PHOTOJOURNALISM: ‘Relationship’ by Zackary Drucker and Rhys Ernst

josiemortimer Leave a Comment

In our first week of class we looked at the photojournalist Eve Arnold’s work, in which was then used as inspiration for our own photography activity. Arnold’s photographs reflect the understanding that she does not see the ordinary nor the extraordinary. What she photographs is simply everyday life, no matter how spectacular they may seem to the rest of us viewing and not having experienced any of what is pictured.

Arnold’s way of viewing photography, and photojournalism as a broader picture, reminds me of an article that I read awhile back that was promoting a book called Relationship by Zackary Drucker and Rhys Ernst. The book is a photo diary that encapsulates intimate photos, memories and moments of two people who are transitioning genders together – Zackary Drucker from male to female and Rhys Ernst from female to male – during the period of their six year relationship. The photographs of their relationship and transitions were raw, upfront and truly intimate. To me, these images are reflective of how Arnold photographs people in a level of intimacy yet unknowingness, as the audience do not personally know the person in the photograph.

©Zackary Drucker & Rhys Ernst - Relationship

This one photograph of Zackary Drucker is one that particularly stood out to me in the context of the whole book. It is a closer look at her, both literally and figuratively. Although this is simply an image of Drucker looking into the mirror, it has far deeper connotations that can be interpreted along with it by each individual. The morphing of the mirror is what attracted me to the photograph, and is a truly intriguing element that is so simplistic and unconventional as a portrait of someone. It is a deeply raw photograph of Drucker analysing herself.

According to Amazon, the book includes photos, video stills, letters and ephemera. This form of documentation that Drucker and Ernst chose is perfect for the context of their relationship and what they aim to show. These artefacts emphasise and display the intimacy of their relationship and the truth of both of their transitions. The contents of this book are snippets of these two people’s lives that they shared together cannot be displayed through film or audio alone.

Drucker and Ernst chose the perfect platform in which to document and display these years of their lives together. The photographs allow for the audience to witness the changes they experience in their transitions, while displaying their relationship and love for one another. While, the letters only further that intimacy and connection between the two for the audience to experience.

©Zackary Drucker & Rhys Ernst - Relationship

This analysis of the book Relationship is aimed to discuss and display how the particular platform that Zackary Drucker and Rhys Ernst chose for the documentation of this time in their lives was explicitly emotive, reflective and worked to capture an unembellished look at their relationship that they wished to portray. This platform worked in a far more intimate way than any other platform could have shown. The book provided raw intimacy and their connection, despite the fact that you are unable to see these two people move or hear them speak.

F for Fake: Film Reflection

josiemortimer Leave a Comment

F for Fake (1973), directed by Orson Welles, is a film about many things, but as stated many times throughout the film, it is mostly a film about trickery and fraud. This was my ever first encounter with an Orson Welles film, so I really had no expectations or understandings about what I was going to watch as I went into the viewing. Although, I was impressed (but also very confused) with the concept. Being part-fiction and part-non-fiction, F for Fake intends to clarify yet confuse – nothing is really true.

Orson Welles in F for Fake (1973)

Magic was a common theme throughout the film that related to the concepts of trickery and fraud. From the very the beginning, Orson Welles stars not only as the narrator, but also a magician that’s main intent is to deceive – in which he succeeds doing so. The way in which he chooses his words and distracts you with his tricks, Welles has you believing that he will tell the truth for the entirety of the film, when in fact there is a time restriction on the truth-telling in this story. To emphasise a truthful nature of the film, those in the film star as themselves, which could be perceived as a documentary. Also, it is clear that they are not hiding the fact that it is a non-fictitious film, as the cameras can occasionally and purposely be seen in the background. So the question is, is F for Fake a documentary or not?The initial, and truthful, part of F for Fake follows Elmyr de Hory’s life and career as an art forger, and the concept of art forgery as a whole. This part was interesting, but admittedly, it did make me want to ‘nod off’ for a bit. Therefore, for myself in particular, this section very much blurred the line to as where that the truth in the film ends and the fraud begins, as the story of Oja Kodar and Pablo Picasso begins.

