Through the practical research we have undertaken so far, I have become to slowly understand how I like to work as a filmmaker. Being able to focus in on producing just a scene, with or without constraints, and reflecting on these processes each week has made me closer to discovering what my working methodology may be.

One of the things I have discovered so far is that reviewing the location and creating a shot list from knowing the location well is very important to me. In many of the exercises, I (or the group as a whole) would have clear ideas about how I would like to cover a particular scene, only for this to completely change once I had arrived on location. Everything from the space in the location (vast or cramped), the shape of the location, the backgrounds (or lack of), the lighting, etc, can all alter the way you end up filming a scene. As I have experienced through the class exercises so far, when I look at a script and have a clear vision of how I would like it to look, it becomes hard for me to let the shots go and adapt to the requirements of the location. In these situations, my creativity becomes crippled, and I can’t be spontaneous or adapt in the short time I have to direct the scene. The way in which I would like to work in the future, is to not look at the script until I am at the location, possibly with the DOP and/or Producer (or maybe alone), during pre-production rather than waiting until the day of filming. This way I can let the location inspire the shots, and use it to my advantage in creating interesting coverage of the scene.

I have also discovered that I prefer to mark up the script initially during pre-production and then create a shot list from this. I find it to be quite a fluid process to mark off where and which shots I want to cover certain parts of the script and use the marked up script as a basis for the rest of my pre-production. I feel as though a shot-list it would help with the organising of filming as not everybody may find it easy to follow someone else’s marked up script. While I haven’t used a storyboard so far in the exercises, this would also be beneficial in visualising the way the shots will look. In previous courses, I have taken photos of the location with stand-ins as a storyboard, rather than drawing one. I find this works a lot better as you’re able to not only visualise the scene within the specific location, but also when you take a photo you are also able to see how the lighting is and if you need any artificial lights to illuminate the scene. This is something that previous groups have also found to work well, and is something I will employ in the future.

The major epiphany I have had in terms of my working methodology is that in the past, I have used the script as a basis for my visualisation of the scene. However, using the location as the primary source for pre-production is far more helpful and interesting to me. By waiting until I am at the location before I even look at the script will allow me to be more creative and use the location to my advantage.

This week’s task was probably the closest to the industrial model compared to the previous shoots we had been on. It’s been an interesting transition so far, to begin with the highly constrained task of the single shot in the first week, to this week having really only a time restriction. We had the freedom of shooting as many or as little shots as we wanted and had around a whole hour to shoot.

My group was group A, which meant that we were to shoot the scene in the traditional shoot to edit style. During our pre-production, we initially discussed the executive roles (director, DOP, and 3 actors), however no-one felt strongly about directing, so we initially decided we would share it around on the day. We marked up the script and felt confident we had enough coverage to shoot in the traditional shoot to edit style. However, we didn’t go down to the location as a group prior to the shoot and create a floor plan, which in hindsight may have assisted us on the day if we had.

On the day of filming, we initially shot Group B’s coverage of the scene. It was interesting to observe how they chose to cover the scene considering they were able to shoot in a way that was less like the industrial model. This meant that they were able to use interesting and creative shots. It was also interesting to see how everyone communicated with one another to make it a great scene. It was also interesting to see that they used a few hand-held shots. I almost questioned them (as in some previous shoots we weren’t allowed to use hand-held) but then remembered there were hardly any constraints on this particular shoot. It was interesting to see how they composed their frames, considering they didn’t have to cover their scene in a more traditional manner. There was a lot more movement in their shots than ours, and more lateral thinking about how to frame the shots. In particular, the shot in which X emerges from the door, was probably their best shot of the day. It was so beautifully composed and framed and they utilized both background and foreground space. Even though I wasn’t behind the camera, I think everyone in the room got the feeling that the shot being framed was something quite special. They used the space really well and created something really inspiring and interesting.

For Group B’s scene, I asked Simone (who was directing) if she wanted me to be the 1st AD for them. which she agreed to. Their pre-production consisted of mostly a storyboard, compared to our marked up script. In my role of being the 1st AD, I talked to the crew mostly while Simone talked to the actors about the shot. I tried to make sure that the DOP and sound crew were all ready and knew what was expected for the particular shot, as well as trying to ensure that the group moved along quickly enough to give them enough time to finish. Simone was really good at communicating, however I found it difficult to follow the storyboard and found myself asking continuously about what was happening in the shot. Personally, I prefer to work off a marked up script or shot list to understand what will be covered in the particular shot.

