Planning

This is a copy of my planning for the storyline of my film. I took inspiration from Sliding Doors - a film revolving around fate and focusing on how a single moment in a person's life can alter the course of their future. I decided on using a bus in my storyline, as they are easier to come by than a train or any other form
of public transport. I brainstormed so I would be able to chose which would be the most suitable as I had to take logistics, money and time into account. Originally, I was going to include a scene on the bus in my film. However, the film would have been too long, so I showed that the woman missed the bus by her checking the timetable. I also brainstormed about the issues I could portray in my film. I chose the theme of homelessness, fate and materialism as I believe they are a relevant and contemporary issue. I wanted my film to be thought-provoking and different, which I believe I have achieved. I wanted it to have a universal appeal, so that anyone could watch it and be interested in it. I also wanted the film to be implicit so people could form their own opinions and reactions to the film.
I can see that my film is different to my earlier planning in some ways, however, I believe this has been because of my increased knowledge of the production process - and my eventual choice to change the storyline to fit the time limit. Overall, I think the film still reflects many aspects of its original planning, as I did not want to move far away from the original concept, but includes new and interesting aspects that works within the film better than some initial ideas.

 

Planning

I have included the research and planning from the pre-production stage of my coursework. It includes storyboards, short film research, brainstorms, and general planning for the filming of my production. It took me around a month to plan properly for my short film. This included a filming session which didn't produce much good footage. I learnt from this, and while I did use a very small part of the footage in my final, it served mostly as a learning opportunity as it made me realise exactly how I wanted my film to look.

This is a copy of the brief for my production:

'A short film in its entirety, lasting approximately five minutes, which may be live action or animated or a combination of both, together with two of the following three options

a poster for the film;

a radio trailer for the film;

a film magazine review page featuring the film'

I chose to do a poster and a film review for my ancilliaries as I believe they accompany the film well.

This is a copy of my research for my short film. I have included my full research and a brainstorm. I watched films from various sites. They were of various lengths and I made notes on them. All of them had a main issue and I found the research helpful as they assisted me with planning my film. From this research I learnt of the conventions of short films including:

•  the focus on a main issue
•  the common use of close-ups to show reactions and expressions
•  the minimal number of characters
•  the implicit nature of the films
•  the unusual methods used by some - e.g. limited speech
•  the recurrent theme of messages and morals

I used all of these conventions and more to help me in the planning of my film.

Evaluation

   After carrying out my questionnaire, I found that, all of the people I surveyed said that my production did look like a short film, though it was for various reasons. They also suggested some improvements which I found helpful.

   Several people said that the film’s length and portrayal of a topical issue (homelessness) both help to make it look authentic. Another said a valuable life lesson was part of the moral that the story tells and that the conveyance of a message was very significant. I was happy that the film successfully conveyed the intended message, which is one of the key conventions of a short film. Also, the fact that it was identifiable as a short film to every member of its audience means that it fulfilled its purpose.

   When I compared my film to other films that I had watched, as part of my research, I was happy as it mirrored different films in different ways. For example, my film focused on an important issue- homelessness – whilst telling a story. I was also happy as my film addressed other issues – such as materialism versus spiritualism and fate. This was shown through the protagonist’s realisation that material items don’t always bring happiness and was compounded by her declaration of peace at the end, despite her seemingly hopeless situation.  My film also included fate as part of its storyline – which was inspired by the film Sliding Doors. At first, my film was going to include a scene with a bus, and the different events that would occur if the protagonist caught or missed the bus. However, my film would be too long if I included this scene, so I had to allude to it instead.

   The people I surveyed also said that the film was enjoyable and was effective as it provided a message through a story. It also engaged the viewer, but still conveyed its message. I was happy, as I wanted my short film to be enjoyable, as I found some short films to be too long – some were fifteen minutes. This meant that some films felt too long and slow-paced which is what I didn’t want for my film. For example, The Undertaker – a story about an undertaker – was very jolty and uncomfortable to watch. I felt that the time limit – five minutes was perfect for my film as it allows the film to tell its story, without being slow-paced or boring.  

   Watching other short films – both professional and amateur, was really helpful as I was able to envisage how long my film would be. I developed their conventions as they helped me to decide on my plot, and helped me decide on the types of shots I would use in different scenes. It gave me an insight into the conventions of short films and illustrated how they are different to normal films – e.g. shots, storylines, and symbolism. My film used these conventions as it has a message and conveys a clear message. I did challenge some conventions – most notably the timeline – as most short films had plots that took place in a short period of time, whereas the events in mine occurred over a period of a few weeks.

   Other people who were surveyed said that my film looked authentic mostly because of the poster and review that accompanied it. These were the ancillary tasks that I was required to produce. They both took around two weeks to complete and were reasonably easy to finish. I used the same picture from the poster in my review to establish a sense of continuity and uniformity. This means that my film, poster and review all look as if they are part of the same production, which is what I was aiming for.