The film as a whole resembles fraud and trickery, whether that be the subject at hand or the audience believing what they’re listening to is the truth when it is not. In this moment when Welles admits to the audience that he has been lying to everyone for the past 10 minutes, it brings on a sense of self awareness. The audience now understands that it was so easy for one to listen to a story in such a way and gullibly believe the contents of it. Despite the film focusing on the masters of trickery and fraud (i.e. Elmyr de Hory), Welles (and the other creators of the film) prove themselves to be the true masters of trickery.

My overall conclusion to as whether or not this film is a documentary is that it is. Despite the fact that Orson Welles deliberately lies about facts he’s putting forth, he also pre-warns you that he will be lying at some point. This film is about deception and not being able to tell when you’re being deceived – everything in this film is truthful, to a degree.

REAL TO REEL: Intentions, Aims, Desires

josiemortimer Leave a Comment

For my studio 5 subject I have chosen Rohan Sprong’s class Real to Reel. From partaking in this class, I expect to obtain a wide range of skills through transmedia platforms while advancing and deepening my knowledge behind the usage of different medias by looking at various professionals, artists and creators and how they use their chosen platorms. In this studio, I am looking forward to having the freedom to use a diverse range of media platforms in order to create a final non-fictitious piece.

By the time I complete this studio, my aim is to have broadened and deepened my practical capabilities in various aspects of media-making, such as photography, radio and film. I intend to not restrict myself to one particular medium in this process, this expanding my practical skillset, with an accompanying understanding of what platform would work best in a certain situation and intention of the final project.

As I generally work in groups in my other projects, I think it would be interesting, yet a lot more difficult in some ways, to work by myself. There are various pros and cons to working by yourself or in a group, and as all my other studios have required group work, right now I want to set the challenge for myself to complete the final project independently. Although, this may not happen in the end by the demanding nature of this project, the intentions of working individually are there. It will allow me to think independently and decide on a topic and master a platform and the whole process by myself.

This studio is like no other I’ve partaken in before. From my understanding, freedom and individual thinking seem to be at the basis of the course, as it forces you to get out of your comfort zone in regard to your own capabilities.

ASSESSMENT #4: HOW DO WE MAKE DOCUMENTARY THAT IS BOTH POLITICAL AND POETIC?

josiemortimer Leave a Comment

It is important to recognise and understand that all documentaries are inherently political, all containing some sort of bias. The intention of putting forth the topic into the world of political discussion and debate is a statement alone. Thus, we move on to making these ‘political documentaries’ poetic. From my own experimentation and observation of my classmates documentaries, to make something poetic really means for it to be meaningful, experimental and out-of-the-box with its execution, encouraging the audience to process, understand and make an individual and unique connection with the film. Throughout this semester of the Art of Persuasion, I have viewed and created many of these experimental documentaries that fight against the boundaries of traditional documentary filmmaking in order to spur a poetic response to political conversation. Therefore, what I have gathered, is that for a film to be both political and poetic, the topic is generally political and the execution is poetic. In order to understand this, I will discuss the three films I have created this semester in regard to their political and poetic attributes.

 

For the first example I will discuss is the latest film that I have created with Alex: Disciples, in which puts forth a social critique of people and their obsession with celebrities, making the bold statement of insinuating that they are like religious figures. In this documentary, we have broken traditional conventions by using only archival footage, no voice-overs, no interviews, and follows the horror genre, in which makes the audience view the film less like a documentary, resulting in being more digestible for many. The film begins with beautiful images of celebrities and religious (catholic/christian) symbolism – in reference to the 2018 Met Gala theme of ‘Heavenly Bodies’ – which is montaged in a way of grace, influenced by stained-glass windows, with an overlay of a catholic hymn to intensify this religious representation and beauty. Soon, the film turns sour, and this change is obvious. The colours turn darker, with more hints of red – this is where the ‘horror’ genre is explicit. Screams are introduced and the celebrities, fans and religious paraphernalia turns evil and grotesque.This shift intends to critique the toxicity of out obsession, connection and devotion to what we believe to be ‘higher’ figures – those of Beyoncé, Lady Gaga, Kanye West – who influence our views, morals and beliefs. This film focuses on using editing to create a strong poetic point of the destructive nature of the celebrity-obsessed nature that is embedded in our society. We intended for this altered tone to be obvious and jarring, in order to display the toxicity of these fanatic’s obsessions with celebrities. Through this poetic montage and heavenly hymn, this documentary poetically exhibits this political and social concern.

