This week we presented our pitches for our transmedia assignments in class. For our teaser, we showed a part of Thomas Bowman’s audition, where he did a piece to camera like an online vlog. We got feedback from the panel (consisting of Paul, Dan, Dr Troy Innocent and Liam) and the basic consensus was that perhaps we had too many different elements to our story. We are considering taking out the webisodes from our artefacts which will lighten the load of work as well as make our story more interesting (sometimes less is more).

After listening to the rest of the pitches, I realised that all the groups in our class have nearly completely different ideas, which will make for a very diverse range of final assignments. I really liked the ideas behind the project ‘Protest of Passion’. I think the boys will do a great job of getting their physical artefacts seen. When I compare the ability for viewers to follow their story, I realise that perhaps it might be a bit harder for audiences to follow ours. On the posters for Jeff Shroud’s campaign, there are many links for audiences to go and find out more information – and because they are targeting an issue that is relatively close to home for many university students (particularly in this political climate), I don’t think they will struggle to get followers. This makes me think about our physical artefacts (the diary and potentially the newspaper article if we choose not to do it online) and how they can be distributed to the public in a way that isn’t over the top but still accessible. This is definitely something we will have to think about as a group.

Something to focus on for the next couple weeks with our assignment is getting our timeline accurate, and also sorting our fake Facebook profiles as I do believe there is a limit to how many you can make a day. We need to generate enough to make a somewhat believable ‘micro-nation’ within our narrative.

Week 8 – The Poetics of Complex Narrative

HBO’s extremely popular and highly successful television series True Detective is a prime example of a ‘quality TV’ show. It is not just another episodic cop television show; rather, it is a dark and twisted anthology which is less of a ‘whodunnit’, and more of a deeper exploration into the two main characters. Its first series aired in early 2014 and was a phenomenal success. According to over 193,000 IMDb users, the aggregate rating out of 10 for True Detective is 9.3: an overwhelmingly positive response (IMDb 2014).

So why is True Detective so popular? How is it receiving such positive reviews from audiences?

In essence, True Detective is a crime show that is unlike any other. In the 1950’s, television cop shows were straightforward and stuck to investigating the crime. In the 80’s these shows developed into incorporating the personal lives of the police. Several years later, different filming and aesthetic styles were introduced to help give the shows a more edgier and creative look. Now, the ‘criminal’ and ‘whodunnit’ aspects of cop shows are almost redundant: the focus is the multifaceted, long form narrative. Instead of presenting a crime, sorting through suspects and eventually finding the guilty party, True Detective encourages audiences to invest emotionally in the journeys of Detective Rust Cohle (Matthew McConaughey) and Detective Marty Hart (Woody Harrelson). As details of the case unravel, so too do the personal lives of the two detectives over the complex 8 episode series.

As True Detective is categorized as a crime anthology, it can be said that it is like watching an extra long (and interesting) movie that plays out over 8 hour long episodes. The screenwriter has an immense creative driving force behind the action on screen, and there is a governing auteur presence from director Cary Fukunaga. Fukunaga directed all 8 episodes of Season 1 of True Detective, and was praised and “credited with its cinematic look” (Couch, 2014). Only 37 years old, Fukunaga is relatively new to the directing scene but is already taking it by storm, winning the 2014 Primetime Emmy award for Outstanding Directing for a Drama Series (Couch, 2014).

The writer (Nic Pizzolatto) was aware that he had 8 episodes in which to allow all the major plot points, drama and character development to occur. Hence he maintained a tremendous amount of creative control. Pizzolatto did not have to concern himself with leaving leads or open ends for future seasons to continue with, nor did he have to write a cliffhanger at the end of the season (so as to bring viewers back for more next season). Instead, Pizzolatto could map out exactly what he wanted to happen and when, as he was aware of his timeline and hence sustained complete control over the narrative development. Pizzolatto was not writing a week-to-week narrative, but rather, he was writing with the knowledge that all narrative points had to be resolved by the season finale with no gaping plot holes left unattended. What happened in-between was up to him. A season finale cliffhanger was not required to ensure a returning audience – the quality and refinement of the content itself would bring the viewers back for the next (unrelated) season. In other television shows that work on a week-to-week narrative, other screenwriters and directors are employed at different times to come and write or direct an episode. What this produces is a scattered vision with a lack of strong narrative focus or direction.

