30 second practice sequence

30 second media coursework practice

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MYWCcosOFQ

Narrative

2 friends are arguing about what happened in a situation.

Context: Dan has been trying to get with Paul’s girlfriend.

·     Paul pulls Dan aside for a chat, trying to be civil and calm about it. They starts arguing but Dan becomes defensive and raises his voice.Paul gets frustrated and grabs Dan by the neck and tells him to “back off.”

Characters

They're both friends and talk most days. They hang round together and would be classed as best mates.

Dan: Villain (Propp)

·     Dan will be represented to be in the wrong. He will be very defensive and argumentative. He will get angry with what people say very easily. Described as a “hot head”. This will make him look like he's scared and insecure in this scene.

Paul: Hero (Propp)

·     Paul will be represented as the good guy. Innocent but stern in his approach. He is a nice guy who acts too nice so people walk all over him. People abuse his niceness and take advantage and shows in the scene that he has had enough and is starting to snap.

Dialogue

Both characters will talk in a very naturalistic way with no forced accents or twangs.

Dan

He starts off answering the questions very calmly but seems shocked by the accusation. He gets high pitched due to the surprise of what he's hearing. When Dan gets very defensive, he raises his voice and gets more gravelly and deepens his voice to act tough and get his misconstrued point across.

Paul

He starts talking quietly so not to attract any unwanted attention to himself but uses a stern tone to show he is serious. After Dan raises his voice in defence, he says calm. When Paul grabs him, he speaks fairly loudly but still articulate and puts emphasis on the words “back off.”

Evaluation

The scene that I have created has a strong narrative and characters with clear motives. Paul wants answers from his friend and Dan doesn’t want any problems and is fairly cordial with his approach. I believe this made the scene easier to watch and follow along with even if some of the shots had continuity issues within. My dialogue was also on part with colloquialisms that suggested the age and causal nature of the conversation. On the other hand, usually you wouldn’t find swearing in a school production despite the anger and emphasis it puts of the moment. 

The shots that I chose were quite complex for the scene and should have been simplified to make the interaction make more sense. Furthermore due to the complicated shots I wrote down, I didn’t follow them fully and ‘went with the flow’ when it was shot. To improve the sequence, I should have used more over the shoulder and point-of-view shots to make the scene more interesting and easier to follow. Along with this, on the day, I wish that I would’ve shot more. This meaning that I would have prolonged the shots that I did to allow more ‘wiggle room’ in post-production. For example, after dialogue is completed, the talent would stay in character for longer rather than saying “is that ok.” This would’ve created a more fluid scene as a whole because there would have been more time between lines, therefore making the conversation more believable.

Even though my storyboard was sufficient and did what it needed to do, I didn’t use it what-so-ever in preparation or on the day of the shoot. This is because the shot length was an estimate and could be changed depending on dramatic pauses, gestures and actions that felt right during production.