The Chinese Restaurant

Looking first at traditional multi-cam shows, I have read scripts form Seinfeld, Friends and Cheers. I’ve decided to write about the Seinfeld script, for no real reason other than I love this episode of the show.

The Chinese Restaurant, a second season episode of Seinfeld, is based entirely in the foyer of a Chinese restaurant. The episode focuses on the group’s (Jerry, Elaine and George) wait for a table in the busy restaurant. As with most, if not all, Seinfeld episodes, this particular narrative centres on the actions of the characters in an everyday situation.

Reading a Seinfeld script is the best way to see how the popular show really is just about nothing. There are no plot advances, no real climaxes, and no greater messages about the meaning of life. However, I was not reading the script in order to explore the meaning of life, but rather to see how a multi-cam comedy is written.

There is no mention of a live audience in the script, nor a real description of how the set looks. We know, in this script, that there is a podium, a public phone, and some tables, all of which are in one room, or adjoining rooms with no doors. This lack of description gives creative leeway to the producers and directors later on in the filming process.

Furthermore, there was only one camera direction in the entire script. This direction simply stated, pan to them (some restaurant-goers) sitting down. This camera direction was followed by one of the characters commenting on the restaurant-goers. However, it seemed odd to me that it was included, as the script directs the cameras in every other instance without having to be direct. Statements such as we see a man give a cue to angle or pan to that man without stating it directly.

Reading this script and not knowing Seinfeld. It would be impossible to tell in which style the show would be formatted. This could be a mockumentary, a standard single-cam comedy, or a multi-cam show shot in front of a live studio audience with no changes to the script. Therefore, our group can now be confident that a single script will work for all of our scenes, with changes made during the production stages rather than in the writing stages.

Writing a ‘Friends’ Script

Since deciding to work on the different formats comedic television can take, we’ve been watching, reading and exploring the formats we’ve chosen to focus on. I’ve been tasked with learning more about traditional multi-cam comedies. Given that I’ve seen all three shows in full, I looked specifically at Seinfeld, Cheers and Friends as examples of this format. After reading scripts from all three shows (see this post for more on that), I decided the best thing I could do to best understand the format would be to write a short script myself.

Friends, given its straightforward narrative, character tropes and comedic style, was the easiest show to write for. I know the characters well, having seen every episode multiple times. In a previous session with our group, we had decided that we should write scripts based around a simple storyline that could be adapted to suit each genre. I thought a bad dating experiencing would be easy to write, as well as being easy to adapt to our three genres; mutli-cam sitcom, mockumentary, and the stoner circle.

screen1screen2screen3screen4 screenscreen6

 

 

While I think that my attempt at ‘jokes’ are awful, I did try my best to make them fit with the style of Friends. While the situation is one that is ‘adult’ – drinking wine, going on a date, being in a large apartment owned by the characters – the jokes are very PG and accessible to a wide demographic.

I found it very easy to write for characters that have already been developed by someone else. The personalities were already there, and therefore it was easier for me to get down to writing a script rather than focusing on developing characters, locations and the basics of a show.

In relation to our final project, in this script I was able to explore how a multi-cam comedy is written. The characters to do not need to move around a lot, but still have the ability to do so if that’s how the director wants to shoot it.

In the first part of my script, I added in (laugh track) directions. While these are never written in actual scripts, I wanted to explore how my peers reacted to the directions – whether they could see where a joke was intended and where it wasn’t, and whether the cues made the jokes seem funnier. Speaking to my group after they read the scripts, it was clear the laugh cues were unimportant. It was obvious to them where a joke was intended, even if the joke wasn’t funny. The laugh cues also seem to imply that changes to the script at later stages would be hard to pull of. Having laugh track cues may put actors, other writes and producers off from improvising and improving the script, for fear of messing up an entire scene.

I found that this writing exercise was one of the most helpful things I have done during the early stages of this project. It allowed me to see where the script work and where it didn’t. It allowed me to explore writing in an easy format. My next step in this process is to story board this script and figure out the coverage, movement of the actors and camera angles.

The Initial Consult

Today we had our initial group consultation with Jasmine. We came in to the consult with very rough ideas, each very different in theme and focus. While my main interest was cinematography and what constitutes a ‘beautiful’ cinematic shot, other group members ideas were the personification of mental illness, the ‘stoner shot’ from That 70s Show and the comedic genre in general.