In our initial pre-production meeting, our group thought that we should swap the roles around and allow everyone to be able to direct, seeing as none of us felt strongly that they really wanted to/didn’t want to direct. However, on the day of filming, once we saw how the group before us ran out of time and missed out on filming one shot in particular, we decided that rather than spend time rotating the roles, one person could direct. We quickly nominated Chris, who appeared to be the most confident with directing. Everyone was happy with that decision, seeing as we had previously discussed the coverage of the scene anyway during pre-production.

As our group was given the brief of covering the scene in a more traditional, industrial, shoot to edit style, we had a few shot-reverse-shots. We also had a few wide shots to allow the action to take place in the area, and using both background and foreground spaces. All of our shots were stationary, except for an experimental hand-held shot we decided to add right at the end of the shoot as we had extra time. As we were in quite a restricted space, that called for more static shots, as any pans would’ve been quite short and awkward.

I was quite surprised at how well everyone worked together, and I think this is mainly due to having more pre-production time. Having this time allowed us to agree on the way in which we would cover the scene, therefore on the day of filming, everyone was working together to achieve the shot list we had come up with. Chris was a great director and natural leader of the group, and communicated really well with everyone. Filming our scene was actually quite relaxing and we felt at ease with what we were doing, which was a nice surprise.  We even ended up finishing before the time was up, so we decided to try and experiment with some more shots, giving us more coverage to work with for post-production.

I think that if my group had gone to the location together before the day of filming, we could have adapted our original thoughts on the coverage to create more interesting or unique shots, while still shooting to edit. Knowing your location extremely well, and even going there with a camera to see how it looks in the viewfinder is really important, as I’ve discovered from this exercise.

The single shot from The King’s Speech interested me in terms of the way it broke from conventions of traditional scene coverage as it wasn’t ‘shot to edit’. While I think the director Tom Hooper took an interesting approach to conveying the story in this scene with the hand-held single shot, covering a scene in this way is restricting as there is very little variance for post-production.

When I first watched this scene, I thought that it was covered with a dolly shot, however after watching it a few times, I realised that it was most likely shot with hand-held camera. While the hand-held works in some of the more emotionally unstable shots in the film, I think it’s quite clunky in this particular scene. By covering the scene in a smooth dolly shot, the actor’s movements would’ve been emphasized more rather than being outshone by the shaky hand-held camera movement.

The main critique I have of this scene, is that it ends on the Queen. Story wise, the scene marks a huge milestone for the King who has just heard himself speak without stammering for the first time in his life and now has hope that he can overcome his speech impediment. However, the continuous single shot chosen to cover this scene restricts the way in which the scene can be covered. If the scene was shot to edit, the editors would’ve been able to end the scene on the King in frame if they wanted. The way the scene is currently, it appears as though the revelation is affecting the Queen more than the King (even though she is indirectly affected), due to the scene ending on her in frame.

Personally, I would’ve covered the scene in the single shot, but then also covered it in a shot to edit style so that I had more variance of shots to work with in post-production. I would’ve shot the King sitting from a high-angle to demonstrate his feelings of being insignificant before he hears himself speaking. I think having more close-ups of him would allow the editors to elongate the length of the screen time and allow the audience to focus on his reaction.

Even having a shot-reverse-shot of the relationship between the King and the record player could have added another dynamic to the scene. Rather than how the scene is currently, filming from the King’s perspective rather than the record player’s the entire time, would give the scene more depth.

By covering the scene in a shot to edit style, not only would there have been more opportunities for different edits in post-production, but the King’s epiphany would’ve been given more focus rather than concentrating on the Queen.

Film: The King’s Speech (2010), Directed by Tom Hooper.

Quick Film Summary: Based on the true story of King George VI’s rapid rise to the ascension of the throne and the speech therapist who helped him overcome his speech impediment.

Chosen Scene: In this scene, the King has given up hope that his speech impediment can be overcome until he listens to the recording of his previous session with Lionel.

