Overall, I am under the impression that my presentation went quite well. No doubt, a large portion of this success was due to the trusty chair I was able to sit on whilst speaking (I don’t know why this gave me so much comfort but it really did). Nevertheless, I felt confident in my pitch’s delivery and equally in its response.

Initially, the idea of presenting daunted me due to my screenplay’s comedic kick and tonality. Fearful mostly of my jokes falling flat, and that the general vision of my screenplay would not be properly communicated, I was in absolute delight when the class laughed at my planned moments of comedic tension and song choice. Further, the practice of having to ‘pitch’ was beneficial as it allowed for my idea to become simplified in its communication to both my audience and myself. Whilst writing, a technical I struggle with most is the translation from inner vision to literature. Concerned with illustrating every aspect of my imagination, (the color of the baby’s eyes, the books my protagonist reads etc.), the three-minute pitch refocused me on my screenplay’s fundamental intent: originality, simplicity and entertainment. Thus, the pitch enabled to test my script first the first time on an audience, whilst simultaneously reminding me of my core values and objectives.

Interestingly, the feedback given to me by Smiljana Glisovi and Dylan Murphy both regarded the practicality of my screenplay. I interpret this as a good sign, as it meant that my concept was delivered strong enough that Smiljana and Dylan could already see imagery within their minds, and add to it what they thought would be visually beneficial. Coincidently, Smiljana feedback centered on my approach to scene transitions, which happened to be the area I was most skeptical of in my script. Due to the compartmentalized nature of my screenplay, I have always been dubious of how to achieve transitional flow. Thus, I drew a lot of inspiration from director Edgar Wright (Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz), due to Wright’s utilization of cinema’s constraints that push the very nature of its boundaries. Wright is famous for his quick cuts and hyperbolic infused actions that instead of simply telling us about his characters and their arc; show us. Ultimately, embodying a notion given by Claudia Sternberg in her text ‘Written for the Screen: The American Motion-Picture Screenplay as Text’ (1997) where she states that ‘screenplay imagery generally assumes the form of simple, easily decodable constructions’ (Sternberg, p81).

Smilljana ultimately suggested that my emphasis on scene transitions could take away from the concept of my protagonist ‘being’, both emotionally and physically, in transit. This was a really solid point to hear, as it meant that my overlying theme of transition and flux was successfully communicated in my pitch. Further, Dylan’s suggestion made conceptual sense meaning that my screenplay was able to become more developed in its practice. In retrospect, Dylan’s advice was quite coincidental as a large part of ‘part a’ within this assignment focused on my approach to scene transition. Considering now I am tempted to throw out the entirety of scene transitions, it really demonstrates the serendipitous and progressive way a creative practice works. Where, one minute you’re putting effort into what you think is one of the most significant aspects of the text, and the next minute that element is thrown out the window due to the nature creativity and its liberalism.

Further, Dylan introduced me to the notion of ‘worldship’ in his feedback. Addressing the nature of my protagonist’s internal surroundings and her relationship to the world outside of her own experience. This granted me a form on insight as I had previously been so concentrated on my protagonist and her specific story that I rejected to acknowledge the realities of her surrounding, and thus overall narrative. As a significant theme within my script is the idea of isolation, stagnation, and transformation, it focused heavily on the inner turmoil of the protagonist, failing to see that her content was – like it is in life – a consequent of her context.

WORD COUNT: 809

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Sternberg, C (1997) ‘Written for the Screen: The American Motion Picture Screenplay as Text’, Tübingen: Stauffenburg, p81