Prompt 1

Prompt 2

Prompt 3

I declare that in submitting all work for this assessment I have read, understood and agree to the content and expectations of the assessment declaration.

The influential text I’m going to talk about about is Up (2009). To be clear, I’ve seen the film before (and I think it’s great) so it was more the discussion in class revolving around the film that influenced me. The complexity of writing the 4 minute scene where we see Carl and Ellie’s life together is what really got to me. It was intimidating in many ways – 15 pages for that short period of time? The way it was weaved together perfectly really shines through in the final product, and I appreciated the complexity of the writing in the sequence. During the activity where we were supposed to write the scene in script form I ended up spending most of my time looking up how I can show the passage of time in a screenplay in this context. There was no definitive answer and after looking at the original script I realised it didn’t necessarily need to be obviously conveyed as much as it is implied.

Up (2009) Source: https://ohmy.disney.com/movies/2014/06/15/love-letter-to-carl-and-ellie/

What the discussion about this scene from Up and its screenplay really got me thinking about was the technicalities of screenwriting. How can I really get my ideas across and make sure they are interpreted properly by a director? We looked at a couple of instances where specific techniques might need to be employed, for example overlapping dialogue. We’ve been told there is no ‘right’ way to do these sorts of things, so I want to delve into these skills and find which ones feel right for me. I honestly didn’t realise just how important it is to have my own way of working around problems in translation until today so I feel as if it should be a main focus for me moving forward; if I sit down to write a screenplay for my final assessment and I don’t know how to put my ideas and thoughts into words then I’ll be in trouble.

So how can I improve in this area? I’m going to do some research online, maybe report back on this blog later on my findings and just keep notes on tips that may be useful going forward. Otherwise, I think practice will be the best thing for me. The more writing I do, the more I’ll be able to understand what works for me and what doesn’t. In terms of my final project I think this means I should be doing as many drafts as possible.To add to what I learned from the section of the Up script we read, I saw a few interesting tidbits of description that I wouldn’t have thought fit in screenwriting but ended up being more concise and effective than I thought they would be. For example: “He’s lucky to have her” is not typical of a screenplay but tells the directors and animators how Carl feels and what his expression should look like in a simple sentence, without being overbearing. It may not always be suitable to write like this (and is probably better for animation) but it’s good to know that it can be done effectively in the right situation.

The discussion around this sequence from Up has given me some direction in terms of working on my own writing ability, and has taught me a few valuable tips. I’m going to try to find what works for me in terms of screenwriting technique and learn as much as possible before working on a script for my final assessment.

Recent discussion in class has had me a bit concerned about preparation for my own idea, I’m not exactly very far into development of it. Worlds and their ‘internal logic’ have been a point of focus and I want to look into how these rules can be established within short films as opposed to feature length films. I feel as if features have much more time to freely dedicate to setting them up, whereas shorts are quite constrained and can therefore struggle to both establish a world and tell a compelling story. An example of a feature-length film that does a great job at showing its world to the audience is Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone. The film is afforded the entire first act of a 2 hour and 39 minute running time to display the rules and ‘social norms’ of the muggle and wizarding worlds.

Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone (2001) Source: http://www.empireonline.com/movies/harry-potter-philosopher-stone/review/

Vernin and Pertunia’s strong negative feelings towards Harry and his magical background show that muggles fear wizards, and the ‘secret entrance’ through the brick wall to platform 9 and 3/4 tells the audience that the large majority of muggles are unaware and ignorant of the wizarding world altogether. These are ways of establishing a world without clunky expositional dialogue that takes the audience out of the film, but these require time, and even more is required to tell a story within this world that has been established. When thinking about how I’m going to establish a world for my final assessment, I’ll face the challenge of juggling between helping the viewer understand the world and not falling into the trap of writing poorly done exposition, and I hope I can pull it off well enough.

