks. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47638753)

That's nice - pirate an indie film. You rebel.

Re:Hulu sucks. (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 months ago | (#47638785)

Make it available and people have no need to resort to other ways to get it.

Free trade only seems to be a good thing when it's against the consumer's interest.

Re: Hulu sucks. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47639329)

So you think you're entitled to have whatever you want for free? A few commercials and you're bitching about pirating a short film. That's ridiculous.

Re: Hulu sucks. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47639489)

Its a lot of atlantic seawater separating me from soil that I can legit watch hulu.

Re: Hulu sucks. (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 months ago | (#47640921)

I'd take the commercials. That's quite allright, fair is fair, you provide a free movie, I sit there and watch your commercials. That's the deal behind free TV and it's a balanced deal. I'd take that.

Problem is, nobody is offering it to me. For some odd reason territory protection is a-ok if I want to see a movie or want to buy it abroad, but it's limiting free trade if a country dares to question its benefit of having DVDs pressed cheaply in Backwateristan with no tariffs being allowed to be levied when they get shipped to the main office.

Re:Hulu sucks. (1)

Thumper_SVX (239525) | about 2 months ago | (#47663257)

You mean like they did right here? [henrithefilm.com]

Indie films... they're going to distribute it any way they can to get an audience. I for one loved it... but I was also one of the Kickstarter backers in the first place. As a piece of indie art it's absolutely fabulous.

Re:Hulu sucks. (1)

davester666 (731373) | about 2 months ago | (#47638883)

of course, the film was completely paid for, in advance. an 'indie film' is normally a small budget film with backers that receive a share of the profits of the film.

this is a film funded by backers who received a copy of the film [or rather "a license to view it"] in exchange for backing it.

all that's left is gravy....for the ones who didn't risk anything [I guess other than getting a bad rep for possibly making a bad movie].

Re: Hulu sucks. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47638925)

And what risks have you ever taken dipshit?

Re: Hulu sucks. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47639161)

Reporting you comment as offensive.

Re: Hulu sucks. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47639309)

Tell mommy and daddy while you're at it... dipshit.

Re:Hulu sucks. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47639487)

So, because you judge that the filmmakers "didn't risk anything" it should be free or pirated? That's absurd on so many levels - starting with your faulty understanding of film financing. I'll side with the indie filmmakers who actually have the balls to make and complete something every time.

Re:Hulu sucks. (1)

Oligonicella (659917) | about 2 months ago | (#47638977)

One friggin' commercial. How terrible for you.

Re:Hulu sucks. (1)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | about 2 months ago | (#47639403)

There are two commercial breaks, in the middle of the film, disturbing the continuity

Re:Hulu sucks. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47639451)

I don't think the filmmakers had a choice with that.

Re:Hulu sucks. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47638749)

Think of Hulu as a box of chocolates. It's filled with nothing but coconut flavored ones.

Re:Hulu sucks. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47638865)

It's your fault for being a foreign faggot. Go suck another Frenchman's dick, you fucking shit eater.

Re: Hulu sucks. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47640901)

I am a German, you filthy jude. Say hello to gaszimmer und krematorium. HEIL FÃoeHRER!

Re:Hulu sucks. (1)

ortholattice (175065) | about 2 months ago | (#47638959)

I am in the USA and tried to watch it. The commercial played beautifully. Then after the commercial, just a black screen. I waited 5 minutes and gave up. Anyone else have this experience?

Re:Hulu sucks. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47639037)

It happened a couple of times to me as well. I then clicked to watch the trailer, returned to the movie, watch another ad and it worked.

The streaming has two breaks for commercials that totally ruin the pace and atmosphere, though. You may want to spend the â1.37 and rent it at the original website to enjoy it in one go, without interruptions.

Re:Hulu sucks. (2)

anachronous diehard (1169155) | about 2 months ago | (#47639915)

Yes. (Using Firefox.) I reloaded, had to click on a "which commercial experience do you prefer" selection, and eventually got to the next segment.

