Non-Verbal performance

Prior to class 15 I had not put much consideration into the moments of my work that went beyond the verbal realm. However, Robin reminded the class of the moments non-verbal performance was in fact displayed in many of our works, by showing us a short montage of the times we utilised performance without dialogue. It was only until then I realised that this element of performance played an important role in much of my work. This was a reminder for me that, through subconscious, I did in fact unties moments in many texts to tell a story through action alone. 

Moving forward, this reminder of verbal performance, allowed me to utilise the performative display of characters receiving dialogue or carrying out actions not requiring vocal performance. Realising the value of this, I was prompted to critique prior works and saw that a lot of my previous editing style was heavily reliant on spoken text. This reliance had many of my edits possess a mundane and back and forth feel, as many of the editing displays only cut between the spoken dialogue of the performers, rather than placing a little more emphasis on the performance of characters receiving the dialogue. 

Evidence of my increased awareness of non-verbal performance is evident in my editing of exercise 7 and 8, however, moving forward I’m more inclined to further explore this as I feel that I could display much more of the non-verbal elements of on screen performance.

Decoupage

Due to the nature of this semester’s working environment, as a class we were unable to produce work that was constructed in the same location as each other. However, birthed out of the restrictive conditions, we were forced to use much more considered approaches when producing our interpretations of the provided texts. As previously mentioned, the importance of preparation is an essential facet to developing work with a team, especially while all being in different locations. Especially when producing work with characters in the same space. The considered approaches to our shot development saw the use of decoupage play a huge role in many of the successful edits.

Without the liberty of extreme experimentation, we were forced to produce work in a very planned and considered way, thus the use of decoupage. Working with disparate locations my team and I viewed the texts through a fragmented lens, by deconstructing text narratives and by breaking up the piece into possible shots, to further understand how the assembly of all elements could be made possible and best translate moments within the texts.

With the constraints of this semester, I have realised the value of narrative deconstruction for the execution of shot planning. This sort of preparation allows for a more thorough understanding of how camera placement and movement can best translate a text visually. Working with the idea of Decoupage is something that I will use moving forward, as I am someone who works best with meticulous preparation and visual understanding.

Post 1 

Post 2 

Post 3

By working in a group, I have not only benefited from creative collaboration, I have also gained a lot from seeing how my fellow group members edit together the same bits of footage I have. Not only is it interesting to see an individual’s thought process and how it may or may not differ from mine, it is also insightful to see what ideas and decisions from others benefitted particular elements of their work. Often after watching edits by other individuals in my group, I have many realisations about how I could have possibly navigated my own edit.

Upon watching all edits of exercise 5 made by my group, I was able to see clear differences and similarities. Both myself and Irene’s edit began with a shot of the road, with the voice of Steve appearing before we see him. Both our J-cut attempts would have benefited from the use of audio editing to establish perspective. Our introduction of Steve’s dialogue was presented as if we were already in the car. However, if we presented the audio as if perspective had us outside of the car listening in, we would have displayed more nuance in our editing. This was a note given by Robin, which I will definitely implement next time, as this is a mistake I often make and something I don’t normally consider.

 Throughout its entirety, I opted to present the whole phone sequence as a mid shot, instead of starting wide, then cutting in like Bronte’s edit, which began on a wide, a move to a mid, followed by Steve’s glance out the window, before cutting back to the same set up as the opening shot of Steve. My Intention in this sequence was to be simplistic in my approach, as I feel jumping around with shots was unnecessary. Of course this is a subjective decision that is open for interpretation. 

Following Steve’s look out the window and the perspective shot, I cut straight to an interior shot of Steve entering the apartment. I noticed in this part of the piece, Bronte, Irene and myself all made different decisions. Bronte’s decision saw her cut back to Steve after the window perspective shot, then a fade transition into the interior view of Steve’s entrance. I saw this as a decision to possibly display passing of time. Irene’s display of this, had the window view of Serge cut straight to him inside the kitchen, as we hear Steve enter before appearing. For me, this decision did not allow for a sense of time to pass, as I interpreted the interior shot of Serge to be within the same moment as the shot of him from Steve’s outside-in perspective. I feel Steve’s entrance erases a sense of passing time. However, understanding that film doesn’t always need to explain, this decision may have been fine. This is something that I’d like to further discuss, to get other opinions. In my version, I thought it would be wise to cut straight from the window scene, as it shows Steve’s desired destination, then to the interior shot of Steve’s entrance. These choices were made in an attempt to allow for a less jarring introduction of Steve. At the end of the day our decisions were neither right or wrong, but merely interpretations that tell the same story. 

