The evolution of televisual systems and social media has not only transformed the way we engage with content, but also the social relations that exist between audiences. Instead of watching and discussing the grossing program with the family, viewers are taking to social media to start the online discussion live as events unfold. For the purpose of this blog, I will be discussing the how the social experience relative to broadcast television has changed, in particular, how scheduling and the proliferation of social media has shaped how we interact with fellow viewers of a program.
Historically, watching television was primarily a social and family-oriented event or experience. We all know the image of the typical white middle-class family spending some quality time together as they sit mesmerised in front of their one-and-only television set. While this image may seem out-dated, it still holds relevance in society today. So what is it about television that makes it such a socially unifying resource?
Television programs are scheduled strategically to reach their target audience at a time when it suits them. For example, in the evenings it is assumed that children and parents have returned from school and work respectively, and wish to wind down with some family friendly programs. This effectively brings the family together as the programs are timed to suit their lifestyles and also usually their mutual interests. Consider singing competition show, The Voice – one of those programs that everyone can get sucked into. Typically, watching The Voice with family or friends is a more fulfilling viewing experience than watching alone as we can commentate our thoughts and feelings on the program to those around us. For example…
“I can’t believe he or she got through to the battle rounds with that song choice!”
“OMG, I know right?”
While this remains a familiar scenario in some homes, social television has taken on new meaning with the recent proliferation of the Internet. For one thing, increased television ownership enables family members to call dibs on a TV to themselves (Singer 2010). Consequently, instead of communicating with the family, they instead take to social media via a second screen to participate actively in the live discussion with equally passionate strangers (Ingrey 2014). When The Voice is on TV for instance, Twitter and Facebook blow up as people engage with others in the viewing community about the happenings of the show.
Even if watching on their lonesome, scheduling reassures viewers that someone else in the world has watched it ‘alongside them.’ If they need to vent about whether or not ‘so and so’ deserved to win that battle, it is more than likely that someone in the viewing community will share their frustration at that moment. The imagined community – a perceived community, culture or nation of viewers – becomes more real as viewers can see the comments flood in live as the show is broadcasted (Anderson 2006). This reinforces feelings of belonging and community to viewers, resulting in a (mostly) positive social experience, albeit online.
It is interesting to note how scheduling can have such impact over our own viewing habits and behaviours, as well as how we subsequently interact with others.
REFERENCES:
Anderson, Benedict, 2006, ‘Introduction’ in Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, Verso, London, p.6
Ingrey, Melanie, 2014, ‘Triple Screening: A New Phenomenon,’ weblog post, 23 February, Nielsen Insights, viewed 10 August 2015, < http://www.nielsen.com/au/en/insights/news/2014/triple-screening-a-new-phenomenon.html>
Singer, Melissa, 2010, ‘Televisions are breeding faster than Australian households,’ The Sydney Morning Herald, July 19, viewed 9 August < http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/hometech/televisions-are-breeding-faster-than-australian-households-20100718-10g3k.html>
Dead Set is a horror/drama mini series in which a zombie apocalypse leaves the Big Brother housemates as the only remaining survivors. Sound ridiculous? Sure. But it is a clever concept created by British broadcaster Charlie Brooker. As an avid zombie fan himself, he believes “every person in the country must’ve fantasised at some point about what would happen if some terrible apocalypse occurred during a run of Big Brother (2008).” Dead Set follows protagonist Kelly, a worker on the fictional program, who manages to save herself and seek refuge in the house of oblivion.
Image source: andykinsella.com
The show can be read in a variety of ways, but in this blog I wish to focus on the way it represents the relationship between reality TV, its producers and its viewers. While Brooker claims that the series is “primarily a romp,” he encourages audiences to be the judge for themselves. The show spoke to me as a critique against reality TV and its creators, but predominantly the culture and following behind the genre itself.