Furthermore, the complex narrative of The Detective relates to its genre. True Detective is a hybrid genre – it is a television series which presents elements of crime, southern-gothic, neo-noir, pulp fiction, drama, mystery and thriller (which each effect the stylistic approach to the series). Presently, there is a crime show stereotype. Due to shows like NCIS, CSI and Law and Order, audiences are used to watching cops solving crimes. What True Detective does is take genre tropes as tools, and then subverts our expectations to create a new type of narrative.

In the season 1 pilot, time (and the detectives place in time) is misconstrued i.e. it is very easy to get confused as a viewer in relation to what is happening and when. There are a lot of period shifts from present time to 17 years prior, and this complex time frame doesn’t allow audiences to get comfortable with the show or narrative. Pizzolatto doesn’t spoon-feed the audience, but forces them into their ‘deep’ attention mode so they do not miss any information (Hayles 2007). True Detective is not one of those television shows in which ‘hyper’ attention will suffice. If audiences aren’t giving the show their full attention, they will miss vital plot points. Therefore, True Detective is not for the audience member who has a low tolerance for concentrating on a singular object for a lengthy period of time. True Detective demands a deeper concentration from its audience, and the beautiful visuals help draw in and maintain that focus.

The “key look” Aaron Couch talks about in his article about Fukunaga’s success at the Emmy’s, is the visual motif that is central to True Detective and the way in which audiences perceive it. True Detective is laced with  “sickly yellows and greens – a world that’s rotting and diseased, a world that’s dying in slow motion” (Donnelly 2014). Production companies Anonymous Content, Lee Caplin / Picture Entertainment and Passanger each have experience working on other television shows/films with a crime, thriller or drama genre (hence making these companies ideal for working on True Detective). One of the tropes of Quality Television is a higher budget. True Detective was provided the adequate money to: manipulate and build sets (to make them look like they were from the 90’s); cast actors with an amazing repertoire and background in cinema experience; and hire crew specifically tailored to their role (an example being Australian cinematographer Adam Arkapaw who worked on critically acclaimed crime dramas Animal Kingdom and The Snowtown Murders).

True Detective and HBO are a perfect fit for each other. The series fits well under HBO’s brand of ‘quality television’, and its complex narrative draws audiences into the story whilst they subconsciously emotionally invest in the main characters. True Detective takes the time to set up the characters psyches. It sets up the people in the town and the world itself. As an audience, we are not rushed through it, instead we are given the grand tour through each and every detail and layer which creates it. This show was never supposed to be shallow. The immersive story world is one that is easy to get lost in, and whilst the ‘whodunnit’ scenario has been done many times before, the crime anthology led by two A-list Hollywood actors is refreshing and intriguing for audiences which is why True Detective has been such an international success.

References:

Couch, A. (2014). Emmys: Cary Fukunaga Wins Outstanding Directing for ‘True Detective’. [online] The Hollywood Reporter. Available at: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/emmy-awards-2014-cary-fukunaga-727731 [Accessed 11 Oct. 2014].

Donnelly, E. (2014). ‘Petrochemical America’: Photos That Inspired ‘True Detective’. [online] Flavorwire. Available at: http://www.flavorwire.com/443778/petrochemical-america-the-richard-misrach-photos-that-inspired-true-detective [Accessed 18 Oct. 2014].

Hayles, N. (2007). Hyper and Deep Attention: The Generational Divide in Cognitive Modes. Profession, p.187.

IMDb, (2014). True Detective (TV Series 2014– ). [online] Available at: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2356777/ [Accessed 11 Oct. 2014].

In this week’s lecture, scenes from Scott Ruo’s ‘Four Images’, Brian Hill’s ‘Drinking for England’ and Chantal Akerman’s ‘D’Est’ were screened.  Choose one of these, and consider, in a single paragraph, what might have intrigued, interested, displeased or repelled you.

D’Est, directed by Chantal Akerman, was fascinating to watch. It was basically like being inside a car, looking out the window at the people on the side of the road. The people weren’t doing anything amazing in particular, but that didn’t mean they weren’t fascinating to watch. Sometimes the camera would be moving alongside someone at a walking pace, and we got to watch them for longer than others. Other times, people were making a conscious effort not to look at the camera, then some others were looking straight at it. But what I liked the most about the excerpt was the sound. Whatever the camera was moving in/on was inaudible. But what could be heard was the footprints of people walking on the sidewalk. This was so intriguing. I remember watching this movie where a man was walking through the snow at a really brisk pace, and something was really odd about the shot. There were cars moving around him, people talking and lots of traffic. But all the audience could hear was the crunching of the snow beneath his feet. This film reminded me of that. Its a bit confusing and disorientating but also fascinating. 