Dear Hulu,
    I don't currently have a Hulu account. Given your broken advertisement insertion technique, I am unlikely to change that. Given the excessive number of over-loud and irrelevant advertisements displayed before your broke code degrades the remainder of the viewing experience, I am even more unlikely to apply for a Hulu account or to try your sponsors products (assuming I remembered what they were).
    Given that this is the opposite of what advertising is intended to do, you have failed to achieve your business objective. Sorry!
Sincerely,
    anachronous diehard

Re:Hulu sucks. (1)

CODiNE (27417) | about 2 months ago | (#47640199)

It still requires an account for US viewing. Won't do it.

Re:Hulu sucks. (1)

Iamthecheese (1264298) | about 2 months ago | (#47640479)

I AM in the US and after being asked which "ad experience" I want, not selecting one, and being shown a car ad anyway the film failed to play. Fuck hulu

There are browser plug-ins to fix that (2)

Ecuador (740021) | about 2 months ago | (#47641231)

It opened fine for me in Firefox with Media Hint - after the obligatory ad of course! But, yeah, Hulu is a terrible choice to host an "indie" short.

Great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47638673)

I support any animated films, I refuse to watch any films with real humans in them. Hopefully they didn't overpay some douchebag from hollywood to do voices.

Re:Great (1)

davester666 (731373) | about 2 months ago | (#47638895)

not good enough. some of the animated characters have a vague resemblance to live people, therefore they have to pay those people as if they were acting in the film.

Utilizes (0)

ourlovecanlastforeve (795111) | about 2 months ago | (#47638709)

> Utilizes

Did you mean "uses"?

Re:Utilizes (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47638725)

Nope

Alternative link please (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47638735)

Why post it on Hulu, that's only available to a minority somewhere in North America.

This is getting out of hand ... (1, Insightful)

Qbertino (265505) | about 2 months ago | (#47638795)

Sorry, currently our video library can only be watched from within the United States

Well, f*ck you and your stupid short-film then!

Just 5 Minutes ago I deleted the open source Spring RTS and the shite they build. 3 different lobbys with 3 different technologies, none of which work or are documented, the one that works - a redo of a webbased lobby in QT called "Weblobby QT" (No joke, seriously ...), has no documentation whatsoever on getting it to work with an existing installation and the 90 seconds before the mono-based lobby crashed a 3rd time some guy told me, they'll redo the lobby for the Steam release. Jesus HB Crickey, if I wanted a steam game for which I have to hand in my name, credit card data, finger prints and my DNA, I'd certainly *not* do it for your shitty game. In fact, I did *not* buy the very neat Shadowrun Returns for linux precisely because it's only available on steam. ...

Just 5 minutes ago this Spring RTS crap! Planing to release on steam ... how about learning to programm first? ... Unbelievable. Now I come to /., click on the upper new story and now this.

Seriously, I'm sounding like a jerk right now, I know, but I get the impression that there are people doing open projects that have no business doing any such projects at all. What's the point in releasing your stuff for free (liberty) if you're relying on shitty flakey libraries and technologies (mono, etc.), especially if you're *increasing* the complexity of your product or its availability and deployment or - as in the case of this art-jerk movie - hand it over to some DRM ridden POS distribution corp. for distribution. ... If I had donated to this project, this would be precisely the moment where I'd be super-pissed.

My 2 cents. Sorry, I'm really pissed right now.

Re:This is getting out of hand ... (1)

Ikester8 (768098) | about 2 months ago | (#47638829)

I just watched it. I was kind of underwhelmed. Not to worry, though, the torrent will be out in 5...4...3...

