After my disenchantment with Media 1, I nominated Exploding Genre as my first studio preference. It was the only one I wanted to do; I just wanted to make movies. When I found out that I was placed in Translating Observation, my second preference, I was disappointed. From reading the pitch, I thought it was this ultra-experimental studio, something I didn’t feel I was prepared for. I put it second not because I wanted to do it, but because I had no desire to do any of the other ones. Well now I’m quite convinced that this was the only studio for me. I cringe at and hate my previous self for my initial reaction; I’m too quick to judge. It was only 20 minutes into the first studio session that I became grateful for my luck; I could tell Robin would be an invaluable resource, which he was. Ultimately, however, I didn’t make the most out of the studio experience.

Despite being somewhat of an observer, I had never really written an observation before this studio. As a result, I was confused during our first studio class when Robin advised us to “just write” for the next 30 or so minutes. I realised that there were no rules when writing an observation, and this freedom encouraged me to write really honest observations. However, as Robin noted, my observations didn’t have a lot of variety in them in terms of perspective. I would always involve myself in them, and I regret not experimenting with the form a bit more. I also regret not writing enough observations. There were plenty of occasions where I wrote observations that I didn’t publish, as I wasn’t really happy with them. But that attitude defeats the purpose of the studio; it was about improving your craft rather than presenting it. My small amount of published works had an impact on my reflections; they, like my observations, didn’t have a lot of depth or diversity. However, without a doubt, this studio has changed the way I observe things. I have noticed that I have a greater appreciation for art, I have a tendency to analyse most situations I’m involved in, and I get caught up on trivialities (which isn’t a bad thing).

My unexpected enthusiasm for the studio had me borrow a tripod and the Sony EX3 early on in the semester. The bus home with the equipment was hell, and so was the night I spent trying to work the camera. Looking back on this night, I didn’t have any patience. The EX3 was a great mystery to me, and I was desperate to master it. But I didn’t understand or respect the process; it was naive of me to think I could teach myself how to use it in one night. Unfortunately this lazy mindset continued for the next month or so; it wasn’t until working on the short film that my attitude changed. I wish I borrowed more equipment earlier on; for the benefit of myself and my studio experience.

During this middle-period of the semester (just before the short-films), I was mulling over what I would pitch as my short film idea. The idea I went with was pretty weak; it wasn’t particularly that interesting and I hadn’t really thought through how I would make it. This was easily the most disappointing moment of the course; I trust my ideas and know what I’m capable of, but that’s useless if you don’t give yourself a proper chance to create something. Fortunately, Alaine’s idea resonated with me.

Working with Alaine has easily been the best film-related experience I have had. The amount that I have learned, as well as the fulfilment I have got out of it is invaluable. I don’t think I would have had the same feeling if I hadn’t changed my mindset coming into the project, and, more importantly, if I worked on a different project. The freedom we had on this project made my relationship with it all the more personal; it was why I was drawn towards it in the first place. I honestly feel I ‘explored’ what we were making, truly. Not ‘explore’ as in present, but ‘explore’ as in further understand the concepts we investigate during the creating process.

I attribute a lot of our group’s success to our relationship with the film. The expectation wasn’t to make a good film, in a traditional sense. It was to try and unpack difficult ideas, ideas that we feel strongly about, through cinematic expression. The film’s unusual form was unlike anything I had worked on before, and yet, it’s what makes it all the more special.

If there was one thing I wish the course would add, it would be a screening. Robin would show the class some truly brilliant pieces of cinema, but it felt like a tease as we didn’t have enough time to either watch more or watch it all. When Robin showed us 5 or so minutes of Chantal Akerman’s From The East (1993), my mind was truly blown and I watched the whole of it that night. I’m sure given the opportunity, Robin would have loved to have a screening.

This studio could not have been taught by someone other than Robin. Robin has easily been the most influential teacher I have had. His approach to film and his methods of teaching have helped me greatly. Therefore I am disappointed that I didn’t put in what was required earlier on. In fact, after writing this, I have realised that I regret even more than I initially thought. However, Robin’s teachings have still had a substantial impact on me, and they will continue to during the rest of my lifetime.

Audience
During the initial discussions, planning and shooting, our group’s awareness of the film’s audience was virtually non-existent; the only time I can recall our group considering the audience was during the editing process. For me personally, this didn’t matter. My approach to the music, writing and film I create in my own time has always been very personal. It has been about creating something for myself, something that I could get great fulfilment out of. Therefore, naturally, I took this approach coming into the film.

