Framing is about how one positions the camera and frames the shot: this includes movement or mobile framing.
The concept of this task was to create a single camera drama entitled The Discovery, and make our own edits to the sequence. Paired up with Sabrina and Isabella, our objective was to create a sequel to the first single camera drama, The Chase.
The ghost of the deceased from the first film haunts the murderer and brutally murders her on campus and her corpse is discovered by a student.
Pre Production
Ideally the scene was meant to have some dialogue but as it was not a necessity in this particular task we choose to rule out the dialogue and include it in the editing process. Instead of drawing a script we drew up a guideline, outlining the flow of events in the film. The protagonist crying in the bathroom, she is haunted by the antagonist in the mirror. Te twist is, the protagonist was already dead when she entered the bathroom, she just didn't know it. Her corpse is later discovered by an innocent student.
We found this narrative very elaborate and complex compared to our other narratives, because it involved such a complex story line even though it was only set in one location.
I found this very effective for a thriller/horror film because there are a number of horror films that have been set in one location.
During the drawing up of the storyboard, we made sure to show case different types of framing, for example the use of close ups to determine emotions and reactions and long shots to show case body language, costumes etc.
This task was to be done in our own individual edits. The filming process was not long, the entire clip was filmed in one day, we used props such as fake blood borrowed from the drama department, we also used our surroundings as a prop, that is the mirror in the female lavatory.
After the filming process I proceeded to edit my work via premiere. This is because premiere work can be tweaked from various locations as long as it had been saved in my "T1.." Drive.
I introduced the film with the protagonist crying in the bathroom, having flash backs of the person that she had killed in the previous film, the guilt had consumed her and she was scared. This was evident by the close up of her upset and emotionally distressed face. The camera then pans out to reveal that the ghost of the person that she had killed standing in the mirror, who is evidently revealed as the antagonist in this particular film. Startled, I used a clip of the protagonists reaction to this shocking establishment, she turns around in shock but the camera is in a fixed position of a mid shot of both the protagonist and the antagonists reflection in the mirror. I found this effective because it then shows the audience who is in the scene, and whether the protagonist is real or fake because she is only seen in the mirror. This begun the altercation between the ghost and the girl. The protagonist exclaims that the antagonist isn't real and the antagonist asks her whether she is real. This scene contained a various amount of close ups, because it was a conversation I used the technique of shot reverse shot which is conventional for a conversation. The following shot was a pan shot the camera pans down from the protagonists eyes to the ground where her corpse lays. I think this shot was effective in the sense that it showed the audience how oblivious the antagonist was to her own demise. The next scene showed Sabrina coming in to the bathroom and seeing her friend on the ground dead, she screams. this shot is a side view shot showing Sabrina looking at the corpse. To conclude the scene, we show Bella the ghost wiping her hands and smiling devilishly.
Saturday 22 February 2014
Narrative and Genre: Dont Mess With Me
This task was the second to last in all our short film sequences. The objective of this workshop in particular was to use the narrative to display the genre of film which is being used. Using techniques such as dialogue, camera angles and mis en scene to tell the story.
The film was meant to be a minute long but paired up with Sabrina Yaqub and Isabella Francis we went the extra mile. To begin the project, we developed an outline script which featured the course of the narrative. The idea to conclude our first two horror films with a detailed narrative inform of a drama-thriller, was mutual. The narrative involved a friend of all three main characters going missing and two of their friends being killed off in the course of the film. To concluded on of the main characters will discover who the killer is.
First, I drew up an accurate story board consisting of various camera angles which we were to use to determine facial expressions. Following up to that, we all came together to develop a more accurate script which determined all the cues, locations and scenes. Finally we assembled our stock characters and begun the production process.
Before filming we had to print off some props we were to use in the course of the film, these included, a missing poster of Meron and photos of the deceased
The opening scene consisted of a fast track intro into the building. Objectively it was meant to look like a point of view shot from one of the main characters, but since it was sped up and it was cut out by a ripple edited via iMovie, it looked like a fast track tour of the college, but it was still able to tie into a dramatic genre. The scene involved the three main characters staring a missing poster talking amongst themselves. Personally I felt the scene worked well, but it would have been better if each of the characters received a close up shot of their faces while they were speaking and then finally a group shot as the each exited the scene. The following scene involved the main characters having a conversation with their friends at a table. There were several problems with this scene, the first was that the camera was in a fixed position, there were no close up shots of any of the characters, audience members are unable to witness facial expressions of the characters involved in the scene, this makes the concept of the scene obsolete. Whenever a character entered or exited, it would have been more professional if the camera fixed on that particular character, in order to make the story clearer. Other wise in the scene, it was clear that there was a disagreement between on of the characters and the group.