Re:This is getting out of hand ... (1)

gajop (1285284) | about 2 months ago | (#47639371)

Not only are you a jerk, you post is also filled with misinformation.
First off, Spring RTS is an engine, not a game. There are multiple games made with it, at least two of which are green-lit on Steam, so it's not clear what you are talking about.
Next, while there are indeed multiple lobbies (as it's an open protocol), this is not something you need to concern yourself with (you can just use the one that comes with the game), and it's certainly not a flaw.
Thirdly, the only information you need to give when you sign up is a username and password, since it's used to play online and the userbase includes non-Steam users.

PS: This is a FLOSS project (lobbies, games, engine, infrastructure, AIs, maps, etc.) created by a bunch of people in their own free time. If your attitude is going to be hostile like that, please stay the fuck away.

Bring on IPv6 - it breaks region checks (1)

dbIII (701233) | about 2 months ago | (#47640441)

Bring on IPv6 - it breaks region checks from these annoying pricks that insist on placing artificial barriers to aid with regional price gouging.

Re: Bring on IPv6 - it breaks region checks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47640795)

[Citation needed]

IPv6 used to break region checks - however (1)

dbIII (701233) | about 2 months ago | (#47641207)

I looked into it again and there you go - it turns out some evil pricks are populating the IP region lookup library with IPv6 addresses just so that they can continue with the regional price gouging.
However one of the things being strongly considered for widespread implementation is roaming IPv6 addresses so that you keep the address for your phone, laptop or whatever no matter where you are on the planet. With such a thing you can have reliable point to point communication instead of having to rely on someone in the middle like Skype (who very recently cut off all devices that used their older protocol). With such a thing you are not tied to a region and regional blocking for price gouging should not occur, but probably will anyway.

Not Free (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47638815)

Advertisements are required.

Re:Not Free (1)

Oligonicella (659917) | about 2 months ago | (#47639007)

Which cost you nothing. It's free. Go get a soda. Holy shit, the entitlement some people have.

Re:Not Free (1)

sysrammer (446839) | about 2 months ago | (#47639739)

Can you explain it to me like I'm five? GimmeGimmeGimme!

Re:Not Free (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47641629)

Yeah I know, some people are such arrogant pricks they think that they can decide how ads effect other people.

Intelligent Decision (4, Interesting)

Idimmu Xul (204345) | about 2 months ago | (#47638819)

USA, population : 318,463,000

*Rest* of world, population : 6,727,537,000

That's a rather large population who could be donating to get this made that they've just alienated.

Re: Intelligent Decision (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47638937)

It's already made...

Re:Intelligent Decision (1)

dywolf (2673597) | about 2 months ago | (#47639009)

a rather large portion of the rest of world has better uses for their extremely limited funds.

Re:Intelligent Decision (1)

Zedrick (764028) | about 2 months ago | (#47639055)

What's your point?

A rather large portion of USA has better uses for their extremely limited funds - US poverty rate is among the worst in the developed world. But there are people with money and the bandwidth to watch the result, just like (almost) every other country in the world.

Re:Intelligent Decision (2)

war4peace (1628283) | about 2 months ago | (#47639103)

Yeah, I saw a documentary about poor people in the US - they were wearing nice clothing and were complaining they have no money for GAS and had to ditch their TV.
I have to say it: you have a very weird definition of "poor".

Re: Intelligent Decision (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47639293)

What does any of this have to do with a sci-fi short film. You folks are ridiculous.

Re:Intelligent Decision (1)

Iamthecheese (1264298) | about 2 months ago | (#47640497)

In the US public transportation is not properly funded. To even get to work on time on a regular basis it's not uncommon to need a car. I'm not going to bother addressing the rest of your comment. Fuck you for spreading misinformation.

Re:Intelligent Decision (1)

war4peace (1628283) | about 2 months ago | (#47640987)

I'm not spreading shit, dumbass, I live on a different continent and here where I am people just make do, they don't appear on TV saying "hey we have cars but we don't have GAS MONEY".

Re:Intelligent Decision (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47642127)

What the actual fuck are you talking about moron? I take you missed the tent cities and the 633,782 homeless people in the USA? Here's a clue skippy, these people are not worried about their TV's or "GAS", they are worried about shelter, food and security, just like the poor everywhere.