Shot List: This scene is shot in one continuous shot. While it seems as though it is hand-held, I’ll still refer to the movement as a ‘track’ even though a dolly may not have been used. The camera movements in order are:

1. The camera tracks left to right from behind the record player with the gramophone taking up most of the frame (in close-up).
2. The camera tracks forward and tilts down slightly, stopping on the King lying on the couch (wide shot).
3. The camera tilts up quickly as the King stands up and walks to get the record from the drawer (wide shot).
4. The camera pans from right to left as the King walks back to the record player and closer to the camera (mid-shot to medium close-up).
5. The camera tilts down to show the King’s hand changing the records (medium close-up).
6. The camera tilts up to the King with the gramophone in frame (medium close-up).
7. The camera pans right slightly, and tilts down to show the gramophone taking up most of the frame, similarly to the first frame of the scene (close-up).
8. The camera then tracks around the left side of the gramophone slowly to show the King sitting on the couch, listening to the record of his voice (mid-shot).
9. The camera continues to track but in a forward motion towards the King, with slight tilt down to capture him sitting on the couch to the right of frame as he listens to himself recite Shakespeare (close-up).
10. The camera tilts up and focuses on the Queen who is left of frame, and continues to tilt and track forward left to frame her in a mid-shot.

No. of Camera Set-Ups: 1

Analysis:

The first frame of the scene is of the large gramophone represented as a looming presence over the King. The camera tracks from right to left around the gramophone, and then in a forward motion towards the King who is lying on the couch. This first tracking movement is quite musical in nature in the sense that it is smooth and is paced in a way that it seems to match the tempo of the music being played on the record player.

It then stops to frame the King who is lying motionless on the couch. The camera stopping to frame him, gives the audience the expectation that he is about to do or say something. He satisfies this expectation by standing up and walking over to the chest of drawers. As he stands, the camera tilts up quickly and a bit shakily to match his quick jolting movement. This movement is quite jarring as the previous track and tilt was quite smooth, and gives the audience the impression that the King is feeling unbalanced. It marks a shift in the scene and makes the audience wonder what the King’s next action will be.

The camera then pans right to left as the King walks over to the record player with a record in his hand. The camera begins moving ahead of the King so that he remains in frame as he walks over. If the director had let the King lead the shot, he may have been lost out of the left side of the frame and the motion would’ve felt awkward and rushed. As the King has moved closer to the camera, he is now framed in a medium close-up and his appearance is quite dishevelled, further emphasizing his emotional instability.

The camera tilts down quite quickly and a bit shakily to show the King changing the record on the record player. Once again the camera leads the motion and moves ahead of the King to show his actions.

Once it has been clearly established that the King has changed the record over, the camera tilts up quickly again to frame him in a medium close-up, once again showing the King in his emotional distress.

The camera then mimics the King’s movement of sitting down on the couch as it tilts down behind the gramophone so it becomes large in the frame and the King can barely be seen. The movement is in time with the King’s movement as the tilt stops at the exact moment that the King sits. This frame is almost exactly the same as the first frame of the scene, with the gramophone being a threatening and looming presence over the King; something that he has failed to conquer thus far. However, the first frame of the scene is not focused on the gramophone, rather the King in the background, whereas in this frame the King is out of focus and the gramophone is in focus. This reflects that the sound from the first frame is not important, however the sound in this frame is very important. Using almost the exact frame suggests a second chance for the King as it is if the scene is beginning all over again, but this time with a different emotional outcome.

The camera tracks around the gramophone again, similarly to the first frame, however it moves at a slower pace. This emphasizes the importance of the sound heard, and the dawning on the King that his speech therapy session with Lionel was a success despite what he had previously thought. It mimics the  King’s slow realisation that his speech impediment can be overcome and emphasizes the emotions of the scene. The movement is quite smooth to demonstrate the smooth way in which the King delivers the speech.

The camera movement ends on a close-up of the King to demonstrate his emotion towards hearing himself recite Shakespeare. The camera frames the King to the right of screen, giving the audience the expectation that something or someone will appear on the left of screen. This expectation is satisfied when the Queen enters frame in the background. The camera then tilts up and focuses on her to show her reaction to what she is hearing. The camera then tracks around towards her slowly, almost as if it is mimicking the sound waves reaching her ears. The scene ends on the mid-shot of the Queen, surprised at the miracle she has just witnessed. The choice to use a close-up of the King compared to the mid-shot of the Queen, reflects the importance of the revelation to each of them. While her husband’s speech impediment effects her greatly, the prospect that it could be overcome is far more important to the King who lives with his problem everyday than it is to the Queen.

The camera movement in the entire scene could personify the sound moving around the room and reflecting how it is absorbed by the characters. In the beginning, the camera movement is quite smooth and matches the tempo of the music first heard in the scene. The movement becomes quite shaky and quick as the camera follows the King’s brash movements. It then returns to a smooth and even slower movement than before when the King’s Shakespearean speech is heard and reaches the characters in the scene.