The first episode in the series begins with housemate Joplin questioning the attraction and merit of television shows like Big Brother in our society. From the get go we are thus led to question how reality TV influences us, and why are audiences are so besotted by it.
According to S. Shyam Sundar – professor of communications and co-director of the Media Effects Research Laboratory at Penn State University Park – reality TV is “much more seductive [than other types of programming] because it seems much more real, much less orchestrated (McDermott 2012).” While this is true to some extent, it is widely recognised today that reality TV is typically not a true representation of ‘the real.’ Dead Set highlights this as Kelly doubts her new job: “the show and the crowds and everything, it’s not really real is it?” This comment encourages viewers to think past what we see on screen and question the validity of what is labelled as “reality.”
To elaborate, reality TV is universally recognised as ‘trash.’ Big Brother of all shows is perhaps the epitome of this, thus making it the obvious choice of program to use as a basis for critique in Dead Set. Brooker also notes that “all zombie movies eventually boil down to a siege situation,” and the secluded, camera-filled Big Brother house would be an ideal and original setting.
In many ways, the mindless zombies in Dead Set attempt to represent and undermine the viewers of reality television. The show likens reality TV to an infection, taking over the world as it gains popularity and sucking in its victims in one by one. Once people start watching shows like Big Brother, they get addicted and cannot pull themselves away. Note the parallel to out-of-control, brain-dead zombies.
Brooker also draws attention to the flaws of reality TV production as viewers are led to immediately despise the money-hungry, ignorant producers in the fictional run of Big Brother. Presumably (and hopefully) this is an exaggerated version of what goes on behind the scenes, but nonetheless it inclines viewers to question the values and priorities of reality TV production as a whole.
Dead Set definitely leaves you with a lot to think about – from the problems with reality TV, all the way through to how to survive a zombie outbreak. It certainly is an interesting representation of some complex underlying issues of the reality genre, making for a thought provoking watch.
REFERENCES
McDermott, Nicole, 2012, ‘Why we’re obsessed with reality TV,’ Greatist, 11 July, viewed 10 August 2015, <http://greatist.com/happiness/why-were-obsessed-reality-tv>
Brooker, Charlie, 2008, ‘Reality bites,’ The Guardian, 18 October, viewed 11 August 2015, <http://www.theguardian.com/film/2008/oct/18/horror-channel4>
In the previous blog, I examined how a transcript of an episode of Skins compared to a completed episode. So to segue on from that, I wish to compare how a first draft of the pilot episode of Friends, or Friends Like Us as it was originally titled, compares to the fine cut of the episode.
Disclaimer: if you are not a Friends fan you probably won’t be a fan of my blog – chances are it’s going to come up A LOT. You have been warned.
The following document marks history in what is one of the most successful sitcoms of all time:
Friends 1×01 – The One Where Monica Gets a Roommate – SCRIPT
Image Source: Friends Wikia – The Pilot
What is most noteworthy for me is the significant dialogue differences between this early draft and the pilot episode. Conversations are cut short, jokes are removed and replaced, and the characters take on different personas. So what happened between this first draft and the fine cut to result in so much change?
In a large-scale production such as this, the script is under the influence of a lot of creative minds – writers, directors, cast, even audiences. Thus, it is likely to undergo a lot of change before it reaches our screens.
On the official Friends website, a FAQ asked, “What was the life-cycle of the typical show?” In response was the following detailed breakdown of all stages of production (with a particular focus on pre-):
Extensive process, huh?
This indicates the time, effort and collaborative measures that go into script writing. Evidently, it is difficult to ever consider a script as being finished as it remains subject to revision throughout all production stages. In fact, it is not until the TV show or film is released that the script can officially be declared as complete. I think it is important for us as amateur writers/filmmakers to remember that what we write is never set in stone. The role of the script is to essentially guide, but not define, our filmmaking practice.