Please go educate yourself http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_the_United_States

Re:Intelligent Decision (1)

war4peace (1628283) | about 2 months ago | (#47642257)

633K out of how many? What's the percentage again? How does it stand against the rest of the world?
Take a look then come back... coward.

Re:Intelligent Decision (1)

Rockoon (1252108) | about 2 months ago | (#47639523)

...but... but... they cant always have the latest iPhone.. sometimes their iPhone gets old and they have to wait another year for their cell phone contract to be up in order to get the new one...

Yes, thats literally what the poor people the GP were talking about have to deal with. He of course wants to paint the picture that all the people in his statistic are living in slums with only tattered rags for possessions...

..the reality is that we calculate our poverty threshold differently than most other countries. Our poverty threshold is an absolute number that only takes into account cash income while most countries factor in non-cash benefits (such as welfare, foodstamps, subsidized housing, etc.) as well. The poor in our poverty statistic also get those non-cash benefits but it doesnt count against the statistic like it does elsewhere.

Intelligent Decision (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about 2 months ago | (#47639491)

half of that 6 .7 billion make $2.50 or less a day, 40 percent of that 6.7 billion have ony five percent of global income.

that 318 million get a quarter of that global income.

Re:Intelligent Decision (1)

NotInHere (3654617) | about 2 months ago | (#47639795)

Good point.

I'm risking being modded flamebait, but EU has more, not very much, but still more:

EU: $17.36 trillion [wolframalpha.com]

US: $16.97 trillion [wolframalpha.com]

Re:Intelligent Decision (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about 2 months ago | (#47639833)

that's with 60% more people though, in 28 countries

Re:Intelligent Decision (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47643167)

"that's with 60% more people though, in 28 countries" - @iggymanz

Yeah you do realize you just took half a continent, and apparently 28 countries to equal 1 of us. And just barely (in the grand scheme of things).

Stopped watching at the commercial (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47638837)

I had to sit through an advert BEFORE watching the 20 minute short and then part-way through the short another advert comes up. Clicked on close. Buh-bye.

Re:Stopped watching at the commercial (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47638843)

Yeah, the adverts are annoying.

Sorry, currently our video library can only be wat (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47638935)

Sorry, currently our video library can only be watched from within the United States

Accept money from outside the US but .. (1)

slincolne (1111555) | about 2 months ago | (#47639499)

don't appear to let people outside the US view it.

Nice business model :-(

yu0 Fail It (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47639593)

OF AMERICA irc

What about other web sites other than Hulu? (1)

antdude (79039) | about 2 months ago | (#47639631)

No region blockages, etc.

Why Hulu? (2)

NotInHere (3654617) | about 2 months ago | (#47639751)

I'm asking the same. The movie's creators know [twitter.com] they are featured on /.. It is possible they read through the comments. They'll see Hulu is very unpopular. I'd like to ask them why they have chosen Hulu and not another, more international website, like youtube with ads enabled, for example.

Re:Why Hulu? (1)

antdude (79039) | about 2 months ago | (#47639839)

For those who have Twitter, let's ask him for a non-Hulu web site so we can watch it.

Great little film (2)

deadcrow (946749) | about 2 months ago | (#47639727)

I think this film was designed to make you want to go dig out your copy of 2001 and watch it. And in that, it succeeded.

Being a 21%er I did get to enjoy the film.

Re:Great little film (1)

anachronous diehard (1169155) | about 2 months ago | (#47639955)

Yes, an excellent film, even if you don't go back to look at 2001: A Space Odyssey. And I think it can stand as an excellent story even for people who miss the references to 2001 entirely.

Review (bad, boring) (2)

Tolvor (579446) | about 2 months ago | (#47639901)

I watched the film, despite the long commercials. Essentially (for me) it is was a waste of time.