 

In our current political climate, there is a debate around whether or not people must explicitly say ‘yes’ before engaging in sexual activities. Differentiating itself from this particular debate, kNOw, one of the two documentaries that Gaby, Tiahne and I created, discusses consent and whether or not the power of ‘no’ really exists. To some, ‘no’ is sexualised, looked over, or people may just not have the power or ability to say they do not want to engage in these activities. The film is very experimental in the way it displays consent through both visuals and audio – both of which were produced by us (except the soundtrack). By replacing bodily parts with fruits, I believe that it allows for the content to be more accepted, though not misunderstood. With the word ‘no’ being voiced in various ways – some stern, some quiet, some sexualised – over the top of these images, it allows the audience to not misinterpret the meaning of the film, thus it becomes poetic. This film may be confronting to some, but it appeals to a wider audience through it’s colour and aesthetic, which thus allows us to spread our message further.

 

Finally, I would like to discuss Organ Harvesting, for a lack of creative thinking of titles. The documentary focuses on organ harvesting as an ongoing issue, using China’s Falun Gong as a case study. We have used a human rights speech by Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein from the United Nations to juxtapose the visuals and quotes that discuss organ harvesting. This helps to emphasise the idea that we have rose-coloured glasses over our eyes in the way we view the world, and that the human rights we experience are not implemented in other parts of the world where people are still suffering from these basic human rights of keeping their own organs. This documentary is very open about it’s thoughts on organ harvesting by using graphic images of human and animal insides. The ending of the film, where the meat is being packaged in sync with the voice over about human rights, is very effective in showing that with organ harvesting we are being treated like animals in the meat industry and our body parts are disposable to many. This poetic intentional sync of the words and the motion of this shot enforces a heightened and solidified political meaning.

 

I only mentioned the films that I have created as I know the meaning, creative process and the poetic and political nature in greater depth. Therefore, I’d like to reiterate that through these documentaries’ meaningful and experimental nature, they have been able to be simultaneously political and poetic in their topic and execution. The Art of Persuasion has taught me that through breaking traditional documentary conventions, experimenting and strong political beliefs, this is how we are able to create documentaries that are both political and poetic.

Assessment #2: Produce Propaganda

josiemortimer Leave a Comment

WHAT IS WRONG WITH SIMPLY OBSERVING THE WORLD?

To that extremely broad question that I have been posed with, I will retaliate with asking why would one want to? There is so much room for change in the world, it is pointless to simply document rather than persuade. It is vital for the evolution of society to put forth, share and engage with various ideas. There is a particular importance to not be impartial and to simply ‘observe’ in documentary, as it has far more power than just documenting and retelling events exactly as they have happened. In saying this, I would also like to question the legitimacy of whether or not one is capable of only being able to observe, when everything that one does has a cause-and-effect.

CAUTION: USE PERSUASIVELY

Documentary is an art form that is capable of being both poetic and political, encouraging manipulation and persuasion. Film is an influential tool that has been at the forefront of many revolutions and political turmoil used to guide people in a certain direction and to enforce change and revolution upon discontent societies. As Nichols notes, “cinema and revolution go hand in hand” (p.217). The most notable use of film to create propaganda would be the Soviet Union and the Russian Revolution in 1917. Sergei Eisenstein’s film Battleship Potemkin (1925) would not typically be classified as a documentary as it is a narrative film, although I would strongly argue that it, in fact, is a documentary through the way it has documented and commentated on a period of political upheaval in Russia and how it was used to influence  change in the country’s political situation. Eisenstein’s sequence of the three lions as they rise would be my definition of creating propaganda, subtly using these shots to spur emotion amongst the intended audience and encourage them to rise up against Tsarist autocracy.