On a bit of a side note, I would love to one day sit in on a table read of a professional TV show or film, just to see how it all goes down. While I have watched quite a few script read-throughs on Youtube, I have only ever experienced them backwards, i.e. watching them after having seen the film in it’s final form. I think it would be amazing to see the whole process, from all the ideas thrown around to determining which jokes are the funniest, and to eventually see it come to life on film.
While I was searching for inspiration for this week’s initiative post, I found myself spending hours reading scripts of my favourite TV shows and films. There’s something almost nostalgic and oddly satisfying about seeing early production documents when you’ve only ever known their completed form. It’s kind of like seeing baby photos of someone you love but never knew as a child – you take notice how they’ve grown, developed and changed from when they were ‘young.’
After reading a script or watching a read-through, I would then seek the completed version of the product for direct comparison. I think making these comparisons is especially fascinating as we get an idea of the stylistic choices made in order to adapt the script onto the screen. While ‘action’ in a script may tell us what the character is doing, it doesn’t tell us how it will be shot, cut or the specific details of the mise en scène. After reading a script, we become more aware and focused on these stylistic qualities, as we already know what dialogue is to come.
It is also interesting to note how the dialogue of scripts translates onto the screen. I was curious to read a script for one of my favourite TV shows, Skins, to see if I would engage with it as much on a textual level. As the show is set in Bristol, UK, the characters speak with an extensive amount of local slang and cuss words. Through reading a transcript (couldn’t find an original script or screenplay), I was surprised by how differently it delivers on paper. In fact, given the language used, it was much less comprehendible and engaging without the tone, body language and actions of the characters.
Obviously the writers of Skins knew what they were doing would translate to screen, but by reading the script alone, people might question whether or not it would appropriate. Of course, it must be realised that a script is a film in its earliest stages, and the complete picture will not come together until it is executed visually and aurally, complete with performance and mise en scène. This essentially reiterates the need for writers to have an aptitude for filmmaking – they must understand what type of text will work on screen and what will not. Alas, being a skilled writer alone is simply not enough.
Image source: HD Wallpapers
This led me to think about how novels differ to scripts and screenplays. Novelists do not have a visual component to fall back on, and thus rely entirely on their descriptive language to paint a picture in the readers’ mind. They must describe their characters thoughts, feelings, whereabouts, actions and dialogue in a way that is both compelling and engaging for readers. Scriptwriting however is concise and straight to the point, with a rule of thumb being to only describe what is seen or heard in addition to dialogue. According to Brian Klems, “clever dialogue is found in quick back and forth exchanges, not prose-y speeches.” He recommends that 95% of dialogue is kept to three lines or less.
Interestingly there is in fact a novel adaptation of the show Skins. Although I have not read it myself, I’d be interested to see how the style of writing differs to that of the dialogue in the script.
All in all, I think it is a valuable exercise to compare scripts to completed films and make observations. I will endeavour to do this throughout the course as it is not only fascinating, but also teaches me a lot about the interdependent relationship between writing and filming.
It’s interesting to learn the specific and ‘proper’ ways to do things when it comes to editing software. I’ve definitely developed habits over the years that slow me down in the suite. I thought it’d be helpful for my benefit, and perhaps anyone else who stumbles across this post, to put up some Premiere short cuts here for future reference:
Selection Tool: V
Track Select Tool: A
Ripple Edit Tool: B
Rolling Edit Tool: N
Rate Stretch Tool: X
Razor Tool: C
Slip Tool: Y
Slide Tool: U
Pen Tool: P
Hand Tool: H
Zoom Tool: Z
Once I have these down pat, they will likely make my life a lot easier. Props to Paul for posting these originally!
The Writing for Film class exercises have offered both a practical and conceptual insight into film production. So far there has been a strong emphasis getting out there and producing content, from script writing, to filming, to editing. I think this approach is really effective as the best way to learn is from doing. It gives us the chance to experiment, make mistakes and ultimately learn from our experiences along the way.
Class exercises over the past two weeks have enabled us to cover the works as we got the chance to dabble in all stages of production. Through this, we were able to put our creative and technical skills into practice to create something simple yet well structured, continuous and complete.
