Final Studio Reflection – Still Here
Creating ‘Still Here’ in the context of the Golden Age Studio was both creatively refreshing and practically challenging. Our studio’s theme encouraged us to reflect on the golden age of cinema not just in terms of style, but in the emotional weight and visual storytelling that classic films of these ages often carried. With ‘Still Here’, a short film about grief, memory, and emotional limbo, we wanted to channel this classic sensibility through a modern, subtle ghost story. My hope was for the film to engage audiences by offering a slow, emotional reveal that unraveled much like the prestige dramas of early cinema while still resonating with viewers on a personal level.
At the core of our story is the emotional disconnect between Alex, who is alive, and Casey, who we eventually discover is a ghost. The aim was not to rely on horror tropes or dramatic twists, but instead to build a quiet sense of unease through lighting/tone, performance, and setting. Drawing from Ahead’s (2024) reflections on golden age cinema’s power to “leave things unsaid but deeply felt,” we used silence, distance, and domestic mundanity to draw viewers in. Our studio’s key concern exploring emotional complexity with cinematic care was something I believe ‘Still Here’ communicates effectively.
Unfortunately, I was unable to attend the studio exhibition due to family commitments. However, through reviewing my peers’ presentations and discussions with my group members, I got a sense of the diversity and ambition across the studio. I would have liked to receive direct audience feedback and see how viewers responded to our film’s pacing and tonal shifts, especially the twist surrounding Casey’s ghostly nature.
The most successful aspect of our project was completing all filming within a single day. It was an intense and exhausting schedule, but the fact that we were able to shoot the entire script in one go, without major technical or creative issues, is something I’m proud of. At the same time, this was also our greatest limitation. The one-day shoot was a result of tight scheduling; our availability didn’t align enough to allow multiple shoot days. This constraint meant we had limited time to finesse shots, adjust lighting with care, or experiment with alternate takes. In retrospect, shooting everything in one day made the production possible, but it also limited the quality and creativity that could have been achieved with more time.
If I were to continue developing ‘Still Here’, I’d revisit the cinematography, lighting, and overall pacing. The lighting in particular could have done more to support the emotional tone for example, using colder hues as Casey fades from the frame, or a focus on shadows to create a sense of ghostly presence. These improvements align with Babbar’s (2024) discussion on the “evolution of visual language in cinema” and how modern films can still learn from the symbolic weight of light and shadow. With more time, I’d also sharpen the narrative arc, perhaps adding more ambiguity at the start or layering in subtle clues about Casey’s absence from the physical world. These small touches would enhance both the film’s mystery and emotional resonance.
One key takeaway from the studio that I’ll carry forward is the importance of thorough pre-production. Our script was strong, and our vision was clear, but certain issues during filming could have been avoided with more detailed planning. We learned this firsthand: when pre-production is rushed, production suffers. As Charleson (2019) argues in Filmmaking as Research, the filmmaking process should be treated as a practice of discovery and preparation is part of that. Our project reinforced the value of spending more time in the earlier stage of our work to test, plan, and prepare, making sure the actual shoot is smoother and more focused.
Collaboration was also vital to this project. We had a strong team, and everyone contributed something important from directing and cinematography to sound and logistics. However, one key lesson I took from the collaborative process was that defined roles matter. When responsibilities are blurry things like collaboration can be taken to far impeding on each others roles. So defining our roles creates more freedom both creatively and logistically in departments such as cinematography editing and writing and directing. Which would have improved our workflow and taken pressure off individuals during filming and other stages of production. Everyone on our team was capable, but clearer understanding and boundaries of each role would have allowed us to work more efficiently under the tight time we had.
Overall, ‘Still Here’ is a film I’m proud of. It reflects the key ideas of the studio drawing from prestige cinema to explore deep emotions and restrained storytelling while also giving me a chance to grow as a filmmaker. I’ve learned how small details like how a light shines or an unspoken line can carry emotional weight. I’ve learned that time, preparation, and teamwork make all the difference. And I’ve learned that sometimes the biggest moments in a story are the quiet ones, if you allow them the space to be felt.
Reference List
Ahead, I. (2024). Shadows and light: Exploring the legacy of Golden Age cinema. The Seybold Report, 19(1), 854–862.
Babbar, I. (2024). Evolution of cinema. International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research, 6(1), 1–4.
Charleson, D. (2019). Filmmaking as research: Screening memories (1st ed.). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24635-8