Are You Smart, Even?
Week 4:
The main topic of this week was about the history of multicam TV, specifically in Britain, however one of the most interesting elements of this week was the differences between single play and more formulaic series fare. Learning the intricacies of creating a series fare, even in the modern day, where the show only uses a few main sets, with formulaic storylines and heavy reuse was fascinating, if only to see how much of a groove those crews get into. Using the same shots, crew and sets to the point where proper floor plans didn’t even need to be made because everyone knew exactly what they were doing was fascinating, and is something that could only be done with years of filming the same show. It’d be interesting to learn if the same could be said for modern news or talk shows. I assume news shows wouldn’t need a proper floor plan in the first place; most of it revolves around hosts sitting at a desk, but for talk shows such as Ellen or Late Night with Jimmy Fallon, where they’re always doing different activities with guests, I wonder if those activities are so formulaic and done so many times that crews automatically know how to film them.
Another thing that interested me was the set design of series fare compared to single plays, with sets for multicam series having a higher degree of separation between the background and the foreground, as to not interfere with the actors from any angle that cameras might film from. The mise en scene of multi-cam productions in general is very interesting, as seeing how they use more even lighting and stage actors closer together to adhere to the multi-cam process, combined with the histories and techniques of filming series’ made me appreciate the level of care and detail put into creating a multi-cam show, even if not all of it is seen in the final product.
Week 5:
Much of this week was dedicated to game shows and how they work, since we are doing one for our next assignment. It was really interesting seeing what constituted a game show, since I hadn’t put that much thought into it beforehand. I had never even associated game shows with the multi-cam process, instead reserving that denotation to sitcoms and news shows, but the more I thought about it, the more similar the genres actually are. They are all filmed live, using multiple cameras to cover many needed angles, and thus game shows would be considered a multi-camera production.
What I had also never considered, however, was what constituted a game show. As discussed in class, as well as the readings, the ‘game show’ is a wide genre, containing multiple sub-genres, like the quiz or panel game show, and, surprisingly, the reality and dating game show. I had never thought that shows like Survivor or The Bachelor could be considered game shows, and I think the biggest reason why is the setting. Reality and Dating shows aren’t filmed in front of a live studio audience for the most part, and instead of taking place in a secluded studio they take place in more realistic environments, indicating to the audience that they are more realistic, when in fact they are almost just as superfluous as other game shows in the genre. Overall this week helped to broaden my view of the game show genre, seeing what was part of it, as well as seeing what different elements a game show requires and what can be changed while still remaining a game show.
Week 6:
This week was our second major assignment, one where we had to plan, script and film a game show on our own. I put my hand up for writer/researcher, as, while I was familiar with writing for films/single cam productions, I had never written for a live multi-camera production before, so doing so would allow me to see if the two were similar. It turns out that they weren’t, at least not for the game show, which focused a lot more on researching questions and figuring out the general flow of rounds, ads, and banter while still trying to keep on time. I think the only reason it was as heavily scripted as it was was due to fact that we planned for the game show to be rigged until the final round, with the questions, specifically in round 2, being created in such a way that Greg would always get a correct answer and Lily would always get an incorrect one. That was also the reason that I signed up to be the host; I felt that having a host that was knowledgeable on where the team wanted the show to go, as well as knowing who to rig it towards would make the process easier. I do feel that I could have helped more during the writing phase, however, as Max wrote most of the script after we had both done the research, with me filling in some blanks and minor touch ups.
Production-wise on the day, I think that the game show went really well for the most part. Everyone was working together like a well oiled machine, setting up the set as well as graphic, EVS and lighting well, leading to those being some of the strongest parts of the game show in my opinion. We decided not to have audio effects and music live, instead opting to add them late in post, as having to cue and play every correct and incorrect audio cue would’ve been too challenging, especially since we couldn’t get the audio to work in our previous assignment.
Another thing that we could’ve worked on more was the EVS, not cueing it up and playing it, but communicating it to the stage. When hosting, I didn’t know if I was meant to be talking over the EVS, explaining the round or not, and I felt that the final product could’ve been improved if I hadn’t kept starting and stopping explaining the rounds during the final production. Other than that though, I think that the game show production went really well, and it was really interesting learning the chaos of live production and how much actually goes into game shows behind the scenes, and how they include much more scripting than I originally thought. If I were to do it again, or for the next assignment, I’d probably pick a behind the scenes role, just to be more involved in the process of production.