baffmovies.files.wordpress.com€¦  · Web viewThe animatic process succeeded in allowing my partner and I to create a rough idea of what we wanted within each shot. They were large

Analysis and Evaluation of Pre-Production Task. The group was given a brief that told us to shoot a short continuative film sequence involving someone walking through a door, sitting down on a chair and exchanging two sentences with another person. This sequence had to show the techniques of match-on-action, shot/reverse shot and the 180 degree rule. Personally, I interpreted this as a good opportunity to show creativity and style due to the fact there were so little specifications, no genre, no target audience, almost everything was free to design and implement as I pleased. My partner and I made a list of what was absolutely needed in the sequence, and built our narrative based around those points, with several extra shots and effects added into the film.

To back up the knowledge been given to help create the sequence, I have had varied previous experience with filming. My first major film project was made during the summer holidays between Years 8 and 9, and was title Parodic Chronicles 6 (the film can be viewed by following this link: http://www.dailymotion.com/relevance/search/parodic%2Bchronicles/video/xd1og_parodic-chronicles-vi_shortfilms). Although the film was actually intended to appear video-game-like in format, the techniques and equipment used were those of the film medium. No storyboards were used; all prior planning was done by writing on paper the actions needed to be performed. The cameraman would shout out the actions and the actors in shot would perform them, with the audio being deleted as there was no need for any speaking or natural background sound. Even back then, I appear to have had some knowledge of the techniques, as very basic match-on-action is used along with various long-shots, medium shots and close-ups. All editing was done by me, which gave me invaluable experience in my software. Secondly, I used to regularly make AMV’s (Music Videos) with various effects and clips used from other media (usually games). Although no filming was used in creating these, the amount of time I spent editing the clips, the effects and the timing of the music also increased my experience and knowledge with my current editing Software. My third and final piece of prior experience was during my Media Studies GCSE course, in which my individual coursework task was to create a Film Trailer, entitled ‘Parallel’. As expected, I learnt much more during the course, including why certain shot types and camera heights were used, various camera movement techniques (tracking, panning, etc) and how to storyboard, which was the main way that I planned my trailer. I gained more experience in filming from a director’s point of view rather than an actors, as I did not star in my trailer, and also gained more experience in editing to the style of match-on-action. Furthermore, I used shot/reverse shot and the 180 degree rule in my trailer (even if I didn’t know it was the time), which were concepts that I hadn’t used before and would use in the A-Level pre-production task. This piece of experience also furthered my understanding of my editing software, particularly for actual film footage.

I believe continuity editing to be editing footage through the software in a way that makes the narrative easy to understand and the film appear to feel uninterrupted. This includes; the order of the shots (to be put chronologically in most cases); the transitions between scenes/shots (this is where match-on-action and the 180 degree rule must be considered); the dialogue, SFX and music (placing the wrong sound/line in at the wrong time could throw the audience away from the plot); the mise-en-scene (for instance, having an actor wearing a white t-shirt in one shot and suddenly wearing a black t-shirt in the next shot in the same scene without showing or suggesting him changing would also confuse the audience).

The animatic process succeeded in allowing my partner and I to create a rough idea of what we wanted within each shot. They were large drawings which allowed more detail to be sketched, and also gave us a good idea as to what shot type and angle we were going to use for the shot. We were also able to include some basic dialogue on certain shots also which helped when we fully developed the script. On the other hand, I believe we could have improved the process in numerous ways. We could have included the shot times on the animatics to give us a rough idea of how long each shot would last, and some of the drawings could have been of a better quality and be more accurate. Furthermore, we should have written up the exact dialogue needed on the animatics for each shot rather than write up a script as we had to spend a short while deciding what amount of dialogue would fit into each shot.

Between the planning and pre-production stages, numerous changes were made to our film sequence. The most notable of these changes would be the added shots at the beginning of the film (the 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th shots), and we added those in due to a complication in the brief. Although we had planned a shot of someone sitting down and another shot of someone else opening a door, they were separate people, and we had been told to shoot a character walking through a door and sitting down on a chair. We added the extra shots to the film to make up for this. We also changed a shot, namely the 7th (“It’s in here. Have you got the money to pay me?”). The content in the scene itself, including the actions and dialogue, haven’t changed, but we had to change the angle and type of shot. This was because we were using two corners of a room, the bottom left and bottom right, as opposite sides, which meant that the original over-shoulder shot would reveal a part of the room we didn’t want the audience to see. The angle and shot type were altered so that the connotation of a small room was kept.