The camera movement could also personify Lionel (the King’s speech therapist). While he is not in the scene, the King’s mind is on his session with him. It is almost as if Lionel’s presence is sneaking up on the King in the beginning and taunting him which then makes him take action. Lionel’s presence is then shaken when the King moves brashly to listen to the record and he hides behind the gramophone. His presence then peeks out slowly to see the King’s reaction to the record and then moves to see the Queen’s reaction. The first frame of the following scene shows the Queen and King sitting in Lionel’s office discussing the business terms.

Director, Tom Hooper employs quite a lot of camera movement throughout the entire film. He uses hand-held camera often, which becomes more shaky when the King is at his lowest and most emotional. The hand-held camera gives the audience the impression that they are witnessing first hand the historical moments in the film, and getting a personal insight into the King’s life. He also uses a lot of tracking shots to cover scenes to create a sense of grandiose and royalty that the historical drama requires. This scene is the only one in the whole film that is covered in one continuous shot.

Hooper’s other great film success has come from the 2012 film ‘Les Miserables’ which is a film adaptation of the musical theater production about the French Revolution. In this film, Hooper also uses hand-held quite a lot throughout to mimic the character’s movements and the tempo of the musical numbers. He rarely uses dolly/tracking shots in this film, perhaps due to the fact that the characters are not of royalty but rather lower class. The camera is rarely still throughout the film, and is only still during some of the more slower musical numbers. Much like ‘The King’s Speech’, the hand-held camera varies from smooth to shaky to reflect the character’s emotions, being more shaky during moments of emotional instability. He has not covered any of the scenes in this film in one continuous shot. As the dialogue is all sung, the camera is almost always constantly moving to match the tempo and emotion of the songs.

3-6 SHOT EDITED EXERCISE:

The planning process for the 3-6 shot edited exercise involved two members from our group going on a location scout while the rest of the group began discussing possible shots based on the script. However, we knew our ideas for our shots during the planning and discussing stage were subject to change based on the location chosen. The time that we spent planning whilst not on location, seemed to be almost a waste as when we arrived on location and saw what we had to work with we basically started planning from scratch.

The location chosen was a balcony with a view of the Old Melbourne Jail grounds and the city skyline which provided a nice backdrop to our scene. However, the space was quite cramped and there was piping and other objects crowding our space. Acting out the scene in the space helped us decide on the shots we were happy with, and we planned the maximum six shots that we were allowed. Having decided to swap the production roles as much as possible throughout the shoot, we managed to all get behind camera except for the two actors due to us running out of time. It was difficult to review the shots in the location as the space was so cramped, we could only have one person behind camera at a time. Having to move along quickly, we trusted that the shot was good without reviewing it and moving on to the following shot.

Filming the over the shoulder (Amy) with the phone was probably the most difficult shot to film, however it was the one we were most excited about. Our aim was to try and get both Amy and Tom’s reflection in the phone clearly, then pan right to frame them together facing each other. Due to the fact that we didn’t have a mirror and had to work with the reflection from the phone, the reflections weren’t as clear as we had hoped, however, it still turned out quite nicely. The other shot that excited everyone on the day was the close up of Amy looking into the camera lens as if it were the mirror on her phone. Being something quite different than what we had seen before made us all quite excited to see the final shot. The shot turned out quite well except for the fact that the camera lens was dirty.

During the editing stage, I was able to review all of the shots and see what I had to work with to create the scene. When I began cutting it together, I realised that one of the cuts in particular was a bit awkward – Tom introducing himself to Amy’s over the shoulder shot. To try and make this as smooth as possible, I shortened the clip with Tom walking into frame as much as possible. I also created a J-cut with Tom’s voice coming over the top of the close-up shot of Amy looking into the camera. These two things helped to create a smoother scene.

For a couple of the shots, the tripod wasn’t level and the boom also ended up in frame. To fix this I used the motion feature on Premiere to rotate and zoom the clips. I also used the brightness/contrast, and three-way colour corrector to correct the blueness throughout all of the clips. I also added some wind sound effects to add ambience to the scene.

Watching other people’s cuts of the scene, it became clear that they were all quite similar, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, however if we had chosen to film less but lengthier shots, we would’ve had more opportunity to create different cuts of the scene. The main lesson I learned from this exercise was that even though we had more freedom to cover the scene (a maximum of six shots) if we had focused our energy on covering it in two fantastic shots we could’ve been more creative with our scene. Putting more constraints on a shoot can mean that the outcome is more creative and adventurous than expected.

