Deck v2: Ornada Content Roll Out Summer 2026
NUBtv Critique
1----------Intro
2-----Breakdown
3--Editing Notes
4----Hook + Intro
My notes and critiques are oriented around achieving higher retention while maintaining the low-fi, casual and tasteful feel. I believe that with stronger exposition, structure, and a few invisible editing and motivational cutting techniques, the video will be more legible to a broader audience while also giving greater clarity to the CORE audience's experience without tarnishing the off-the-cuff feeling. The video already has a strong style and vision, and these notes are designed to be minimally invasive and constructive.
I will begin with my first impressions and a breakdown of the video. The first notes pertain to the editing itself, revealing that the general order and structure are well executed but contain dead frames and non-motivated edits. Through a quick recut of a scene from Episode 2, I examine the methodology of the current edit and explore possibilities that already exist within it. I would be interested in your comparison of these two versions and would like to use this as a case study to understand the NubTV videos at a metacognitive level. It is likely that you will both like and dislike aspects of this alternate cut. My main hope is that it provides clarity to my critique and serves as a useful point of reference for discussion.
The final area of critique looks at the first minute of the video, a crucial section not only for YouTube videos but for any film in general. The primary concern is whether we are delivering the exposition needed to answer the most important question: “Why do I care?” This section breaks down the hook and intro of Episode 2 and begins a conversation around maximizing their effectiveness.
Each scene is a montage paired with music, banter, and funny moments from a new location. The video crashes into scenes with lower thirds that explain locations, characters, and/or details about the nature of the scene (ex. Stop #4). There is no external context to where places are, nor does the video utilize establishing shots. Scenes are frequently entered tightly without developing the world that these scenes are existing within. The film cuts into moments quickly and assumes a chronological structure, with only a counting upward of competition stop numbers. Scenes occasionally feel like they are ending, but then continue into tangential interludes and/or spend 120 seconds on ideas that can be developed in 55 seconds.
To give a visual representation, I cut down the second part of the Georgia scene from Episode 2 (5:24–7:18) to give a better idea of how this can be seen in practice. I was able to edit the cut down from 1:59 to 0:55, and I personally think that by reducing it, the important information shines through, pushing us into the next scene with more expectation and suspense. Other aspects I experimented with were adding SFX to help guide the audience more and help comedic moments hit harder (this could easily be dialed up or down). The final additions were some GFX. The first are title cards that help emphasize what's going on and what will happen next. The final GFX element is a map that could become an ongoing theme to help ground the audience in where we are while building more exposition and creating clearer structural breaks.
One of my editing heroes is Walter Murch, who edited Apocalypse Now, a super analytical editor who broke everything down into frames and talked about hyper detailed methods. One of my favorite things he mentions is that, "The artistry... is to know what can be left out," and adds to the mantra from above, "Frames become seconds, and seconds become minutes," which further emphasizes the practicality of reduction.
In my opinion, this cut being 50% shorter emphasizes the crucial elements while removing dead frames that distract from the narrative. I think this is even more important in an MTV-esque video style where we are cutting quickly and in jarring ways. It can easily become incoherent if each shot is not motivated. I am interested in expanding this conversation and am very interested in how we compare these two iterations.
For the sake of NubTV Episode 2, the crucial details are that we begin a journey from Stops #2–4, traveling around Europe from Andorra to Georgia to Austria, with two athletes, Ben and Tobi, competing to qualify for a spot in the Alaska finals. On YouTube, this information is frequently given twice: once at a super surface level in the hook and then expanded on in the intro.
My first idea to effectively create a hook in a humorous way would be looking at Top Gear UK and stepladdering their structure. Their episodes would begin with something like: "Tonight! Richard races a bike through St. Petersburg, James tests a very small car, and I invent a hovercraft van."
Using a funny or entertaining voice, the episode could begin with: "In this week's episode of NubTV, the boys travel to three Freeride World Tour events in Andorra, Georgia, and Austria, Tobi tries to stand on a chair, and the boys go too big."
The first shot after the hook could be Ben and Tobi, our main characters, in the gate with all the title cards (Stop #2) and the current standings. We watch their runs and still get the funny banter at the bottom. When we see the podium, we see the standings. Simply emphasizing both Tobi and Ben's runs and adding GFX with standings would be enough to establish this intro without taking it too far.
I believe now when the video moves from place to place, topic to topic, there would be more context for what is happening, allowing the audience to more easily read between the lines. Most importantly, we set up the audience with the "why," focusing on qualifying for the finals and creating a backbone for the jokes to rest on.
1. Work Examples
a. Action Sports Edits
On the LEFT is a ski film from 2022, and on the RIGHT is a [WIP] skate video. Looking at these side by side reveals a shift in my work, while also highlighting the nostalgic and memory-driven themes I seem to always return to.
b. High Retention Films
This winter, I edited 9 videos (2.5 hours of total runtime) that accumulated 4.2 million views over the season. This style of editing comes from understanding how to balance the key elements that make films and stories entertaining on Youtube.
2. Ideas & Methodology On How to Translate This Into Content For Ornada
a. Intro
I could begin by learning the footage through cutting short-form content, finding highlights from the entire film and creating a library of vertical deliverables for the upcoming season (3–4 days). Then, with more familiarity, I could begin discussing footage that could inspire a YouTube video to be made in the remaining 11–12 days.
This would then leave a library of vertical content and a longform video ready to be posted during prime ski content time.
b. Youtube Video Concepts
On the RIGHT would be examples of thumbnails designed for high retention. They capture the widest possible TAM audience and then the promise is delivered with a punchy hook and intro that clearly lay out what to expect, such as a behind the scenes journey with one of skiing’s biggest legends on a heli trip in Alaska that hosts some climactic moment. This, of course, could be dialed back with branding in mind. For example, “A Day in the Life of Sammy Carlson” is less “YouTube-y” than “How Pros Ski the Steepest Lines in the World.”
The main difference between this and a typical raw cut is the framing of the thumbnail and title. This concept could also be expanded into “1 Hour of Falls,” “1 Hour of Rails,” “1 Hour of…”.