Get Help Creating Your Film!

Vimeo, the video sharing website, has created an online Video School with helpful clips about all aspects of filmmaking. Whether you're looking for storyboarding help or trying to enhance the composition of your shots, take a few minutes to check out Vimeo!

Test on Monday, 12/6

The test will focus on Night of the Living Dead, Do the Right Thing, North By Northwest, and the key terms and concepts from chapter 2 of our textbook, Understanding Movies. Also, review everything from the beginning of the course, such as the definition of "rhetoric," and literary, dramatic, and cinematic aspects, etc.

Be sure to focus on these areas in your review:

• In North By Northwest: director's cameo; day for night shooting; rear screen projection effect; femme fatale; MacGuffin; final cut privileges; title credits; parody; montage; characterization & compression; visual irony; phallic symbol; visual foreshadowing; aural cue; character subtext; "stealing a shot"; film subtexts; "Becoming George Kaplan"; "The Matchless Eve Kendall"; "Murder scenes shot lovingly & love scenes shot murderously"; epiphany & character arc; how tension & suspense are created in "The Crop Dusting Scene." Be able to cite specific examples of these concepts from the film to prove your point
• In Night of the Living Dead: the zombie apocalypse genre and its conventions; continuity error; colorblind casting; "stealing a scene"; indie film; expressionism; subtexts (cultural/historical significance); ironies in the plot; final shot; director's cameo. Be able to cite specific examples of these concepts from the film to prove your point.
• In Do The Right Thing: title credits; match cut; breaking the fourth wall; montage; allusion; racial tensions in NYC; Spike Lee's DVD Special Features. Be able to cite specific examples of these concepts from the film to prove your point. 
• From Understanding Movies: (Ch. 2) Mise en scene ("placing on stage"), aspect ratio (standard vs. widescreen), iris shot, the dominant, subsidiary contrasts, intrinsic interest, tight vs. loose framing, character placement, composition, proxemic patterns, open vs. closed form.

Look over your notes, your homework assignments, and all Viewing Guides and handouts. Extra Help will be offered at 2:45 p.m. on Thursday, 12/2 in room 452.

Mise en Scene Analysis for NBNW

"Mise en scene" literally means the arrangement of performers and properties on a stage. A mise en scene analysis dissects the meaningful ways actors and objects are arranged in a frame of a film.

For homework, analyze this frame from Alfred Hitchcock's North By Northwest, and respond to the following questions. Please type and double-space your answers. It's DUE Monday, 11/22 and will be collected in class. (NOTE: clicking on the image will ENLARGE it!)

1) Briefly describe the context. What's happening at this moment in the film?
2) DOMINANT - What is your eye attracted to first? Why?
3) SUBSIDIARY CONTRASTS - What do your eyes notice next after taking in the DOMINANT?
4) COMPOSITION - How is the two-dimensional space segmented and organized? What is the underlying design? (S-shape? Triadic? Parallel? Symmetrical or asymmetrical?)
5) FORM - Open or closed? Explain. (Check your notes for what these terms mean!)
6) FRAMING - Tight or loose? Are the characters trapped (maybe even cropped) or can they move about freely without impediments?
7) CHARACTER PLACEMENT - What part of the framed space do the characters occupy? Center? Top? Bottom? Edges? Why?
8) CHARACTER PROXEMICS - How much space is there between the characters (Public, social, personal, or intimate?) and what does this say about their relationship?
9) Summary - Considering everything you've analyzed above, what does Hitchcock want us to feel at this moment in the film? How does the mise en scene contribute to Hitchcock's purpose?

Blog Topic #3 - COMMENT by 9:00 p.m. on Fri. 11/12

Spike Lee's Do The Right Thing chronicles the semi-fictional events of a sweltering hot day in Bed Stuy, Brooklyn. The climax of this controversial film depicts a race riot where a largely African-American mob destroys a pizzeria owned by Sal, a white Italian-American.

What precipitates the riot? Earlier in the day an African-American man (Buggin' Out) had insisted that Sal include some "Brothers" on the pizzeria's wall of fame, a kind of secular shrine reserved for famous Italian-Americans. When Sal refuses, tensions escalate eventually leading to fisticuffs between Sal and Radio Raheem, another African-American. With a baseball bat, Sal destroys Radio Raheem's giant boom box, and when the NYPD arrives they kill Radio Raheem with a chokehold while trying to restrain him. Mookie, an African-American and an employee of Sal's, is so incensed that he throws a garbage pail through the pizzeria's window, screaming "Hate!" and inciting the riot.

Please leave a comment on this post that responds to this question: Considering all of these events, is Mookie justified in starting the riot? Explain.

Remember that blog comments are at least 1 full paragraph (5-7 sentences). They should be well-written, entirely original, and highly specific (pointing to concrete examples in the film). Entries that are not proofread will not count! 

Test on Monday, 11/1

The test will focus on Jesus Camp, Run Lola Run, Modern Times, and the key terms and concepts from chapter 8 of our textbook, Understanding Movies. Also, review everything from the beginning of the course, such as the definition of "rhetoric," and literary, dramatic, and cinematic aspects, etc.

