Masterchef is great. I hate cooking, but watching what these contestants come up with is incredible! I also watch it because a girl who went to my school, who was in year 12 when I was in year 11 is on it (Nicolette), so it’s fun watching someone I know.

But it really got me thinking about editing.

When the judges lift up the lids to specific ingredients such as chocolate, berries or meat, they take about 10 seconds explaining the rules of the challenge before yelling ‘your time starts now!’.

They literally have 20 seconds to find out the main ingredient, how much time they have, the overall basic constrains and work out their dish.

I know these chefs are all absolutely amazing, but it got me thinking if they actually had 20 seconds, or if editing is a major factor within this? Is it possible they actually had 2 minutes to decide what to make before running into the pantry to collect their ingredients? Maybe they have 10 minutes? 30 minutes? You never know! Never, in all this time watching the show, have I seen a contestant unsure of what to make after the judge’s yell ‘your time starts now’. So they all thought of a meal in 20 seconds and know exactly what they need from the pantry? I don’t know. The power the media has on audiences is amazing, television programs can be so deceiving!

 

Today in tutorial we went around the room and talked about the types and content of media we had consumed in the past week, and to chose one that stood out.

One person in the class spoke about the program ‘The Voice’ and how it’s completely staged and rigged, and you don’t get on the show unless you have a story. I am guilty of watching this program only because I love singing and watching people sing and perform, but I as a viewer have definitely realised that the show is a scam and people don’t get on unless they have a story.

His friend auditioned as a great singer, and when they asked her ‘what is your story?’, she had nothing major to report, only that she was a happy and healthy girl, and she didn’t get on the show.

I was listening to 774 the other morning on the way to work and a similar issue arose about The Voice television show. They were talking about how not only everyone has a story, but the whole program is actually about the judges. It’s a way for them to make a comeback into the industry and gain more publicity. The contestants are just a small fraction of the show, it’s all about the judges. I totally see this now! I didn’t really so much before, but after watching Sunday night’s episode I couldn’t stop thinking about it and realising it!

The most cringe parts of the show are when the judges talk about what it’s like to be in the industry, or talk about the strengths of the other judges. It’s so lame and scripted I can’t even watch it. They try to make it so intense and dramatic when it’s just not at all, it’s just pathetic I think! I like the judges don’t get me wrong and as I said before I’m a fan of the show, but these parts I just can’t watch.

 

A bit about my interviewee….

 

Mark is my dad’s sisters husband, so my uncle, who as mentioned previously is a film producer. He and his wife and two children live in Adelaide, where he has his studio.

In 2000, Mark was the producer of Paul Cox’s “Innocence”, which he won many awards for including Best Film, If Awards 2000, Australia. In 2005, he teamed up with Paul Cox again and produced ‘Human Touch’. In 2012, he produced a television short series called ‘Race to London’, which followed the journey of aspiring Australians determined to qualify for that years Olympics in London.

In 2015, Mark’s film ‘Force of Destiny’ opened the Melbourne International Film Festival in June. I was lucky enough to attend this amazing event as one of his guests, meaning that I got to walk the red carpet, get photos taken, get front row screening of the film, meet the stars and director of the film (Paul Cox) and just basically get VIP treatment (and refreshments!). The film itself was amazing.

I chose to interview Mark because he has so much incredible knowledge with films. The way he interprets them and understands them is of a completely different level to anyone I know, so I thought it would be so interesting to get his opinions on the film ‘The Interview’. Even though he hadn’t seen the film, he was easily able to answer the questions just on a more basic level, and still justify his believes, providing many great examples and evidence through his knowledge in historic cinema

 

.

Dear future self….

By the completion of my degree, I want to be able to do/be better at / know/ achieve:

1. Excellent skills in editing using premiere
2. Using sound effects, creating best quality sound
3. Better at co-operative skills
4. I want to have done an overseas exchange
5. I want to have met people in the industry already, gained connections
6. I want to have done some acting
7. Become super tech-savy
8. Some experience in radio

For the video essay, I interviewed my uncle Mark – a film producer based in Adelaide. He has always been one of my inspirations with regard to the work he does. Initially I wanted to do the interview over skype, and set up a camera just left of the computer and film the interview to get both visual and audio for the video essay, however he was very busy so only had time for a phone call. I was a bit rushed myself so only had time to film the actual phone whilst it was on speaker. This method still worked well, and the sound was clear enough to hear exactly what he was saying.