In my opinion, there are two aspects when considering the audience. There is the ostentatious aspect, where you create something with the purpose of impressing the audience. And there’s the assembling aspect, where you construct your work in a particular way to allow the audience to understand it. Our group ignored the former for a few reasons. Firstly, as I mentioned, my approach to art is about self-fulfilment, and I’m certain it is also Alaine’s. Secondly, Robin has always encouraged us to experiment. And thirdly, the form and purpose of The Other isn’t to provide the audience with a traditional cinematic experience. With assembling, however, there were several occasions where we had to consider how the audience would respond to a particular moment. The Other is quite convoluted, which I like, but it’s not complex for the sake of being complex. We wanted to provide the audience with subtle clues throughout, and I feel we achieved that during the editing process. Ultimately, however, I honestly don’t care what the audience thinks. Maybe because we don’t really have one. Should I care? Probably. I do care what Robin thinks.

Collaboration
I never talked to Alaine before this project, so coming into the group I was quite intimidated by her. Which was silly. From the beginning, Alaine and I were on the same conceptual page. We had countless philosophical discussions, and acted upon the same impulse in relation to our choice of ‘moments’. Chynnae was also an important contributor who made this project a lot easier to work on. The three of us had strong chemistry and an understanding of one another, and our relationship with The Other is very personal. Sam’s presence, however, felt missing. There were plenty of occasions where he didn’t contribute as he didn’t have the same attachment to The Other as the rest of us. He would even admit that he probably didn’t need to join our group.

I think I could have done a much better job producing The Other. There were several times that Alaine or Chynnae were the producer. I think I spent too much time with the conceptual side of things, but then again, if I didn’t, maybe I wouldn’t have had the same relationship with The Other that I do today. I probably got away with it for this project, but in the future, I’ll need to balance my roles better.

Towards the end of the project, Alaine and I were searching for some kind of moment of finality. Robin had always been very clear that we needed one more vignette to complete the film, and while Alaine and I agreed, we didn’t want to put something in for the hell of it. One night, Alaine and I sat in the editing suites discussing what we could do for about an hour. We had very vague ideas, but none we really wanted to pursue. We watched videos of Camus, Sartre, dogs painted like Pokemon, kids dancing on a reality television show, and poetry amongst other non-related things. We then began to discuss the idea of someone forcing their ideology and/or unrealised dreams upon the helpless for their own twisted satisfaction; Mothers making their 3, 4 or 5 year-old daughters dress up in beauty pageants, the exploitative nature of reality television, etc. We then thought of animals, something that we have explored quite thoroughly in other moments. After searching for random CC-licensed footage of animals, we found this bizarre 70’s documentary capturing the behaviour of dogs. It was perfect.

We cut up a montage of a scene where a dog is brought to a home, played with by a family, goes to sleep under a tree, then a cut to a dream of the dog running for its master. We showed Robin and he agreed that this was it; a moment of completeness. Alaine and I could not believe how lucky we were to find this, especially on the final day of editing.

Editing Jenny’s moment was the first occasion that I thought how we could use something other than the footage to bring or elevate a certain mood. The answer was sound. Jenny’s moment is split into two shots; one long take from her selfie camera that goes for about a minute, and another brief shot of her from a wider angle. The first shot is where everything happens, and the climax comes from transitioning into the next shot. After Robin viewed the raw edit, he advised us that we needed some kind of noise that heightens that climactic transition. After discussing with Alaine the next step, we opted to increase the volume on the transition, which is Jenny purposely dropping her phone on the ground. The sound has a crash quality that is truly powerful due to its velocity, frequency and purpose.

I also provided Alaine with about 30 or so songs/compositions that either I made, my friend made, or we both made. They are a combination of ambient and experimental sounds that I felt suited the project because of its ethereal nature. We’ve used 5 or 6 of them and the general response has been quite positive. It’s nice to use your own sounds; my relationship with the project feels even more personal.

The scene that I acted in (the headphones moment) was a rewarding experience; not for my future or anything like that, but just for enjoyment. I hadn’t acted for about 2 years but during the shoot I felt I rediscovered my desire. After the shoot, I asked Alex if he wanted me to act in his group’s film, which he accepted.