A good scifi film should raise interesting questions (what is "intelligence", "human", "purpose"...) To some degree this film tries to achieve this. A computer more-or-less becomes self-aware on a long-dead spaceship. Okay, good start. However there is no point to it whatsoever. The computer sits in a chair and thinks and then watches the spaceship explode. Questions about why would someone send a (presumably) research vessel aimlessly into deep space, why design an AI that has no mission to accomplish (no programs, projects, repairs to do?), why did the crew die of old age (advanced spaceship and no cryo-storage?). Come on, a generational spaceship with crew being born, trained, and dying would be better. What destroyed the ship at the end?

I feel this film is a weird cross not of 2001, but of "A.I." (where the entire point is to see the robot play out the end of humanity to far-future space aliens discovering the ruins) and "Silent Running" which details a man trying to save the last bio-habitat space station by sending it out into deep space before Earth can destroy it. At the end of the film he hides the habitat in deep space so Earth can't find it, and beyond their reach. So effectively it is the same thing as destroyed, and pointless.

The commercials were more interesting than the movie. The film technique may be impressive and noteworthy. However to me I'd rather watch a film with so-so technique that is entertaining (ex "Avatar") vs something that is avant-garde and boring (ex: "HENRi", "Blue")

Re:Review (bad, boring) (2)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 2 months ago | (#47640455)

I think you missed the point.

Somebody had reused a human brain as a ship AI. After the crew died (there is some indication it was disease, not old age- Dr. Calvin in her death scene did not look old and still had color to her hair, despite there being nobody around left to be vain for) he foolishly asked to be left turned on, and eventually the amnesia circuits started to degrade, bringing back his human memories- which is why he created the robot body for himself, and why, after he had recovered those memories, he agreed with you and committed suicide (rather spectacularly- running the ship into a sun?)

Re:Review (bad, boring) (1)

flargleblarg (685368) | about 2 months ago | (#47641035)

Thanks for posting that explanation. It helps me not completely feel like I wasted my time watching it. That said, I think it would have been much better as a 10-page short story.

Re:Review (bad, boring) (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 2 months ago | (#47644619)

Maybe 20 page, there were a LOT of flashbacks.

Re:Review (bad, boring) (1)

Chordonblue (585047) | about 2 months ago | (#47640463)

And you clearly missed the point of A.I. if you think those beings at the end of the film were 'space aliens'. Do some Googling. I missed that too... :/

Review (bad, boring) (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47640807)

To each their own. I must have watched something different, because I really enjoyed it. Totally picked up on the classic sci-fi references. It worked for me on an emotional level as well. Slightly confused about the ending... but I think he was killed by the death (birth?) of a star. If that's the case, a star going supernova is a rather beautiful and spectacular way to end ones life. That was poignant to me.

Re:Review (bad, boring) (1)

flargleblarg (685368) | about 2 months ago | (#47641049)

And the ship just happened to have enough fuel to change its course and make its way to a some star instead of wherver it was going? In a time-frame short enough that the human brain inside the robot didn't die? Doesn't seem likely to me. Also, that fireball that was supposed to be a sun exploding was pretty unrealistic. I mean, a sun doesn't look like a fireball, and a supernova explodes pretty much instantaneously from your ship's point of view. It's doesn't gradually expand like that. You get hit by it expoloding and you're gone. There's no pretty fireball.

Review (bad, boring) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47644175)

You lost all credibility when you said you'd prefer Avatar... yikes.

Hulu? (3, Insightful)

msobkow (48369) | about 2 months ago | (#47639979)

Why didn't they just post it to a private web server with no public facing ports?

Re:Hulu? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47640391)

Well, because if they did that then nobody would be able to access... Oh, I see what you're saying.

Old news (2)

Jarik C-Bol (894741) | about 2 months ago | (#47640263)

I bought and downloaded and watched this almost two years ago, why in the world is it making the 'news' now? It's pretty, but the story felt kind of.. absent, like it was trying to riff off of some of the great sci-fi of the past and not really putting it all together. to make anything particularly coherent.

