The main problem we encountered during filming of  our documentary was getting the message we wanted to portray to the audience, basically the idea was settled on how media effects us and how we could instead of spending the money to help fuel the “capitalist machine” we could spend money on better things that could broaden our minds. this message took us a lot of meetings and a lot of thinking to come to the decision, to overcome this in terms on the production itself we thought this could be shown through the ‘Vox Pop’s’ we gathered asking the interviewees what the best way to spend their money hoping for a response which could be used to get the message across, an answer such as  ”travel the world” we thought would portray the message brilliantly. To show how the Media effects us we used the same Vox pop idea but used questions such as “do you feel the Media effects us?” this would give us an answer we could use to show the audience they are effected like everyone else, so the solution for these problems was the same and although it took a few meetings to get it we eventually got the message across to the audience in a interesting and coherent way.

my main role during pre-production was a sort of creative advisor, by this i mean, because the idea we ended up doing wasn’t my idea i felt that i should allow the owner of the idea to come up with the basis for the documentary, saying that, i felt that we all had to have an hand in the documentary and have all put ideas into it, being a creative advisor for the group was a good role for me because i felt that my ideas we’re valid for the documentary, for example i came up with the idea of an actor playing an internal monolog, i felt this was a good way of getting the audience to relate to the documentary using the actor as a connection to the audience by breaking the fourth wall to talk to the audience, although this was not as prominent in the final documentary as i would have liked it.

During the production in the group was camera and sound/boom handler, the camera role during the filming of the Vox pop’s production was shared between me and others within the group which i felt was a fair way to do it as we all had similar knowledge of the cameras as for the boom use during the production the same rules applied as we all had similar knowledge we swapped round using the boom for ever other Vox pop shot.

my post production role was mainly to work on the production file with the help of the group, i was in charge of getting the production file together and finished in time for the hand in, this tested my organisational skills but i found that i was able to collect and produce the file well, as for editing i felt that allowing the rest of the group to do the editing and having me as an advisor, much like my role during pre production i would focus on the look of the documentary and speak up and generally help the group edit by casting an eye across the whole editing process and the documentary, this was a role i was comfortable in although i would have liked to have got more involved within the editing instead of taking a back seat during this process.

During this production i feel that i have developed as a film maker thanks to the group i felt that the way we produced the start of the documentary (the t.v mash-up) this was a huge changed to anything i’ve made before and i was very happy with the production of it and the way it came up, i felt that i learnt ‘Vox pop’s’ can be powerful, before i found them to be dull, i have also learnt how to gather together a strong production file and organise it well, as for the way this documentary may affect my future work i feel that it will only do good to my film making but i don’t believe i will make anymore documentaries on this subject.  i found the way we produced it interesting, enlightening, taught me to think harder about the message put across in my films and i believe i came out with all of this and a new focus in learning the practical aspects of production better.

i was happy that our doc’ was different to everyone else’s in terms that it wasn’t about someone it was about a community or people as a whole which i felt was and is much stronger than just a single person but also left us with some difficulties in terms of broadening the message to cover everyone.

i was disappointed my idea never really came to be, i feel that it would have been a strong piece and i would have been able to put more of my ideas with confidence into my own idea although i feel i was a creative help to the piece we went with in the end i feel i would have felt more comfortable giving my option on my own idea.

(www.google.co.uk, http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Arts/Arts_/Pictures/2007/05/18/control460.jpgso, 4th december 2009, 4th december 2009)

i decided that (being only able to afford one film) that Shadow-play had to be it, i found the film itself to be interesting in what it said but not as i expected it to be, i expected it to be more influenced by Anton’s work, sadly this was not case and during the Q&A session i asked the director how Anton “Affected his work?” his reply was vague, but besides this i was inspired mainly my Anton Corbijns Photography to hopefully style the documentary in a high contrast way, but as this would have only worked for my idea it never came to be.