Be sure to focus on these areas in your review:

• In Run Lola Run: 5 visual aesthetics, epigraph, birds-eye view shot, split screen, pastiche, arc shot, crane or boom shot, steadicam, chaos theory, motifs (spirals, etc.), establishing sound, snorkel camera, montage, red filter, freeze frame, web of life plot, Lola as hero. Be able to cite specific examples of these concepts from the film to prove your point.
• In Jesus Camp: evangelical, culture war, praying in tongues, separation of church and state, Intelligent Design vs. Darwinian Evolution, the features of a documentary; where do you put the film on the 'spectrum of film types' between cinema verite and 60 Minutes style documentaries?; in your opinion, does the film inform or persuade? Be able to cite specific examples of these concepts from the film to prove your point. 
• In Modern Times: silent film, inter-title, characterization of the Tramp, episodic structure, motifs of police officers & food, sight gags & slapstick, final shot. DVD Special Features: deleted scene, original ending, all voices filtered through technology & 24 frames per second. Be able to cite specific examples of these concepts from the film to prove your point.
• In Chapter 8 - Understanding Movies: mimesis, diegesis, avant-garde, plot, story, conventions, genre, classical paradigm (including exposition, inciting incident, rising action, climax, resolution & closure), linear vs. non linear narratives, realism as style, rites of passage, cinema verite

Look over your notes, your homework assignments, and all Viewing Guides and handouts. Extra Help will be offered at 2:45 p.m. on Thursday, 10/28 in room 452.

Writing an Argument for 'Run Lola Run'

The Assignment: Write an original essay arguing for where you place Run Lola Run on the style spectrum. Regardless of where you place it overall, make certain you address the film’s formalistic, classical, and realistic aspects. Be sure to consider narrative structure and visual style. 

Remember some of the key elements of an argument: a thesis statement that contains what you intend to argue for; specific evidence from the film that supports your thesis, and a conclusion that sums up your ideas without repeating your introduction word for word.

This essay must be 1-2 pages, typed and double-spaced. It should be convincing and well written, following the conventions of standard written English. 

Be certain to demonstrate a thorough knowledge of Run Lola Run and the various film styles we have studied.

Check out the director's statement and see what he thinks about the film's style. (If you use any information from the article, be sure to give credit to your source!)


DUE: Monday, 10/25

Blog Topic #2 - COMMENT by 9:00 p.m. on Fri. 10/15

Jesus Camp documents the attempt by some adults to indoctrinate children into their religious and political beliefs. Are these actions fair or unfair? Isn't it correct to say that most of us have "inherited" our religious and political views from our parents? Is Jesus Camp showing us this, or something else? Explain.

Remember that blog comments are at least 1 full paragraph (5-7 sentences). They should be well-written, entirely original, and highly specific (pointing to concrete examples in the film). Entries that are not proofread will not count!

And check this out too: it's "I Love You and Buddha Too" by Mason Jennings. Thanks for the link, Elana!

Test on Fri., 5/21

The test will focus on Wes Anderson's Rushmore, Federico Fellini's La Strada, and Alfred Hitchcock's North By Northwest. You should also know the terms from chapter 3 of our textbook, Understanding Movies. Also, review all critical terms that we learned earlier in the course, from cinematic terms (such as "long shot") to other terms such as "mise en scene."

Look over your notes, your homework assignments, and all Viewing Guides and handouts.

Along with the general plot and character developments of the following films, be sure to focus on these areas in your review:

• In Rushmore: Montage; deadpan humor; the structure of comedy; slow motion photography; theme: the nature of friendships.  Be able to cite specific examples of these concepts from the film to prove your point.
• In La Strada: The classic tale of Beauty & the Beast; Nino Rota, Federico Fellini; a Fellini moment; Italian Neorealism; the circus as metaphor; the Franciscan element of compassion for all living beings; St. Francis of Assissi; the didactic tone of the "Parable of the Pebble"; sympathy for Zampano?; Martin Scorcese's DVD special features interview; the metaphor of "the road." Be able to cite specific examples of these concepts from the film to prove your point.
• In North By Northwest: Director's cameo; femme fatale; MacGuffin; final cut privileges; title credits; montage; characterization & compression; visual irony; phallic symbol; visual foreshadowing; aural cue; character subtext; "stealing a shot"; film subtexts; "Becoming George Kaplan"; "The Matchless Eve Kendall"; "Murder scenes shot lovingly & love scenes shot murderously"; epiphany & character arc; how tension & suspense are created in "The Crop Dusting Scene." Be able to cite specific examples of these concepts from the film to prove your point.
• Key Terms: Jump cut; deep/shallow focus; swish pan; pull back; 24 fps; fast motion; freeze frame; steadicam; persistence of vision. 

This is only a general guide and not a complete list of everything we learned and everything you should study!

Extra help will be offered after school on Thursday, 5/20 in room 452 at 2:45.

Good luck!

Blog Comment DUE Wed. 5/12 @ 9:00 p.m.

Develop one of the questions from last week's discussion of the film (see the back of Viewing Guide 6/6) into a full paragraph (5-7 sentences minimum) and leave it here as a COMMENT.