Also stars 'Karen Allen' (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47640271)

Too bad they didn't mention Karen Allen's contributions to the project.

I thought she brought a wonderful character to life for the film.

One of the few films that left so many mysteries that a sequel could really add to the story rather than take away from it. I've seen many Indy films over the years, some good or bad, but this one truly, really served the Story and not the FX. It has an Alien (the Astronomer room bit) aspect to it. It has a 2001 aspect to it. It has an end of the human race aspect to it. And an innocent child alone in the dark, exploring his memories aspect to it. Even a Terminator/T2 spin on it. And a Prometheus aspect to it.

I think the story might even be able to go on "after" but that would depend on a good story.

it reminds me of all the 1970's SciFi stories and paperbacks (shortly after the Apollo missions) I read as a child that explored the "Big Picture" of human thought, and adventure.. like "Childhoods End" by Arthur C. Clarke. And "that" is another aspect of the Story.. how like [ It's not the End.. but only the Beginning ]

Also stars 'Karen Allen' (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47643971)

It's Margot Kidder, not Karen Allen - but yes, she's wonderful.

What's "old school' about it? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47640847)

The fact that anything at all in it isn't a shitty CGI cartoon, or the fact that it doesn't suck?

Requiers a plus account (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47643117)

"You'll need a Hulu Plus account to watch."

Clearing Up Some Things (4, Insightful)

Sasich (3780639) | about 2 months ago | (#47643121)

Hi – I'm Eli, I directed HENRi. I normally don't interact with forums or comments concerning my work – once a project is out there, it's fair game. However, I was made aware of the heated discussion here at /. about the film being released on Hulu, and I wanted to clear up a few things.

First, I want to apologize to those of you outside of the U.S. who were unable to view the film due to Hulu's territory restrictions. I certainly want anyone who wishes to see the film to be able to do so, regardless of where they are located in the world. More on that later.

Second, we didn't specifically pick Hulu for distribution. After the festival run we licensed the film with Shorts International and IndieFlix. These two companies then distributed the film with their partners across multiple platforms for maximum exposure – including OnDemand and TV programming, educational use, and streaming / digital download services. Hulu is the latest viewing option to go live, and the first "free" option for those who don't mind a few commercials. Hulu also has region restrictions, which is unfortunate and out of our control.

For our non-U.S. based friends, there are several ways to check out the film. On our website [henrithefilm.com] we use a service called Distrify – which allows you to stream or download a copy of the film, and the making-of doc, for a small fee. There are no international restrictions, and we kept the price point at the lowest possible option. For those of you who subscribe to IndieFlix [indieflix.com] , we are available on their service, which can be accessed around the world. We also sell region-free DVDs and Blu-rays.

I hope that clears up any confusion or frustration some of you had. Many thanks to those of you who have watched the film and supported us. So say we all.

Best,
Eli Sasich

Re:Clearing Up Some Things (1)

Artemis3 (85734) | about 2 months ago | (#47644499)

Ever heard of, youtube, vimeo, dailymotion, etc? Just saying,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

If you don't care, well; your loss.

Re:Clearing Up Some Things (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47644731)

It's not often that the creator of a project will take the time to answer a question here. I thought it was classy and I appreciated the explanation.

Your response was passive-agressive and childish. A link to wikipedia video hosting sites... seriously? Obviously they are trying a specific distribution process here. I don't mind giving them 99 cents to see the film. Grow up.

Why are we not funding more of this?!? (1)

Shifty0x88 (1732980) | about 2 months ago | (#47643175)

'nuff said.

You can buy/download the video legitimately... (1)

htnprm (176191) | about 2 months ago | (#47644679)

...and at a reasonable price. DRM free and no geo-restrictions:

http://www.henrithefilm.com/ [henrithefilm.com]

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?