The scene that followed was the first murder. This scene was planned out well, the camera was mobile in a point of view shot looking through the eyes of the murderer. The victim makes it clear that the murderer is someone he knows, but that remains oblivious to the audience, as the camera pans upward towards the sky and a guns shot is heard, making it clear to the audience someone has been killed.
The next scene involves an argument between the couple of Hari and Cynthia. Cynthia is upset about the disappearance of her friend, Hari tries to calm her down but is clearly not successful. The camera angles we used include, over the shoulder shots to establish the view of both charaters. We used a mid shot at the side of the couple to show who is in the conversation. The following scene involved the death of Hari, sitting on his own interrupted by the point of view shot of the murderer that he clearly knows. Once again the camera pans up and the sound of a stab and a scream is heard, while a bird flies away in the sky. (A happy accident) which adds to the mood and meaning of the scene.
A memorial of the deceased outside with portraits of the victims. The three main characters from the beginning once again are seen looking at more tragic information. the camera pans from right to left looking at the facial expressions of each of the characters. Unfortunately, the scene would have worked better if in the beginning of the panning shot, Cynthia was placed in center screen. finally the scene ends with the girls all departing which was very effective. The final scene in the film is the discovery of the murderers, Bella stumbles upon Sabrina in an isolated room on campus. They have an altercation as Bella over hears Sabrina talking to her accomplice over the phone. This scene is effective in terms of dialogue. The plans of the murderer are unmasked we see the story unravel and we find out who the antagonist is. The scene however was uneffective in terms of camera shot. I would have been effective if we used cut to cut shots of the characters rather than panning.
The film was meant to be a minute long but paired up with Sabrina Yaqub and Isabella Francis we went the extra mile. To begin the project, we developed an outline script which featured the course of the narrative. The idea to conclude our first two horror films with a detailed narrative inform of a drama-thriller, was mutual. The narrative involved a friend of all three main characters going missing and two of their friends being killed off in the course of the film. To concluded on of the main characters will discover who the killer is.
First, I drew up an accurate story board consisting of various camera angles which we were to use to determine facial expressions. Following up to that, we all came together to develop a more accurate script which determined all the cues, locations and scenes. Finally we assembled our stock characters and begun the production process.
Before filming we had to print off some props we were to use in the course of the film, these included, a missing poster of Meron and photos of the deceased
The opening scene consisted of a fast track intro into the building. Objectively it was meant to look like a point of view shot from one of the main characters, but since it was sped up and it was cut out by a ripple edited via iMovie, it looked like a fast track tour of the college, but it was still able to tie into a dramatic genre. The scene involved the three main characters staring a missing poster talking amongst themselves. Personally I felt the scene worked well, but it would have been better if each of the characters received a close up shot of their faces while they were speaking and then finally a group shot as the each exited the scene. The following scene involved the main characters having a conversation with their friends at a table. There were several problems with this scene, the first was that the camera was in a fixed position, there were no close up shots of any of the characters, audience members are unable to witness facial expressions of the characters involved in the scene, this makes the concept of the scene obsolete. Whenever a character entered or exited, it would have been more professional if the camera fixed on that particular character, in order to make the story clearer. Other wise in the scene, it was clear that there was a disagreement between on of the characters and the group.
The scene that followed was the first murder. This scene was planned out well, the camera was mobile in a point of view shot looking through the eyes of the murderer. The victim makes it clear that the murderer is someone he knows, but that remains oblivious to the audience, as the camera pans upward towards the sky and a guns shot is heard, making it clear to the audience someone has been killed.
The next scene involves an argument between the couple of Hari and Cynthia. Cynthia is upset about the disappearance of her friend, Hari tries to calm her down but is clearly not successful. The camera angles we used include, over the shoulder shots to establish the view of both charaters. We used a mid shot at the side of the couple to show who is in the conversation. The following scene involved the death of Hari, sitting on his own interrupted by the point of view shot of the murderer that he clearly knows. Once again the camera pans up and the sound of a stab and a scream is heard, while a bird flies away in the sky. (A happy accident) which adds to the mood and meaning of the scene.
A memorial of the deceased outside with portraits of the victims. The three main characters from the beginning once again are seen looking at more tragic information. the camera pans from right to left looking at the facial expressions of each of the characters. Unfortunately, the scene would have worked better if in the beginning of the panning shot, Cynthia was placed in center screen. finally the scene ends with the girls all departing which was very effective. The final scene in the film is the discovery of the murderers, Bella stumbles upon Sabrina in an isolated room on campus. They have an altercation as Bella over hears Sabrina talking to her accomplice over the phone. This scene is effective in terms of dialogue. The plans of the murderer are unmasked we see the story unravel and we find out who the antagonist is. The scene however was uneffective in terms of camera shot. I would have been effective if we used cut to cut shots of the characters rather than panning.