The actual footage from the shoot was fantastic. There was one glorious moment, where the brightness of the sun changed twice in the space of 10 seconds. I hear about how much ‘luck’ is involved when filming, and we were very fortunate that we were able to capture that moment. Alaine chose her angles really well, and Chynnae did a very good job with the lighting. The actual ‘moment’ required a lot of editing to fulfil its purpose as it relies on the manipulation of sound. It probably took Alaine and I a few weeks of work for it to reach its potential, but it was all worth it; its probably the most satisfying scene I’ve been involved in, due to its technique and meaning.

During an editing session, Robin gave our group a workshop on colour grading. My knowledge in this field was limited, if not non-existent, so it was quite an eye-opening moment to notice the different ways Premiere allows you to grade.

Alaine posted some very interesting ideas on several different Google Drive docs. At first, I found it all to be a bit disjointed; I don’t think I truly understood the concept. But I gained clarity after spending some time to reflect on them.

I think what really appealed to me is that we have total freedom over the film. We rejected the standard notion of the audience early on, and would make crucial decisions based on how we felt, rather than how we thought an audience would respond. I originally felt we were entering quite murky territory; acting on impulse can sometimes be dangerous. But after having several conceptual discussions with Alaine, I think she would agree that we felt quite comfortable with the route we were taking.

Despite knowing what we were trying to communicate, I had no idea how we would communicate it in a visual sense. I was unable to attend the shoot for the first “moment”, so my first encounter with the aesthetic came about in the edit suites. I have a lot of faith in Sam’s camera ability, and thought everything he shot looked quite nice. In the editing room, it was really the music that helped with the overall mood of the “moment”.

The next scene we shot was Jenny’s phone scene. Unlike the other “moments”, this one is (essentially) one take that goes for about a minute, thus, I thought it would be quite difficult. However, the shoot was completed quite early thanks to Jenny’s acting ability and Alaine’s precise direction. We had Jenny rehearse the scene a few times in various ways, and once we started to record, Jenny nailed it.

What I got out of this was understanding the importance of time on set. The rehearsal helped; with non-professional actors, it is really vital that they understand every aspect of the scene in order for them to deliver.

During the presentation of my idea to the class, it was quite clear to me (and most likely the class, Robin and the guests) that my film idea needed refining. I wasn’t sure if many members of the class responded to my idea, and while I couldn’t care less about that, I realised that I myself didn’t have the desire to follow through with it. It was a very disappointing moment. I wanted to make something that spawned from my mind, but to me, there was no point going with it if it was just mediocre.

After having a few days to get over the disappointment, I realised that I wasn’t putting enough effort into my work. My discipline needed improvement. Why? It could have been a few reasons. I was just coming out of a period of escape, I had just moved out, and I typically struggle to dedicate myself to something that provides me with little to no fulfilment. It just wasn’t a good time. But that’s lazy. I hate excuses.

On the following Monday, I found myself in (somewhat) of a negotiation between about 6 of us in class. We all felt strongly about Alex’s and Alaine’s respective projects, and tried to split into core groups. Everyone was hesitant to decide; was it a matter of manners? I made an impulsive decision and announced to everyone that I would like to work with Alaine because it was the most interesting idea that I heard during the pitches. Chynnae also joined, and the three of us felt satisfied with a small core group.

After working out the roles, pretty much all of the studio session was dedicated to developing the idea. Alaine wanted the film to be split into 5 vignettes, or “moments” as we now call them, related by match-cuts, symbols and the idea of “the other” (something that to this day we are still exploring). Sam also joined the group and wanted to contribute to the camerawork.

My group were assigned a scene from Ermanno Olmi’s The Finances and another from Akira Kurosawa’s High and Low. My first impression of the scene from The Finances was that it looked feasible to replicate; as the cutting was quite fast, we wouldn’t have to film long takes. The scene from High and Low however looked quite difficult to shoot. It was one take, and it had that classic Kurosawa blocking that you only realise the true genius of when trying to recreate it.

I love directing and requested that I direct The Finances sequence. My group accepted. I would also act in it (in a very minor role). I was assigned to be an actor for the High and Low take that Sam would direct. In the lead up to directing the shoot, I watched the sequence many times. I had an idea of how to do it, but at the same time it was difficult because we didn’t know where we were going to shoot. Jess tried to book a classroom online but we couldn’t find anything; we knew we would have to find something on the day. Fortunately, the classroom next to our studio classroom was empty, spacious, and perfect for the shoot.

