Action Sequence Critiques

For our most recent Media Production workshop, I had to produce, do the pre-production materials for, and edit, a one minute action sequence, before showing it to the rest of the group and gaining critical feedback of it all. My action sequence involved a woman being stalked by a mysterious character.





Firstly, my group and I played my edit of the sequence we produced. The feedback I gained received mixed views. Firstly, they thought the match cuts at the beginning of the film were very well shot and edited together. They applauded this because in action sequences, it is quite important to pace the action, and my match cuts were a good way to make the cuts flow into one another, without disturbing the sequence. Secondly, they thought the cuts towards the middle of my sequence, when the stalker began chasing the victim, were poorly put together. This is because I faded to black a couple of times before continuing with the action. However, this was the only way of putting my production together, as a couple of shots I had to cut out of the sequence, didn't match well and therefore would have disturbed the flow of the action more so than what my fades-to-black already had done. Lastly, at the end when it came to the shot of the victim hiding in the foreground with the stalker looking for her in the background, they didn't follow why the stalker went out of shot but immediately returned a second later, appearing next to the victim. However, this was my intention, as I had hoped to add that extra bit of tension to my film. But the lecturer had pointed out that although this was a good idea, that it was executed to much like a horror piece. Overall, I think it is clear that my film had both good and bad elements to it and from the critique I gained, will enable me to produce something better in the next workshop.






The other edit of my sequence, was produced my Sam. The feedback he gained was again, quite controversial, but unfortunately it seems it didn't gain as well received views as the other edits. Firstly, what was critiqued more so than other parts of the production, was where, at the start, he missed the POV shots of the stalker, which is important as it established there was someone following the woman we are presented with at the start. The other critical responses he gained was when he obviously kept using the poor takes of the shots we filmed which put a negative light on the film.

Before my group had showed each of our edits, the other group showed their action sequence. The first of which I will talk of, is by Ben, the camera man of the group. Their action sequence was more or less the same;it involved a chase and a cliffhanger at the end. Ben's edit of his action sequence received both positive and negative feedback, much the same as my group's edits. However, unlike my edit, his film went from bad to good, rather than good to bad. The first part of his edit seemed to receive more negative feedback for the first couple of shots he used, which unfortunately didn't flow into one another, when really it should have been a clear match cut. Another critical comment he received was when the music he used, which started off well and complimented the action, started to become too mellow for when the film started to become more packed with action. Other than this however, his edit was received well, and good comments fortunately outbalanced the bad. Firstly, his use of black and white seemed to compliment the style of his action sequence, as it added to the thrilling and suspenseful elements much the same as the black and white tones do for film noirs.

Shanice's edit was praised very well considering it was her first time at editing. A match cut at first was the first positive feedback she gained. She carefully considered the flow of one shot into another and matched them both together very well. The music was a little too intense for the sequence, but nevertheless still fit in well in parts. The music matched the ending well too, and seemed to compliment the last couple of shots very well. Another element of her edit that was praised, was how she didn't need to use fancy effects to make her version of the film work.

Bi's edit was more controversial than the others. Firstly, she didn't match the shots as well as the other videos. Some shots were played more than once and therefore didn't flow into one another as well as they could, and for me, this unfortunately destroyed the tension, which is one of the elements I think most would look for in a good action sequence.

One Minute Action Sequence

Over the last couple of weeks, the rest of the class and I were again split into two groups, in which we would all work together and create a one minute action sequence. Our first objective was to think of ideas for an action sequence individually and then discuss with the rest of the group which one we most wanted to use.

After deciding which idea we would use, we then went on to produce a shot list, storyboard and a treatment. This is the pre-production process of filmmaking, and it was this that perhaps the most work was put into. This is because we had to draft out on paper how our action sequence would go, and how we could use the different shots of filmmaking to heighten the action of our one minute film. I drafted out the storyboard for my group as it was my idea that was nominated to be the one we would film. I already had an idea of how I wanted the film to go; I thought perhaps the best thing to do for such a short film would be to build as much suspense as possible and involve something adrenaline-fueled, rather than focusing on the plot or storyline. This is why I thought a chase would be an applicable action sequence to revolve my film around.

After producing all the pre-production materials, the rest of the group and I began the production process. I was camera man and director again and felt that I managed to control my group quite well. It took us about 1 or 2 hours to get all the takes we needed and edit them together in Final Cut Pro. I felt that my camerawork was quite professional, apart from the last shot where I tried to match-cut two shots together. I also felt my direction wasn't too bad either. The team seemed to know what they were doing from the instructions I gave them and put all their effort into their specific role. One drawback which didn't make the film as good as I had hoped, was how the antagonist of our one minute drama wasn't to be seen on the day of filming, which meant another performer had to step in; had we been prepared for this, perhaps our film would have been better.
After we finished filming, we spent a lesson editing in Final Cut Pro. This is where each of us in the group could have a go at the same role. All of us edited our own version of the film and will decide on which one to use next week. However, I did help some of my group members with their version of the edit, as they have had no experience with editing before.
Overall, I felt it was a good team effort and all of us worked as well as we possibly could. My roles in the production were - the cameraman, director, editor and also being involved with all the pre-production processes and responsible specifically for the storyboard. I hope it shows that I tried as hard as I could in the time frame we were given, and although I feel I made a good one minute film, I will learn from the few mistakes such as the one at the end that I mentioned, to make a better job of my role in the next production we do on the BTEC.