1. Thinking "Big Picture" or overall theme, complete this sentence: "North By Northwest is a film about..." Then, explain.
2. Describe the most vivid visual moment from the film. Why is it memorable?
3. Describe the most vivid aural moment from the film. Why is it memorable?
4. What's one question you still have about the film? (Attempt a possible answer to your question as part of your comment.)

In the Beginning...

On Monday, the introduction to your research paper is due. Last week we spoke about how to craft an introduction using the "funnel technique."

You need to start your introductory paragraph with a general statement that leads, eventually, to your very specific thesis statement: the last sentence of the introduction.

Review the handout from last week, and email me if you have any questions.

Please type and double-space your introduction.

Oh, here's a handy link too:

RotMI Research Paper Requirements

QUIZ on Monday, 4/19

The last grade of the 3rd quarter will be a quiz on Monday, 4/19. Aside from the general plots and characters, be sure to review the following terms & concepts from our last two films, Double Indemnity and Spirited Away.

Double Indemnity: film noir, establishing shot, first image of Walter Neff, whodunnit vs. how&whyhedunnit, badinage, fatalism, definition of "double indemnity", off screen space, actuarial tables, dramatic irony, heroic character, final shot, the Hays Code, novella, apocryphal, casting against type.

Spirited Away: motifs; "the kindness of strangers"; eco-message; flashback; the importance of memory & identity; social, moral, & cultural values; final shot; character arc.

Good luck!

Viewing Your Genre Film - DUE Mon., 4/12

Now that you've chosen three films from a particular genre, it's time to view one of them by Monday, April 12.

UPDATE: I've emailed everyone a pdf version of the 2-page VIEWING GUIDE that you need to submit on Monday, 4/12. You need to fill it out with your research and observations about your film. The pdf is also available from our class web site, barebodkin.net.

The lefthand column asks questions about genre conventions that you need to fill out in the other two columns.

The middle column is where you answer those questions regarding the typical conventions of YOUR GENRE.

The righthand column is where you note similarities and differences with YOUR FILM and the conventions you've noted in the middle column.

Please email me if you have any questions about filling out this graphic organizer. It will be collected in class on 4/12.

Choosing a Genre Film - DUE Thurs., 3/25 by 9 p.m.

Spring is in the air, and so is our upcoming research paper!

Here's how we'll start: while we're studying Billy Wilder's Double Indemnity in class as the quintessential Film Noir, you're exploring a genre film of your own choice.

STEP 1: Choose a genre - Horror, Romantic Comedy, Western, Gangster/Crime Drama, Documentary, Science Fiction, Thriller, etc.

STEP 2: Choose three (3) films from that genre made before 1992.

STEP 3: By 9 p.m. on Thursday, March 25, leave a blog comment on this post that describes your chosen genre, the 3 films (with titles and years they were released) you're considering from that genre, and several of that genre's conventions (essentially what you might expect from those films based on their genre)

STEP 4: By Monday, April 12, view one (1) of those genre films on your own and submit your completed handouts that can be found in the post above this one.

After Spring Break we'll begin a research project based on your genre film!

TEST on Friday, 3/19

The test will focus on Peter Weir's Witness, the documentary Young @ Heart, Tom Tykwer's Run Lola Run, and the terms and concepts from chapters 1, 2, and 8 of our textbook, Understanding Movies.


Look over your notes, your homework assignments, and all Viewing Guides and handouts.

Along with the general plot and character developments of the following films, be sure to focus on these areas in your review:

• In Run Lola Run: epigraph, birds-eye view shot, split screen, pastiche, arc shot, crane or boom shot, steadicam, chaos theory, motifs (spirals, etc.), establishing sound, snorkel camera, montage, red filter, (NEW: freeze frame,) web of life plot, Lola as hero. Be able to cite specific examples of these concepts from the film to prove your point.
• In Young @ Heart: the documentary style spectrum (characteristics of realism & formalism), inter-title, cinema verite, reaction shot, episodic structure. Be able to cite specific examples of these concepts from the film to prove your point.
• In Witness: establishing shot, Amish culture, setting (Philadelphia vs. the Amish world), the Ordnung, the bonds of community vs. individual desire. Be able to cite specific examples of these concepts from the film to prove your point.
• Key Terms: Be able to define the term 'rhetoric' and how it relates to the title of our course: Rhetoric of the Moving Image. Also, literary, cinematic, & dramatic aspects, long/medium/close-up shots, high/low/eye-level/dutch (canted) angles, low/high key lighting, subjective/authorial point of view, eye-line match, diegetic/nondiegetic sound, (NEW: mid-ground, background, foreground.)
• From Understanding Movies: (Ch. 1) Film style: formalism/realism/classicism. (Ch. 2) Mise-en-scene ("placing on stage"), aspect ratio (standard vs. widescreen), iris shot, the dominant, intrinsic interest, tight vs. loose framing, proxemic patterns, open vs. closed form. (Ch. 8) Mimesis, diegesis, avant-garde, plot, story, conventions, genre, classical paradigm, linear vs. nonlinear narratives, realism as style, rites of passage.

This is only a general guide and not a complete list of everything we learned and everything you should study! Extra help will be at 2:45 p.m on Thursday, 3/18 in room 452.

