What went well?
For the purpose of failure, I think we did very well in the Lenny exercise. The use of limited space, gave us as a crew and the actors an imaginary feeling of how it actually is to shoot, in a certain space. What I liked about the Lenny exercise is when Paul said ‘you guys are meant to use and take advantage of the space you’re shooting in’ and he also added that we had to think about HOW we did this. This leads to my second point, where we applied this knowledge (together with the knowledge of camera, lighting, colors and sound settings) into the practice of Lenny. I believe that the 60 minutes we had, gave us enough time to follow the script to each point and also the actual options we have in this amount of space.
What went wrong?
Small things as: the director in the shoot, the boomer in the frame and the unnoticed ‘hand shift’ of the actor but also, the storyboarding. We had too many back up plans giving too many options to choose between instead of having one set of shoots per scene. Good because we had plans A,B and C but bad because this simply showed that we were detailed, picky, focused and neat on the actual shoot resulting into what a journalist lecturer (Alex) names as ‘ you guys were OVER thinking, just simplify it’. I don’t think its wrong but instead showed that the group as whole is together extreme goal targeted and learned a lot on this, and will take this lesson further into ‘Sneaker Spastic’ and in future short-film production. The storyboarding needs to be narrower for Sneaker Spastic and the conciseness of the shoot needs a) to be in the hands of the camera woman and b) reshoot after the entire actual scene.
How can I myself improve this and how can the group as a whole improve on this field?
The learning process of Film-TV 1 after this, and also when constructing the scene, we need to check for everything and keep on to our roles as much as possible. I think the article of developing a crew touches on the aspects that we find challenging both Lenny and Sneaker Spastic. When linking this aspect with Arbiger’s article, the expectations of the crew development there’s a lot to be taught. Arbiger talks about using people with experience and continuing developing communication. I agree with the author in terms of common language and responsibility. This because he introduces us new comers of this discipline, how to do what in terms of a low budget film, communication strategies for handling stress and immaturity for crew members, organizing responsibility, the production hierarchy, production department, directing, DP, sound, art department and styling (make-up and hair).
No matter how straight forwards this article is I did not like the practical implementation of it; I mean, how are we meant to remember all of this, in the time space, of scene shot’s duration say 2 minutes? Our outcome of Lenny, showed good post-production and the crew development here is reflected into Arbiger’s crew construction (386-391). By trusting this article and follow its procedures on crew management and strategic communication, I believe that if each of us maintain our roles as its highlighted in this article, then we wont be over thinking and do those small mistakes as we did in Lenny, in Sneaker Spastic.
After the casting and find the characters we’re looking for, I think then we will be stabile enough as a group to continue the fun of producing Sneaker Spastic, for Arbiger’s part on Art Department. Imagine the make-up, wardrobe, hairstyle, background, props and more that involves for the production design? The more we know the merrier, and the better the organisation and production of this film will be.
No comments:
Post a Comment