An issue that arose as we gained a better understanding of project two was whether or not our initial ideas would still be relevant. These initial ideas basically consisted of parody of online video types, such as video tech reviews. After a great deal of thought, we decided that we could ultimately stick with our original concepts, though we had to make sure that they were coming from, or directly related to our case study – a straight, serious iPhone video review.
This led to a large amount of our sketches beginning with an idea like ‘we’ve taken this aspect of the case study, and asked how could this be deconstructed for comedic effect?’. This way of working is reasonably new to me, as my only real experience with deconstructive parody comes from viewing or consuming the work of others – though I do feel this familiarity with the parody video type has been extremely useful in this process, as I’ve been able to draw on other videos to influence how I analyse and deconstruct the central case study.
Hopefully in the future, this issue could be avoided by ensuring a good understanding of the set task prior to beginning the exploring of ideas. However, if the issue is not avoided for whatever reason, a useful way of going about it would be to not throw out our ideas, but to re-explore them in relation to the new knowledge of the task at hand.