As we talked through our ideas with Jasmine, we realised that our ideas could come together in one project. Maybe it would be a comedy, with that iconic 360 degree circle shot, featuring characters who personify mental illness. That would bring our interests; cinematography, the stoner circle shot, comedy and mental illness into one scene.

Though there were only three of us at the consult, we agreed that working on something in this vein would work for all of us. However, as we left the consult, we began talking about how ambitious this idea was. Trying to write a script with strong characters, as well as focusing on the cinematography and format of the shot, all while trying to keep if funny, may just not work. In a group of five people, it seemed that having a more defined focus would work better.

As we discussed our project, we went off track and talked about TV we watched; comedies we love. We then started the discussion on the format of the shows, and thought about how interesting it might be to explore these formats.

So we have decided to shoot a single scene in a variety of different formats. We will use the stoner-circle shot, as well as mockumentary style shooting, multi-cam live studio audience shows, shows with flashbacks, and shorter style sketch shows. We will be able to focus on writing, writing one good scene that will be adapted for multiple formats. We will also be able have a strong focus on shooting and experimenting with editing (adding laugh tracks, etc.).

Thinking back on our discussion now, I think we are on the right track. We are in agreement, which is rare in group projects. However, I also think there is a lot more work to do. We need to actually explore these formats of shooting, because at the moment what we now of them is what we see in finished scenes we watch on television.

Boys becoming men, men becoming wolves

I watch a lot of TV. From the most terrible scripted reality programs to the best-written and acted dramas, TV is my number one interest. But the genre I really love is comedy. Whether it be a classic sitcom filmed in front of a live studio audience or a mostly improvised sketch show, I just really love comedy television.

30 Rock is one of my favourite shows. I think it is fantastically written; the jokes are nuanced and both over-the-top or subtle at the right moments. I have read a few scripts from my favourite comedies, including the following 30 Rock script.I know that I have written things that haven’t initiated a laugh when read, yet I have still insisted they will be funny once they are acted. But one of the things I have found through reading scripts is that if a joke doesn’t work on paper, it generally doesn’t work on screen either.  I have looked at this script and thought about why a joke does or doesn’t work.

 

opening

 

 

 

The excerpt above shows the original opening for 30 Rock. Liz is Lisa, and she is competing with two mums for space. This is cut from the episode. The way that Lisa takes a ‘running jump’ doesn’t fit with the tone that 30 Rock set in its early episodes. The show begins as a more grounded comedy, with slightly exaggerated, but believable characters. Later in the series this physical gag would work well, as the humour develops into more fantastical and inflated comedy.

When I first read this script a few years ago, many scenes made me laugh. This was not one of them. Maybe this is because physical comedy is so hard to describe in writing, but in this case I can easily imagine what that jump would look like. I think that the reason this scene doesn’t work is because it is simple and dumb humour. Nipples? A running jump over children? 30 Rock is a clever show, but this scene could work on The Big Bang Theory. I can hear the laugh track now.

When I think about this in relation to my own writing, there are a few take away points. It is important to know what tone your script is going to be, and to base the opening scene around that tone. If I were writing a stupid, easy, very accessible comedy, I would include a scene like this. If I were writing a nuanced, clever and cynical comedy, I would leave it out, much like the producers of 30 Rock did with this one.

 

one line

 

 

Immediately following this first scene is one of my favourite 30 Rock jokes. Here we have Lisa, or Liz, lining up for food, when a man cuts in front of the existing queue. Liz states that ‘there’a a line’, to which the man replies (in the final cut version), ‘now there’s too lines’. These lines are the very first lines of the entire series. Every time I watch the 30 Rock pilot and I am so amused by how clever this is. It surprises me that this was not originally going to be the opening joke, and that the line obviously weren’t first formed to have this double meaning.

This scene works well to set that tone I mentioned earlier. These two lines, despite being very general, unimportant pieces of dialogue, initiate a laugh from their placement in the show. The decision to open a series with such clever writing sets the bar for the comedy that is to follow.