For exercise 2b, in groups we were asked to draw inspiration from the creative students kids clips to create something of our own. In our group, we decided to write our script as a continuation of the following clip:
With the intent to change the dynamic of the relationship, we decided that the main mobster character would be the father/mother to the two ‘children.’ Although we had limited time to come up with a script, we came up with something short, snappy and easy to shoot. This left a lot of room for improvisation on set, resulting in the dialogue to come across more natural and fluent.
In terms of filming, we were instructed to gather six shots in total. At first I thought that this seemed a lot for a scene with minimal action, but when it came to editing, I realised why the more shots would be useful. In terms of continuity, some shots would work, and others would not. Thus it was valuable to have an array of different shots to choose from and carefully select which of them would work best. Here’s what I came up with in the editing suite (please excuse the painfully awkward ending – we kind of forgot to come up with a conclusion):
In the edit suite, I also learned that changing shots must fulfil purpose. If they are changed erratically, or unnecessarily, they consequently detract from the content of the film and viewer is likely to be aware of the cuts when they should fly unnoticed. More shots or cuts does not necessarily equate to a better quality product. For this reason I chose to neglect a medium close up two shot of the children as it just seemed random and unnecessary, and ultimately disruptive to the flow of the scene.
So far I am really enjoying these classes and am learning a lot from each exercise. With each task come new learning curves that teach us something valuable about the filmmaking process.
Perhaps the hardest thing for me when it comes to script writing is coming up with an original and imaginative story concept.
I’ve personally had more experience and am thus more comfortable with journalistic writing and documentary-style film. I am used to conducting interviews and creating stories based on fact. It is therefore more of a challenge for me to rely on my imagination when I am so used to documenting truth.
So what makes a good story? How can I improve my capacity to come up with compelling characters and plots?
In our class exercises so far, the prompters have certainly helped my ability to write freely in a script format (being provided with a character and action to base your script around). In these instances however, I find myself less passionate about the stories and characters. I do not necessarily feel a connection to the story, and this is likely to be shown through my writing.
I interviewed a young writer/director recently and he gave me some inspiring advice.
“Write what you know,” he told me
As a filmmaker, the ultimate goal is to resonate with an audience; to make a connection; to create something people will want to watch again. It becomes difficult to do this however if we write stories way out of our depth – stories based on something we have no knowledge of, experience with or exposure to.
“I find that a lot of young filmmakers forget that they’re are in their 20s… So tell 20-year-old stories. ‘Cause if you can identify with an audience, your film’s got more integrity and it will be more successful,” he said. “Just draw from real life, and you’ll be surprised what you can make”
Makes sense, right? It made me feel at ease. Why not write what I know? Whether that be a simple case of boy meets girl, two people having a conversation in a café, or about the connectedness of a town. Good stories do not necessarily mean spies, superheroes and vampires. Real, genuine characters can be just as, if not more, powerful.
I feel like this misconception of elaborate narratives equating to quality has hindered my capacity to dive into scriptwriting in the past. The entire process has kind of made me nervous as I felt as though there’s more room for failure when you haven’t got facts to fall back on. But maybe I can rewire my skills of documenting truth into my scriptwriting, by telling stories based on my own experience or stories I have personal connection with.
With this in mind, I hope to broaden my imaginative capabilities and write some damn good scripts.
PS: I hope that this rambling-style of blog is acceptable. I feel like the blogging format is more allowing of personal content like this, as sometimes I just like to let my mind run wild without necessarily stressing about research, formatting and the like.
In Thursday’s class we had our first collaborative exercise with the creative writing students. After writing a script based on a random character and action, the task was to film one single take version, and one shoot to edit. Our script revolved around 18 year old soldier Brody who was ‘waiting for a train.’