Page 1

Evaluation

   The people I surveyed did point out flaws and offer suggestions, which I was happy with, as I too had found ways in which I could improve my film. The main issues are to do with continuity, for example, there is an umbrella depicted in the poster that is not seen in the film. Not many people noticed this, and those that did said that it was a trivial flaw of little importance. The umbrella was used as a last resort, as it was raining heavily on the day the poster shoot was done. This was one of the problems I encountered during the pre-production phase, though it was easily averted. I did consider cropping out it out of the photo; however the position of the subject would seem absurd as they would appear to be holding something. After further consideration I decided that I would include the issue as part of my evaluation and keep the flaw as it was not troublesome.

   One other flaw that I noticed was the fact that the character wears the same clothes throughout most of the film, despite the fact that several weeks have passed in the film. This was because the film was shot in one day. At first, this was a problem, but when I carried out my questionnaire and no-one else pointed it out, I realised it wasn’t a huge problem as it wasn’t as obvious as I had first thought. This was trivial compared to the problems I had incurred whilst shooting the film as it took two shoots to get it right and four months to complete. I was working alone, which was unfamiliar as, at AS level, I had worked in a group. Working on my own gave me complete power over the film, but also left me with a lot of responsibility. The editing process was particularly different, as I didn’t have the opportunity to ask for second opinions, and instead had to rely on my own. However, in time, I found working alone to be enjoyable as I shaped the film according to my previous vision and was satisfied when the final film looked as I had imagined it.

   Also, it gave me an opportunity to use the cameras, tripods and editing equipment alone. I did encounter some problems during the filming process as, during my second shoot, the camera’s batteries ran out before I had finished shooting my film and I did not have the opportunity to use a tripod. Despite this, I found the tripod was not completely necessary, and as a result of its absence, my filming became steadier which was a benefit. I also found a way round the battery expiration as I stopped filming for half an hour and used the last ounces of the retiring battery to film my final scene in one take. This initially made me apprehensive, as I was worried that the ending would look rushed. However, in the end, the ending was one of the best parts of the whole film, and its brevity meant that the time limit was adhered to, which I was happy with.

Page 2

Questionnaire

 This is a copy of my questionnaire which, so far, has been completed by two people.

Questionnaire

1.       Does the film look authentic? (Can it be identified as a short film)

Yes                                                         No

How/why?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

2.       Does the ancillary (review and poster) that accompanies the film look authentic?

Yes                                                         No

How/why?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

3.       Can you understand/interpret the message that the film is trying to convey?

Yes                                                         No

How/why?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

4.       Is the film successful/unsuccessful?

Yes                                                         No

How/why?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Evaluation

Continuing from the previous post, I have decided to add the questions that I am required to answer.
The brief states that the evaluation can be presented as a powerpoint, a blog/website, a podcast or a DVD with 'extras'. I have decided to do my evaluation on my blog as I find writing for the blog is more suited to me than a powerpoint, as I did my evaluation in a powerpoint for my AS level coursework.
The four main questions we are required to answer are:

• In what ways does your media product use, develop or challenge forms and conventions of real media products?
• How effective is the combination of your main product and your ancillary texts?
• What have you learnt from your audience feedback?
• How did you use new media technologies in the construction and research, planning and evaluation stages?

I have also begun work on a questionnaire in order to answer the second and third questions effectively and have, so far, surveyed 2 people about my film, both, of whom, replied with postive feedback.

I have added details and notes that I made in order to answer the questions properly. (Below)

In what ways does you media product use, develop or challenge forms and conventions of real media products?

·         COMPARE TO OTHER SHORT FILMS

·         How does your film develop the ideas of other short films

·         How does it challenge the conventions of short films

·         How does it use/have the conventions of other short films?

How effective is the combination of your main product and your ancillary texts?

·         Uniformity – does it match your film – is it identifiable to your brand?

·         Continuity – do you use same people, pictures etc?

·         Representation – does it have an identity to your production/institution?

Basically, do they work well together – can you tell they represent the same project? HOW

What have you learnt from your audience feedback?

·         What have your audience said? Is it successful – how and why

·         Any pointers/ improvements that could be made

·         Pie chart – representation of viewer opinion

·         Ask about ancillary tasks as well – can you tell they are associated with the film? How

·         10-15 people

How did you use new media technologies in the construction and research, planning and evaluation stages?

·         Did you use any new technology?

·         How have you progressed/learnt?

·         Worked alone – different to plan alone, use of blog

·         Different to use camera alone and edit alone – sole executor – ONE camera

·         In ALL stages of production

Evaluation

I have begun work on my evaluation which is due on the 21st January 2011. There are four main questions which we need to answer during the evaluation which are shown on the brief.


I will be going over my blog to make sure my planning and research is acceptable. The brief states that the blog must contain evidence of:

• Research into similar products and a potential target audience
• Organisation of actors, locations, costumes, props etc
• Storyboarding, scripts, shot lists, layouts, draft pages etc
• Time management (scheduling)

I am aware that I need to scan in parts of my plan like the storyboards and early planning. I need to show the schedule through which I organised myself. I have shown evidence of research and planning, though I wish to add more examples of short films I have researched and watched to show I have gained an understanding of the genre.