Preliminary exercise evaluation (BLK)

For our prelim task, we made this sequence and named it "The Return".
Who did you work with and how did you manage the task between you?

I worked with Mila and Shobnam, and we decided to split various tasks between us. For the initial idea stages, we all worked together, but for the planning stages we split the story board, shot list and shoot schedule, and the script between us. For editing, we took equal turns but sat and helped the person editing if they needed it, and we made our decisions together. Although we delegated tasks between us, we also discussed each part that we were planning, to make sure we all agreed on what each of us were doing.

How did you plan your sequence? What processes did you use? What theories did you try to take into account?

Because we knew the requirements for the exercise, we started off with a brainstorm to decide who the characters would be, and what they would be discussing. Once we had decided on an idea for a spy talking to the director of the company, we split the tasks of the script, story board, and shot list & shoot schedule between us, so Mila did the script, I did the the shot list, shoot schedule and props (with the input of Mila and Shobnam) and Shobnam worked on the storyboard. We wanted to have a clear sense of genre, so we also planned costume. Because the task was to test our continuity skills, we planned our shots extremely carefully to make sure they used the continuity techniques stated in the brief: match on action, shot/reverse shot and the 180 degree rule.

What technology did you use to complete the task, and how did you use it?

We filmed the sequence on Canon DV30, also using a tripod, and then edited our footage using Adobe Premiere Pro. We were all familiar with Premiere Pro, so editing was quick, because editing our footage didn't require any complicated effects or transitions.

What factors did you have to take into account when planning, shooting and editing?

When planning our sequence, we had to think about using all of the continuity techniques stated in the brief, but also constructing a convincing narrative and having good characterisation. So we planned our script very carefully and decided to shoot the conversation twice, so we would have plenty of footage to edit. We also discussed shot types very carefully, because we wanted to vary our shot types, but still have our sequence flow naturally. We also planned where we were going to shoot first, and decided not to film the majority of our sequence outside, but film in the media office instead.
When shooting our sequence, we decided to shoot the shots that take place outside first, so the lighting would be consistent throughout the sequence, and then we didn't have to worry about the weather changing (meaning if it started raining whilst we were shooting or anything that would make shooting more difficult), and the lighting would be consistent. Also, because we were in a school, we were conscious of students walking past and talking, but we managed to avoid that by shooting mainly indoors. We also made sure that the shots were the same each time, for example when Mila opens the door at the beginning of the sequence, we made sure that she stood in the same place when I shot it both times, and also that she opens the door with the same hand.

For editing, we all worked together to make sure that shot order looked natural, and the scene flowed easily. We also thought that we would have straight cuts rather than any shot transitions, because shot transitions would slow the scene down, and with the dialogue that we have, shot transitions wouldn't fit easily into our sequence. We also worked extremely hard on making sure that the shots made sense, so when Mila is walking outside towards the door, that when the shot changed it looked like she was in the same place in the previous shot, so the sequence looked natural.

How successful was your sequence? Please identify what worked well, and with hindsight, what you would improve/do differently?

Overall I think our sequence was successful, we managed to stick to all of the continuity techniques that were mentioned in the brief. For example, when Mila is walking towards the door and the shots change, we used match on action, which worked. Also during the conversation between Mila and Shobnam, we used shot/reverse shot throughout, and we didn't break the 180 degree rule because the conversation was shot from Mila's left side and Shobnam's right side. 
If I were to change anything, I would probably make sure that the lighting was consistent. Because we shot on two different days, the natural lighting from outside had changed, which affected how the inside of the room looked. I would also make the shots transition a bit more naturally, which I didn't notice until I started editing the footage. Our first shots go from a close up of Mila's shoes to a long shot of Mila walking. If I were to re-shoot, I would go from a close up to a mid close up, rather than have such a large gap between the different shots. Also, we didn't have a master shot, which means that we used the same two shots for the conversation for too long. This means that the audience didn't see the entire room and get a sense of where the characters were. I would have also changed the last shot at the end of our sequence, which is a high angle close up. Doing this made our sequence look quite strange, and didn't fit with the genre that we had decided on. If I were to re-shoot, I think I would make the shot just a close up, so we can see her face fully, rather than having both a close up and a high angle. Despite this, I still think our sequence went very well and according to plan. 

What have you learnt from completing this task? Looking ahead, how will this learning be significant when completing the rest of your foundation coursework, do you think?

I have learnt how to use different continuity techniques, and how to make a scene flow naturally. I also learnt how to edit match on action, and also how to shoot a conversation and then edit between two pieces of footage. I also learnt how to set up shots, and what order to shoot in. I think this preliminary task was important, because for the film opening that we will make later, continuity will be extremely important, and the preliminary task is a practice for that. I think learning how to apply these for this sequence as a practice was extremely useful, so that for our other foundation coursework, it will have less mistakes and be slicker than our first sequence.

Dexter title sequence re-edit - Evaluation (DYM)

1. Summarise the conventions of title sequences that were most important to this task.
For our re-edit, it was important that we stuck to the conventions of colour schemes, different titles for different shots (meaning that one title didn't hang over too many shots). We also tried to make our titles legible in each shot and tried to make the titles convey the genre of the programme.