The process of on-going making has allowed for creative momentum. Learning a craft such as filmmaking is an ongoing process of discoveries and realisations. I’ve found over the numerous weeks creating different work, I come across new challenges and have new revelations all the time during the process. Ongoing creation has not only meant that new discoveries are made by developing the work alone, it has also meant that in-class discussions are forever diverse. Each week, having something different to present, has allowed for me to gather further insight into the outcomes of my creative decisions. I have found a great appreciation for presenting my work and allowing for critique and constructive feedback. Following each presentation of work, I consider all given feedback and find ways to implement them into my next piece. The regularity of weekly exercises has allowed me to quickly implement new ideas and learnt techniques and really benefit from quick turnovers. I feel as if the forever process of making has allowed me to keep the finger on the pulse, especially throughout lockdowns. During a time where it isn’t always easy to find motivation, the need for regular creation has kept me busy. Though of course, I would much prefer to work with larger teams in person and have the luxury of using diverse space and personnel, the texts that have been provided have been exciting enough to be able to produce enjoyable works.

As some of our works are created solo, or if done in a group, our given roles see us work in our respective spaces by ourselves; it is almost impossible not to have some sort of directorial input in the decision making of a performative or technical display. The role of the director is very much about interpreting a body of text and finding ways to bring to life what is written. As we are given texts and sent away to interpret them and provide a visual representation, we are always making directorial decisions which are evident in the pieces. A good example of my own directorial decision was in the Carol and Jim script, which had Carol on the phone speaking to Jim. Instead of having Carol on a mobile phone, I decided to have them converse by wireless AirPods. This decision was made because I felt it would aid in smoother transitions and physical navigation of the space. I also made this decision based on the performative freedom it would give myself, while playing the role of carol. By freeing up my hands and not relying on an object to lead the story, I removed a potentially distracting element. This allowed for the full effect of facial expression to be the main focus in the shot. This decision also made it a little easier to capture the shots. With a more central focus on Carol, compared to if had them on a phone. By having a phone, I’d’ve needed to consider working the camera around an arm or hand covering the face. Without having to do this, I was able to make a much more fluid edit.

Since the beginning of week 4, more stringent collaborative exercises have seen more technically complex work and of course, more focus placed on collaboration. Having been grouped up with fellow class members, distribution of roles has allowed for more creative freedom. Being able to work with other people has meant further ideas and suggestions are seen in completed works. Allowing for more diverse and interesting pieces. It has been very enjoyable to work with a team on longer bits of text, compared to the much shorter scripts from earlier on in the semester. Longer bits of text and more constraints has meant much more planning is needed to figure out execution of the exercises. As someone who enjoys working in groups, I’ve really enjoyed constructing pieces of work with other people.

Exercise 4 saw my fellow group members and I construct an interpretation of the Esme and Eduardo Zoom call script. When given this text, we went through numerous rehearsals to figure out the best casting for the piece, then guided our focus towards designing a camera set-ups and shot list. As part of our execution we decided that all members will take turns recording the zoom call, have over the shoulder shots of both characters in their respective spaces and stand alone shots for Esme’s bathroom scene. This preparation time proved to be very valuable at the conclusion of shooting. When it came to editing the piece we had many shots, with different and angles, which covered the entire zoom call scene. By having zoom recordings and a camera set up in our locations, we were essentially working with a multi-camera set up. This made for a much easier editing process. Once all the footage from the zoom call scene was in the editing suite, I found each shot and lined them up with their respective takes. This allowed me to make numerous versions, with the different takes. Once this was complete, the only thing I needed to do was select which shots I wanted to use and cut between. A lot of emphasis was put on the technicality of coverage, we unfortunately missed out on the entire scene of Eduardo looking at the library books online, following the end of the call. This mistake was made because too much focus was put on how we were going to capture the call. I definitely learnt my lesson. Always read the script properly! 

One of my favourite parts of this studio is watching each other’s work and the discussions that follow. This is a very informative part of each class, as it helps view my work from a different lens. After each discussion, I am usually left with different suggestions that I can think about and consider implementing in my future work. Not only do I gain insight from analysis of my work, I learn just as much from hearing the thoughts of other students on other work.

In exercise three, I gave my interpretation of the Carol and Jim script. It was interesting to see the feedback given on my performance, especially on the subtleties in my performance of Carol reading. It was interesting to find that interpretations of this saw that Carol was moved In some way by what they were reading, however it wasn’t clear exactly how this affected her. Whether this was a weakness in the piece or not, reflecting on this I can see how there was something missing in the nuance of my display. This highlighted that subtleties of performance are not always explicit enough to provide much needed information. It also made me wonder how this could have impacted a story which was more reliant on the performance of this part.

Reflective Post 1

Reflective Post 2

Reflective Post 3

As discussed in my previous post, I worked with a fellow studio member to create our interpretation on the Barney and Rachel script. Having produced many performative variations of this text and having played the role of both Barney and Rachel, I felt confident to recreate this scene once more, but now on my own. Though having the option to produce work from a script designed for a solo production, I was far more interested in seeing how well I could produce work intended for two performers by myself. Coming into this exercise I knew what It would require to make a solo interpretation of this text visually believable. The things I needed to consider were, the 180 degree rule, costume, distinguishable performances for both characters and eye-line. I took on this exercise to challenge myself and see how well I could exhibit this piece. 