When watching the scene from Blow Up, it was obvious how much choreography and direction had been administered throughout. One of the biggest elements of the construction of the scenes which stood out to me was the placement of the subjects in relation to the objects and props around them. At various times, the female actor would be dodging in, out and around props, which would inevitably have caused a variety of different shadows, had the cinematographer not considered lighting which would ensure she would be illuminated consistently. Furthermore, the actors are regularly framed within interestingly shaped props i.e. traiangluar wood fixtures or behind couches. This makes the image more visually stimulating to look at, because it isn’t just the standard setting and standard props.

It seems that as the actors are walking from the back of the frame to the front, the focus would have to change in order to keep them sharp. In order to do this, many rehearsals would have to be had for the camera operator to determine the correct pull of focus (which he would mark with a sticker and perhaps have an assistant help him to do so, as we learnt in one of the lectures).

The actors almost always are moving around. The actors are amazing and captivating. Their motion around the set as instructed by the director, only makes them more interesting to observe. They never seem to stand still, and so, many different shots would have to be blocked and used. There are various times where it seems as if the actors have awkwardly been framed i.e. the shot where the woman stands up from the couch opposite the man, but the top halves of their bodies are cut off by a ceiling fixture. This is a creative choice made by the filmmaker, and is actually quite interesting to see. There also always seems to be objects in the frame which, if they were removed, could result in a more aesthetically pleasing shot. An example is pieces of the photography equipment which seem to protrude from the bottom or top of the frame at different times. It is as if the camera is placed in the scene, and we are amongst the action, for we are consistently surrounded in the objects which make up the space; never is the camera segregated from them.

Attending this weeks group assessment on the k-films which we made was quite enlightening as I got to watch the films which my other group members made. I was with Lauren, Tiana and Kevin. I enjoyed watching the others films, and in particular, I really liked the way Tiana recorded her sketch tasks. It wasn’t a simple matter of pointing the camera at something and hitting record. It was clear she thought about how she wanted to record something and did so in a very aesthetically pleasing way.

Seth asked us towards the end of the session if there was a way we could find more meaning between our videos so that they weren’t just a random bunch of videos linked with simple key words such as ‘square’ or ‘light’. When we were recording our videos, we were unaware that we were going to be using them to create a k-film, and so, most of them looked like a random bunch of videos put together. I literally only used two keywords, which were shapes, or not shapes. I guess with our final film we will have to think more about meaning than just what we are seeing.

Also, I used quotes from songs, which I didn’t reference the singer for. And the lengths of the sentences need to be relatively short to make them easier to read.

INTERNET QUESTION
• We freely donate all our information to facebook, which in turn, they sell to industries which want to buy it and we don’t get a cent.
• The Great Firewall of China
o Restraint of activities
• Internet is not a random chaotic environment
o Distributed network where the nodes can interact with each other no matter how far apart they are
o How does resistance work within such a system. Where are the points we can work against the mode of control?
• Adrian: Not convinced that the internet was that democratic to begin with. It is flat, which is wone oone of the things that Galloway talks about in the reading.
• Flame walls: email culture
o Arguments which escalate over 3 comments
o Not polite
o Doesn’t happen face to face
o You have to be careful how you frame your discussion
o Protocol is the basis of the web
o The internet is primarily social practise
 What should I share
 What will I get back from it
 How self aware am I
•
• Participatory culture
o We monitor ourselves
 When we go onto facebook, we rethink if we commont, because we could get picked up by certain algorythms
 Technological advances
o Elliot: even though technologies aren’t equally distributed, there are ways in which to distribute them equally.
o Adrian: once we have cars, there’s a future with each car that ends up being  roads, freeways, suburbs. Suddenly we need new technical protocols and social protocols
o When we make something, there is no standard. We have no way of knowing what will evolve. E.g. phonogram
o
o Virtual and actual: anything has before it a set of futures. Anything that falls into possible futures are virtual. Any of these futures which come to be are actual.
o Therefore we each have a series virtual futures: i.e the Cone. The further in the future we get, the wider the cone gets.
o This example is like the internet. The further could be already here. There are future possibilities which are all possible, but only some will get to be actualised.