Final K-Film

K-film Link – With Great Power…

http://www.themediastudents.net/im1/2014/james.muntisov/withgreatpower/kfilmfinal.html

Essay Below

Is there a definitive line between authentic and fabricated reality?  Is it always possible to tell what is real from what has been fabricated and if so, how?  In today’s technologically advanced society, in which CGI and special effects, along with Photoshop and other similar programs, are prevalent, it can become very difficult to determine whether what we are seeing is real or fake.

The purpose of our film, called “With Great Power…”, is to ask the audience to pay attention to what they are seeing, not just within our film but in their everyday life.  The film aims to challenge the notion of what reality is by introducing elements throughout our videos that either appear to be either mildly believable or obviously orchestrated, when mixed with those that are genuine in order to test the audience’s ability to determine whether or not what they are seeing is actually real.

Content is the most important element of our film as it is the content of each film clip that will act both individually and collectively, to deliver the intended meaning of our film.  The clips of the film have been categorised into three groups: ‘real’; ‘surreal’; and ‘unreal’.  These three categories comprise the entirety of the film and the clips within them intertwine to form a constantly fluctuating view of reality versus fabrication.

In order to communicate our concept, we have introduced the theme of superpowers running throughout the film.  Superpowers as a theme provides a simplistic, yet interesting and engaging way of delivering our ideas as the majority of what people see in present day superhero films is either edited or fabricated actions and powers.  The superpowers shown in our film cover a wide range of not only abilities but concepts.  The clips themselves often appear to be a little rushed and rather candid and unprofessional.  This was a specific intention of ours when creating the clips as we wanted to create the feel of on the spot moments, as if the audience member was witnessing a sudden display of a superpower in public and pulled out their phone quickly to capture the event.

This allows the viewer to relate more to the video in two ways.  Firstly, because it mirrors the spontaneous way in which people live their lives today; for example, an unprecedented event occurs and passersby pull out their phones to record it.  Secondly, it makes the clips seem more realistic; if each clip was professionally set up and filmed then they would all seem fake and too reminiscent of the Hollywood effects which we are trying to expose.  Rather, the clips having the “on the spot” feeling, give them a more realistic sense, so it appears plausible that these events and examples of superpowers could really have occurred and someone happened to be there and able to film it.

Category one is the “real” category and the videos in this section are exactly that, real. they have not been edited or added to in any way to make them appear in a way different to what was physically recorded. While some clips in the ‘real’ category may show people performing simple stunts or tricks that others may not be able to, for example curling their tongue, or even putting out a flame with it, other clips show elements of our lives or examples in today’s society that involve or allude to superheroes.  Clips like this include a superhero cape hanging to dry on a clothesline, a superman shirt in a wardrobe or even a passerby staring at a superhero movie poster or watching a superhero movie. The clips demonstrate the prevalence of superheroes and superpowers in our everyday lives, commenting that we as a society have become so used to these as being a normal part of our culture that we don’t even see them as something strange or different anymore.  These clips are used to contrast this reality from fiction, and to show to the viewers just how blinded they have become by the overload of Hollywood superhero films and the actions contained within them.

The second category, the ‘unreal’ videos, demonstrate the visual and special effects that the audience is used to seeing every day.  From television shows to YouTube videos to blockbuster superhero movies, CGI and green screen technology rules and we have become so used to it that we don’t even question what we are seeing.  The content of the videos in this category are generally quite overstated in order to draw the attention towards the editing and fabrication that has been used to create the visual effects.

There are different kinds of clips again in this category.  While most have to do with superheroes or superpowers, others, for example a car being blown up, or the helicopter crashing in a busy street, have been included as examples of over-exaggeration; to point out to the viewer that some things that they are seeing are clearly not real.  These clips also help to draw some attention away from other clip categories, which are generally more subtle. Some of these less obvious clips include Batman being frozen in ice, someone springing onto a high ledge, and a man walking through a reversing crowd of people.  While these clips have been edited to look the way they do, when they are contrasted against the far more heavily edited superpower clips, for example someone teleporting, or clips that include obvious CGI, such as a person having the physical ability to cause an avalanche snowstorm.  They cause the audience to wonder whether or not what they are seeing is in fact somehow occurring.

The final category has been labelled as ‘surreal’ and is the most important section of clips, each one being a combination of both the ‘real’ and the ‘unreal’.  The content in this category drives home the entire premise of the film as it is the tie between the authentic and the fabricated.  These videos have been purposely constructed to truly make the viewer wonder whether what they are seeing is real or has in fact been edited.