I wish I could analyse this entire script, but I could go on for days about 30 Rock. I think it is important to look to our favourite shows for inspiration, and to critique them as well. Looking at this 30 Rock script has got me to think about my attempts at comedy writing, and to see what works and what doesn’t.

Editing

 

I’m not an editor. If I can, I usually handball that task off to someone else. I’m not terrible at editing, but I am horrendously slow. Hours and hours of work went into my six minute film at the end of last semester’s studio, and I’m still not happy with it.

Already this semester I can see that I am getting better. It helps when everything is organised, and when you take the time to actually watch and label clips. Using a sequence to do that also makes it a ton easier (thanks Paul).

This week we have edited the short pieces we shot to edit. Shooting to edit makes things a whole lot easier. Shooting things in order, and having the clap board helps.

Our script was short; only a few lines of dialogue and three characters. During the shoot process, the dialogue did not change much, probably because we acted it out as we wrote it, and were able to write  dialogue that sounded good when it was delivered.

Before shooting we also took the time to draw a quick storyboard. I can not draw for the life of me, yet storyboarding is always the most helpful plan to have during a shoot. Our storyboard allowed to shoot the shots we envisioned during the writing process quickly and without fuss. The other half of our group did not storyboard and took half an hour longer than us to shoot their scene. The were constantly referring back to the script, and more than once forgot what they had already shot. I was also able to use the storyboard while editing to keep me on track of the original plan.

Since our script was so short, in almost every shot the entirety of the script was delivered in full. This meant that when it came to editing, while the shots were long, it was easy to make sure that everything was covered. The only difficulty in caused in editing was a range of different sound mixed and volumes. This can be easily fixed with a little mixing (which I don’t know how to do but will make an effort to learn).

While this piece was shot to edit, it was not written to edit. Writing to edit would definitely save time later on, but I’m not sure it would be worth it. Wiring to edit would be taking organised planning to a whole new level, and would impact on creative freedom later on. If a piece was written to edit, those working on a shoot may feel that they cannot change the script too much, lest it impact on an organised edit later on. I like to be able to change up how a shoot is going during the process; maybe I have had a better idea, or maybe the location just does not allow for what is in the script.

When it came to this piece, a well-thought out script, along with a good storyboard, was the key to a successful shoot ad a reasonably easy edit.

 

 

Week 4 Writing Exercise

Synopsis:

Ben and Demi match each other on Tinder and get talking. Neither are really looking for a date but they click online so decide to meet at a restaurant.

Ben arrives at the restaurant first. The reservation is under his name and he chose the restaurant based on its reviews on Zomato. He didn’t bother to actually look at the menu. He is seated and waits about 10 minutes for Demi to show up. Her lateness annoys him slightly.

When Ben and Demi first see each other, they are both taken aback. Ben clears his throat and tells Demi she looks lovely. Demi thanks him but offers no compliment in return. They sit and look at the menu. Demi is shocked that Ben would take a Tinder date somewhere so expensive. Ben is shocked the online reviews didn’t mention the price.

The two talk idly about jobs and family and home; things they have already covered online. Ben is talking about his last audition when Demi interrupts him to ask whether his headshots look anything like him at all, or if they are the same misleading ones from his Tinder profile. Ben replies that he has to use misleading photos otherwise people would never swipe right because he looks ‘too Asian’. He then asks about Demi’s photos.

Demi is offended but tries to explain that she doesn’t photograph well and hence only takes one decent photo a year. The five on her Tinder profile range from the ages of 18-23.

The rest of the night Ben makes stupid jokes like ‘I hope the gnocchi looks like it is described as on the menu’, winking at Demi each time. Demi laughs graciously and tries to flirt, terrified that her debit card will be rejected if she has to pay.

Ben offers to pay and Demi half-heartedly tries to argue. Ben walks Demi back to her car and leans in. She turns her head and he kisses her cheek. He says that they should go out again soon and Demi replies that she’s really busy but she’ll see. Ben returns to his own car. Both immediately get out their phones and block the other on Tinder.

Continue reading

The Initiative Post

One of the aims of this course is to see how writing is woven through all three stages of production. In general, we see writing as being only the first stage of production. Then the script is passed on, filmed and then edited, never straying far from the original written word. I am interested in seeing how this can be flipped on its head, how we can include writing in all stages of production.