Having planned out my shots, set-ups and coverage, bringing my footage into the editing suite and producing a solid and precise cut wasn’t too difficult. Watching back, my initial thoughts saw a well crafted film that made sense. However, after watching the finished product more times, I found that the finished product lacked in it’s framing. This was detrimental to the believability of the two characters being in the same space. Inconsistency in framing saw Barney’s character have a much tighter frame and Rachel having a much looser one. This made both characters look different in size. Being done solo I wasn’t able to see framing as action played out, so this mistake was likely to happen. As this was something I didn’t consider beforehand, It was a mistake that I will use as a lesson for further development in this craft. 

As a further critique of my work, next time I would have more shot diversity by having closer shots opposed to having the scene shot entirely in mid-shots. I feel by having closer shots on particular sections, it would assist in highlighting tension on some of Barney’s lines. This critique comes after looking back at some of the other students and examples shown by Robin.

As a conclusive opinion of my work and this exercise, I realise that being behind the camera while a scene is being played out, I’d be able to have far more control and framing mistakes would be far less apparent. This exercise allowed me to think more critically about the way I construct shots and inspired me to think more creatively about my own shot selection.

In our initial attempts of exercise 1, myself and Callum put a heavy focus on script interpretation and performance. Though a very short bit of text, we decided to record many different variations and interpretations of the Barney and Rachel scene. The different versions of this piece consisted of Callum and I taking turns performing both the roles of Barney and Rachel and changing the meaning of the text through different styles of character performance. An example of the variation we produced saw us perform the script as it was intended with Rachel seemingly happy and excited, with Barney appearing mellow and disappointed, and then in an attempt to change the meaning of the script through performance, we had Rachel appear apprehensive has she spoke her line of going to South America. We hoped this alternate version gave the impression that Rachel was worried about leaving or maybe going against their will. 

It was fun being able to experiment with this text and see how many variations we could produce without changing the script. After completing this we decided to stick with the original performance intended for the script, with myself playing Barney and Callum performing the role of Rachel. We came to this decision because our performance was much better in this version. After class we sat down and looked at how we could improve on the work. As we were largely happy with the performance, we decided change needed to be seen in the aesthetic component of the recording. Noticing that we both had heavy back light, causing the picture to be very washed out, we decided to reshoot with a much more suitable lighting set up. In our reshoot we made sure that more light was coming from the front, adding more light to our faces opposed to coming from behind.

As a technical and artistic analysis of some other student’s work, I was particularly impressed with the work of Charlotte and Irene’s pieces and how the addition of props and more movement in their second version made for an even more interesting display. Though both versions were great, I can see more thought was put into the execution of their second take. With the addition of props and movement, the performance appeared to be much more natural. As a critique of this piece from a directorial stand point, I would have focussed on the believability of the piece. As this script was set on a zoom call, I would have focussed on how particular elements would add to the credibility of the work. For example, not have Rachel coming in to the call as if she was already logged on.

Though this exercise was done under many constraints, it was still good to see how far we could push the piece under the limitations. Having such a simple body of text, it allowed us to play around with other elements such as performance. Due to the nature of the medium we used to capture the scene, we didn’t have the luxury of multiple camera setups and shots, which meant we only had one static shot at our disposal. This meant that casting and performance were very much the focal point. I feel this highlighted performative imperfections, as they were much more pronounced under the circumstances.

Based on my own perspective gathered over three weeks of participation in this studio, I am able to have a better understanding of what Designing Drama is about. I have really enjoyed the key components explored in this studio so far. The dissection of narrative and performative texts have me further inspect the many variables when it comes to the display and performance of particular texts. Not only have we focussed on performative aspects of on screen drama, we have also been immersed in the ideas of camera coverage and how coverage can aid in the conveyance of story. Being able to view and discuss the way other work has been shot and how camera coverage plays a role in showing on screen drama, I’m always left inspired to try new things when it comes to the production of my own work. In the second class of week 2, I was very intrigued by the way the bar scene in ‘The Fire Within’ was filmed. Though not following conventional 180 degree rules, I still found it a brilliant display of film. I particularly enjoyed seeing how Robin broke the scene down into a set up and shot list with a birds-eye-view of the scene.

Further understanding of camera coverage and all the technical components required for capturing theatrical pieces is something that I really desire to acquire. Already having more experience in the performative and editing side of narrative film production, I’d now like to further develop in other areas, such as camera work. Due to an absence from campus for my entire uni tenure, I have been stuck within the constraints of what technical equipment and personnel was available to me. Hoping we will be able to step foot on campus this semester, I really look forward to being able to have access to equipment and other personnel. This will allow me to really focus on specific technical aspects of capturing moving images. I especially look forward to being present behind the camera, while action is in play and have the freedom of seeing a scene play out in real time.

I have really enjoyed viewing the work of other students and the discussion around our findings. This is something I find rather engaging. Often after viewing the work of other people, I am inspired to try things that I didn’t do in my work. Having conversations around each individual’s perspective is something I really value.