Interview: Steve Autstin and CM Punk by JR
This interview was conducted by Wrestling commentator legend Jim Ross and two superstar athletes from different eras, Stone Cold Steve Austin from the Attitude Era and CM Punk, who was at the time the reigning WWE champion for over 400 days from the New Generation. The interview was about the new WWE Game at the time WWE 13 available on X Box and PlayStation. In the interview Jim Ross was promoting the game whilst asking the two athletes about their opinion on the game, and how it gives players the opportunity to create matches between superstars from different eras.
Questions asked
1. (Directed towards CM Punk) In 1997 you were just getting your career started the Attitude Era was red hot, do you think looking back on that talent raster when you were in your formative years of your career, how would you have faired now back in that period?
This is an open question, it begins with an honest statement about the athletes career and ends with a question demanding an elaborate response in regards to his opinion of a hypothetical situation.
2. (Directed at CM Punk) So you're very confident that you would do more than survive, you would thrive, in that environment with a Hall of Fame laden talent raster?
This was a follow up question to Punk's response to the first question asking him, if he is sure of the response he had given previously. This is an elongated closed question, Jim hasn't asked why Punk feels the way he does about his response he is just asking whether he is confident or not about the hypothetical situation.
3. (Directed at Stone Cold) Steve, your thoughts on watching CM Punks work today, knowing what you went through in the late 90's in the attitude era, how do you think he would have faired?
Jim asks for Steve's opinion, about his first question asked towards CM Punk, it is an open question because it calls for an explanation as to whether or not, Steve thinks that Punk can survive as he said in an Era where he was one of the most dominant athletes.
4. (Directed at Stone Cold) Speaking of the Attitude Era, looking at todays product how do you compare the difference between the Attitude Era and the current WWE? What Strikes you as the most stark difference from then to now?
Another open question, asking for Steve's opinion regarding the past and the present with in the WWE, and also asking for what he thinks stands out the most.
5. (Directed at Punk) I would say that the Attitude Era had a locker room full of men that liked to fight liked to compete, they all wanted to be number 1, I see, with the exception of a handful of guys in the WWE that the one thing that this raster has over the attitude era is that this raster probably can play video games better.
6. Great thing about this is on WWE 13 that time machine exists. (Directed at Stone Cold) and Steve for some young folks today, what can they expect if they aren't familiar with the stone cold because your attitude, your musette everything about what you did in the attitude era lives vibrantly in this game. What is it that is gonna surprise them about what Stone Cold does in the ring when they put you in game mode?
Both of these questions are similar in such a way in the sense that they have, statements to introduce them, revolved around a fact or his opinion. these are both open questions which require an elaborate answer from the superstars.
7. (Directed at CM Punk) Modern day Stone Cold in todays WWE how would he fit in your locker room?
This is a short yet open question, using the word "how" JR demands an elaborate explanation from CM Punk.
8. (Directed at Stone Cold) Exist, thrive, how would you put it Steve because right now it seems that John Cena and CM Punk are the two top dogs, how would you hunt with those dogs if you were to walk back in their tomorrow?
9. (Directed at Stone Cold) We are just talking about video games WWE 13 because that's what it's all about, which brings up an interesting point somebody is always suggesting that what would it be like for Stone Cold to wrestle CM Punk, well it is going to happen on WWE 13... But Steve do you get tired of that question, What if...
In an attempt to ease the tension between the two super stars, JR revolts the conversation back to the fact that the interview is about the up and coming video game WW13. The game allows the impossible matches to become possible but JR asks a question which most of the fans ask all day.
10. (Directed at CM Punk) What if?
JR repeats the question that he asked to CM Punk in a summarised version but as short as the question is, it is still an open question.
Questions asked
1. (Directed towards CM Punk) In 1997 you were just getting your career started the Attitude Era was red hot, do you think looking back on that talent raster when you were in your formative years of your career, how would you have faired now back in that period?
This is an open question, it begins with an honest statement about the athletes career and ends with a question demanding an elaborate response in regards to his opinion of a hypothetical situation.
2. (Directed at CM Punk) So you're very confident that you would do more than survive, you would thrive, in that environment with a Hall of Fame laden talent raster?
This was a follow up question to Punk's response to the first question asking him, if he is sure of the response he had given previously. This is an elongated closed question, Jim hasn't asked why Punk feels the way he does about his response he is just asking whether he is confident or not about the hypothetical situation.
