After reading the majority of your Project Brief 1 blog posts (still waiting on a few of you … !!!) I thought I’d jot down a few points for you to consider as we move further down the river and into the jungles of the Studio. These points will make up the criteria / matrix against which I grade your written work in the next project briefs. Remember as well that for Briefs 3 and 4 you will be reflecting on actual process and projects you have undertaken.

1. Professional standards. How you write in your reflections is a reflection on your own standards. Your standards reflect how you will be in your professional lives and so it matters. A reflection does not have to be formal. It can expressive, humorous, full of disparate connections and varied media. It must however be coherent in that it allows insight into how you got from point A to point B and the lessons you learned along the way.
2. Referencing and citations. We are in an academic environment and so referencing must be disciplined. Please check the library website for the referencing guide (see Harvard Quickguide).
3. More on referencing. Referencing points the marker toward your research. This is important to be able to follow the paper trail but also because it allows the marker to understand the extent to which you have been able to absorb, summarise and re-articulate the publication in question. Have you understood its context? Have you transformed its context? Have you used it with interest and insight or are you filling in the wordcount? Illuminate your thinking with supporting text and case studies.
4. Research. Why research? Because it’s fun and it’s where you deepen your knowledge and awareness of topic. In our case the topic is: ‘who are you and what sort of film are you going to make?’ Noone exists in  a vacuum and in terms of the creative aspect of our course, research means how you contextualise, develop and communicate your ideas.
5. A point by point way to think about how to structure a piece of reflective writing:
   1. report
   2. respond
   3. discuss (argue)
   4. conclude
   5. points to continue

Another short. This time Australian and directed by Jennifer Kent. This film was later developed into ‘The Babadook’ (2014). Have a think about the continuity from the short film to the feature film. Is there a theme or a visual style or a soundscape that is consistent across these two films? What might that mean in terms of how Jennifer Kent talked about and pitched her vision of the film?

Taken from Olivia’s blog post..

A really interesting short film with fantastic textures and tones. A great sound design. Shot locally as well.

67

dir: Kasimir Burgess

prod: Julia Ciccarone