April 25th - Self-Critique

A_ I wanted my audience to seriously consider the importance of recycling using humor as a persuasive device.

1. Probably 7. It made my audience laugh, but I don't know that it made them think about recycling from now on
2. The story left me thinking "That could've been better." I thought it might not be impacting enough; that maybe it was still ending too quickly, or that there's something missing. What's missing is the sense of drama a score could provide.
3. It left me feeling like it fell short; it didn't really meet my expectations, but I never did develop a cohesive end, in my opinion. The "Star Wars-mind trick" was a good suggestion, but the execution didn't leave me thinking, "This joker means business, I'd better recycle." 
4.     The source of the main idea I started with is environmental activism. I tend to get somewhat passionate about the way we treat or mistreat the environment, and even though some problems are just beyond my control to confront, I know something as simple as recycling makes a big difference. The problem there is 1) lack of facilities, 2) limited scope of what can be collected for recycling, and/or 3) some people's apathy. Note that I quantified it with "some." By no means am I attempting to make any broad generalizations here, but I think it's pretty safe to say that a lot of people are just apathetic towards recycling, or they don't have any passion about it. I think it needs "passion" because any fool can walk casually toss something in the trash can without thinking twice about it. Plus, everyone's focus seems to be on littering. As if we don't have enough anti-litter campaigns. Now, I disdain littering as much as the next person, but I disdain not recycling even more if there's a plainly marked container for it in your face and an obviously recyclable plastic container or aluminum can in your hand. Granted, it's not always obvious what will and what will not be accepted by the collection agency, but you'll never know if you don't put it in there, or, in the case of curbside recycling, you could read the info. packet they give out on occasion. It wouldn't take any more of your time than is necessary; it's as easy as shooting a text message. Moving on...
5.     So, the theme of my piece is (drumroll please) environmental awareness. The goal of the film was to inspire a fundamental change. To make it simpler, just change which container you put certain "trash" in. All "trash" is not trash. I actually wanted to say more, but that wouldn't have been feasible in the production I ended up with. The objective was to get this rude, nasty guy to give a care and recycle. Before we started shooting, it was suggested that I aim for reinforcing the goal with the message: "Not recycling = Annoying". Or something to that effect. After finishing the piece, it didn't seem like the premise was reinforced by the action at all to me. Everybody was still thinking about littering, and the confrontation between Stanley and Soda can guy was a bit anticlimactic. Maybe Stanley should've said something to the guy while he was still eating... Plus, I had wanted the chip bag to be recycled, but I didn't think about it at the time, and, only a week later, I found out that chip bags aren't recyclable after all when doing another research project. In the end, I think the addition of text saved it in a way, but the text disappeared too quickly. It seemed more to me like the resolution was "Thank God he's gone; I was so sick of him," or something to that effect. But perhaps I'm overanalyzing things.

B_ I think the tension was clear, but the main conflict may not have been. Essentially, there are two conflicts: the main one, is that an annoying slouch doesn't recycle; the other conflict, is that he's bugging the heck out of Stanley, who is minding his business studying.

1. I could see all the parts except the ending scene clearly.
2. The part that would be difficult for me to recall is the stare-down, which was a last-shot addition. Stanley getting pissed off and the guy being sloppy and loud, I could easily retell. I can also retell the part when Stanley advises the guy to recycle, and that whole interaction happens to be my favorite part.

C_ The story doesn't quite feel complete because the ending clip seemed cut-off, and we don't see what happens to the guy after he recycles the can.

1. On a scale of 1 to 10. None of these scenes is functioning to its full potential
1. scene 1: 6
2. scene 2: 7
3. scene 3: 6
2. The strong elements are the clarity and levelness of the shots. There's also some shot variety and more coverage than in the last production I worked on. The weak elements are the sound and the continuity. In the first scene, the light's are all on in the cafe and the tables behind Stanley don't have anything we can see on them. After the first few takes, some of the lights went out, and in one shot, the crappy LED mini decided to come back on fully. And when shooting other takes later, an uncovered soda can shows up on the table behind Soda can guy in one of the shots, and a roll of paper towels appears on the table behind Stanley in two other shots. There is also a lack of cutaways. I wanted some cutaways to Stanley's readings, and I wanted the National Geographic magazines to be identifiable, but Travis covered them up with the book. I also wanted a cutaway to the recycling symbols on the recyclable wastes containers. 