2. How did your group plan to edit the title sequence? (Consider timings, industry requirements, etc).

We decided to have the cast first, because that is a convention of most title sequences, and have the titles long enough so that they can be read in time. We also decided to have the director, producer and writer's names after the cast names, also because it is a convention of title sequences. For timings, they needed to be long enough to be read, but short enough so that they weren't on for too long and we could fit the other titles in. So we thought that having a different title per shot was the best way to go, because the most of the shots were the right length.

3. Explain the creative decisions made by your group.

We decided to have the titles red, to have the same branding as the "Dexter" title at the beginning of the sequence. We also decided to use a sans serif font, also like the "Dexter" title. We also felt that a sans serif font would be better and fit the genre of the show more. We had the titles fade in and shake a little bit, to emphasise the horror genre of the programme.

4. How does your re-edit compare to the original?

Our re-edit is fairly similar to the original. In the original they also have red titles, although the red in the original titles is a lot brighter, because we decided to use a fairly dark red. The titles also used a different font, also sans serif, but the design was a lot more spaced out, because the font we used was quite narrow. The original titles were also a lot simpler, because they didn't have any identifiable transitions, apart from a slight fade. Overall our edit was not very different to the original.

Opening title sound analysis

I chose to analyse the sound in the opening titles for Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street.
There was no dialogue in this opening sequence so I just analysed the music (a huge part of this sequence & generally the film) and the sound effects.

Music:

• Starts with music - get the sense that the film is a musical.
• Orchestral music from the original score by Stephen Sondheim - gives the dark/ominous atmosphere.
• Starts off quietly and then the violins start to get higher and the trumpets get louder, to the crescendo - overwhelms the audience and adds to the darkness of the film.
• Pace quickens as it takes us through the process of the pies being made - makes the audience feel thrilled in anticipation for the film to start.
• In minor - gives a slight strangeness and seriousness to the film

Sound effects:

• Starts with the sound of a thunderstorm & rain - kind of like pathetic fallacy? - gives the film a dark, scary element.
• Sound of the blood trickling - emphasises horror genre.
• Sound of the cogs turning, meat grinding and the blood dripping - makes the audience feel uneasy which ties into the genre of the film.

Continuity analysis

For my continuity sequence, I chose to analyse a scene from one of my favourite films ever, Ferris Bueller's Day Off.

Establishing shot:

• ELS of the building that the restaurant is in - to inform the audience of where the scene is taking place.

Shot reverse shot:

• When Ferris is talking to the waiter, they switch between shots of the two of them - we see how both characters respond to the conversation.

180 degree rule:

• The whole scene is filmed from Ferris's right side and does not switch to the other side. This is so the audience will not feel disoriented or confused.

30 degree rule:

• When Ferris says that he is going to call the police, the shot changes to face the phone straight on, so the camera moves about 45 degrees. If the camera did not change the angle it would look like a jump cut, which looks slighty strange and glitchy.

Match on action:

• When the waiter enters the scene, we see a MCU of him walking toward Ferris, Cameron and Sloane. It then changes to an LS of the waiter walking toward the three of them, but he is still walking, so the scene looks logical.

Sound:

• When Sloane is on the phone to the waiter, Sloane's voice continues through the shots changing. This is so we can see both of their reactions to what the other is saying.

Accident Continuity Analysis

What worked well:

• Played with the action shot and convention of establishing shot - started with a close up rather than an ELS.
• Match on action - from when he runs into the room in slow motion and crashes into the locker.
• Good range of shot types.

What we could improve:

• Start of chaotically and then move to slow motion - too much of a change and seemed out of place.
• Room looks the same on both sides, so it looks as though he falls over toward the locker he crashed into, rather than away from it.
• Broke the 180 degree rule - crossed an invisible line and the direction was changed.

5 codes (When Harry Met Sally)

I chose to analyse When Harry Met Sally... (1989) for my film (the first 7 minutes).

Enigma code:

• Who is the old couple? Why are they relevant to the story?
• Who is Harry kissing?
• Where are they driving to? Why are they going together?
• Why are they going to New York? What will happen to them in New York?
• Why are people with such different personalities going to spend an 18 hour road trip together and what will happen?

Action code:

• The old couple are talking - we know (eventually) that they are not Harry and Sally, so this suggests possible foreshadowing of events and how Harry and Sally will fall in love.
• Driving to New York together - a long journey, we know that their meeting and this journey is important to the story. This makes us want to know what happens to them later on.

Semiotic code:

• Big building with lots of young students around - a university/college.
• Sally is wearing make up and her hair is perfectly done - takes pride in her appearance at all times, even for a road trip.
• Harry is wearing jeans and a jumper - a bit scruffy, doesn't really care about his appearance.
• Wide shots of the road & outdoors where they are driving - suggests the length of how long they have been driving for.

Cultural code:

• Titles - simple, with cheerful music - get the sense that this is a lighthearted film, rather than a thriller or horror movie.
• Old couple telling story of how they met - suggests romantic comedy.
• Harry and Sally arguing about Casablanca - a well known romantic film, so we understand what they're discussing and side with Harry or Sally.
• Going to New York - famous for being a big city, we understand that they're going there for opportunities and to experience something new.
• Characters arguing - building tension between the two, and they have to spend the next 18 hours together.

Symbolic code:

• Harry talking about his "dark side" - possibly a bit pretentious? 
• Sally talking about her planning - very organised, maybe irritating?
• Old couple talking at the beginning - foreshadowing of Harry and Sally's relationship?