NEW: The general format of the test will be approximately as follows: PART I (40 points) - 20 multiple choice questions on film terminology, character and plot developments in our three films, and textbook/homework terms. PART II (40 points) - 4 short answer questions on major terms and concepts from the textbook relating to our three films. PART III (20 points) - mini-essay mise en scene analysis of a frame from one of our three films.


Good luck!

Writing an Argument for 'Young @ Heart'

The Assignment: Write an original essay arguing for where you place Young @ Heart on the Style Spectrum for Documentaries (Click on the image above for a larger view). What about it is formalistic and/or realistic? Be sure to consider narrative structure (Ch. 8) and visual style (Chs. 1&2).

Remember some of the key elements of an argument. You must have a thesis statement with specific evidence from the film that supports your thesis, and a conclusion that sums up your ideas without repeating your introduction verbatim.

This essay must be 1-2 pages, typed and double-spaced. It should be convincing and well written, following the conventions of standard written English.

Be certain to demonstrate a thorough knowledge of Young @ Heart and the various documentary film styles we have studied.

DUE: Tuesday, 3/16

REMEMBER: IF YOU COME TO SCHOOL AFTER 1st PERIOD, YOUR ESSAY IS STILL DUE. DROP IT OFF IN THE ENGLISH OFFICE - RM. 450.

Homework Topic #2 - DUE Wednesday, 3/10 @ 9 p.m.

Respond to the following prompt in the form of a COMMENT regarding our study of Chapter 2: Mise en Scene in Understanding Movies and Peter Weir's Witness. (To write your comment, click on the link below that says "0 COMMENTS ON THIS TOPIC.")

For full credit on this homework assignment, your COMMENT must be completely original and well-developed. Your COMMENT may be bullet points followed by a paragraph response. COMMENTs that are not proofread will receive a zero. (Remember that after you publish your comment it will not immediately appear, but I will be able to review it. After the deadline I will publish all comments simultaneously.)

HOMEWORK TOPIC #2: Do a mise en scene analysis of the above frame from Witness. Respond in bullet points to the following elements:

• What is the frame's dominant?
• What is the angle of this shot?
• Composition? (Parallel? Triadic? S or X shaped?)
• Form? Open or closed?
• Framing? Tight or loose?
• What are the staging positions of those in this frame?
• Character proxemics? How much space is there between the characters and how does this comment on their relationship?

Then, respond in a paragraph detailing how these elements work together to make the frame meaningful and to visually convey essential information about the film.

You can click on the image for a larger version of it. Check your handouts and Chapter 2 for help with the above terms.

Questions? Answers: mrd@barebodkin.net

Homework Topic #1 - DUE Thursday, 2/25 @ 9 p.m.

Respond to the following prompt in the form of a COMMENT regarding our current film, Peter Weir's Witness. (To write your comment, click on the link below that says "## COMMENTS ON THIS TOPIC.")

For full credit on this home work assignment, your COMMENT must be completely original and a minimum of 1 well-developed paragraph (5-7 sentences). COMMENTs that are not proofread will receive a zero. (Remember that after you publish your comment it will not immediately appear, but I will be able to review it. After the deadline I will publish all comments simultaneously.)

HOMEWORK TOPIC #1: Look back to Viewing Guide #3, Question #1. Witness is often considered a blend of genres including Thriller, Drama, and Romance.

• Take one of these genres and explain what expectations you have for a film of this type. 
• Give an example of another film in this genre and how it fits the expectations of the genre. Be specific.
• Make a prediction for Witness based on the expectations of one of these genre categories (Thriller/Drama/Romance). Be specific using appropriate character names, etc.

Welcome to the RotMI Blog, Spring 2010!

Check your email for an invitation to join the RotMI blog as an author. When you get it, follow the link to join; and standby for further instructions!

And the Winner Is... (Part 2)

Hollywood's Academy Awards have the Oscar. RotMI has the Baby Daz.

The winner of the coveted Baby Daz in ALL 5 remaining categories goes to one film.

BEST EDITING | BEST  DANCING | BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY | BEST PERFORMANCES | BEST PICTURE

Vive Cuevo!

(Simon, Yale, Tom)

Please feel free to leave your acceptance speeches in the form of comments. 

Thanks to all the RotMI Academy Members for voting!

And the Winner Is... (Part 1)

Hollywood's Academy Awards have the Oscar. RotMI has the Baby Daz.

Congratulations to the RotMI FALL 2009 winners of the coveted Baby Daz in the following categories:



BEST DOCUMENTARY
In Da Heightz 2 (Justin, Ashley)

BEST ORIGINAL STORY

In Blind Sight (Gabe, Spencer, Steven W. Daniel)




BEST MUSIC
Little Jokes (Elena, Ali, Perri)

BEST ART PRODUCTION
How To Make A Gingerbread House (Jonathan, Brandyn)

BEST FIGHT SCENE
Can You Teach Me How To Beat The Bully? (Cliff, Eric, Isaac, Andrew)

The winners for BEST PERFORMANCES, BEST EDITING, BEST DANCING, BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY, and BEST PICTURE will be announced soon!

Reflection on "In Blind Sight"

Reflection on “In Blind Sight”

Throughout the semester, I had spent eighth period every school day studying the elements and concepts that go into filmmaking. My class and I learned about the intricacies of cinematography and the great time and effort necessary to produce a film. For our final project, we were given the task of creating our very own original works of film.

