Thoughts on Clayton Vila's FIVE?

Interesting, but wasn't for me. I definitely see it as more of a passion project he did for himself rather than something meant to be liked by the masses, so I don't feel bad in not liking it.

holy shit that chick was hot. We need a lot more of that in movies

I don't know who got all artsy fartsy, but just go straight bangers for 10 minutes....ie. The Wallisch Project. Bears, chicks, pools, knives, metaphors...save it for the college kids.

Everybody likes straight bangers and a few solid wrecks.

Breaking_RadI don't know who got all artsy fartsy, but just go straight bangers for 10 minutes....ie. The Wallisch Project. Bears, chicks, pools, knives, metaphors...save it for the college kids.

Everybody likes straight bangers and a few solid wrecks.

NO.

if everyone made a movie of straight bangers and wrecks our industry would be boring as fuck..

its time for HOLLYWOOD and bunny rabbits and especially Rilakkuma

chicks, bears, pools, and knives definitely isn't the common definition of artsy fartsy. obviously some people are going to appreciate Clayton's endeavor at doing something real different and others won't. but dumbasses like you saying everything should be straight bangers and wrecks is what is gonnna kill all the creativity in this industry

go.....yourself

The referenced post has been removed.

Generally people make videos non-downloadable so that it racks up the view count to show sponsors that the project had a major impact. It's smart. With most of my videos I would have it be non-downloadable for a month or so then eventually make it available for download.

In my opinion view count is extremely important with these types of projects, especially to companies that support them. I would have to wager K2 would be a lot more likely to sponsor a project like this in the future if it has 100,000+ views than 15,000 views. 15k views is no small feat but at the same time I would have to imagine a large company like that would want to see higher viewership. There's a decent amount of these free projects that don't get nearly the number of views they should given the quality of the material.

I loved Five. Clayton is such an enjoyable skier to watch. His style and artistry of technical tricks is insane. I think it's interesting to see how some people love the side storyline and some hate it. I personally really enjoyed it and am thankful we can have both styles of videos.

I do agree with whoever mentioned being somewhat conflicted about skiers migrating away from traditional flicks. First and foremost I completely understand why many of the best are stepping back from production companies and wanting to do their own thing. There's a hell of a lot more freedom to do what you want, from locations, tricks, less stress and bullshit, choosing which shots actually go in the final cut, etc.

There is definitely an enjoyable nostalgia about seeing a banger opening or closing segment of a flick though. Having learned more about the process and reality of the making of the traditional style ski movie is depressing to me but there's something glorious about those legendary unforgettable segments.

I think part of it is the magic of the premiere too; I didn't attend IF3 this year so I didn't get to see this on the big screen, I love that IF3 includes these short films. There's definitely something more impactful about getting a room full of snow-lovers together and cheering at our favorite tricks and lines then sitting by yourself at your house watching an edit "premiere".

End thoughts, Five is fucking sick.

I just rewatched Clayton's segment in Mutiny, and I'd have to say that I prefer the classic format: some banger skiing with a banger song. Five was really good, it's cool that he did something different, but I've watched the whole thing 2-3 times and that's enough. Now when I watch it I just want to see Clayton ski, so I skip through the whole scenario, I only watch that girl's butt at the beginning. But his Mutiny segment, I've watched it a ton since it came out.

SKI.INGInteresting, but wasn't for me. I definitely see it as more of a passion project he did for himself rather than something meant to be liked by the masses, so I don't feel bad in not liking it.

Yeah agreed, skiing was top but not a fan of the weird story personally.

I personally though it was fucking stupid.
Sorry, I am not got be a trend whore and say it was cool cause there was a hot chick and it was "different"

good skiing though.

WillowShabbyWell the natural, for me at least, thing to say would be that the girl's relationship with the bear is basically a symbol of Villa's relationship with skiing (urban). The conclusion would then be that the toy bear turns into a real bear after being punished for his acts just as Villa comes back a more grown up/sicker skier after the crashes...
But... I think that NS members could have other views on this... Ladies and gentlemen.. Fire away!

This is from my other thread that got removed, but I really think the idea of making a segment with a side story is really quite interesting. Some guys in the thread had some cool ideas aswell

HeddiousTeddybear Crisis vibes anyone?

My thoughts are it's a combo of both of these but slightly different.

1.) Why the teddy bear? Teddybear Crisis inspires him to go for a run at skiing career
2.) Teddy bear is symbolic for his view/dream/perspective of skiing, industry, etc...
3.) He is the chick. Relationship with Teddybear is amazing at first (dinners, kissing, etc...), then reality hits (turns into real bear)
4.)Other characters represent industry types, friends, and family
5.)Stab bear (industry isn't what he thought it was, dreams crushed, reality sets in)
6.) ????
7.) Profit (do whatever he wants, time to move onto the next thing that will actual pay the bills)

Only question is why did he name it FIVE?

FredyFerlI only watch that girl's butt at the beginning.

Just because it's a ski film that incorporates other imagery doesn't mean it has a narrative flow to it.