Work discussed in entry

The piece I’ve chosen to review for this entry is my ‘written adaption’ of our week 2 group work, where we were tasked with creating a narrative through a series of photos. I tried to make the story funny, in the same vein as the original work. It’s difficult to evaluate whether any of it is truly funny, but I’ll look at the strengths and weaknesses of my writing. Firstly for the positives, I wrote in the present tense and apparently that’s what we were supposed to do. I suppose that’s how it’s done in screenwriting, and it’s what I’m generally used to at this point. I felt as if I didn’t go into too much detail describing little things, which (especially in a short story) can drag the pace of the narrative down a significant amount, depending on the tale being told. Another part of the story that I think worked was the description of the road as a chaotic and terrifying place, establishing the world a little bit while putting a different spin on how we portrayed the setting with the original pictures.

I think I could have improved upon several aspects of the story in retrospect. One of the parts I felt to be a strength – a small amount of detail – I also think was a weakness. When I read through the story again I observed that I was just reciting the events that were happening, and didn’t take enough time or effort to make anything particularly interesting. It feels like an order of events in a way and while I don’t perceive this as an issue that sticks out like a sore thumb, there isn’t much flair involved in the work. Take for example this line: “A Ford was accelerating towards her with no signs of slowing”. There’s room for more creativity in lines such as these and they don’t necessarily have to fall into the pit of over describing either. There’s a healthy middle area between these two potential issues and I sometimes find myself struggling to land in there.

Another problem I found with the piece was how I initially established the world in the first paragraph. I used it as an opportunity to try and make a joke about the dryness of RMIT as a setting visually, rather than to actually give the reader an idea of how it looked and its relation to the narrative and characters. I probably wouldn’t change this looking back as I didn’t want the story to be serious, but from certain perspectives this may not have had a place in the writing. Another issue worth pointing out was that I didn’t include the shot of the city morgue at the end. If I remember correctly I didn’t add it because it wasn’t directly related to the rest of the story and would’ve been quiet a time jump. I’ve had difficulty with time jumps when writing stories that aren’t for the screen as I find it hard to tell the audience how far we’ve jumped without going about it too obviously; I can try working on this in the future. As a whole I didn’t mind the piece, for something written in class it was fine (especially considering I didn’t think anybody was going to read it, but here we are), though there were definitely some fundamental issues that could have been ironed out.

“I always find that if two (or more) of us throw ideas backwards and forwards I get to more interesting and original places than I could have ever have gotten to on my own”

This quote from John Cleese is almost always true from the limited experience I’ve had in coming up with ideas for narratives.  Tossing ideas around to different people will give different perspectives, which will in turn give different suggestions. Taking the best of what a group has to offer will allow for the best result. My idea for my VCE media film came about from group discussion; simply discussing what I had in mind with friends made me realise what was working and what wasn’t. Last week during our workshop we were asked to create a narrative from a series of photographs taken in the RMIT campus. Just by walking around and trying to find the right location for the shoot we started talking and bouncing ideas off each other, attempting to find something we liked. The task was quick and simple and the group was easy going, so we didn’t have too much difficulty with coming up with something in the end. Our final product – Look Both Ways – was the result of collaboration and a transformation from a story about star-crossed lovers to a romantic tragedy, both of which are quite a bit satirical.

For all the strengths that come with throwing ideas around as a group, there are some drawbacks that come with it. When in a group all members must come to an agreement, or at least be content with the end result of a discussion, which could lead to disagreement and conflict. As I previously said, I haven’t run into this during any studio activities, nor have I pretty much ever, but they are always a possibility when working in a group and sometimes out of your control. Another possible weakness of this sort of collaboration is the loss of somebody’s vision for a project. Asking for help from a group of people is often useful, but when you have a very particular idea in your head of what you want, that idea could be twisted by others who are trying to help, resulting in something so radically different that it is no longer the same concept. A possible way around these issues is to conceive an idea with a group to begin with, shaping and molding it around suggestions that have been bounced around. Despite the downsides of discussing ideas with a group, I agree with Cleese’s quote for the most part. The best projects I’ve been a part of have been collaborative, and the potential for things to go awry shouldn’t deter people from the possibility of a greater idea.