Conversation Critiques

In our most recent lesson, the rest of the class and I had to split into two groups and produce a one minute single camera production that involved a conversation. From the script we were handed we had to draft out a storyboard and shot list and shoot the film accordingly. In my group, I was both the director and the camera-man. I also helped to draft out the storyboard and decide on what shots to use in the shot list.

Our Group:

After we finished our production, which we were given an hour to complete, we decided on what was good and bad in our productions. There was only two flaws in my film; one was that I missed a shot when the "prisoner" character was talking, and the other was that I crossed the line - the all important 180 degree rule in productions. This was at the start of the film when I filmed an establishing shot of the room in which the prisoner was being questioned, but then I switched to the other side of her in the shot after the POV. However, I did do this for a reason; and this was so I could film both the prisoner and the questioner who was coming through the door at the same time. I was told that had I filmed this from a higher perspective, a CCTV camera for example, then the switch in sides would have been applicable. The positive feedback I gained however, overshadowed the criticism I received. This was that the match cuts were well executed and added professionalism to the production, I kept to the 180 degree rule in the second half of the film, the blocking and movement of the performers was good, and the cuts between shots were also done well.

Overall I am very pleased with my effort. Considering this is the first piece of filming I directed and did the camera-work for myself, I think the constructive criticism I received and positive feedback I gained meant I did do a good job of it, especially as we had only an hour to storyboard, do the shot list for, and shoot the film.

Other group's film:

The other group too, made some mistakes. Like my group, they broke the 180 degree rule at one point which is a very important rule in media productions. Although it was subtle, it was still enough to stop the flow of the film. Another mistake the other group made, was the fades between the shots. The fades didn't match the short film and so this editing technique need not have been in there. The last mistake of the film was when they broke another important rule in media production; the rule of thirds. The rule of thirds is a compositional rule in visual arts that states the image should be divided into nine parts and the most important compositional elements should be places along these intersections. However, there were also elements of this production that made it look more professional where the mistakes didn't give it justice. The fact that this film used many shots made it look more professional than had there not been a variety in the shots used. Apart from the 180 degree rule, the camerawork was good, as was the blocking, or movement and positioning of performers.

Wasp

How does 'Wasp' fit into the category of a Single Camera Production?

Wasp is a short film which follows single mother, Zoe, who is struggling to cope with poverty as she lives with her four children in Dartford. It is a single camera production for many reasons. All of which make it very fitting for this particular method of production.

Firstly, the aesthetic is very important in Wasp, and creates an atmosphere which heightens the elements of the film that I believe director, Andrea Arnold, wanted to highlight. This is primarily the element of poverty which is the theme around which the film revolves. To bring this theme to life through the aesthetic would require good lighting and sound techniques. These filmmaking tools were used to great effect as they created a very real and visceral feel by heightening the grittiness of poverty.

The sound for example, created a good atmosphere that complimented the poverty in the film. Dialogue was important and helped depict the lower class characters we are presented with, but Arnold also had to use ambience and even the soundtrack at one point to help with the exposition too. An example of this is where the song Hey! Baby, a song that seems typical of a lower class society to listen to, was featured to make obvious the class Zoe belongs to.

The film was also shot using a hand-held camera, which brought its own benefits to the table. This was namely how it complimented the real and visceral world of Dartford that Arnold hoped to create, and again, handheld camera is a single camera technique.

Examples of Single Camera and Multi-camera Television Shows

The show True Blood is a prime example for a television program which employs the method of single camera production.

The television drama series focuses on the co-existance between vampires and humans in a fictional small town, Bon Temps.

Being a television show which requires location and aesthetic to make an effective production, single camera is really the only choice for the production crew to film in. Being such a dark program means that lighting is a very important aesthetic and must be taken into thorough consideration. Because of this, each shot

must be carefully constructed so that lighting can be of any effect and produce a good show.

The location is also very important; being there various places in which we visit in True Blood, means that it would be far more logical to use real locations to help create this aesthetic. However, this can't be said for multiple camera shows, which brings me on to my next example.

Friends is an American sitcom, and one of the most successful in history, that follows a group of six friends and their every day lives.

