“When you look into an abyss, the abyss also looks into you.”

                                        - Friedrich Nietzsche


A lot can be said about Nietzsche. There are many theories about the opinions he defends are dark, his narration is stifling, and the expressions he uses are sharp. Another controversy is that Nietzsche's readers are suicidal. Whatever it is, opening the film with Nietzsche shows that the images we will watch soon will attack our psychology directly. It's actually a good tip for the audience. You can see on which axis you will progress without even reading the subject of the movie by seeing a single name! What more can you get! ..


It is really difficult to shoot such experimental films. Many elements such as style, color palette, objects, content, lines, camera angles should be carefully determined in advance and they all serve one purpose. At this point, it is necessary to touch upon the technical analysis of the film. There are new techniques tried, but how successful they are used is debatable. Starting with the scenes of a foot and completing it with a human image is a metaphor. It is very nice that these metaphors are in the movie; nevertheless, they cause nothing but confusion when there is no superior purpose they serve. Maybe it's an induction, or deductive when we think in reverse. However, the clues that will provide us with this solution are not sufficiently clear in the movie.


Some sequences have been kept too long. Many images that can take 6-7 seconds take 20 seconds or more. It could be shot in a much more compact structure. This is an important criticism. Close-up foot scene is a risky movie start. It can bother most people. It was not appropriate for the fiction to switch to the current camera immediately afterward. There are two different angles in the living room at home, is it a message to see the camera and the tripod at the second angle? This part is not understood. In the continuation of the film, there are many details that are not understood in the first viewing. However, short films are often watched once, so some issues need to be clearer in terms of expression.


This project has two successful aspects. First is the idea! If it could be processed more accurately, it would be a compelling experimental/exploratory film. The second is the sounds and "noises" used. It really bothers, but this discomfort favorably supports the atmosphere of the movie. Trying to shoot a hit movie with a small budget is an effort to appreciate. However, if the superstructure that will support the foundations of the film is not created, the audience will break the bond with the movie. It has a fluctuating relationship or abandons. "Thoughts out of Season" is not a short film everyone can love. Probably this is not what the film wants. It is a very different movie with an unprecedented narrative that tries to provide effective content for a particular minority. We watched with great curiosity from start to finish. We are still alive at the end of the movie. So, that which does not kill us makes us stronger ...