The first film I thought of when I read the studio brief was Boyhood. Shot over 12 years, I assumed the film could not have been written traditionally; there are too many uncontrollable circumstances that can happen over 12 years that would screw up a script. I was right.

Anyone that has seen Boyhood knows that it is a film in which not much happens. It is a portrait of childhood, and in some ways, of parenting. It tracks the process of growing up, there is no real beginning, middle or end. That in itself is a different way of writing; not following the standard conventions of a story.

Richard Linklater, who directed Boyhood, mentions that because he shooting only 10-15 minutes of footage per year, filming took place generally over 2-3 days. This meant Linklater had an entire year to think about what would happen in the next year. He did not have a script, per say, but rather an idea of when his portrait begins, and when it ends. Linklater told IndieWire that  ‘I knew the structure… I knew the last shot of the movie 11 years ago’ (Kiang, 2014). Having not written a script, Linklater had to write the film as it was made, skewing Hollywood conventions and giving him more freedom within his work.

Each segment of the film was shot based on what would naturally happen, helped along by suggestions from the lead actor, who was virtually living the film (Film4Video, 2014). Linklater collaborated with his lead, asking him to write down conversations he had in his real life. This allowed Linklater to truly make his film into something ‘real’. He did not have to follow a script he wrote years ago, he had real input from people who were living the film as he made it.

For me,  Boyhood is the prime example of how a film can be scripted – the film is not purporting to be ‘reality’ – yet still be written in a way other than the traditional script to shooting to editing style. I am intrigued to learn more in this course about how writing can be incorporated into the entire process. Boyhood was unique in that it was shot over such a long period of time, so I hope to see how similar writing practices can be used in a shorter time frame. I also hope to see how writing can be incorporated into editing. I know that the way something is edited can change it’s entire direction, and I want to see what I can do in that way.

 

 

 

 

 

Film4Video. (2014). Richard Linklater on Boyhood | Interview Special | Film. Available: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-selLiYt94. Last accessed 29th July 2015.

Kiang, Jessica. (2014). Richard Linklater Discusses His 12-Year Project ‘Boyhood,’ Chronology, Memory & A Movie That Occurs Offscreen.Available: http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/richard-linklater-discusses-his-12-year-project-boyhood-chronology-memory-and-a-movie-that-occurs-offscreen-20140218. Last accessed 29th July 2015.

 

 

Thursday July 23rd

Week one of this new studio. Starting any new class is daunting, but I am especially nervous about this one, having not done any creative writing at uni yet. Getting started straight away helped, though.

The first exercise, writing whatever came to mind, was familiar and calming. The act of typing as fast as I could, getting it all down without worrying bout spelling or grammar or sentence structure helped to get me in the right mind. I am always worried that I don’t have any decent ideas. I always say that my lack of creative thinking holds me back. Writing everything that came to mind helped me see that I can write about interesting things if I just let it happen.

It always helps to have a prompt, so the next exercise was alright. No need to worry about coming up with something exciting. We shared our writing this time. I hate this part, watching how someone reacts as they view your work. I guess if I want to be a media maker I just have to get used to it. Having to share our work around the table reassured me that even if my writing is awful, the worst that can happen is I get some constructive criticism. I am not trying to make a career out of writing, so I guess I can’t really ‘fail’.

Our first class with the Creative Writing students. It’s always a strange dynamic when two courses meet. Why do I always think the students are going to be so different? I always assume they are more advanced that I am, that they understand more of what is going on, that they are more confident. I am always wrong.

We shot two scenes today, a single shot scene, and a scene shot to edit. This was a fairly simple task for the media students, we have done this before. It was interesting seeing the creative writing students work. They were confident in their ideas, but less so in how to go about getting them on camera. I suppose that the media students are the same when it comes to writing.

 

Writing for Film

I chose this course because I have always been interested in writing. It has been something I did well at all throughout school, something that my teachers said I was good at. I have never been confident though. I don’t think I have interesting  ideas, I don’t think I’m a great writer.

I chose this course because I want to get better at writing. I want to do something I enjoy. I want to learn from the creative writing students. I want to learn about the process of scriptwriting, and the process of developing a script into a film.

