So… Week 3 and I already feel as though I’m being pushed into the deep end of a 7meter deep pool.. the thing is.. I like it. Yes I’m being pushed out of my comfort zone but what I’m gain2ing out of it is more practical than I could have imagined.

Last week we were divided in to groups with the brief a scripted scene with yet a different number of constraints: we were to film a maximum of 6 shots that we would then edit into a scene. What was so interesting about this experience is that, we had to  efficiently create a dynamic and emotive scene scene that effectively delivers the narrative elements. These shot constraints spark a quest to find creativity in other cinematic elements such as mis en scene, framing, edit style, setting etc.

This week we observed each student’s edit and it was amazing how, although the individuals had filmed the scenes together, their final edited produced varied, often greatly. Here were some instances that I admired:

– Aki chose to begin his scene with a CU panning shot of feet dancing. As the camera continued to pan the audience is introduced to an awkward girl on a couch sitting isolated in the left of the frame. What I love about this idea is that their did not need to be an immediate contextualizing wide shot that establish where the characters were. It’s great that Aki understood the scene as part of a larger whole – that is the film – therefore, undermining the necessity to contextualize.

– I also loved a different edit (same scene where a girl stood up observing the dance floor whilst the diegetic background music played). When the girl sat down on the chair, music simultaneously shifted from being diegetic to non-diegetic as it suddenly became louder to become a soundtrack. That inspired me to think more about how we can subtly shift between the diegetic and non-diegetic.

Something Robin said really stuck with me and that was that each of the two classes undertaking the same subject had already developed their own film culture in the space of three weeks (we observed the other classes work and found great differences – particularly that they were more creative with the story elements whilst we seems to push the creativity through our shots). That’s something I would love to research further as it will speak volumes about the way in which directors find themselves influenced by those around them.

Lastly, we were shown the original films that our edits were based on and this was fantastic. I was especially struck by the train scene that my team had filmed. There was a combined total of 4 shots in that scene. Meanwhile, we had ironically been worrying about only utilizing 6 shots. The main point of difference is in the pacing of the edits. Each shot lasted much longer than 2 or 3 of our shots combined. It really opened my eyes to the possibilities that can be achieved through pacing. The scene, in my opinion, was much more effective in its emotive nature as the lingering camera shots invited us to enter the world of the characters.

Weekly Epiphany: My weekly epiphany is inspired by the train scene from the film ‘Fizdanti’. Longer shots are NOT BAD!! In fact, they are incredibly effective when used appropriately. However, in saying this, as the long shot lingers on the actor, the actor needs to be captivating. As such, acting technique and camera shots can become an unstoppable duo 🙂