FIRST INDIVIDUAL DIRECTING EXERCISE:

The first individual directing exercise was really exciting. Having the freedom to pick whichever part (or all) of the scene and how you want to cover it was an exciting prospect. When I looked at the script I was immediately able to visualise the shot I wanted to direct. I decided that I wanted to try shooting the first half of the script with the first frame being a mid-shot of the two characters crouching down looking for the book and then panning to follow the book in close-up and then the last frame being the two characters in a mid-shot sitting down with the book.

The first decision we all had to make was which exterior location we should use. We tried to find somewhere that wouldn’t be too noisy or too bright. After deciding on our location we began setting up the equipment and organising the roles for the first shot. We came across an issue with the white balance on the camera where if we tried to set the white balance to A or B, the image would appear either green or red. After trying to troubleshoot, we decided we were wasting too much time trying to fix the issue and so we used the preset white balance, which wasn’t quite right but was better than before.

Allowing the person who was directing to have complete control over the shoot ensured that their visions were (hopefully) met. It was clear that everybody felt a lot freer to choose what they wanted and how they wanted it done, and it was really nice to see everybody’s creative sides.

While I did have a clear idea of what I wanted my shot to look like, it did change when we chose the location. The location didn’t really allow for the almost 90 degree pan I had envisioned. With the time constraints putting us under pressure I decided to still try and film the shot the way I had planned, but with a smaller pan. The experience was fantastic and I would be able to do it again, now understanding that you need to be quite flexible and work with what you have (eg; the location). The main epiphany I had during this exercise was that while I’m not really confident that I pulled off my shot the way I envisioned, I tend to gravitate towards moving shots as I find that they can create depth and you can be quite creative in what you focus on. My intention was to focus on the book during the pan, however my camera position wasn’t correct and it didn’t quite work the way I thought. However this exercise gave me a lot of confidence in my ability to think outside of the box and focus my energy on creating an interesting shot.

Unfortunately not everyone in my shooting group had a chance to film their shot as we ran out of time, this would be the only thing that I would change going forward – to allow for more time for the shoot as a whole.

This week I feel as though there is a lot to reflect on, so I’m going to break it down into subheadings. Terms like ‘unique’, ‘complicated’ and ‘simple’ you’ll find will probably be in quotation marks as I feel like these terms will form part of my research into camera coverage and their definitions to me will most likely change over time.

FOUND SCENE:

The task of finding a scene and analysing the camera coverage sounded interesting and exciting, until I had to choose an actual scene. The issue I found wasn’t discussing the camera coverage and possible reasons the filmmakers chose to use certain shots, but rather finding a scene that was ‘unique’ in the way it had been covered. I didn’t think it would be difficult at all to find a scene from some of my favourite films, as one of the main reasons why I loved these films is due to their scene constructions, right? As it turns out I was wrong.

As I began to pull apart some of my favourite films, isolate and analyse particular scenes that had impacted me, I began to realise that there were reasons other than the camera coverage that helped me connect with the film. When I isolated particular scenes and watched them repeatedly to find some kind of meaning behind the camera coverage, I found that even listening to the dialogue out of context at times made the dialogue sound contrived. This was quite frustrating as I began to feel as though my judgement of these films as being amazing was not as well considered as I originally thought. Perhaps these films stood out to me for the way in which the film as a whole worked together (with the script, cinematography, and performances working together) and the scenes themselves were just building blocks towards the climax with nothing ‘unique’ about the camera coverage.

This prompted many questions as I became quite frustrated in trying to find a scene based on camera coverage that I could analyse and describe the possible meaning and reasons behind the chosen set-ups. How is it that these films that had stood out of the pack and I had encouraged my friends to watch have ‘simple’ scene constructions and camera coverage? Did the director purposefully use ‘simple’ camera set-ups in order to allow the actors performances to shine through? Did the tone and slow-burning rhythm of the films mean that using more complicated camera coverage would distract the viewer from the action? Or were the reasons purely to do with the place and time the films were made (eg; Hollywood)?

What I found to be an interesting scene to analyse came from an unlikely film in The Way Way Back. While I did really enjoy watching this film, the cinematography and camera coverage didn’t originally stand out to me. It was only until I decided to pick apart the scenes that I began to gain more appreciation for it’s camera coverage.

Questions like these will continue to form my research throughout the semester and challenge the way I think about camera coverage and scene construction.

