Harrison Radcliffe received marks for his AS coursework in various categories. For his main construction task, a thriller film, he received high marks for his effective use of camera, editing, and sound. In his evaluation, he provided some understanding and details regarding genre conventions and audience expectations, but his answers lacked clarity and detail in places. Overall, his work demonstrated good knowledge but did not always provide enough evidence and variation to fully understand the topics. His total marks were 83 out of 100, earning him a grade of A.

1. AS Coursework Overall Marks
Name: Harrison Radcliffe
Planning – Comments and mark out of 13/20
For full comments please see the pre-production marks sheet
Construction – Main Task – comments and mark out of 56/60
Footage:
Is appropriate for target audience, fitting genre conventions of a thriller well. Controlled use of camera
throughout. Great use of mise en scene.
Editing:
Edited excellently to build to the plot. Great variety of shots used throughout. Good use of tracking
shots.
Sound:
Great use of diegetic sound. Decision to have no non-diegetic sound is effective
Overall:
An excellent drama piece fitting the genre well.
Evaluation – Comments and mark out of 14/20
Q1: PowerPoint/SlideShare
Some understating of conventions/technical elements and how they were used in opening to
conform/challenge to genre. Some audience expectation of genre recognised. Good reference to real
products. Lacks good detail.
Q2: Word&Images/SlideShare
Some detail on how assassin represented – costume/performance/age. Lacks clarity – who exactly
are you representing?
Q3: Prezi
Some detail on suitability of Warner Bros or Vertigo with some reference to real products but no
conclusion and therefore question not answered???
Q4: Prezi
Some info on potential audience but lacks good detail. No evidence of research – just because people
wear a suit does not mean they will be an audience for a film whose protagonist wears a suit? Other
interests included.
Q5: Prezi
Elements used to attract audience have been mentioned, but no feedback from audience. How do you
know if you have been successful? No reflective analysis.
Q6: PowerPoint/SlideShare
Good detail (especially editing) on different technologies used. No mention of camera.
Q7: Word&Images/SlideShare
Good detail on how improvement made within aspects of production – camera and editing. Good
detail on what can still be improved. Reflection is specific to certain technical elements.
Overall:
Work is good but lacks key detail. At times candidate shows good knowledge of conventions but does
not show enough evidence to show a full understanding of topic. More variation of ICT needed.
Total 83/100 Level: Grade: A