I read scripts occasionally. I have friends online who are great writers, so I read their work. I read scripts for television pilots, mostly because I love TV. Good scriptwriting is something I envy, something I want to learn more about.

While I attended the studio information session at the end of last semester, I admit that I didn’t really look very far into the studios. I picked this one because I like the sound of it, and because I wanted to write. I imagined that we would work alongside the creative writing students to produce a script or scripts in the first half of the semester, and then in the second half we would develop them into films. I should have know that nothing in the communication school is that simple.

The studio’s aim, to see how writing is woven throughout the film making process, is intriguing. It will be interesting to see how this works, since the students from the two courses will only be together once a week.

I am hoping that at the end of this studio I will have a clear understanding of standard writing and shooting practices for film. I also want to understand how this can be detrimental. I want to have explored how writing and shooting can be done differently, how working in a different way can result in a better outcome. I am also hoping to have improved writing and reflection skills, as well as continuing to work of practical media making skills.

 

I declare that in submitting all work for this assessment I have read, understood and agree to the content and expectations of the assessment declaration

 

Final Blog Post

 

URL
Readings –
  • Cresswell (introduction)
https://www.mediafactory.org.au/ellen-mccutchan/2015/03/10/cresswell-an-introduction/
  • Hornstein
https://www.mediafactory.org.au/ellen-mccutchan/2015/03/16/tourism-and-place/
  • J.E. Malpas
https://www.mediafactory.org.au/ellen-mccutchan/2015/04/05/malpas/
  • Mason
https://www.mediafactory.org.au/ellen-mccutchan/2015/03/09/new-perspective/
Site Visits –
  • State Library
https://www.mediafactory.org.au/ellen-mccutchan/2015/03/06/state-library/
  • Public Records Office
https://www.mediafactory.org.au/ellen-mccutchan/2015/04/10/public-records-office/
  • Melbourne Museum
https://www.mediafactory.org.au/ellen-mccutchan/2015/04/10/melbourne-museum/
Guests –
  • Professor Martyn Hook (& the reading associated with his visit)
https://www.mediafactory.org.au/ellen-mccutchan/2015/04/10/martyn-hook-presentation/
  • Professor Paul Gough
https://www.mediafactory.org.au/ellen-mccutchan/2015/04/23/remembrance/
  • Abigail Belfrage
https://www.mediafactory.org.au/ellen-mccutchan/2015/05/01/abigail-belfrage/
  • Jeremy Bowtell
https://www.mediafactory.org.au/ellen-mccutchan/2015/06/01/editing/ (didn’t get to the class, but talk about editing here)
Briefs –
  • Brief 1
https://www.mediafactory.org.au/ellen-mccutchan/2015/03/12/building-20
  • Brief 2
Not on my blog – was submitted through google drive
  • Brief 3 (with presentation slides)
https://www.mediafactory.org.au/ellen-mccutchan/2015/04/24/brief-3/
  • Brief 4
https://www.mediafactory.org.au/ellen-mccutchan/2015/06/03/group-work-websitepresentation/ ‎
https://www.mediafactory.org.au/ellen-mccutchan/2015/06/03/brief-4a
Work in progress posts
  • Individual project
https://www.mediafactory.org.au/ellen-mccutchan/2015/04/10/idea-central/

Brief 3 feedback

Shoot Day


https://www.mediafactory.org.au/ellen-mccutchan/2015/06/01/editing/

  • Group project
https://www.mediafactory.org.au/ellen-mccutchan/2015/05/20/websitepresentaion-update
Final Reflection (1000 words) addressing the following criteria.
Read chapter 5 of Tim Creswell’s Place an Introduction and use this to reflect on your journey throughout the semester.
Identify the aspects of the chapter that resonate most with the projects you have completed this semester and discuss how your understanding of PLACE has developed (and possibly shifted) throughout the semester.As you are writing up this component I suggest you think about it from these perspectives.

  • what have you’ve learned?
  • what have you found most challenging in the course?
  • what have you discovered about your own creative practice?
https://www.mediafactory.org.au/ellen-mccutchan/2015/06/05/final-blog-post

Coming into this semester, I had never studied space and place in any sort of conceptual way. I had taken geography all through high school, but that was a subject mainly made up of stats and figures regarding drought and population sizes. Ghosts of RMIT and its focus on place were new to me.