D_ What I want to learn to do better is direct and lead.

1. It was my production, yet once again, I didn't have the balls to take the reigns when I should have. My talent did as much directing as I did (i.e. Travis) Rah and Aminah also ended up directing Josh, who told me later, I wasn't doing my job too well. Everything was already down the drain when I showed up on set without a shot list or printed script. Aminah freaked out and scolded me for not being prepared, and at the end of it all, everyone was pissed at me for "making them look bad," in front of the talent. I tried to tell them earlier that I knew exactly what kinds of shots I wanted, but unfortunately, it just doesn't work that way. I won't delve any deeper into the emotional hurricane of that day, but it got done, and we only went over by ten minutes. I know it doesn't reflect well on me, but considering that I didn't envision myself being able to do this at all (much less all in a one-day, four-hour shoot) I'd said I did pretty good. Anyway, I really have to work on that timing and confidence thing. One of the reasons I wasn't "prepared" was that I didn't force myself to make pre-production packet...and I know I was capable of doing it. I allowed myself to get stressed out about it. The cooperation among the four of us was well, though; and there weren't any excessive takes, so we got a reasonable amount of takes for each scene.
2. The only thing I can suggest to strengthen what was weak is to get myself together. I can't continue to make work this way, barely scraping by, and I certainly can't make good work this way. I also need to clarify my understanding of some of the technical aspects of shooting a film, adjusting and manipulating lighting, and structuring shots, especially in relation to the conceptual aspects.

Visting Artist: Chris Irick

Before I saw the artist, I thought it was going to be a man, but that's irrelevant. Chris Irick is a metalsmith, and she talked to us about her career as a metalsmith and the type of work she produces. She is also a teacher. She was featured in a series called Tributaries at the Metals Museum, which features contemporary artists the museum feels are making an impact in the arts.

Ms. Irick's family moved a lot when she was a child, and by her late teens she had moved twenty times and had lived in about 12 different states. The introductory piece on the slideshow was a charm bracelet she had made, with engravings of the States she had lived in on the plates. Ms. Irick told us that she grew up watching nature shows and the Discovery channel, which is how she developed an interest in adornment in other cultures and their jewelry. She also has metalworking in her blood, with both of her grandfathers having been metalworkers/artisans and her father as well. When Ms. Irick first took metal arts classes in a high school in Texas, she became very interested in formal techniques. At the age of nineteen, she became the first undergraduate student to be featured in the American Craft magazine. She attended a concept-driven graduate school in Massachusetts. While in college and grad school, Irick learned a to produce work using a number of techniques, including dye-forming, carved acrylic fabrication, raising, sawing and piercing materials, soldering, hand-carving, casting and fabrication.

Throughout her education, Irick retained her interest in adornment in other cultures and her fascination with nature, but her interests also diversified; she became interested in working with industrial and scientific subject matter. Ms. Irick mentioned that she prefers to work on small-scale projects, most of them small enough to be cupped in one's hand. But the techniques and detail that she uses in her work creates a deceptive sense of depth. Irick does a lot of perspective pieces, using tromp l'ouel and shifts in scale to create foreshortened interior elements and receding spaces, such as hallways and tunnels. Her influences include nature, industrial designs, decorative elements, scientific subjects-- engines, airplane models, turbines, early flying machines--, birds, Victorian hair jewelry, Victorian manhole covers, armor, industrial connections, manholes, isolated spaces, stairwells and maritime influences and images. A lot of the works she showed us exhibited the perspective techniques, using stairwells, tunnels and isolated spaces or maritime imagery. She also showed one piece, which she talked about combining the formal aspect of jewelry design--creating a lenticular--with the movement of a flock of birds.