“[Documentaries] attempt to act, to intervene – whether as gut-level calls to immediate, localised action or as more cerebral essays in long-term, global analysis” (Waugh, p.5).

N.B: PROPAGANDA IS STRONGLY ENCOURAGED

Without documentaries I can say with conviction that there would be a larger conservative populous than there currently is now. Post-Russian Revolution, “activists on the left have continued to use the documentary medium to intervene wherever they have been challenging the inherited structures of social domination” (Waugh, p.4), and these documentaries have helped to bring attention to many human rights issues we experience today, even in first world countries, such as the debates around gender and race. To stay observant in these situations would thus mean that we as individuals and a society would not progress and change would not occur. Thus, uncomfortable social, political and economic situations would stay the same or progressively worsen.

Similar to Battleship Potemkin, Toomelah (2011), directed by Ivan Sen, is not explicitly a documentary in the conventional generic sense of the word, though its ‘fictional’ aspect does work as a tool to shine light onto many issues within Indigenous communities and the loss of Indigenous culture through the history of Australia. The use of nonprofessional actors that live as a part of the community on the mission and whom know Ivan Sen on a personal level assist to create an intimate portrait that has the same effects of that of a generic and traditional documentary. The characters in Toomelah are humanised and are used to connect the audience with them, as they go on a journey through day-to-day activities on the mission at Toomelah. This film almost seems observant, as it follows Daniel, but is clearly portraying a bias.

OBSERVATIONAL DOCUMENTARY IS NOT APOLITICAL

I will now reiterate the fact that, as humans, it is inherently impossible for us to simply observe the world. We as citizens in society are naturally inclined to feel bias towards about various subjects based on the political, social and economic environment that we are situated in. Observational documentary believes it is something that it isn’t, classifying itself as impartial and working as a ‘fly-on-the-wall’. Though observational documentary may not interfere with the events that are occurring or may not contain explicitly biased points or views, such as talking heads, when film is constructed, such as a documentary, it is incapable of being purely observational. The documentary’s existence alone is making a statement. By choosing a particular topic, the filmmaker is deeming it an important subject that is worthy of insight and discussion. Particularly when editing, it is difficult to stay unbiased and apolitical. Every clip that is used, every clip that isn’t used and every cut that is made is done for a reason and is therefore inadvertently biased.

Whether it is intentional or not, people’s political opinions will seep into every action that they take and everything that they make, and documentary is no exception. Documentary is an art form thats whole existence is based on creating discussion, generating ideas and encouraging revolutions. To believe that one is able to simply observe the world without partaking in any of the discussion and action is naive. When we live diverse societies where major changes need to be made, why simply observe when you can revolt?

 

REFERENCES

Battleship Potemkin (1925) dir. Sergei Eisentein [film] Soviet Union: Goskino

Nichols, B. (2010) Introduction to Documentary, Bloomington: Indiana University press

Toomelah (2011) dir. Ivan Sen [film] Australia: Bunya Productions

Waugh, T. (2011) Right to Play Oneself: Looking Back on Documentary Film, University of Minnesota Press

Assessment #1: Poetically Political

josiemortimer Leave a Comment

Can something be both political and poetic?

At first thought, the characteristics surrounding politics that may come into mind might be Canberra, suits, white men, and impregnating media advisors. Believe it or not, this is really not the be-all and end-all of politics and political discussion – rather they spur debates around topics ranging from sex work to euthanasia. Although politics may give off the impersonation of being quite dry and dense, it is possible, and very much encouraged, to use politics and poetics in the same sentence – take Sergei Eisenstein for instance.