During our three hour workshop in week 2, we were given the challenge of creating a small narrative through a slideshow of photos we’d taken on the streets, with a particular focus on the world of this narrative. The activity got us collaborating and gearing up creatively, the latter of which will be much needed in the coming weeks as we come up with ideas for our final projects. The most testing part was producing an idea that fit into 5-9 pictures. Our initial idea was creating a romance film where a pair were separated by the bars at Old Melbourne Gaol (which ended up being done by another group), but we ended up landing on a tragedy where one was killed in a car crash when we came across a door that read ‘City Morgue’. The world we wanted to try and create was bleak and dour, which was only very achievable through the look of the frames given the limited amount of space to tell the story. Grey and dark colours were emphasized, especially from the middle to end, to give the sense of grief and regret that the man is feeling after his partner was killed. I was happy with our final product for this activity and felt like I took a lot away from it!

I found the reading we were given for our first week tutorial quite interesting, as well as the content we looked at in class, and I felt I learnt a few things that I can really take forward and use during the semester. Peter Bloore’s guide on giving feedback and writing script notes was instructive and concise and provided a few tips that should come in use when it comes to looking at work my peers have done. While it may seem obvious in retrospect, it’s a helpful reminder to be considerate and constructive when criticising somebody else’s work. The other thing we looked at that I think may come in handy was Cooper and Dancyger’s ‘8 questions for finding your short film’s structure’. I’ve often struggled with short films and coming up with a narrative I’m happy with, so having something to look at as a guide is sure to be useful and I look forward to challenging myself to create something I’ll be able to look at and be happy with.

Prompt: “I watched [insert title of screenwork here], and it got me thinking about…”

Confined and restrictive settings in cinema have always fascinated me. In fact when I gave an (admittedly small) amount of thought to what sort of story I would want to do for the final project of ‘Another World’, a story set in a small world was the first thing that came to mind. It just so happened that these worlds were discussed heavily in our week 1 tutorial. So, that film I watched that got me thinking was Snowpiercer (2013), a sci-fi action-thriller directed by South Korean filmmaker Bong Joon-ho. The movie takes place in on a train that loops around the world indefinitely using a self-sustaining power source, after the world has frozen over due to a failed attempt to counter global warming.

Chris Evans (left) and Go Ah-sung (right) in Snowpiercer (2013). Source: http://www.themarysue.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Curtis-Yona.jpg

What Snowpiercer got me thinking about in particular was worlds within worlds, particularly the perception characters have of their surroundings and the effect that has on the narrative. Snowpiercer takes place in 2031, 17 years after the world has frozen over, meaning there are children that have been born on the train and only ever lived there. Characters that have never seen the ‘outside world’ are ingenuous in this film, curiously asking questions about what came before them. The setting of Snowpiercer is both a claustrophobic world, and a world within a world. This poses the question, is the world actually tight and constrained if that is all a particular character has ever known? In these situations, the setting in a narrative has very different effects on different characters.

The protagonist of Snowpiercer Curtis (Chris Evans) views the train as a prison; he has been forced to live there to survive since he was a teenager and has resided at the back end of the train for the entirety of it, where those who are least privileged are required to stay. Comparing Curtis’ perception of the world around him to a child who has been born and raised near the front of the train with many prerogatives that Curtis doesn’t have, this child would view the train has their home – especially as the children are influenced by adults at the front of the train to thank Wilford (the creator of the train) every day for what he has given them. This example from Snowpiercer provides an insight into how small worlds can be perceived by different characters due to their experiences and how that can shape characters and a narrative.

I declare that in submitting all work for this assessment I have read, understood and agree to the content and expectations of the assessment declaration.