Essentially these were the questions I asked Mark in relation to The Interview film.

• From a cinematic and academic perspective what are your thoughts on this movie?
• Do you think the style/stylistic approaches override the overall ideology of the film and if so do you think this is problematic?

Unfortunately, he hadn’t actually seen the film. I originally thought this was problematic at the beginning of the interview however once he began talking and was on a role, it really didn’t matter, because he still managed to answer the questions just not in relation to the interview, more so in these types of films in general and cultural differences/interpretations in films.

I was overall happy with Mark’s interview, he answered the questions really well (as expected) and definitely footage we will use for our video essay.

About two hours into today’s class, we previewed our rough audio essay cut to Louise. Into the first 5 seconds, Louise immediately commented on the pace of speaking in the monologue. Ryan had stylistically chosen this as a technique he aimed to achieve inspired by podcasts he listens to himself.

We included this skit: (Link) As a comedic asset to our audio. However, although it was completely in the context of trigger warnings, the specific place where it is located in the rough cut (directly following the monologue) was quiet out of context. It’s confusing as to who is talking and Louise couldn’t tell it was a skit, she was confused. She suggested that we have a mini intro to the skit, with something along the lines of ‘there has even been parodies of the ridiculousness of trigger warnings…’ then have the skit. This makes it clearer. Louise also suggested breaking up the monologue throughout the entire essay, rather than all at the start – which I believe it a great idea. It would keep the essay flowing better.

 

Today in class the rough cuts for our PB4 audio essays were due. Ryan is voluntarily assigned to the role of official audio editor, so he is in charge of this process. The plan was he was going to show us what he had come up with from all our footage and to then edit it properly as a group in class. Unfortunately, a few people (including me) in the group forgot to give him our footage (so I forgot to give him the interview I did with Hannah) so he didn’t have enough time to properly create exactly what he had in mind. So we didn’t even get to preview it until Louise came over and listened to it – so this was the first time we had all heard it all together as well. This meant we didn’t have time to discuss as a group what could be better, or to edit it together.

But we will get this done in our next meeting for sure, just weren’t able to during this lesson.

At the beginning of tutorial this week we held the discussion of internships and different types of areas people within the class are interested in. It was actually very interesting to hear this as we are ultimately all doing this course to find our place!

Some of the areas that were discussed included:

• Video production
• Radio
• Music journalism
• Radio
• Film and TV
• Creative agency
• Online magazines

I am extremely keen to complete an internship in the film and television area as that it what I am most interested in and it’s where I can definitely see myself working in the future. I don’t exactly know what just now, but I know it’s a good start.

Once we had each thought about our specific areas, we had to generate ideas as to how we would find internships. Louise stated that the most important thing to do before anything is research. If I am interested in film and TV, I need to ook speicifcally at production companies at the end of each film or show I watch, and get in contact with them. BUT before this, I need to research. I need to find out everything about this specific production company (or whatever company it ends up being) so show that I am knowledgeable, and most of all I genuinely want an internship there and I am super keen (to simply put it).

I completely agree with this 1005. There would be nothing worse (I can imagine) than not knowing anything, or even just knowing the basics, of a specific place, company or whatever it may be that you are interested to work in/ have any connection to.  It could come across as not very enthusiastic and quite challenging for the people hiring (e.g.).

So… RESEARCH RESEARCH RESEARCH !!!

Yesterday at our PB4 meeting we were so productive – we got virtually all our audio complete. We each did a mini introduction for our interviewee’s interview, and Ryan recorded the monologue. Unfortunately, it wasn’t until the meeting had finished and we were all at home when we realised that Jason and I’s recordings were both too loud and the frequency caused the audio to be crackly and unclear. This meant we had to re-record. So today in tutorial we found a quiet, empty room on level 9 and re-recorded our mini sections. It was fine, it only took roughly 15 minutes to complete. I also had to record the disclaimer section to include in the end of our essay, which took a while considering I had to completely read out everybody’s email address!

In today’s meeting, we had aimed to complete majority, if not all of our audio. This was quite successful as all we had to do was introduce our interviewees seeing as the dialogue would predominately consist of the interviews.

Ryan took three takes before being happy with the sound of his 1 minute monologue where he would introduce the entire essay in a quirky, matter of fact way.

The day as a whole was a success as we got through exactly what we planned.

The room in which we booked was located in building 9 and it kept in sound really well, without echoes and gave our dialogue the clarity it needed.

Overall this process took about 1 hour.