In Eisenstein’s 1925 film Battleship Potemkin, he documents an important time in the Soviet Union’s political history through a fictional narrative. The ‘Odessa Steps’ scene is one of his most recognised sequences for his focus on editing to create tension and emphasise the horror that the government soldiers are inflicting. Eisenstein creates such an emotive piece, which was used as propaganda and encouragement for the Russian Revolution. This scene validates that something is able to be simultaneously political and poetic. The focus on editing in this sequence and the way it has produced a tightened emotion in the audience in a biased perspective is one of my inspirations for assessment #3.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laJ_1P-Py2k

 

What is the role of formal experimentation in political documentary?

Formal experimentation in political documentaries allow for the filmmaker to explore different avenues in which they can use to emphasise the statement that they are putting forth. By using unconventional techniques in creating a documentary, it draws in attention from the audience, providing them with not only a greater interest in the topic, but a new way of understanding it.

Experimental films focusing on editing are a major inspiration to my work as a filmmaker. The Illustrated Auschwitz (1991) by Jackie Farkas is an unconventional documentary on a holocaust-survivor. While a woman tells her experience of Auschwitz, Farkas excludes any use of talking heads – instead she incorporates footage of The Wizard of Oz. The use of The Wizard of Oz as a reference in her film is very powerful, as it the film itself refers to and is a product of the happenings of World War II. Although talking heads are used to create intimacy within an interview, Farkas has ignored this and used powerful shots from this classic in order to emphasise what the woman is saying and the impact it has left.

REFERENCES

Battleship Potemkin (1925), dir. Sergei Eisenstein

The Illustrated Auschwitz (1991), dir. Jackie Farkas

“Team Work Makes the Dream Work” – Dream Team, 2017

josiemortimer Leave a Comment

Semester two has now been completed, which means that This Is Serial has come to an end. While feeling slightly nostalgic of everything I’ve experienced in my first ever Media studio, whether these have been positive or negative experiences, I’ve realised that I’ve learnt a whole lot from every hurdle my team and I have jumped in the creation of a collaborative web serial.

The Good:

After the pilot, there was really no way to go but up. In saying this, I still believe that we exceeded ourselves and have come such a long way since that disaster. The best thing we did was to critique ourselves as much as we did – this is not necessarily discourage us, but we realised the wrong in our ways. Personally, I believe that our main improvement in the whole project was understanding our roles and sticking to them. Not doing this in the pilot was a major setback for us, and doing so made the whole production run smoothly (especially with communicating with the cast members). We worked on pre-production a lot more, which was far more effective than we realised, and we took our time to create.

It was really interesting and fun to work with outside cast whom we had no previous contact with. They were very dedicated in the project and were efficient with their roles. I believe it also helped them a lot to have Heidi, one of our writers, on set, as she helped them get to know their roles and get into character before shoots. Most of all, from this experience, I now understand how to communicate properly with a professional cast on and off set, which will help me for any future film projects.

During this experience I really got to know my role as a First Assistant Director. I had searched my role in advance to understand what it really entailed, and I believe that I pulled through when it came to organising schedules with cast and crew. I made sure that people were doing their job on set and working efficiently, in which most days we finished many hours early than what the call sheet had inscribed.

The Bad:

I would have to say that the biggest issue we overcame during pre-production would be securing our locations. These rooms weren’t actually finalised when we were shooting, which really was not our fault as we had sent out a booking for the room over a week in advance to our first shoot day. On the day of the shoot – 1.5 hours before the cast were to arrive – Robin helped us out in taking our claim on the room, asking for confirmation and affirmation from the professors in the area, whom gave us the O.K. In regard to organising locations, we were really lucky to have the help Robin and his expertise and I don’t want to think about where we would’ve been without his help in this situation.