We decided that we would shoot the High and Low sequence first. Problems arose when I was found to be too tall to play one of the male actors. We switched roles (I played the female), and I performed whilst sitting on a wheelie chair that was moved by the director. We knew the final result would be imperfect (my chair is visible), but we were happy with the outcome of the blocking.

Directing The Finances scene was great. I think I came off too much as an authoritarian, but it was worth it (maybe). Fortunately, the actors Sam and Kris were very easy to work with. The only problems were technical (mainly the camera movement in the first shot), but after time, everyone had adjusted and were familiar with their respective roles. We finished with about 1 minute to go.

It’s not until you edit the two shot-for-shot when you realise how successful the experience was. We took a lot of shots for The Finances, and overall, I was very pleased with the outcome. The errors aren’t that noticeable, the timing was close to perfect and most importantly, it makes sense when played out. As for High and Low, the main problem was that the takes were too short. It plays out very quickly. Each actor could have taken a breath before their lines, and as a result it would have looked a bit more smooth. But, understandably, the actors weren’t professional, and when your main focus is on your movement rather than your lines, the outcome can be quite rushed. Overall, a worthwhile experiment.

The lead-up to shooting the footage with Alex and Chynnae was quite exciting. We had no idea what we were going to shoot. Robin suggested to pursue a theme, but as we didn’t really have enough time to make an executive decision, we improvised, knowing we had the security of using material from the other groups if our footage wasn’t useful.

We shot practically all our material on Victoria Street. It was busy, and there was a lot of material. We shot a few things; plants, buildings, traffic, the shadows of passerbys. We didn’t opt to use a lot of camera movement as we agreed it would be somewhat of a distraction; we wanted the sole focus to be on the subject.

After gathering and watching over all of the available material, I saw a lot of similarities in the content. This was obviously because we all shot in practically the same location, and therefore had similar choices at our disposal.

I decided my idea to pursue would be the natural world versus the constructed world. Maybe not ‘versus’, but line the two up alongside each other and create some kind of contrast. I would do this by showing something natural (a la flowers/trees), fading to black, then showing something constructed (a la buildings), before fading to black and starting the process over again.

Each shot (except for the last) is similar in length. They are timed and accompanied by a musical score. The score, created by my friend, is a piece of classical music (natural) that has been distorted through production (construction).

The last shot takes up about double the time I had used in the previous shots. I wanted to change the formula I had been using. It is a shot that focusses on some kind of construction box, before moving to a crane and following it as it lowers. I ended with this and increased its length (in comparison to the other shots) for two reasons. One, because I am obsessed with the cinematography in Hitchcock’s and De Palma’s cinema, and this shot is something you would see in those films (unnecessary and irrelevant in the context of my film but I get great satisfaction from it). And two, because it’s symbolic of the constructed world taking over (via the time I allotted for each shot) the natural world.

After watching it over a few times, I opted not to shoot any more footage. It was unnecessary, and despite the footage being just okay, I enjoy the imperfect aspect of the shots and think it suits the form and content of the film.

I hate festivals and anybody who attends them. If you’re not a part of the lineup then you shouldn’t be there. I hate the culture. Everybody dresses and behaves ostentatiously. They’re all wearing those hats. You know the ones. And the sunglasses.

Festivals give the materialistic an excuse to think that they are these free-spirited nomads. I see through you all. And all you hear from the attendees are how much of a “life-changing” experience it was and how they “found” themselves.

My Facebook seems to always be clogged with photos of these holes of sin. I have a strict zero tolerance policy, so these who post that smut are swiftly deleted.

Night-time. I’m in the garden sitting at least 20 metres away from the beer pong frat boy bro’s. I can’t see them, they’re around the corner, but I can hear them quite clearly. Boisterous cheers, chest pumps, hi-fives. It sickens me. How can you be that excited over throwing a ping pong ball into a (presumably) red cup.

The Film
Establishing shot of the subject sitting by himself in the garden. The camera gradually zooms into him while we hear the obnoxious sounds of the beer pong players in the background. The camera stops at a close-up of the subject. We hear one last (but loud) cheer of “YEAH” from the bro’s. The subject sighs.