Question 1

When watching the Clown Train, I believe sound was the element which kept me actively engaging with the film. The sound was suspenseful, high pitched and mysterious. It wasn’t flowing or harmonious, creating a feeling of unease thus resulting on me believing that something unpleasant was to happen. There were a lot of high pitched screeching sounds (possibly achieved through the use of violins and actual trains running on train tracks) which naturally make the listener cringe, as the high frequencies are unpleasant to listen to. When we are first introduced to the clown, there is a low pitched timpani (or bass) drum noise, which echoes out. This sound is subtle, not overbearing or in your face, which creates the idea that the clown is a threat. This soundtrack, therefore, complimented what was on screen nicely: the train was deserted (creating a feeling of unease, as we all know the dangers of public transport at night), the clown was uncomfortable and scary to look at, and the night was dark and black.

A key moment in the short film where sound was invaluable to supporting the plot, was the moment when the clown finishes telling the joke. “…and you don’t remember how you got there?” The soundtrack builds up from soft, to extremely loud, then cutting to silence just as the clown laughs (slow attack and sharp decay). It creates the idea of a bad realisation, and the fact that the clown laughs and doesn’t act threateningly is even more disturbing, as we expect the build up to be a violent one. Additional sound effects employed throughout the film are the electrical noises the lights make when they flicker. These lights would not have made those noises on set, but rather, this sound effect has been added in to further enhance the feeling of unease, as we associate these sounds with electrocution – danger.

This type of sound scape is heavily utilised within the genre of thriller and horror films. What draws the audiences in with these genres, is the build up. We become absorbed in the action happening on the screen, and take cues and hints from the music as to what is happening. Usually, a woman slowly climbing down the stairs into the basement is accompanied by tense (but soft) violins. She doesn’t know what to expect, and neither do we. Then, when she is suddenly faced by a threat, the soundtrack turns to immediate and loud drum sounds to scare and shock the audience.

Question 2

Mackendrick, A. Slogans for the Screenwriters wall. “Student films come in three sizes: too long, much too long and very much too long. If it can be cut out then CUT IT OUT.” This is something which I already know, in a way. However, I always believed that a script or story which contains a lot of detail is one which will not loose its audiences: if it explains and shows all the necessary details, then we can easily follow and we won’t get lost. It is only now that I am actually realising it is a balancing act between cutting out what you don’t need, and leaving in the essentials.

It was interesting to read about the relationships between a director and an actor. It is important that a director has a good understanding of acting themselves, for they need to be able to appreciate the work of an actor. They do not necessarily have to be able to perform, but they need to have a good idea of what it is like to be on the other side of a camera. I guess is this why there are some successful actors turned directors, as they understand what it is to be actor and therefore their relationships with them are easier. Just an intellectual level of understanding between a director and actor won’t really work – there needs to be a deeper communication and appreciation. Furthermore, an actor needs to be consistently appreciated and never really negatively bombarded. That being said, feedback from a director is still very important, and constructive criticism is appreciated. The director needs to be as passionate about the actors performance as the actor themselves, and so needs to be as driven to prevent distractions and disturbances which may hinder on the actors performance. Also, a director should never let his true aggression show.

Question 4

Rolling was a cute short film. I quite liked it. I remember the first thing which stood out to me, though, was in the opening scene. I thought it was clever how they did a shot in front of the main guy, tracking him as he walked forwards. However, I did notice straight away that the white balance kept changing. Sometimes it would go dark, then other times it would go lighter. This was a minor technical fault, but one that stayed with me. As I said, I liked the idea behind the plot. We meet the main character and he is surrounded by toilet paper – we want to know how such a predicament happened straight away. And only towards the end does it click. I really like how they used the ending at the start, then returned to it again at the end. If the casting for the male lead had been different, I’m not sure it would have worked. He pulled it off quite well – didn’t over do it, wasn’t too corny, fit the character stereotype. The chemistry between him and the female lead also worked quite well. They complimented each other. I did find, however, in some parts the dialogue was lagging. It was a bit slow and the audience could predict how it was going to pan out, so we wanted it to move on a bit faster. The use of location was great! I remember wondering how they got such a great little shop to work with. We are told that it is ideal to only shoot in one location, however this short had two locations. So they were doing really well fitting them both into their one day shoot. As I already mentioned, I did like some of the camera movement, like the first scene. However, there were some inconsistencies. When we first see the guy’s apartment there are several dolly shots where the camera moves around his kitchen and shows us whats on his wall (accompanied with really a appropriate guitar backing song I might add). In one of these shots, the camera starts of slowly revealing the mess around the place, then speeding up randomly. I felt as if this inconsistency in speed was a bit distracting and quite noticeable. But generally, the film was entertaining and did make you feel good watching it.

At first I thought Rolling was in fact the other short film, Play. I wrote a bit about my thoughts on Play: The first thing which stood out to me about this short film was how uncertain the ending was. The elements of the plot unfolding wasn’t really all that clear. I wasn’t even sure exactly what was happening when the girl supposedly fell of the equipment and broke her neck. Perhaps more dialog could have solved this problem? What I really loved was the way it was shot. There were certain shots which really stood out to me, like the ones where the girls were on the equipment and the camera was filming from their point of view. We felt as if we were spinning around with them. The lighting behind the first girls head in a close up was perfect. We couldn’t have anticipated the horrible outcome for her friend.