WEDNESDAY EXERCISE:

I found Wednesday’s exercise to be much more challenging than last week’s exercise, not just because of the constraints of the task (editing in camera, 3-5 shots) but because my group again had (I never thought I would say this) a script to work off. A couple of people who had been in my group last week agreed that having a script seemed to be more of a creative limitation than just having a scene description. We found ourselves spending more time scrutinizing the script and feeling forced to follow the script to a tee. Every creative shot we came up with was then changed to accommodate the script’s specific actions. We also had to decide where our minimum 3 shots and maximum 5 shots would be placed according to the script which also restricted our creativeness as we resigned ourselves to showing, for example, Antonio walking towards Susan and Linda as the script told us to, rather than changing the action to suit our creative vision.

Having come from the Screenwriting course, I have always been able to visualize how I would expect my scripts to be adapted to the screen. I had been trained to write in a way that was instructive to the director, yet leaving room for a director’s creative visual choices. So finding this task as being restrictive because of the script was quite bizarre for me, however I found myself saying “I wish we didn’t have a script.”

Seeing the way in which the other two groups were able to create visually interesting, beautiful, and even hilarious scenes by their camera coverage choices compared to ours made it clear that the material you have to work from as well as the individual’s vision can create such starkly different scenes. I was really blown away by some of the shots that they had created and even felt a ping of jealousy that they were able to interpret their given scene in a purely creative way with less restrictions.

FRIDAY EXERCISE:

So I got another script to work with for Friday’s exercise. Being a bit disappointed that I couldn’t experiment with a different form of instructive text, I tried to really think of creative ways to show the action without feeling restricted by the specifics in the script. While a couple of people went and scouted for a location, the rest of us discussed some really interesting ideas, however when we arrived on the location it became apparent that we couldn’t film all of the shots exactly how we wanted. One of the issues we came across in the script was that the character in one action goes from having her head out of a window to looking into a mirror on a wall. In our discussion we thought it would be interesting to use the camera as a mirror and have the actor look directly into it.

We still came up with a few dynamically interesting shots and were really excited to shoot them especially because we had such a cool backdrop of the city (our location was a balcony). Because the location that was chosen by our two location scouts was exterior and there was no mirror to use, we improvised by using the camera on a mobile phone as the mirror. While at the time it seemed like a great solution, I feel as though if we had found an interior location with a mirror, we would’ve had more opportunity to play around with the reflections and create something quite unique. Other concerns about the location were the cramped nature of the balcony and the noise from nearby construction.

After discussing the shots in the location and cutting the script into the maximum 6 shots we were allowed, we began shooting. We shot out of order so that we wouldn’t have to continually move the camera’s position. After each shot, we rotated roles so that most people could have a go at filming a shot. While we all agreed this was a great idea, the cramped quarters of our location made it difficult to oversee what other people’s shots looked like. While at the time we thought the shots looked great, it wasn’t until we actually got to see the shots properly in post that it became clear that they weren’t executed as well as we thought (eg; focus, exposure, camera balance, height of tripod – not showing the backdrop that well).

Having to stick to the industrial model and log our takes also became quite tedious. This process might be helpful for a bigger shoot with more shots (eg; a short film) but for one scene it seemed pointless. When I began reviewing and assembling the shots in post, I followed the log sheet, however I found that with a bit of tweaking to overcome the continuity issues recorded in the log sheet, I could use the lower rated shots and actually sometimes preferred using them. While we had more ‘freedom’ with this exercise, it became clear that perhaps having more constraints meant that we had to think more outside of the box and more creatively in previous exercises rather than this one.

While it was a collaborative effort and everybody had a small contribution, I feel as though maybe we didn’t all get a say in how the scene was shot and that there were great creative opportunities that were missed. Not letting everyone’s voices be heard meant that their great ideas were also missed out on, which is a real shame. While we are each supposed to be experimenting and creating an understanding about our own methodology, I don’t feel like everyone is being able to speak up and grow individually as a filmmaker. I think this really does depend on the dynamics of the group and personalities, which can make people feel like taking a back seat rather than contributing their thoughts. While we don’t have enough cameras or time to allow every student to film their own scene, I think there may be other ways to try and overcome this issue. I think a way to overcome this might be to in the next filming exercise, rather than discuss the shots as a group, have each person mark up the scene with how they would film it. Then go around the table and discuss what each person came up with, and have a constraint be that each person must have at least one of their shots filmed and filmed by them. Maybe this is a good idea, maybe it would make the scene look fractured, I’m not sure, but at least everyone would be able to present their ideas and learn from them.