From the very beginning, Spencer, Gabe, Steven, and I were out to make an unforgettable class film. Being a group of jokesters, it came as a surprise that we decided to branch out from the typical humorous class films and create an emotional drama. As a group, we handed Gabe the reins and, a week later, received the original screenplay that is In Blind Sight.

With the story set, we assigned each group member a role in both the production of the film and the cast. Steven was set to play Alex, however complications later shifted this role to Spencer. Instead, Steven played the doctor, as well as being the group’s main cameraman. Spencer played Alex and was given the job of head editor. Gabe, the author of the screenplay, was also set to play Alex’s father, and I, the director, played the role of the priest.

On the first night of filming, we all met at Spencer’s house to film the first scene. We knew we needed to start the film off right, with a subtly powerful shot to go along with the touching narration. In the fashion of all great directors, I envisioned the shot we began filming. The shot is backlit with a candle shining through the photograph of Alex and his mother. This focuses the attention on the photograph, which sets up the movie in synergy with the opening narration.

The dialogue of the movie is mostly non-diegetic narration. We felt that this technique would be able to give the audience insight into Alex’s feelings. Another technique that we employ in the film is cutting between camera angles during conversations. In both the kitchen and doctor’s office scenes, the camera cuts back and forth between shots of Alex and his dad or doctor, depending on who is talking. This enhances the contrasting viewpoints of the kitchen scene and enables the viewer to see all the emotion of the doctor’s office scene.

The scene in which Alex first opens his eyes after surgery is my favorite scene. This is due to the cinematography of the shot. For this scene we once again use backlighting, but also make use of a first-person subjective viewpoint. This allows the audience to feel as Alex feels and sympathize with the character. A final important technique we made use of in the film was an eyeline match. This technique was employed when Alex arrives at the park. We first see his disbelief and sadness, then the shot cuts to a visual of the barren park, and back to Alex’s face. This sets up the feeling toward the park and satisfies the audiences curiosity of what Alex is seeing.

All of these techniques come together to create the beautiful film that is In Blind Sight. I am very pleased with the outcome of our work and I think we successfully made a great student film. Throughout this semester I learned the techniques needed to make a film and the process through which this is done. By means of this project, I was finally able to apply this newfound knowledge and reap the benefits of Rhetoric of the Moving Image.