Maybe its supposed to be more of a critique of the conventional edit/movie. Ski edits are empty as far as content, they are only as good as what they convey visually, the spectacle of people doing stuff on skis. This time there's a dude doing stuff on skis chopped with a bunch of scenes that only relate to one another through the motif of the bear, be it a stuffed animal or a huge-ass grizzly. The bear thus functions as the feature of an empty progression of scenes just as the skier is the feature of the ski edit, an essentially ephemeral display. The only difference comes from the fact that viewers don't expect to think critically about the skiing aspect but they will think critically about scenes that loosely infer a deeper, more profound meaning.

This is kind of why I think Mutiny and Tracing Skylines got it wrong, they attempt to give the act of watching skiing some kind of narrative element that just does not exist. They both attempt to make the viewer think about the skiing in a deeper way, but its too in your face, it becomes a nuisance. It seems like Clayton was kind of like fuck it, no one will think about skiing or ski film making in any depth unless it gets real abstract.

Regardless, I'm stoked on this project, the skiing was dope and the overall effect has opened up discussion that goes beyond the type typically associated with Ski Gabber.

I really liked the whole idea of skiing being a form of self expression being expanded to the skier helping to create and direct a whole film. You can see the influence that cv had on the entire video. Seemed like more than some director jerking himself off and showing off for the art school crowd while just happening to film some skier/biker/etc. getting rad.

mcswizzleJust because it's a ski film that incorporates other imagery doesn't mean it has a narrative flow to it.

Maybe its supposed to be more of a critique of the conventional edit/movie. Ski edits are empty as far as content, they are only as good as what they convey visually, the spectacle of people doing stuff on skis. This time there's a dude doing stuff on skis chopped with a bunch of scenes that only relate to one another through the motif of the bear, be it a stuffed animal or a huge-ass grizzly. The bear thus functions as the feature of an empty progression of scenes just as the skier is the feature of the ski edit, an essentially ephemeral display. The only difference comes from the fact that viewers don't expect to think critically about the skiing aspect but they will think critically about scenes that loosely infer a deeper, more profound meaning.

This is kind of why I think Mutiny and Tracing Skylines got it wrong, they attempt to give the act of watching skiing some kind of narrative element that just does not exist. They both attempt to make the viewer think about the skiing in a deeper way, but its too in your face, it becomes a nuisance. It seems like Clayton was kind of like fuck it, no one will think about skiing or ski film making in any depth unless it gets real abstract.

Regardless, I'm stoked on this project, the skiing was dope and the overall effect has opened up discussion that goes beyond the type typically associated with Ski Gabber.

I see what you're saying, but being abstract for the sake of abstract does not make good art. People always do that when they put something out, but then nobody likes it so they say "It's abstract, you just don't get it. It's too deep." This is usually just an excuse for a lack of a cohesive narrative, etc. You have to toe a fine line when it comes to that, and this was just too disjointed. And if you liked the edit that's fine, but don't say it was because it was abstract.

artrud23Only question is why did he name it FIVE?

It's named Five because this is his fifth year of full time "pro" skiing is what he said in his Q and A

Honestly I watch ski movies for the skiing. I didn't like it as a whole, but skiing was raw.

mcswizzleJust because it's a ski film that incorporates other imagery doesn't mean it has a narrative flow to it.

Maybe its supposed to be more of a critique of the conventional edit/movie. Ski edits are empty as far as content, they are only as good as what they convey visually, the spectacle of people doing stuff on skis. This time there's a dude doing stuff on skis chopped with a bunch of scenes that only relate to one another through the motif of the bear, be it a stuffed animal or a huge-ass grizzly. The bear thus functions as the feature of an empty progression of scenes just as the skier is the feature of the ski edit, an essentially ephemeral display. The only difference comes from the fact that viewers don't expect to think critically about the skiing aspect but they will think critically about scenes that loosely infer a deeper, more profound meaning.

This is kind of why I think Mutiny and Tracing Skylines got it wrong, they attempt to give the act of watching skiing some kind of narrative element that just does not exist. They both attempt to make the viewer think about the skiing in a deeper way, but its too in your face, it becomes a nuisance. It seems like Clayton was kind of like fuck it, no one will think about skiing or ski film making in any depth unless it gets real abstract.

Regardless, I'm stoked on this project, the skiing was dope and the overall effect has opened up discussion that goes beyond the type typically associated with Ski Gabber.

=)

SKI.INGI see what you're saying, but being abstract for the sake of abstract does not make good art. People always do that when they put something out, but then nobody likes it so they say "It's abstract, you just don't get it. It's too deep." This is usually just an excuse for a lack of a cohesive narrative, etc. You have to toe a fine line when it comes to that, and this was just too disjointed. And if you liked the edit that's fine, but don't say it was because it was abstract.

He's not saying it's abstract for the sake of it. I think he's suggesting that the movie is a commentary on the failed attempts at tacking on a narrative to ski films. Like skiing itself, one could try to construct a meaning or story with the shots in Five but there isn't necessarily one there. The shots are connected by theme or motif (the bear) and nothing else just like the shots in a ski porn movie. Clayton might be making comments about the ways ski movies are made but this depends on your interpretation.