During shooting, I quickly learned that it can be harder than first expected to get that perfect shot. In the scenes where we had to introduce Dr. Evil, it took several takes to get the actions right, the voice in perfect pitch, tone and accent; even a slight costume change was needed to truly get a feel for who the character was. Directing was also harder than I first thought; getting everyone around the area to be quiet and getting the actors into place is a hard task when everyone is busy working and getting distracted. Finally, I also learned that even if you think you have a great shot after the first take, it’s still wise to take some extra shots from the same or different angles just in case you change your opinion on that ‘perfect shot’ or you spot something in another take that could be better. One thing I would’ve definitely done different was get the scenes with Bond in right. In final edit, you can easily see that in every shot that showed Bonds face he was smiling, which seems very out of character, and the roll shot seemed very fake and generally unimpressive. His voice changed between shots too, going from a regular pitch to an extremely low pitch. With all that said, however, we did have a very limited time to get those shots done, and the actor who played bond had a limit to how many rolls he could perform without injury. Perhaps another change I would make is the actor who played the Bond character, exchanging him for someone with a slightly more serious persona and a body fit to perform stunts such as rolls. I would also have liked to get a few more takes of the shot in which we introduce Dr. Evil (where he shuts the suitcase and reveals his face) as the take I chose cuts early, a continuity error that potentially makes the audience feel somewhat rushed through the film. As a last point, there is a lot of non-diagetic sound coming from various people talking while we were shooting, and this is very hard to remove from the sound once it is in the clip. I would get a few more takes of those scenes to make sure there was no unnecessary sound during the take.

Match-On-Action.

A fundamental feature of continuity editing, Match-On-Action quite literally means to Match On the Action from one shot to another. If a character is performing an action, and the shot is cut before the action ends, the next shot should begin precisely from where the last one left off, either showing the same character performing the rest of the action or showing the action itself from a different angle or point of view. Here is an example:

Match-On-Action is mostly used to achieve continuity for the film. Without this, the audience will get confused because everything is suddenly different, in a different place, doing something different with no link as to how it got there or why, and the narrative will also suffer because nothing is in order, the sequence of events won’t follow each other correctly making in unable to be understood. Match-On-Action allows a flow of action that is almost invisible while the audience watches it, allowing them to be satisfied that everything is linked. Because actions are linked together, the narrative will also flow smoothly as events within it are also linked.

The 180° Rule

These are the end frame from shot 1 (top image) and the beginning frame from shot 2 (bottom image). The character is walking towards the white building in shot 1.

As you can see, the character is a set distance from the metal framework to the very right of the screen in shot 1. You can also see that the case he is carrying is facing away from the framework.

In shot 2, the character is the same set distance from the framework, even if it’s at a different angle. The case is also facing the same way as before. If you look closely, even his legs are perfectly a frame apart in the walking phase.

This is Match-On-Action. Matching On the Action of one shot to the next shot.

Once two characters have been established in a scene, they have been ‘given’ a side of the shot. An imaginary line is drawn between the two characters, and the camera cannot cross that line unless it is shown to move over the line in a single shot. This is known as the 180° rule. Here is an example: Below are frames of shots 10 (left image) and 11 (right image)

As you can see, these two shots follow the 180 degree rule due to the fact they are shot on the same side of the 180 degree line (whatever shot type, angle or height is used is irrelevant).

The 180 degree rule is another important part of continuity editing. Within a narrative, for example, the hero and villain meet and exchange conversation. Should the 180 not be used, the hero and villain would be shown on the same side of the screen; almost connoting they were on the same ‘side’. Using the rule also uses ‘eye line match’. This means that the characters appear to be looking at each other because the direction in which they are looking meets the direction that the other is facing, further deepening the connotation that the two are looking at each other and engaging in conversation. For the audience, the same applies. Using the 180 degree rule will allow them to become familiar with both characters separately, following the conversation and knowing that the two are talking to each other through the ‘eye line match’ technique. Without this, it would be highly possible for the viewer to not believe they are talking to each other properly as they wouldn’t ever look at each other while they were speaking.

Shot/Reverse Shot

10 11

The diagram to the left shows a plan of the scene. The dotted line shows the 180 line which has been established, and the half marked with the red ‘no’ symbol is the area where the shots can’t be taken from. The cylinders represent cameras and the yellow triangles are the area they have in shot, while the numbers on the cameras designate what shot number they were used for.

Shot / Reverse shot is, when put simply, a supplement for the 180 degree rule. In one shot, a character is shown to look one way and in another shot, the second character is shown to look in the opposite direction. Since they are looking oppositely, they are assumed to be facing each other, and thus their eye lines match. Here is an example using the same Frames as before:

As you can see above, in Shot 10, Dr. Evil is facing one direction while, in Shot 11, The Delivery Boy is facing the opposite direction. Through this, we can assume that they are looking at each other. (Note that they eyelines do not meet PERFECTLY. This is due to the difference in angle of the shot.)