Reflection for "Out of Ammo" - Steven Villacis

Throughout any intensive review process, one is plagued with the idea of whether the final polished product will “be good enough.” This can take a typically enjoyable and fun experience, and mutilate it beyond recognition – transforming it into a nightmare. Although this wasn’t precisely the problem of my group, this fear loomed over our heads for the majority of the film making process. Fortunately, my group had enough cohesion to move the project along despite what seemed like an onslaught of setbacks.
Every person in the group made a concerted effort to add progress to our project. When we first began this endeavor, however, even our undying initiative couldn’t circumvent the problem that plagued us. Initially, we were fortunate enough to have a camcorder to film with; however, when it came the time to film and then capture the camera’s video onto a computer, we had met a dead end. We were stuck and had nowhere to run. This was a horrible omen that had come to us in the very beginnings of our creative process – consuming valuable time. Faced with a computer virus and a dysfunctional camcorder, our efforts became seriously dampened by a longing for food from the popular burger joint “Five Guys.” This may seem strange at the outset, but our film would later incorporate a scene in which the human resistance fighters would have their meeting – as lackluster as it may be – over a warm and greasy meal.
Our plot was strange, but reasonably abstract and unconventional. It would consist of a story that mixes humor and irony with a genre that is typically used to instill fear in all who set their eyes on it. This movie started off with a typical planning scene often incorporated into movies as the scene that takes place at HQ, but with zombies taking the place of the humans as the organized side in an ongoing war. The zombies would convene over a map of the area and make specific plans as to what should be attacked and when those attacks should take place. The cut scenes that we would include were laced with the zombie offensive plans that had previously been discussed; a vivid execution of what should be a human initiative. Our movie would progress through several human planning and training scenes soon after this opening act, filled with more than one’s daily dose of irony. These scenes would revolve around video games and pizza. In rapid succession, the zombie forces would come to dispatch numerous human guards and would infiltrate the defenses of the human resistance. Using a unique set of skills that include stealth and cunning, the zombies end the movie with a cliffhanger, targeting the gluttonous and self-indulgent demeanor of the humans as the weakest link.
As the group’s “stunt” coordinator for many of the zombie attack scenes, I would basically take the role of director for these particular scenes and organize the chaos of an attack scene as best I could. The camera angles used during these scenes were strong indicators of the feelings expected of the audience. During a zombie attack scene where the human guard was completely outnumbered, we used the high angle and medium shot to depict a situation that would hint towards the trapped individual being overtaken with minimal resistance. In the larger scale zombie attack scene, I had set up the actors (which included me) so that they would flow in from the sides of the frame as the scene progressed. The actor portraying the guard would again be easily overcome by the zombies’ joint operation, and the zombies’ strength in numbers would once again be deemed a source of triumph.
As one of the screenwriters in the film, I had allowed for a unique form of dialogue to take place. The zombies were given a sense of self-awareness, allowing them to accurately plan out their attacks on the human stronghold. The humans, on the other hand, were downgraded to a low level of preparation and even to a level of stupidity. The point of the film was to put a spin on the zombie apocalypse genre, switching the mentality of the zombie with that of the human.
We had allocated the front and back yard space surrounding the director’s as the settings for the zombie offensive movements. We took full advantage of the stability of the tripod in order to get the camera in proper position for a Dutch shot. It was essential for us to execute this shot properly because the very angle of the camera would impact the degree to which the shot was believable and effective in conveying the disastrous outcome of poor planning on the part of the human resistance. The film also included a series of close-up shots that were used during the planning scenes. Although the facial expression was not of the utmost priority, we decided to insert the close-up shots so that zombies could be seen as cold and calculating killers rather than the typical view of them as mindless and conspicuous. However, the zombies still retain their “strength in numbers” dogma, as we introduced scenes to the movie where they could act on that statement.
Our group was inspired by the horror movies that have recently emerged under the zombie apocalypse genre. We knew from the start that it would be a massive undertaking for us to make the film genuinely scary and frightening. Although we longed for a film that would blur the distinctions between a zombie apocalypse film and an action film, we were restricted by our resources and the amount of time that we could spend on this film. Ultimately, we couldn’t afford to spend all of our time on this movie – as much as we wished we could have done so. As a result of these limitations, we had decided to put more pressure on our script and plot, but our acting and the camcorder’s sound capture abilities made it difficult to have the effect we intended to have on our audience.
The film was significantly hindered and weakened by our acting experience, which for most of us was nonexistent. We did work at getting the lines in place and conveying the proper emotion, but this is where the cohesion of the group and between the group members met its match. We struggled to keep our state of mind in sync with each other, but we each spoke at different intonations which were rarely an accurate reflection of what the lines wished to convey on their own. Our film seemed great on paper, and our plot seemed well planned prior to filming, but it was nearly impossible to make sense of the movie with issues like background noise and music configuration. The actors of the film were very compliant with the screenplay’s content, but on the other hand, personal interpretations were necessary sacrifices that were made to maintain the group’s integrity. If the screenwriters and the director had decided to restrict behaviors of the actors, the group could have easily dismantled itself.
Fortunately, the strengths had masked the weaknesses to some extent. Our shots were very effective and they served as the soul of some of my favorite scenes. One of the scenes in the middle of the film included a match cut that would connect one of our actors with a video game character. The video game character was confronted by overwhelming odds, and after a valiant effort, would succumb to a heavy barrage of bullets. This character was completely outnumbered by a fleet of humanoid creatures, much like the situation in many of the zombie assault scenes that the group had filmed.
The scene that followed would be a display of carnage that was left behind by a single zombie, using the element of surprise to continue with the battering of human defenses. The actors are depicted lying lifeless in different positions, with one of the actors in a position that mimics the dead video game character. The sloppy cut that takes the audience from the TV screen to the death scene was intentional and was implemented beautifully. This transition, along with a sound that is difficult to describe, but easy to identify, created a scene that was likely the most believable of all of the scenes that came together to make the movie.
For my next film pursuit, I hope to spend more time on the execution of a screenplay rather than become bogged down during the planning stage. By doing so, I really hope to further the quality of the end product, and eliminate much of the disarray that consumed the group during the pre-production. The art of film was a major source of intrigue throughout the production phase. The group was constantly afflicted by the self-proposed challenge to make the film into a work of art that will evoke the proper and appropriate emotions from the audience. This particular process was difficult because we lacked the organization needed to leave enough time to screen the film to an audience of peers and work off of their reactions. I believe that such a procedure would be immensely beneficial to a film because although the population may not accurately represent the future audience as a whole, the feedback received is precisely in making a movie that can appeal to different people with different expectations.

reflection "in blind sight"