It is always difficult to go straight into working with people before you get the chance to get to know them. I for one find it easier to be assertive when I’m comfortable with those around me. Nonetheless, our group meshed well with the mutual goal of producing a high quality product.
In the single take shoot, I volunteered to be one of the characters. I am usually an awkward being when it comes to being in front of the camera so doing this pushed the boundaries of my comfort zone. Anyway, it was relatively straightforward as all I had to do was to remember my lines and gestures (however it did prove more difficult than expected at first – curse my terrible memory) and I let the crew behind the camera direct the action.
For the second shoot, I was allocated the role of assistant director. Due to the casualness of the shoot however, I essentially became an all-rounder. Although I haven’t done a lot of filming for narrative before, I was able to finally put a lot of my built-up knowledge into practice. My understanding of the 180degree rule, framing and shot size certainly became useful, and although it was not my role to control these factors, I feel as though I made some valuable suggestions and offered some sound advice.
We initially encountered some issues when in came to audio due to the signal to noise ratio. To begin, we were using the on shot gun mic mounted on top of the camera. In order to lessen background noise, I suggested we use the extension cord and hold the mic closer to the signal to mimic the function of a boom mic. While this did improve the sound quality to some extent (and Jules got a good ab workout), we could not get the mic close enough without entering the frame. I then suggested that we try the lapel mic – this can be tricky to use when not wireless, but we made it work and it ended up being the best sound out all three options.
While I didn’t get a chance to watch all our footage back and evaluate it properly, I do think we managed to do a decent job. We worked well as a team and I think we were able to execute the script with relative success.
Hello again blog. Apologies for neglecting you.
So here we are again, a new semester, new subjects, a new me. Well, not really a new me. I’m still the same old me. But everything else is pretty new. What am I even talking about?
The studio I chose to partake in this semester is called “Writing for Film.” While this may sound self-explanatory, we are taking it the concept a step further by dissecting the conventional relationship between screenwriting and filmmaking.
We intend to challenge the industry practice of isolating the screenwriters from the filmmakers by integrating writing into all production stages. It is bizarre that in traditional practice these two roles do not necessarily overlap, as how can one write for film without having any experience filming a film? In my opinion, these two aspects of the filmmaking process are very interdependent.
Of course, there are exceptions in the industry to this supposed ‘conventional practice.’ For me, comedy and sitcoms immediately came to mind. In a show like Friends, the writers would sit in on the shoot and they would make changes to the script on the fly. Through filming in front of an audience, the writers, directors and cast members could gauge which jokes would work and which did not, as what might sound good on paper may not necessarily transfer to viewers. They would then collaboratively make the appropriate changes to the script as they were shooting. I believe this working dynamic is something that we can draw from as judging by the success of the show, it was very effective.
So why I am I taking this course? I’ll admit that I struggle with the imaginative side of the narrative filmmaking process. I mean I like to think I’m creative, but I find it difficult to conjure up a random, brilliant story out of nowhere. I’m taking this course to practice and develop my storytelling skills, from coming up with an idea to putting it on paper. As writing goes hand in hand with filmmaking, I deemed it was necessary to build my skills in my weaker area in order to succeed in the other.
To be continued…
So last week I turned 19, and thus a birthday-related post was obviously necessary! Spent the day running around the city redeeming free birthday food with my uni pals, managing to score a burrito from Salsas, boost juice from Boost and a 6inch sanga and drink from Subway. Unfortuately I was too full for free churros from San Churro, wehhh. After a long day, I came home to more food and more of my favourite people. The following Saturday saw a birthday gathering with my co-birthday-girl Tori (aka Torz, Tortellini) and a group of our closest friends from school. Thanks to all of those who made my day/week special!
Shoutout to my boyfriend Riles for the beautiful flowers and my parents for the super cool ‘pouffe’ which feature in this Instagram snap I posted!
Feeling like my bedroom is looking fresh with some new birthday bling! #flowers #pouffe #ishka #hippievibes #decor #cutest
View on Instagram