I don't remember an exact quote, but one thing I remember Ms. Irick talking about was a couple of her college metals instructors. She spoke of what a big influence they had each had on her and that they were her mentors at some point. She said they also encouraged her to push herself and her work, and one of them has even published a book. That stood out to me because it reminded of the days in K-12 that there would be some essay contest of one sort or another that asked you to write about someone who influenced you or inspired you, or talk about a teacher who made a big impact in your life. It also made me wonder, do people suppose that every one who is successful has a teacher-mentor? And, have I had one and just didn't realize it, or will I get one someday?

All of Ms. Irick's work clearly exhibits her conceptual training and scientific/historical tendencies. The presentation was well-organized and informative, but the speaker herself got slightly boring to listen to at times because of her dry tone. Fortunately, all her work was interesting enough to keep us awake.

April 11th - Self-Critique

A) The intent was to represent two different sides of an argument without taking either side. The goal was to create a film that did not tell the viewer how to feel about an issue but to allow the viewer to determine his or her own stance.

1. On a scale of 1 to 10, I'd say the story is a 5. The issue we chose was compelling, but some of the footage is not as convincing, in terms of production design. It gets the message across, but I'm concerned whether or not the audience will pick up on it; whether or not the dialogue shots are compelling enough to make the viewers think about the political implications of the issue: abortion and women's rights.
2. The story left me thinking that we should have shot better footage. In my edit, the audience may be distracted from the overall objective because of my failure to clip out a residual segment of one clip I deleted and the cutting off, in one clip, of the first 3 quarters of a second of audio. Not having a score doesn't help me. It's shameful really; the emotional power of the film is diminished by unnecessary errors, lack of shot variety, and poor media management, in terms of labeling all the files, among other things.
3. I feel that the main character, Elizabeth, does reach a certain state of liberation. In the final scene, she has left her wedding ring on the counter, and she's wearing an outfit that shows her legs, with high-heeled shoes. She's less conservative, less of a pushover; she has chosen not to return to the pro-life demonstrator group, as seen in her leaving those protest signs behind.
4. The source of the main idea I started with was a result of my general introspectiveness, which was exacerbated in some respects once I came to college. Although, I may seem to view the world in black-and-white, I've long known that I do not. I can and will appreciate the 'grays in between' when I deem it relevant to my ideological schema. Anyway, the kernel of the story we ended up shooting was a perfect opportunity to work around a current, inflammatory debate--the abortion wars. I can say I somewhat passionate about the issue and women's rights to make their own decisions without the endangerment of their health lurking in the corner. And, even though I'm proud of my Christian values, I'm not an extremist, and I agree in certain instances that one cannot enforce morality.
5. After the film's completion, I saw that the theme shifted away from this woman's loneliness as the driving force behind the plot and towards a woman's empowerment. The confrontation with Jeff became the cynosure of the movie. The way he treated her when he found that consultation slip on her desk embodies the chauvinistic attitude that women don't have the right to make decisions about their own bodies.

B) I think the tension was very clear, but the main conflict doesn't seem to be apparent to anyone who's seen the movie so far...

1. I say the way that the scenes ended up being structured was different from my expectations, but I saw all the scenes clearly in my mind's eye. I think it's mainly a case of actuality failing to accommodate the 'artistic vision'.
2. The part I could easily and pleasurably and easily retell is the scene when Jeff confronts Elizabeth; it's not that I don't remember the other parts, but overall they were less impressing in terms of the emotional effect. Of course, as one who worked on the film, I'm particularly pleased with some of the shots in this scene. I can recall the other scenes as well, but I'm less interested in the way they turned out.

C) I don't think the execution brought out the full potential of the story, but that's more of a production issue rather than something inherently lacking in the script.