At first I was put to the test of being the main character as the blind kid, but sadly we found out I wasn’t the greatest actor and didn’t have the “skills” to pull it off. My group put me in as the doctor and when I wasn’t acting which was most of the time, I was the camera man getting those great angles and close-ups. We were assigned different roles in this project depending on who was best at whatever the part was. Gabe wrote a great screen play, Spencer played an excellent blind boy and was a co-editor, Daniel directed and played the priest, and I acted as the doctor and was the camera man. Its hard to say only because I feel Spencer did a great job acting, but Gabe was the main person behind this film writing the screen play and editing our great film, so I would have to give the MVP award to Gabe Stine.
We sure had an advantage being that we were all friends from the start. So we all felt comfortable acting around each other, I have a feeling that if it was anyone else like people I didn’t know I would have been pretty embarrassed doing what I did. We did goof off sometimes while filming and had fun but when it was time to get serious we got the job done, and worked great together without many arguments, we would find a way to work it out if there was ever a problem.
Me and Spencer wanted to make a funny video from the start but Gabe spoke us into doing a serious movie with some sort of message, we figured most people were going to be making funny silly movies and we definitely are not like most people so we did the opposite, and that’s really how it started then Gabe wrote his screen play. I am not really sure where he got the idea for it, but it was a well written screen play and it seemed like a good idea to do it. This film is about a boy Alex that was born blind and grew up with a messed up life style. His mother died when he was very young age and his dad is a drunk who doesn’t really care for him to much. Then a new surgery was made that would allow Alex to see as well as anyone with perfect vision. But Alex wont like what he sees when the real world is finally revealed to his new eyes.
I felt that this was a very successful film and I am not saying that just because I was in it. The editing, music, acting, and story line I felt was excellent. I would have liked it if it could have been a little longer, but due to our time limit we couldn’t make it longer. I don’t feel that there are many weaknesses at least none that I can see. I think we did a pretty good job in making this film being that we didn’t have money to work with and used all the resources we had just like everyone else. My favorite scene was when Alex was waking up from surgery and there is narration, music, and voices in the back round. Gabe did a great job putting that scene together it makes you feel like your really in the movie waking up.
Everything in my opinion turned out great but I feel like if we had a little more time we could have added some small talk in to it because I felt it was some what jumpy from scene to scene. But I really can’t complain about anything it came out just as I thought it would and hoped it would. Next time I make a film I will definitely make sure to give it more time because it was a lot of work and very time consuming more then I thought it would be. But when it comes to the group and effort put in, it was good and everyone did there job well making sure to get it done.
I learned many things from doing this project, for example, I learned how time consuming it really is to film, get the take you want, and edit the whole thing, and I learned that team work and getting along really takes you far in getting the job done as a group. Many of the views we used and lighting effects we learned from class like, we used canted angle for when Alex is running down the hall way in the hospital which makes it sort of questioning and different not like the normal shot where its just straight on. We used low angle for when he is sitting against the white wall at he end of the movie to make a bad energy effect because he says there is no point to going to church anymore. When Alex is talking to the priest we used a low key lighting shot to make the mood seem right, he is in a confessional booth having a very depressing talk so we felt we should make it dark. We used close up when Alex is looking at the park, to show how upsetting it is and how upset he really is to see it broken down and just an empty dirty lot. Lastly we used a far shot for when he is running to the park after his surgery to get the effect of the whole scenery and showing him really in a rush and running a good distance to get to this very important park.

A Reflection on "In Blind Sight"

Gabe Stine
ROTMI

A Reflection on “In Blind Sight”

“In Blind Sight” was a film I’ve wanted to put together for a long time, so when I heard that we were making our own movies, I was very excited. Naturally, my friends (Spencer, Steven, and Daniel), wanted to make a funny movie, well because, we’re teenagers and that’s what we do. Funny movies are always enjoyable to make, but I could have easily made one before taking ROTMI. I wanted to apply the skills I learned in class to this film, and I think “In Blind Sight” does a great job at demonstrating the skills that the four of us have learned.
Originally, I was just supposed to be the screenwriter of the film. The storyline was my idea so it only made sense. Writing the story, and the rest of pre-production went very smoothly. Everyone in the group liked my screenplay, and we were all excited to get filming. I did end up playing Alex’s (the main character) father in the film. I had never acted before so it was a new experience. Filming to my surprise went smoothly as well. We did have some schedule issues with some group members, but we got it done. Now the story starts to get interesting with post-production. At first everything was looking awesome, until Premiere Pro (the program Spencer was using to edit) had crashed with one scene left to edit. After plenty of hair being ripped out and a couple of head bashes to the wall, I decided to download Premiere Pro to my computer and start editing. The entire editing process had to be restarted, and basically finished within one night, but it eventually got done. I think it is fair to say that I was a vital contributor to this film, having major roles in all three production phases. However, I feel narcissistic calling myself an MVP.
“In Blind Sight” is a film about Alex, a blind highschool boy who finally gets to see for the first time after having surgery. Alex doesn’t necessarily like what he sees. The single most important thing to me while making this film is to incorporate a message, or at least something that is below the surface of the storyline. I refuse to share this message with anyone before they have seen the film, so ask me after class. Creating a serious and almost bitter film with a message, was extremely difficult to do, while keeping it five minutes in length. Many things setback my goal. Acting is such a crucial aspect of film, and without professional actors, I believe that some of the seriousness is lost. Also, since we were pretty much limited to having teenage actors, having characters that realistically look like one’s father or doctor was impractical. After all the setbacks though, I think the film’s message is still retained.
There is one scene in the movie that I am especially proud of. Alex’s first time seeing is when he wakes up from surgery. Seeing was something he wanted, but never expected to do his entire life, and I love the way the four of us captured this moment. The combination of acting, narration, lighting, and music make this scene in a way, beautiful. It had to be beautiful. This scene made Alex’s ultimate downfall that much worse, and I think the film would have definitely been negatively affected if this scene were to be shot in any other way.
Many cinematic aspects were used in our film. In the scene explained above (when Alex wakes up from surgery), the scene is shot in extremely soft focus when Alex opens his eyes. This had the effect of making everything blurry to the point where nothing other than shapes can be distinguished. The use of soft focus in this scene is purposely very ironic. The first time Alex gets to see the world clearly, the audience sees it as a blur. Irony was a way of foreshadowing in this scene.
Low key and high key lighting were used on the priest in a strategic manner as well. Alex is blind in the confessional scene and therefore cannot see his priest; well neither can the audience. The film purposely does not put religion in the greatest light (no pun intended), and low key lighting infers that something is being hidden. When Alex can see at the end, the priest is shown in high key lighting. Whatever was being hidden is now wide out in the open, and Alex rejects and ignores his priest in this scene.
The close-up was also used effectively in the film. The close-up shot allowed us to fully embrace Alex’s emotion when he looked at the destroyed and closed down park. A medium or long shot would not do this emotional moment justice.
My final cinematic aspect also has to do with foreshadowing. As Alex decides to run out of the hospital in the hope of finally seeing the park he loved as a little kid, a canted angle is used to film him running in the hallway towards the door. Naturally, the scene is uplifting but as Alex started heading for the real world, he is shown with a canted angle, which looks like anything but uplifting. The canted angle foreshadows what’s to come when Alex does finally see the real world for the first time.
Through all the bumps, setbacks, and missing hair, creating “In Blind Sight” was a great experience and has possibly opened my eyes to a career path I would have never thought of going into before this film and this class. I look forward to making more films and to continue applying what I had learned in ROTMI to every creative work I do.