It is a good example for a multiple camera production. Sitcoms have usually employed this mode of production (up until the last decade where the use of single camera production is rising) because they tend to feature common environments rather than a variety of locations like in True Blood.

These environments are on-set locations rather than in real locations, and therefore Friends is more fitting for this mode of production. Friends is also a show which includes a live studio audience. This would mean that multiple camera is the more logical method for Friends to be filmed in, as single camera production would disrupt the flow of the program for the audience.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Single Camera and Multiple Camera Productions

The advantages of single camera productions:

• This mode of production allows for the reconstruction of events in a different order than they may have occurred. For example, it allows many shots at different times of the day to be taken at one scene. On the next day of production, shots may be taken at a different scene and then the two can be edited together in post production. As a result this means that sometimes it can be a quicker process, which for other reasons too, makes it an advantage of single camera production itself.
• In some cases, the process can be quicker as explained in the advantage above.
• With single camera productions, it will also be cheaper to film, compared to the high cost of the multiple camera mode of production. This is simply because with this production set up, you are only employing one camera unit, which would obviously be cheaper to run than having multiple cameras set up. However, it may also cheapen the cost if you have expensive performers acting in the production, because with single camera set ups, seldom to you need all performers at any one time, whereas with multiple cameras, you would, as you are filming all action at once.
• The control of aesthetics is a big advantage to single camera productions. Depending on the show, the aesthetic can have a huge effect because the lighting and sound and other aesthetics are individually made up for each shot, it therefore makes everything look more realistic, which in itself is another advantage.
• It looks realistic.

The disadvantages of single camera productions:

• Unfortunately, single camera productions also come with its disadvantages too, one and probably a huge factor being the different angles. Different shots and angles can be very effective depending on the film or television program, especially within a specific genre such as action, where various shots and angles are needed to heighten the intensity of the scene. This in turn, could arguably ruin the aesthetic of the show, which ironically is an advantage of single camera production.
• As stated in the advantages above, you can play around with the order of the shots you take and at what location, to quicken the process and leave the work of reconstructing each scene to the editing. However, it is exactly this that will slow you down in the long run as it will take time to do this. In some cases, single camera set ups can be quick, but this only accounts for the production itself; in post production however, you have to take the time in editing and reconstructing the scenes together.

The advantages of multiple camera productions:

• Of course the first most obvious advantage of multiple camera productions is that is a much quicker process. With multiple camera set ups, it allows you to record the action in multiple shots and angles all in one swift process. This is a necessity for shows that can't take their time in filming if they have to output their show on a regular basis; these are programs such as soap operas, which normally output their show once a week and sometimes even have live performances.
• Multiple camera productions can also be cheap, just like single camera productions, but for a different reason. This is because with a multiple camera mode of production, it means you can produce a film or television program in a shorter amount of time, which can make it the cheaper set up.
• Multiple camera productions also tend to capture the best performances from the actors and actresses. This is because, unlike single camera productions, you do not have to repeat each scene. Repeating a scene may make their performances worse as they are being forced to act out the same bit over and over. It isn't uncommon to find directors even record rehearsals because performers put most of their effort into their first few tries. However, it is also possible to find these performers are being secretly filmed in rehearsals because there is pressure on them to act well when they are put in front of the camera and the crew, which ultimately could even make their acting worse.
• Another advantage closely related to, and party covered in the first advantage of multiple camera, is that there is better coverage of the scene. More shots, angles, footage etc of the scene, means there is more material that could possibly make a better production.

The disadvantages of multiple camera productions:

• Ironically, as multiple camera productions are the much quicker process, it does still take a long time to set up at first. With more than one camera unit employed, as the same with other equipment, it means it will take longer to set it all up.
• The aesthetic is also not as good with multiple camera productions because unlike single camera productions where the equipment is reset after each shot to fit the atmosphere of the next one, with multiple camera you must stand by the aesthetic from the beginning as the equipment is already set up.
• Another disadvantage of multiple camera productions is that the locations in which the footage is shot, is less believable, because with this mode or production, the scenes are generally filmed on-set, rather than a real location, which otherwise would add depth and aesthetic to the film or program.

Single Camera and Multiple Camera Production

Single Camera Production:

A single camera mode of production is a method of shooting films and television programs with just one camera. It is where each shot or camera angle in a production is taken with the same camera but at different times as between shots, the camera is moved. It is common to find that film and television productions shoot out of order and then assemble them into order when editing in post production. It is therefore likely that lighting set-ups will also be reset in between shots.

Multiple Camera Production:

The multiple camera mode of production is another way of shooting films and television programs. Unlike single camera productions, multiple camera involves several cameras which are set up and record footage simultaneously, as the name implies. With this technique, multiple shots are obtained without having to disturb the flow of the action by resetting the camera, unlike single camera productions. This mode of production is more commonly used among television programs that regularly output their episodes, and they are also essential in live television.