3. (Directed at Stone Cold) Steve, your thoughts on watching CM Punks work today, knowing what you went through in the late 90's in the attitude era, how do you think he would have faired?
Jim asks for Steve's opinion, about his first question asked towards CM Punk, it is an open question because it calls for an explanation as to whether or not, Steve thinks that Punk can survive as he said in an Era where he was one of the most dominant athletes.
4. (Directed at Stone Cold) Speaking of the Attitude Era, looking at todays product how do you compare the difference between the Attitude Era and the current WWE? What Strikes you as the most stark difference from then to now?
Another open question, asking for Steve's opinion regarding the past and the present with in the WWE, and also asking for what he thinks stands out the most.
5. (Directed at Punk) I would say that the Attitude Era had a locker room full of men that liked to fight liked to compete, they all wanted to be number 1, I see, with the exception of a handful of guys in the WWE that the one thing that this raster has over the attitude era is that this raster probably can play video games better.
6. Great thing about this is on WWE 13 that time machine exists. (Directed at Stone Cold) and Steve for some young folks today, what can they expect if they aren't familiar with the stone cold because your attitude, your musette everything about what you did in the attitude era lives vibrantly in this game. What is it that is gonna surprise them about what Stone Cold does in the ring when they put you in game mode?
Both of these questions are similar in such a way in the sense that they have, statements to introduce them, revolved around a fact or his opinion. these are both open questions which require an elaborate answer from the superstars.
7. (Directed at CM Punk) Modern day Stone Cold in todays WWE how would he fit in your locker room?
This is a short yet open question, using the word "how" JR demands an elaborate explanation from CM Punk.
8. (Directed at Stone Cold) Exist, thrive, how would you put it Steve because right now it seems that John Cena and CM Punk are the two top dogs, how would you hunt with those dogs if you were to walk back in their tomorrow?
9. (Directed at Stone Cold) We are just talking about video games WWE 13 because that's what it's all about, which brings up an interesting point somebody is always suggesting that what would it be like for Stone Cold to wrestle CM Punk, well it is going to happen on WWE 13... But Steve do you get tired of that question, What if...
In an attempt to ease the tension between the two super stars, JR revolts the conversation back to the fact that the interview is about the up and coming video game WW13. The game allows the impossible matches to become possible but JR asks a question which most of the fans ask all day.
10. (Directed at CM Punk) What if?
JR repeats the question that he asked to CM Punk in a summarised version but as short as the question is, it is still an open question.
Friday 14 February 2014
High Country
1. What
is the social issue being focused on in this documentary?
The issue being documented, is Marijuana. (The cannabis plant)
d. Summarise
what happens in the beginning/middle/end of this documentary
Beginning
The director shows footage of the cannabis plant and explains the way that America has reacted to the usage of the substance. Using interviews and archive footage the director shows the audience who is for and who is against the plant.
Middle
The director then gets close to different scientists who are looking to isolate the damaging properties in the plant and use it for its sole purpose, it's healing properties.
End
the director finally attend the 4:20 Parade which is for people who engage in the sale and use of marijuana, it is originally for the people who want it legalised for the right reasons but now it has been reduced to a low class holiday and an excuse for people to get high.
The director shows footage of the cannabis plant and explains the way that America has reacted to the usage of the substance. Using interviews and archive footage the director shows the audience who is for and who is against the plant.
Middle
The director then gets close to different scientists who are looking to isolate the damaging properties in the plant and use it for its sole purpose, it's healing properties.
End
the director finally attend the 4:20 Parade which is for people who engage in the sale and use of marijuana, it is originally for the people who want it legalised for the right reasons but now it has been reduced to a low class holiday and an excuse for people to get high.
1. What
type of documentary is this? Conventions used?
This is an educative documentary
1. What
techniques are used to maintain the audiences attention?
t The use of music relevant to the subject matter
Voice overs explaining the concept of the documentary to people
Cutaways giving the audience a break
Exploring the various uses of the plant (information perceived)
t The use of music relevant to the subject matter
Voice overs explaining the concept of the documentary to people
Cutaways giving the audience a break
Exploring the various uses of the plant (information perceived)
1. What
is the purpose of this documentary? What change is it campaigning for?
The point of this documentary is to educate its audience of the benefits of the cannabis plant and its healing properties.
1. Who
is the target audience? Age/gender/interests/location/language etc.
16+
P Predominantly male but to both genders
People who use or are against the use of marijuana
1. How
have they been targeted?
Through show casing both the pros and cons of the plant
2. How
is the audience encouraged to participate in creating change?
By interviewing different people on both sides of the topic.
By interviewing different people on both sides of the topic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)