True Life: Brian Bergman Reflection

Ever since I was a little boy the world of movies intrigued me so much that after I would see a movie I would beg my parents to take me to Toy”R”Us so I could buy all the merchandise from that movie so I could pretend I was a part of the adventure. My love for movies as grown at such a rapid pace that almost every week me and my best friend Derek go to the movie theater at least once a week and see a movie. The best part is that we see any kind of movie just so we can expand our knowledge of movies, and this year when Dr. Ganes told me about Mr. Daszenski’s Rhetoric of the Moving Image class I knew I had to sign up for it. The best part is that this class has actually helped guide me with my future and has helped me to figure out what type of career I might wish to pursue. So far the best part has been this project, besides the fact that I got to make a movie about myself, (what’s cooler than that????) I got to learn what it takes to make a film, which is something I had never tried before.

One of our first assignments to this project was creating a production company, after hours and hours of arguing Derek, Andrew and I finally came up with A Sour Diesel Film. We finally were able to agree upon this because we felt it was something that really represented us and one of the reasons why we are such good friends. In this group my role was to play the leading role in our film and to be the assistant editor in the post-production part of our project. These were to things that I knew were very new to me and were difficult tasks but I was up to the challenge. Andrew was our director of course, because I don’t know if you know Andrew but he is always the head honcho and he also can do anything else but boss people around. Derek was our head editor, we gave this position to Derek because of his extensive background in film editing and since he spent an entire summer working at a film editing company called Company 3. In our project there was no screen writer because our film was a documentary and in a documentary everything is real and unscripted. The only parts that were written down were the questions that were asked in the film. I’m sure that it is expected for me to nominate myself as the group’s MVP, but to be honest I can’t give myself that much credit, I really believe that as a whole we were all MVP’s because without each other our project would have never gotten anywhere.

I do not know how well our group worked together compared to other groups but I know we didn’t work as well as we had hoped. Most people would think that friends would work well together because you know what the people in your group are capable of and what they aren’t capable of, but the problem with our group is that we let personal issues interfere with our progress. In the pre-production we had some complications; our biggest problem was deciding what our film was going to be about. Even though we are similar people and we all have a very similar taste in movies deciding what we were going to film was almost impossible. The reason for this was because every time one of us made a suggestion about what our film should be about, one of us would immediately find reasons why we shouldn’t use that idea. Not until we had a “film-making conference” with Mr. Daszenski did we finally settle on our film. During the production stage of our film everything started out easy and of course everything went downhill from there. On January 13, 2010 our group was supposed to begin our filming process, but with our groups luck Andrew forgot to charge his camera, which ended up putting pressure on us to film everything we needed the next day. The reason we need to do all of this on the 14^th was because on Friday the 15^th I was going to be in school and without me (lead role) we couldn’t get footage. Finally everything came together with our post-production and we were able to work together as a group to make our film the right way.

The inspiration for our group’s film came from our teacher, Mr. Daszenski. During our “film-making conference” with him he gave us the idea to make a documentary about Brian Bergman. The reason he did this is unexplainable, but if I had to guess it’s probably because he finds me to be an interesting individual. A True Life: Brian Bergman is about a high school student named Brian Bergman, and what his fellow students and teachers think about him. To me I feel our film was very successful, yes it had some weaknesses such as the planning of our film and the constant fighting that took place during the production. Strengths of our film to me were finding out what people really thought of me, even though most of them were joking around and trying to be funny, I still as able to get a jist for what people thought about me. My favorite scene in our film is the opening question, in this question we ask people to describe me using one word. It was my favorite because we got to really play around with different transitions and we were able to make 12 seconds of our film hilarious. To be honest throughout the production I would have been able to come up with several reasons of things that didn’t come out the way I had hoped, but after we finished the film I was very happy with the way everything turned out. Next time I have the opportunity to make a film I will certainly not choose a group the consists of my closest friends, this way my group will focus on what’s important not who looks the most important in the group. In our film the 5 cinematic techniques we utilized were inter-titles, tracking shot; close up, medium shot and long shot. In order the portray the scene of “Brian being Brian” we had to use a low angle tracking shot to represent the emotion and significance of the scene.