Film: The Way Way Back (2013)

Quick Film Summary: Shy 14 year-old Duncan goes on a summer holiday with his mum, his mum’s boyfriend Trent and Trent’s daughter Steph. The friends he makes at his new job at the water park helps him gain his self-confidence.

Chosen Scene: Opening scene.

Shot List:

1. Extreme C/U of Trent’s (Duncan’s future step-Dad) eyes in rear-view mirror.
2. Medium C/U of Duncan sitting in the very back of the car, his back facing Trent.
3. Extreme C/U of Trent’s eyes in rear-view mirror.
4. Medium C/U of Duncan sitting in the very back of the car, his back facing Trent.
5. Extreme C/U of Trent’s eyes in rear-view mirror.
6. Medium C/U of Duncan sitting in the very back of the car, his back facing Trent.
7. Extreme C/U of Trent’s eyes in rear-view mirror.
8. Medium C/U of Duncan sitting in the very back of the car, his back facing Trent.
9. Medium C/U of Duncan turning around to face Trent.
10. Medium C/U (from Duncan’s P.O.V) of the back of Pam (Duncan’s mum) asleep in the passenger seat.
11. Medium C/U of Steph (Duncan’s future step-sister) asleep.
12. Medium C/U of Duncan facing Trent.
13. Extreme C/U of Trent’s eyes in rear-view mirror.
14. Closer Medium C/U of Duncan facing Trent.
15. Extreme C/U of Trent’s eyes in rear-view mirror.
16. Closer Medium C/U of Duncan facing Trent.
17. Extreme C/U of Trent’s eyes in rear-view mirror.
18. Closer Medium C/U of Duncan facing Trent.
19. C/U of Trent’s eyes in rear-view mirror.
20. Closer Medium C/U of Duncan facing Trent.
21. Further Medium C/U of the back of Duncan, now facing Trent.
22. C/U of Trent’s eyes in rear-view mirror.
23. Closer Medium C/U of Duncan facing Trent.
24. Medium C/U of Duncan sitting in the very back of the car, his back facing Trent.

No. of Camera Set-ups: 8

Analysis:

The film The Way Way Back opens with an awkward conversation between Duncan and his mum’s boyfriend Trent in the car on the way to their summer holiday house. The camera coverage chosen to film this scene establishes the distant and troubled relationship between Duncan and Trent as well as highlighting Duncan’s personality and view of the world.

The scene opens with an extreme close-up (no. 1) of Trent’s eyes in the rear-view mirror as he tries to engage in a conversation with Duncan. Choosing to frame his eyes so closely and never actually showing his whole face establishes him as an imposing and authoritative figure. As he continues to belittle Duncan, his eyes scrutinize him. The choice to not show Trent’s entire face makes the audience focus on what he is saying to Duncan, making Trent appear arrogant and cruel, and makes the audience empathize with Duncan. While it is clear that Trent is an important character in the film, the choice to only frame his eyes. and later the back of his head compared with the varying shots used for Duncan, helps the audience understand that Duncan is the protagonist. This repeated extreme close-up also gives the impression that Trent is looking down on Duncan as he isn’t framed turning his head to look directly at Duncan, which furthers the audience’s feeling of dislike towards him.

The following medium close-up (no. 2) of Duncan sitting at the very back of the car (in foreground) with his back facing Trent who is small in the frame (in background) establishes the distance in their relationship and their inability to relate to one another. Positioning Duncan right at the back of the car with the luggage in frame demonstrates to the audience that he is not regarded as important by his family as well as the world. The choice to show Duncan’s whole face throughout the scene allows the audience to see his reaction to Trent’s belittling and puts them on Duncan’s side. These two shots continue to be edited side-by-side until Duncan becomes increasingly upset with Trent’s comments and turns around to face him in medium close-up (no. 9).

When Duncan turns around, his point of view is shown in the form of a medium close-up of his mum sleeping in the passenger seat (no. 10). This demonstrates that nobody else in the car is aware of what Trent is saying to Duncan and therefore won’t stand up for him – Duncan has to fend for himself. His mum being positioned in the passenger seat next to Trent also suggests that she is on Trent’s side and not Duncan’s. The medium close-up of Steph lying across the whole back seat of the car, asleep (no. 11), further demonstrates that Duncan isn’t treated equally in the family as he could have easily sat in the seat beside her rather than at the very back with the luggage.

