In the tute we screened a short film called Rolling – a film made in Film-TV1 a few years ago.  In 300 words or less describe what you thought worked or didn’t. At this stage we don’t expect you to have a great deal of film knowledge or language. Don’t be afraid to use your own words. Things you could talk about – script, casting, timing, camera movement, location. You may not remember much detail, if so, it could be helpful to talk about your first impressions, after all this is what most of us are left with after one viewing.

Personally, I wasn’t a big fan of Rolling.  I felt its biggest problem was the lack of plot direction, along with characters who displayed both little emotion and personal development.  The story seemed like a half-hearted attempt at a romantic comedy, however it was neither romantic nor comedic; instead an awkward in-between which left me, as an audience member, confused.

The film revolves around a young man who while attempting to talk to his muse, a young attendant who works at the local supermarket, nervously tries to initiate conversation with her, stumbling over his words with her and somehow manages to purchase fifty extra large packs of toilet paper; a nice comedic touch, but that’s about as bizarre the film (or at least its script) gets.  The film should have expanded on this gag, and at the very least, incorporated more humour into the film, so that its genre was more defined and didn’t lack emotions.  Alternatively, the film could have been situated in a flower shop, of something of the kind, and play up the romantic interest in the film, however the two leads had no chemistry between them, so perhaps the comedic route was the way to go.  It’s hard to shift the blame solely to either screenwriters or actors, but both elements refused to gel as one.

In addition, the film’s locations, while generically appropriate, simply felt lifeless – much like the film itself.  Camera angles and shot selections were awkward, and emphasised the obvious height difference between the leading couple.

Select from one of the readings, up to but not including Week 5, and briefly describe two points that you have taken from it. Points that excite you, something that was completely new to you. 

I enjoyed Rowan Ayers’ piece on Sound Recording, which stressed the importance of sound and sound quality, bringing unwanted background noise to attention, as he raised the point that “…the human ear is selective.  It can focus on one sounds source and reject other noises, but the microphone cannot.  It will pick up every sound within its range, even some which your ears may not have noticed”, demonstrating the importance of sound recording while on a shoot, and then being incredibly selective as to what sounds you want, or don’t want throughout your scene.

After exploring Cinema Verité documentary last week in Cinema Studies, Stanley Alten’s reading on Creating the Sound Design was also interesting, discussing how sound recording could be used and manipulated in the observational form of documentary, simply by selecting different microphones for varying effects, despite the ‘truthfulness’ intended to be conveyed in cinema verité.