Early on in the semester, we looked at the introduction to Tim Cresswell’s Place: An Introduction. This introduced me to different ways of thinking about place. I considered whether place was physical, or mostly just imagined boundaries. I thought about place and memory, and human connection to place.

Reading chapter five of Place: An Introduction, I was able to see how my projects in Ghosts of RMIT have related back to Cresswell’s theoretical concepts about place. Two sections of this chapter have encapsulated how my work relates to place; Place and Memory and Place and Architecture are particularly relevant to my work.

‘Place and memory are, it seems, inevitably intertwined’ (Cresswell, 2014, pg. 119). My work throughout this semester has been focused particularly on one event; the Russell Street Bombing. Taking place in 1986, my dad was just 22 when a bomb exploded outside the courtroom he was working in. My work has been focused on how this event has formed his perception of Building 20, the Old Melbourne Magistrates’ Court.

As is evident in my final piece, the Russell Street Bombing still weighs heavily on my fathers’ mind. I have spoken to him on multiple occasions about the bombing, but it was not until we sat down in the courtroom that the memories really returned to him. Being able to see the windows that smashed, the corridors he had run down and the street where the car bomb was acted as a catalyst for remembering.

However, as Cresswell states, ‘memory appears to be a personal thing, but memory is also a social thing’ (pg. 119). While my father’s memories are catalysed by place, so too are the memories of the wider society.

Building 20 has remained reasonably unchanged since its transformation from a working courthouse to an administration building. The courtrooms still look like courtrooms, and many of the original architectural features, such as windows and doors, are still present. The building is heritage listed, which prevents many changes being made, but there is a reason for this. As Professor Martyn Hook explained to us, buildings are given heritage status either because they are architecturally significant, or because something significant occurred in them. In the case of Building 20, it is a bit of both, and both relate to memory.

Maybe Building 20 has been kept the way it is because we want to remember events that happened there. The Ned Kelly trial, Squizzy Taylor, and the Russell Street Bombing are significant historical events that have been written into the national dialogue as important to remember. Building 20 is also considered architecturally important. But this is only because we want to remember building of the past, how the city, the world, was ‘before’.

This leads in to ‘Place and Architecture’, the next section of the chapter that resonated with my work. Cresswell talks of genius loci, which, in modern times, is taken to mean ‘sense of place’. In terms of Building 20, the architect responsible for its move from a courthouse to an RMIT building has done well to create and preserve the genius loci of the building. The building looks and feels like it has had an interesting history. From the preservation of the courtrooms and the caretaker sign, to the minimal additions of modern fixings, the Building has changed little since its precious life. I have tried to convey this genius locus in my piece through shots of the building and by keeping the courtroom setting in every frame.

Throughout this semester I have learned that place is a multitude of things and cannot be easily defined. I have learned that conveying a sense of place is difficult, but can be done. I have learned how to use a Z 7 camera.

For me, the most challenging aspect of this course has been getting my ideas from paper to physicality. From just getting my dad to say the right words, making the camera steady and then editing hours of footage into a five-minute film, I have been challenged. However, the studio format has meant that I have been able to troubleshoot any problems without difficulty. The class has become close-knit and we can trust each other to give good feedback. Being able to be in class twice a week has meant that there has been more than enough time to get things done.

Ghosts of RMIT has made me see that I can work well in a group. I have always said that I am too much of a control freak to work well with others, which I have been trying to work on. However, in Ghosts I have been able to work in a team with no issues. Maybe it is because we have had so much time together in class. Without the pressure of trying to find a time to meet, everybody seems a lot calmer. Whatever the reason, I am glad that I have had a chance to work in a stress-free group. It has led to better work all round.

Through Ghosts of RMIT I have also learned that I like interviewing. I like listening to someone talk, especially when that person is talking about something that they are passionate about, or that effects them deeply.

Ghosts of RMIT has opened me up to thinking about place in a more complex way than ever before. It has helped me to learn my strengths and weaknesses when it comes to making video content, as well as working in a group. I have been able to explore ways of working that I wouldn’t have in a different setting.