When shooting, I believe that we should have stuck to the shot list more accurately and used more advance camera movement and angles to emphasise humour, rather than just still over-the-shoulder shots. A few shots were also out-of focus and not much consideration was taken into them as needed. Although, this was not my department so I really did not have a say in it (but Hazel was great on camera, and Beth was an amazing director), I do believe that this could have made the show more humorous in the way we were intending. Not sticking to the shot list also created difficulties in my job as First AD and for the actors whom had prepared to film certain scenes. One scene was actually cut out all together because it did not seem necessary, but the actors were already set to shoot that scene and thus meant that their call time did not need to be as early or late as it was. Next time, as a First AD, I will need to encourage the director that we should film all the scenes we have prepared and take our time doing so to perfect them, and we will then decide whether or not to use them when we get to post-production.

While discussing post-production, I also believe that this process was a little rushed. Though the editors have done a great job in the time frame that they completed the project, I believe that small details, such as colour grading, could have taken place if the editing process had of been started before we had completed filming. In saying this, we have improved greatly in our time management since completing our pilot, and our editing is far better than it was in the pilot – there were far less mishaps.

The Dream Team:

I can honestly say that I feel accomplished after these past thirteen weeks in This Is Studio. I’ve been apart of the creation of two webisodes for Ghastly Solutions and I’ve met some incredible and talented friends in the process. I’ve gotten to work in professional environment with passionate people and experience many up-hill battles in which has made me confident that I’ve gained knowledge about my role, other roles, and the whole pre-production and shooting process of a web serial.

*this photo is missing Hazel Ilagan and Dalena Aradmo

Collaboration Nation: Working With a Dream Team

josiemortimer Leave a Comment

Collaboration has been a large part of our studio: whether this be with the writers, actors or our media team members. In the completion of two ‘webisodes’, I believe that my team and I have greatly succeeded in working together and creating this web serial, Ghastly Solutions.

 

The Writers:

We really did not have any qualms with the writers – we asked for their scripts by a certain date and they provided. Essentially, we understood that this was their creative section of the web serial that they would want and need to complete without us, and we respected that. When we were all trying to decide what the web serial should be about (back when we were sending prompts, etc.) and there were massive communication issues between the media and writing studios, we had gotten the idea into our head that the writers may be difficult to work with, but we were wrong. Whether or not my Dream Team just got the luck of the draw, but our writers were excellent – both the media crew and the cast really enjoyed the scripts.

Even though we only filmed two out of four of the scrips, each of the four writers were significantly involved in the production of the web serial one way or another. After we collected the scripts and decided to at least complete the first two – Anthony and Mack’s scripts – we started to film. Having to drop the actor we had organised to play Duncan, we asked Monty (one of the other writers) to play the part, as he did in the first episode. It was very useful that he did, as he was one of the creators of the characters and knew exactly how to play him.

Heidi, another one of the writers, was excellent throughout the whole process. She really wanted to be there for every moment of its creation, and we really appreciated this and she was a massive help to us. Being the one of the writers who created these characters and understood them, it was really useful for her to be there for everything cast-orientated. She was there to help decide on the actors for the cast, to help out and guide the actors in the table read, and she was there for the shoot days to help the actors get into their roles and rehearse their lines with them. While everyone was busy on set, she was a really useful asset to us, and we were very grateful for her enthusiasm and productivity in the production.

The Cast:

This was my first time ever working with a cast that I didn’t previously know or were just interviewing. In past projects, I’ve only ever worked with friends who would act in music videos or short films I made in high school or I’ve interviewed strangers for an informational piece. As first assistant director, I was the person whom communicated directly with the actors, emailing them and letting them know information about the serial, including organising availabilities and writing up call sheets and organising. As communication with cast members is a large part of my job as a first assistant director, this has been a very valuable experience for me to work directly with them.

As I mentioned in a previous post, I personally had to let go of one of our actors as his availabilities were uncertain and we didn’t have enough time to be too flexible. It was very unfortunate that we had to let him go, but on a positive note it was an experience that I believe was very important for me to have for future productions where issues like this may occur again. I’m glad that we didn’t let it get too far into pre-production before let him go, both for him and for us, as we were quickly able to replace him with another actor whose schedule was better suited to ours.