Clips in this category include levitation, creating a fire by clicking fingers, and card tricks.  Each one is filmed in such a way that the viewers are uncertain whether or not what they are seeing is real or fake.  To accomplish this, filming these clips involved utilising specific camera angles to hide certain parts of the trick; much the way a magician uses sleight of hand and distractions to perform some “magic” tricks. These videos are intended to blend between those in the other two categories, essentially blurring the lines between them and making one continuous whole as opposed to two or three separate categories.  The surreal acts as the glue between the two because without these clips, the real and the unreal would seem stark opposites and the audience would be able to tell immediately what is authentic and what is fabricated.

Documentary theorist, Craig Hight, argues that “documentary has always responded, in an often dynamic fashion, to the possibilities afforded by new technologies” (2008, p.3).  Our Korsakow film can also be described as a documentary style, and reflects Hight’s opinion that “documentary film-makers [share] means to experiment with innovative approaches to capturing the social-historical world, help[ing] to reinvigorate interest in the genre amongst a new generation of… audiences” (2008, p.3).  This is true of both our theme of documentary, which appeals greatly to today’s younger generation, as well as our style and way that we have constructed our clips.  [1]

Our film’s interface is laid out with the featured clip central to sixteen surrounding videos.  While this layout looks visually appealing, it also resembles that of traditional comic book panels, vibrant colours stretching across the entire page.  Because of this, the interface can almost immediately be associated with the superhero genre, almost similar to Marvel Comic’s preview cinematic, which consists of a rapid montage of comic strip scenes.  However, our film’s layout also attempts to represent our argument, or at least, help to convince audiences that this concept of ‘superpowers’ and the abilities of other individuals, have become entrenched throughout our society, especially in recent times with the rapid rise of the genre of the ‘comic book movie’.

Originally, for our list of sixty videos, we had planned to include twenty videos from each of our three categories of ‘real’, surreal’ and ‘unreal’.  This did not work out to be the case for our final product, because although we were being stretched thin with our ideas for some of the categories, we decided that having an uneven number of videos in each category, it would potentially make our argument of “is it real” less structured and obvious.

The backing instrumental track we have chosen to use throughout our film is titled ‘Black Vortex’, and is an intense, suspenseful orchestral hybrid arrangement with a prominent strings section throughout much of the piece.  It begins slow and bold, before it ramps up to a fast tempo, with an unrelenting melody.  The disconcerting, dark yet epic buzz of the synthesizers throughout make the piece seem like it could be taken straight from Nolan’s Dark Knight Trilogy composed by Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard.

Pattern is another important element in our film.  A topic that was discussed mid semester in the class before the submission of the sketch film was due was about how to organise the SNU’s using ‘in’ and ‘out’ keywords.  One important point was that it is not only often simpler to use just a minimal number of keywords, but it can make the pattern of the film and the clips themselves feel a lot more effective.  Taking this useful advice, we have chosen to only use three keywords for our SNU’s, these are: “real”, “unreal” and “surreal”.

A film in any one of these three categories will have keywords leading out to the other two.  This has been done to truly blur the lines between the three categories and the viewer will be unsure to which the clip belongs to.  By limiting the amount of keywords, more emphasis is placed on the three specific categories that are used and a pattern will begin to emerge.  This allows the viewer to experience a range of different clips because each category is linked to the other two categories instead of its own one.

As a whole, the process of recording the short clips was rather fun, assisted by our topic of choice with highlights including Jim walking backwards in public bumping into people and trying on children’s dress ups in stores.  We did however, encounter a few difficulties throughout the project.  To think of sixty achievable clips was a rather challenging process however, as we began filming new ideas would spontaneously present themselves and often we could serendipitously shoot them and this method of on the spot idea generation and recording added to the candid nature of the overall project.

Aspect ratios differ slightly throughout the film, due to filming on the different devices of the iPhone 4 and 5, however, while not ideal, we feel this is only a minor detriment to the final product and in fact, it could be argued that this gives the film a greater sense of authenticity, as it is highly unlikely that all witnesses to these ‘accounts’ would have the same mobile phone camera.

In conclusion, we feel that our Korsakow film clearly demonstrates that, while most of the time it is rather easy to tell the difference between what is real from what has been fabricated, sometimes these boundaries are less simple to determine when edited clips are made to look authentic and believable.   Nothing can be taken for granted in today’s society, much less to be ignored.

[1]  Hight, Craig 2008. The Field of Digital Documentary: A Challenge to Documentary Theorists. Studies in Documentary Film 2.1: 3–7.