The effect it has on the narrative is basically the same as the 180 degree rule, as it also bases its use around eyeline matching. For the narrative, Shot/Reverse Shot connotes the characters to be looking at each other, and are assumed to be engaging in conversation should they be talking. For the audience, the eyeline match created within shot/reverse shot allows them to easily accept that the two characters are talking and looking at each other. If it wasn’t present, the viewer would become confused and disorientated as to whether the two of them were talking or not.

Within the film, there are several special effects I used:

A combination of widescreen view and a complicated visual colour filter that gave it the added ‘cinematic’ touch. In other words, this effect was to make it seem more like a professional film to the viewer rather than amateurs recording using a handheld camera.

A ‘reflection’ effect shown in shot 12. Using a separate shot of a door, I mixed the two shots together to create a reflection of the door in Dr. Evil’s glasses. This was to connote the fact that he could see, and was looking towards, the door that Bond is about to burst into, almost connoting he was ‘expecting him’.

Titles were used within the film to credit those who made it. The font style used is slightly rough and blurred, connoting the setting and film involves very rough and mysterious places/situations. Also, the way the titles are transitioned in (a zoom) connotes that events are going to come at the viewer by surprise, or in quick succession.

The final titles at the end are used to introduce the film name and announce that it is ‘Coming Soon’. The font for most of the text is the font from the Bond movie ‘Goldeneye’ which will obviously have strong Bond Film connotations, whereas the other font used is very similar to the rough-cut beginning titles, a further connotation of a rough and dangerous storyline. These titles are transitioned in and out of shot by a zoom in and another zoom in which appears to make the title go past the viewer. This

transition style uses the fact that the text is ‘zooming’ toward the viewer to connote that the viewer is actually going towards the film, as if it is actually coming.

A special effect used for the James Bonds ROFLHOUSE title is to have the two O’s in the ROFLHOUSE word shot, and by changing them from solid letters to having a hole in the middle each connotes they have been shot. With the added effect of blood hitting the screen and the gunshot SFX, all of it put together strongly connotes a lot of blood, violence and gunfights within the film.Alongside all of this, the special title effects make the film look slightly more professional and impressive.

Between shots, cuts were used as a transition. These are commonly used to join a sequence of events together in quick succession, and the quick cuts within the film give a fast-paced feel to it, almost connoting it to be of the action genre.

Overall, I believe my finished sequence meets the brief almost completely. Although there are some errors within the sequence itself, these mistakes don’t affect how they meet the needs set by the brief. It involves a character opening a door, walking inside, sitting in a chair and exchanging more than two sentences with another character, so it definitely meets the narrative requirements. With the examples above, I clearly show how it meets the rules of Match-On-Action, the 180 degree rule and Shot/Reverse Shot, so, with that said, it meets all the requirements set by the brief. If I cut out shots 1 – 4 and shots 11 onwards, it would still include Match-on-action, the 180 degree rule and Shot/Reverse Shot, as well as containing all the requirements met by the narrative, so perhaps an ‘Improvement’ would be to cut those if I wanted to just meet the brief with no extra parts of the sequence. Furthermore, if I wanted to completely meet the brief alone, I could cut shot 8 of Dr. Evil shutting the suitcase and change the dialogue spoken in shot 9 to make them only speak two sentences and still be continuative. On the issue of Continuity, there are some very minor errors including the very slight early cut at the end of shot 8, and during shots 9, 10 and 11 there are supposed to be two suitcases, however you only see one in each shot and there is sufficient evidence to believe that the one held by Dr. Evil disappears during shots 9 and 11. To conclude, I believe that this sequence meets the brief well, but there are still mistakes and things I can learn to improve on for the Main Coursework Task ahead.

Tips I have learned for my next production are very much based on the errors made within this sequence, with a couple of exceptions. 1) Always wait until after the shot is completely finished to stop recording. 2) Always record extra takes of the same shot so you have a choice when you edit them. 3) Bring in all the objects you need for the mise-en-scene to avoid continuity errors. 4) Write the script first before putting the dialogue onto the animatics, it will save time. 5) Draw on the animatic more accurately to how you want the shot, and write the shot time. 6) Make sure you understand what MUST be done before you start to plan shots (this is in reference to the change in shot 7 because we couldn’t show what was behind the character.) 7) Make the effort to find actors who are willing to play their part well (e.g. they know they have to perform an action roll and they can do it well without injuring themselves.)