As a class, we discussed the meaning of studying filmmaking, focusing on whether it is even possible to study the more abstract elements of the craft. I understand the premise of the question, as it can be complicated to study subjective topics; but I feel like that subjectivity just means that different questions have to be asked. Rather than asking whether something is good or bad, instead it’s a matter of asking why the director used this shot rather than another one; or how to work with cinematic conventions – or how to break them in a constructive way.

When looking at how competency and expertise doesn’t necessarily pertain to a good film, it made me think of most of the films lampooned on Mystery Science Theatre 3000. While no one can defend any of those films in terms of technical brilliance, the passion and dedication that these “terrible” directors had created entertaining films that have sometimes stood the test of time better than anything good, but mediocre.

I agree with Robin, in that a combination of study and practice is required to get a grasp of the concept of decoupage.

Personally, it has been hard to practice, as I just haven’t had the equipment, crew, inspiration or motivation to “just get out and film”, which, compounded by COVID-19, has made me feel like I hadn’t quite got out as much out of the studio as if classes had not been impacted. I’m hoping that I can meet up with my classmates once we can work together and experiment with the practical lessons that we have learned throughout the semester.

With that being said, I feel like practicing decoupage is an ongoing thing that changes depending on style, genre, culture, cast and crew; with that being said, it is a fun, interesting element to experiment with.

I read an essay about Michelangelo Antonioni, especially how he directed and worked with his actors. It portrayed him as a complicated personality who became a director through unorthodox means – from critiquing films, to be precise.

He seemed to have a somewhat misanthropic view of the world, and he took this out on his cast. I feel like there could be an element of sexism in his behaviour, as he acted nastier towards women – at least according to the essay, though I assume many men of his age had similar attitudes in that era, especially coming from a culture that has hyper-masculine elements.

The main thing that actors did that he disliked was asking him to explain the motives behind the directions he gave. While there were many theories about this raised through the essay, the one that stood out to me was the assumption that he thought the actors were attempting to be “backseat directors” themselves.

If this is correct, I understand his sentiment, but having worked on sets, (I understand that community television and student productions could be different to the industry, but surely not that much) collaboration is important, and productions are markedly higher quality if everyone involved is on the same page.

On the other hand, it was interesting to see how innovative he was in regards to the way that he used actors. He made sure he was able to capture all of the subtleties in things that other directors at the time didn’t even think about, such as facial expressions and tone of voice. The fact that his films were driven not necessarily by the cast, but by everything around it, was fascinating; as it means that actors would work around the film – something that some current directors are starting to experiment with, but still don’t quite understand. I need to watch some of his works.

Faking Authenticity

Research

Week 9 Presentations

Lachlan’s Edgar Wright presentation for Assignment 3

Antonioni and Actors

Study and Practice

Presenting my research project was an interesting experience. I ended up adjusting my assignment, trying to also focus on what Robin calls “facsimile documentaries” – which, from my understanding, are a synonym for docudramas and mockumentaries. I could go for TV series like The Office or Parks and Recreation, though I might look at the “classic” mockumentary film This is Spın̈al Tap.

Robin introduced me to a filmmaker called Peter Watkins, who seems to have popularised the “facsimile documentary”. From a quick look at him, I’m looking forward to watching and analysing at least one of his films. I feel like some of his works have foretold the future, particularly Punishment Park. It would also be interesting to see his shorter films in contrast to his longer – though I think it will have to do it in my own time, as I don’t feel like it would be particularly relevant to this studio. I will take a look at one of his films for this assignment though.

We all presented our ideas for our research projects, and the others in my group all had interesting ideas looking at a variety of different topics. To be honest, all of the presentations in my group – yes, including mine – weren’t particularly polished, which meant that we all had to use our words to portray our ideas, rather than some fancy, polished presentation. The worst thing was that I panicked a bit during the session and had to finish the presentation a bit late. I probably didn’t have to worry about it in hindsight.

Looking back, I feel like my project has suffered a bit of “scope creep,” so I could probably cut it back. Perhaps just focusing on the docudrama/mockumentary side of things would make things leaner and more relevant to the unit. The fact that a large amount of the cinematography in The Blair Witch Project was improvised would mean that there wouldn’t be much to research, even if I looked at other similarly shot films.

Now that I’ve actually got time to think coherently, I feel like I can change my reflection format up a little bit.

The hardest part of starting a research project is figuring out exactly what I want to research. I assume that most of my classmates are probably in the same boat, but it’s still a massive pain in the neck. I think of ideas, and so many of them turn out to have nothing to do with the studio, I can’t find enough solid information from accurate sources, or I just panic from having to find anything useful within a massive block of text.

While I have an understanding of where the concepts of coverage and decoupage fit into the production process, I still feel like there’s a lot more for me to learn. However, looking through some of the studio prompts, it seems like analysing them is still fairly new, and it’s incredibly easy for many to confuse them with other elements of film production – be it montage, or even cinematography in general.

To make a long story short, I think I might have the start of an idea:

Faking Reality (working title)

I analyse found footage films, like The Blair Witch Project; figure out whether its use has any contribution to coverage and decoupage, or if it is only done for aesthetics; and how it is used in different genres.

Upon further research, and consulting with Robin, I feel like just questioning that one thing might be a bit shallow, and if it turns out that aesthetics were the only reason for found footage, then the assignment would be in vain.

I could look at documentaries, but I’m not exactly a fan of them, so it might come across as biased, but I could see through a lens of what Robin refers to as “facsimile documentaries” – which, to me, sound like serious mockumentaries. Perhaps examining the ways that a filmmaker is able to make a scene look “real.”

I’ll keep workshopping it, and hopefully I’ll be able to make my ideas seem coherent enough for the presentation.