The Media Crew:

I was so very lucky to have sat down with these wonderful and talented people in my Dream Team at the start of the semester. We instantly clicked as friends, and though there was some concern after the pilot that we weren’t able to work professionally together, we got our acts together and successfully created these two webisodes. After the presentation, we understood that there was a hierarchy in which everyone needed to follow to make this production a success. Our pilot and the presentation with the panel made us realise that we needed to alter our friendship into a professional mode while filming, in which we did and it made working on set a whole lot easier.

 

What worked best for the writers, the cast and the media production team was that we all had a pretty similar creative vision for how we wanted this project to turn out. I believe that we successfully created pieces of work that we will all be proud of.

Working as a First AD

josiemortimer Leave a Comment

I have really learnt a lot over the course of these 13 weeks, and one of them was my role as a First Assistant Director. At first *cough* the pilot *cough* I had no idea what I was doing. I mean, I didn’t even know we had to create a shooting schedule (no wonder we failed at a drastic proportion).

After the pilot, I realised we really needed to get it together. For my role, I personally googled what my job as a First AD entailed. So call lists, contact with cast and crew on set and outside of shooting, shooting schedules – basically making sure everyone is on track and knowing what they’re doing.

I learnt how much I enjoyed this role. Although very stressful at times, I was able to keep on top of things. The main thing I learnt from this role, is that you’re not only keeping yourself in line, but everyone else too. Whether you need to get the shot list in by a certain day so that you’re able to write the shooting schedule, or organising availabilities of cast and crew, you need to be very organised and put-together.

I did struggle a little with how to write up a call sheet, but luckily my team members whom had previous experience with this were able to help me through it and after the first one was completed I was able to do the rest of them alone. I also looked at the production forms that Screen Australia provides and used them as a template for my shooting schedule and call sheet.

Though my group and I all connected as friends, after we saw how the pilot went we made sure to segregate that friendship while working and create a professional relationship. Though we still had fun together on set, I really had to make sure everyone was on task at all times so that we got through each shoot smoothly and created a professional impression in front of the cast.

If I had my time over again there would be a few things that I would change, such as making sure that we completed more takes and make that we stuck to the shot list more thoroughly so that it made post-production easier. Though there were no explicit issues with shooting and this did not create any problems, I would’ve preferred to follow the idea that everyone went through me to talk to the other departments (such as the camera to the sound, etc.).

Overall, I really enjoyed this experience as First AD and it is a role that I am seriously considering undertaking as a profession. Though I will need a lot more experience and understanding of this job, I believe this was a great introductory experience, and I learnt a lot from it and now feel a lot more confident in my abilities to organise and communicate with others.

Producing Pre-Production Products

josiemortimer Leave a Comment

After Tuesday’s meeting with the film crew and writers, I’m feeling far more confident with our production as we sorted out a lot of issues and concerns that we had and decided on 4 shoot days that worked with the cast and crew’s schedules:

  • Monday, 2nd of October;
  • Wednesday, 4th of October;
  • Thursday, 5th of October;
  • and Friday, 13th of October.

A few days ago I emailed the crew, obtaining details on their availabilities, in which most responded promptly. I then called them all today to properly introduce myself and confirm with the dates they had replied with.

Unfortunately, we had to let go of our actor for ‘Duncan’ due to uncertainty in schedules that would not allow us to work with him properly. This was a very strange experience to have to let an actor go, but we had to do what was best for our production and seeing as we are working in a limited time-frame, ambiguity around schedules cannot occur. Fortunately for our team, we were able to use one of our writers whom played the part of Duncan in the pilot. This will be extremely beneficial, as he understands the character very well and will know how to portray him properly.

I have notified all of the actors that a table read will be held on the 28th of September (Thursday next week) – along with the date of the table read, I sent out confirmation that they would be able to work the four days that we have chosen. Beth (director), Ben (production manager), Gaby (casting director), Heidi (writer) and I will be attending the table read as a chance to meet the cast – if we haven’t already – and discuss with them our plans for the production, provide them any feedback on performances and answer any questions they may have about the production. This table read will also include signing of release forms for the actors. Now, next on my to-do list: the filming schedule!