1. The story doesn't feel complete, because some of the sequences had to be taken out due to poor filming execution and production errors.
2. Scene 1 (Elizabeth's routine): 5  The shots are too similar; there's little variety in the shot structure. Only the first sequence has a close-up; all the other shots are medium. Also, there aren't a lot of different angles, so it gets kind of boring. Also, the title is a little distracting, and the crawl, is very distracting.
1. Scene 2 (Protest): 5  Mildly interesting. The weakest point is the protest itself; I couldn't find any audio of them protesting, so I had to use presence. Also, it's mostly a one shot deal, so, lack of variety is the culprit again. There's one other shot from a different angle but it's really quick
2. Scene 3 (Alone): 4  Boring. There's no audio for the extreme close-up of the hand, but I there should have been some presence to put in there; and once again, it's all shot from one angle, one distance (except the extreme close-up)
3. Scene 4 (Martha): 6 Okay. The outstanding problem here is my cut. The transition from a close-up of Martha beckoning Jeff to a medium 2S of the same action is redundant. It's also awkward because there's no usable coverage of Elizabeth's reaction to Martha's first statement. There's also no usable coverage of close-ups for Elizabeth's reaction to Martha's set up. There's no OTS either, so this weakens the scene overall.
4. Scene 5 (Jeff): 5  The scene starts out well, but then, when they get into the living room, there's a small reflection of the key light in the bottom left corner of the picture hanging over the chair. It's distracting, but unfortunately that's the best coverage of that point, and the scene would be incomplete without it. The cut to the next section is awkward b/c I took out the part when they sit down on the floor. From there on it's all right.
5. Scene 6 (Argument): 5  The "marker" sequence is boring because it's focused on Jeff. He looks away, but there's no cutaway to what he's looking at. Then, from his exit to the confrontation is an awkward jump cut, because the footage for the connecting section couldn't be used; our sound recordist's leg and the boom was in the corner of the shot. After that though, there are some nice-looking shots, but alas, only two OTS, and no usable coverage of Elizabeth's reaction face-on.
6. Scene 7 (Reveal): 4  The first part of the shot was blown out, so it looked slightly out-of-place even after color correction. Pretty much the same issue persists; not a lot of shot variety, and the distance between Elizabeth and the group isn't really established.
7. Scene 8 (A New Day): 7  One of the best sequences, probably. Although, the shot where the character exits is noticeably tilted, and there's no establishment of her routine, so we don't get a sense of how she's breaking it. On top of that, to make up for no establishing shot, I used an additive cross-dissolve for the transition, to make up for that and to hopefully show the passage of time.

D) What I want to learn to do better is manage my time so I can get tasks done and seem more reliable. I also want to learn how to coordinate all the aspects of pre-production, so that production design and shot list don't quibble with each other on set.

1. Obviously, what was not working was the production design and the shot execution--mainly the shot execution. I was in charge of production design, yet I didn't think or have the courage to say "We need to move this" or "We can't have this in the shot," etc. Plus I didn't have every aspect of it under my jurisdiction, so I didn't even get to have a definitive say in what our main character wore.
2. Next time, I'd like there to be decisiveness among the group. There was some sort of communication barrier, so each of us didn't always understand what the other was talking about, and sometimes people just plain got shot down. It didn't help that we were uncertain about whether we were doing something "right," particularly our "leader." Tension, bitterness on my part, and lack of preparation were our downfall. I wasn't always taken seriously either, even if I knew what I was talking about, because of my "wusiness" and my poor reputation. That is, my record suggested that I couldn't be trusted to get things done or to get them done on time. To an extent, feeling the projection of those doubts upon me, if only for a moment, caused me to turn it into a self-fulfilling prophecy. Enough about myself, though. The persons in charge of the shot list should have taken into account getting different takes, with different angles and distances, of scene segments. Also, the others weren't super confident with the equipment and they didn't want to trust me (of course, I didn't assert myself), so I took way too long to get set up. And the first shot took way too many takes; so, it's partly that they just didn't approach the idea "right" or well.