Here are the links to the three vlogs for Assignment 2:

A2 Blog 1: Here!

A2 Blog 2: Here!

A2 Blog 3: Here!

Yay! A2 Done!

For Assignment Two, the group I was a part of made a game/quiz show called “Lair Liar, Pants on Fire” in which two contestants were only able to answer the quiz questions with incorrect answers to impress The Judge who would allocate points. To mediate the game, a host will ask the three questions per each three rounds.

As the groups for this assignment were bigger than the first assignment, I had expected some difficulty with communication as there were more ideas to float around, people to please and more people to compromise with. However, I also expected more creative diversity, which excited me greatly. My team mates, Viv, Jack, Mina, Mia, Yao, Vi, Yun all had great ideas going into the pre-production stages and I had lot of fun planning our show!

However, during production, I was surprised at how frazzled the group became, me included. Even though we had created a run sheet and planned (what I would consider) extensively, there was a lack of communication on time during filming.

Aside from all of the technical difficulties we couldn’t have planned for or controlled (mics cutting out etc), there seemed to be an overall miscommunication. In the future, I would have drawn a comprehensive plan of the set – or allocated a set designer who was in charge to compensate for this. Moreover, I would plan a table read of the script with the crew and the talent as well as it was disheartening to see our Host, Sabrina, struggle to comprehend the script Yun and I had written and for Connor and Liz to not know their cues. I felt that our team could have planned more to make the filming experience easier for the talent.

Moreover, I felt that our downfall was the crossover between the roles of those in the control room. During production, it became apparent that many team members (absolutely including me) were adopting the roles that were lacking. As I was a writer, I assumed the role of the AutoCue Operator on filming day (which was pre planned) in which I intermittently jumped in to help to keep time. At the fault of my own (not trying to be critical of everyone but me!) this caused confusion which then led to panic. I also felt that I would slip into a more directorial role, confusing things further. I have learned that I really need to step back into my own role and not try to accomplish too much or step on others toes. It would be up to clear communication to convey to others that they need to keep to time rather than trying to do it for them.

All things considered, I felt that Viv, our director, did a great job of coordinating us between the rehearsal and the final take. The rehearsal was messy, the cameras were shaky, the graphics and EVS did not always play and there were parts of the script missing (whoops). Viv was able to convey his vision and the changes he wanted for the final take to each group member and the talent in a calm and concise manner. I felt this was a very positive turning point for our production. Going into the final take, I felt more confident in our ability to complete the game show.

In post production, we agreed to edit in the missing intro music and edit out the pauses where the Auto Cue had been behind (sorry!). As game shows are not always exclusively live to tape, I was excited about the possibility of editing out some of our errors to create a polished finished product!

I am happy with the final edited version!

 

Check out our raw final take: Here!

Check out our edited final take: Here!

(Two audios edited in from the YouTube Copyright Free Audio Library. ‘1973’ by Bruno E. and ‘Daytime Forest Bonfire’).

 

^The control room feat. Jack and Viv.

In week 5 there were two quotes from Holme’s book which caught my attention. One of which is…

‘This observation relates to a wider objection: that approaches to genre in television have often simply been transferred from film and literary studies, without sufficient consideration of their applicability to television’ (Holmes 2008 pg 11)

I felt in my own media making, I was not aware that television genres are different from film genres, and I had been guilty of this very application of genre. I feel that much of what I’m learning about television has been subconscious in my mind, but never taught to me or never explored. Moreover, despite rarely watching quiz/game shows, I feel aware of the genre conventions and the creation of shows in class feels organic to create as I am realising I have been exposed to television my life (even if they are not well applied to television from film). This then speaks to the idea that the Multi Camera Television set up has been far more present in my life than I had previously thought, and as documented by my previous blog posts.

Another quote I found interesting from this week was ‘there is a greater tendency toward hybridity and intertextuality (1992: 157)’ (Holmes 2008 pg 13) which describes one of my favourite aspects of modern film and television and something I hope to employ in my own media making. Particularly on the idea of intertextuality, I realised reading the quote that so much of quiz shows is intertextuality. In our practice exercises we often asked each other media related questions which brings me to think, does this count as intertextuality (as prior media knowledge was needed for this)? Or is this simply just a genre convention? But then, is that the precise hybridity Holmes is describing? I am greatly interested in intertextuality and the exclusivity it creates, and I hope it is something I could write into future productions.

Reference:

Holmes, Su. “Genre and the Quiz Show” in The Quiz Show, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, 2008, pp. 11-31.

In week four, we discussed the use and preparation of the studio space as a response to Ben Lamb’s article ‘Narrative Form and the British Television Studio 1955–1963’. A quote that caught my attention was `Leonard White [of the Armchair Theatre] claimed that the camera ‘rarely stood still for long’ and directors would no longer ‘stand-off and photograph’ […] this use of cameras made ‘camera movement an integral part of the performance’. This reminded me greatly of the class work we completed from weeks 2-4 in which we employed one or two moving camera’s into our production to bring some life to the production. I discovered that the slight movement (or tracking of tallent) felt more natural to the eye as it almost simulated the slight movement of our own eyes, as if we were viewing it ourselves in real time.

It was interesting to then watch clips of other late night shows and their camera movements. The combination of the host (and guest) with their space (sitting at desks etc) and then the slight camera movement felt to have created a personal relationship between the at home audience and the host. The rigidity of the static cameras felt inorganic and sterile. 

In this clip of Taylor Swift’s interview with Seth Meyers, you can see the cameras track the two talents when Swift enters the set and when they move slightly in their seats, rocking back and forth. This feels totally natural. The movements are large enough that the action of the scene remains centred and there is a slight constant movement, but small enough that it goes largely unnoticed if you’re not searching for it. I think finding this equilibrium when filming the next assignment will be difficult.

Moreover, White’s description of ‘the performance’ reminded me greatly of my first assignment. I felt that understanding the rehearsal process as a true physical rehearsal for not only timing purposes but also camera movements and their coordination with the director and thus, vision switcher was one of my greatest learning curves. I now understand after trying the roles of the camera operator that without the rehearsal, the final take was stressful and I would often miss key cues as I wasn’t prepared. And thus, I hope to help with the rehearsal of the camera operators in the next assignment!

 

References;

Lamb, B 2014. ‘Narrative Form and the British Television Studio 1955-1963’, Historical journal of film, radio and television, vol.34, no.3, pp.357-368