(www.google.co.uk, http://www.pastemagazine.com/images/articles/5408_image_1.jpg, 4th of December 2009 , 4th december 2009)

(Www.google.co.uk, http://2.bp.blogspot.com/__XBw8cqgq1A/SYccTqrujNI/AAAAAAAABsk/awHBMlxSQRE/s400/Anton_Corbijn_1990.jpg

4th december 2009, 4th december 2009)

the main sources for the documentary we made was mainly things like Youtube this was the source of the start of our documentary, the video mash-up of different Youtube clips to form a sentence which i feel is very interesting and is taken mainly from the documentary ‘RIP:Remix’ which was the main source of our style of documentary due to its fast paced cuts and interesting approach.

(www.google.co.uk, http://archive.sensesofcinema.com/images/05/cteq/british_sounds.jpg , 4th of december 2009, 4th of december 2009)

(www.google.co.uk, http://www.lcsd.gov.hk/CE/CulturalService/filmprog/images/2009jlg/18.jpgThe, 4th december 2009, 4th december 2009)

experimentation was my 1 minute taster for my idea, which was a character called ‘Sheepy’ i chose him because i felt he fit the Outsider brief, i thought that Sheepy’s story would have made a brilliant story for my documentary, sadly because he wasn’t a reliable enough to do filming, he wasn’t chosen for the final documentary, i felt although i was slightly disappointed by him not being chosen i felt it was the right thing to have done and thought the final idea was the best of the three.

we we’re told that the actor we filmed to give a speech on human nature linking it to capitalism was patrionising, which i feel is a fair comment but i think that to get the audience thinking you have to get them to feel something although i feel that feeling patronized isn’t the feeling we want from this i feel it is a start. we need to make people feel they are victims and also tell them how they can resist being the victims they are i feel this will come across more as the documentary progresses, there also needs to be more of a focus and more of an arguement within the piece again i feel that this will be easy to produce once we have all the new footage and a main focus.

The sound of the T.V giving the audience the narrative and telling them what we’re going to be talking about. Shot 2 – a visual conflict between people and animals these shots will compare people to animals e.g. pigeons or cattle. Audio

The audio from YouTube clips talking about materialism using the visuals to aid the audience Shot 3 – Shots of people worshipping celebrities, using tacky images placed onto archive of people worshipping in the style of “RIP Remix” showing how celebrities produce materialism Audio

The same as above, still talking about materialism but also the cult of celebrity using visuals as an aid for the audience Shot 4 – another visual conflict shot, involving a shot of an animal documentary, possibly a peacock, conflicting with a celeb in a beautiful dress or even an actor in drag to give comedic relief. Audio

This audio will be from the documentary of the animal mixed over both the doc’ and our shot of the celeb or drag. Shot 5 – Vox pops of intrusive questions to the public about their clothes and why they spend so much on clothes etc. Audio

Audio from people bring interview non-diagetic music in the background , girl talk the band from “RIP remix” Shot 6 – Ending shot, businessman in full suit on white background giving the idea of an internal monolog giving an aggressive speech on materialism and how we don’t need it Audio

Audio from the businessman’s speech and non- diagetic music form girl talk.
]]> http://tristanmjames215mc.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/shooting-script/feed/ 0 tristanmjames http://tristanmjames215mc.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/interview-questions/ http://tristanmjames215mc.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/interview-questions/#comments Mon, 09 Nov 2009 11:52:16 +0000 tristanmjames http://tristanmjames215mc.wordpress.com/?p=83 ]]> the interview question cover captialism in terms of materialism that i feel is a by-product of capitalism.

• Does branding effect your choice of clothes?
• Does what celebrities wear effect your choice of clothing?
• Do you choose a style to dress to – if yes what determines your style?
• Why do you think there is such a focus on fashion?
• Do you frequently buy clothes to catch up with friends?
• Who do you think creates trends?
• Does your choice of clothing make you individual – if yes how do you feel when others wear the same clothes or buying high street clothes?
• Do you feel that materialism is a bad thing? – how do you think it effects others e.g. third world countries lower classes?

these question will be filtered down into a few good questions which stick to the focus of our documentary and will be integral to getting the answers and questions we want to give people who watch our documentary.