The conversation between Trent and Duncan continues with the editing of an extreme close-up of Trent’s eyes in the rear-view mirror and a closer medium shot (no. 14) of Duncan facing Trent. This demonstrates that Duncan wants to defend himself but doesn’t have the self-confidence to do so. Framing Duncan in a tighter frame puts more pressure on him and gives the audience the expectation that he will defend himself against Trent’s comments. The extreme close-up of Trent’s eyes in the rear-view mirror becomes a close-up (no. 19) when he begins talking about them all becoming a family to soften the audience’s view of him slightly while also establishing more distance between him and Duncan. The following medium close-up from the back of the car with Duncan’s back in the foreground (no. 21) further demonstrates the irony of Trent describing the four of them as a family as there is a lot of distance between all of the characters. It becomes clear to the audience that Duncan has given up when he turns around with his back to Trent in the same medium close-up he was first shown in (no. 24) as he decides to just listen to his music instead of having a conversation with Trent. The camera set-up is the same as the first shot we saw Duncan in, giving the audience the impression that Duncan’s conversation with Trent hasn’t changed anything, and Duncan won’t take any of Trent’s advice.

The main reason why I found this scene interesting is because there is no establishing shot of the car or road, rather the opening shot of the entire film is an extreme close-up of a secondary character in the film. This results in a quite jarring feeling for the audience, but as it is so close it draws you straight into the action and forces you to listen intently to the dialogue as you can’t see Trent’s mouth (at all in the entire scene).

The choice of camera shots and framing allows the directors to give the audience the information slowly rather than all at once (for example; if they had opened with a wide shot of all of the characters in the car the audience would understand the family dynamics straight away). The camera in the beginning of the scene only frames Trent and Duncan separately, and quite closely giving the audience the impression that Trent is Duncan’s dad.

The camera ‘world’ opens up as Duncan’s point of view shows his mum and Trent’s daughter Steph; introducing the audience to new characters while Trent’s dialogue explains that he isn’t Duncan’s real dad.Towards the end of the scene, the camera is positioned slightly further away to represent the distance between all of the characters and making it clear that this ‘family’ will not be able to become a close unit.

The camera coverage chosen in this scene not only establishes who the protagonist is but also gives the audience an insight into how the world perceives him and how he perceives the world without him having much dialogue at all. The shots establish that he is insignificant within his make-believe family, he has low self-esteem, and his step-father is driving a wedge between him and his mother, which inform the rest of the film. The camera coverage and shot selections reveal more about the characters and their relationships with one another than the dialogue even does.

Last year in TV-1 and TV-2 I learned and gained experience in a wide range of technical and production skills. I thoroughly enjoyed being able to create a short film and documentary, both of which were fantastic learning experiences. While we were able to try our hand at different production roles and construct our shots based on our script/documentary outline, variables such as time and the weather tended to alter our idea of how we would film a particular shot or scene.

This course excites me because we have the opportunity to really focus and practice our skills by working on one scene, rather than a complete film. Robin and Paul’s comments in the lecture really resonated with me as having the pressure of submitting a complete film to a deadline did mean that on our shooting days we had to cut certain shots for our coverage of our scene in order to finish filming.

Being able to think about scene construction and the many different ways a scene can be ‘covered’ is really interesting as there aren’t really any rules (as was pointed out in the lecture with the discussion about crossing the line). How creative, innovative, simple or complicated you want the camera coverage to be is completely up to the individual. Thinking and experimenting with camera coverage means that hopefully we will all as individual filmmakers be able to find our own ‘style’ or even possibly ‘authorship’ that we can continue to develop throughout our careers.

Another point that was raised in the lecture that intrigued me was the idea of researching the way different filmmakers and even films from different countries construct their scenes and exploring why this occurs as well as the effectiveness of their individual styles.

The constraints that were set for the first task forced us to think differently about a scene. Rather than relying on a shot-reverse-shot for a typical conversation between two characters, my group had to experiment and work out the most interesting way we could present our scene. After switching roles a few times and testing out different but yet still quite common shots (shots we have seen time and time again), we discussed what we thought the subtext of the scene we were assigned was. We decided that the characters had had a past relationship and the female was concerned about revealing her engagement to the male (also her boss). The majority of the action also comes from her, (walking into the office, talking to her boss, turning to leave but then stopping, etc) so we tried framing her action while keeping the boss’ identity a mystery and placing the camera behind him. This resulted in a construction of the scene that we were all very excited about as the choices we made were not something we had commonly seen. This exercise proved to us that focusing our energy on how to portray the relationship between the two characters and experimenting with abstract shots can create something quite unique and interesting.