3. Representation of the artist
• From the music video the band is represented
as a minority in the music world mainly
because the in the video the band has a small
audience in a underground venue.
5. Camerawork
• The camera is often panning, as opposed to
staying still. It gives the impression that it is
always moving. There is also a lot of close-ups,
usually on the singer but also on the other
band members when their instrument is more
prominent in the song.
6. Editing
• There are frequent cuts between close-ups,
such as showing the same shot but mirrored,
and cutting between the band and the
audience. It also often jump cuts to the band
members playing their instruments, usually
when their instrument is louder in the actual
song.
7. Sound
• The video has no extra sounds, such as the
audience cheering. It is only the song that
plays. There is no non-diagetic sound, as the
video is the band playing their song in a run
down venue, so all of the sound is diagetic.
8. Mise-en-scene
• The venue in which the band is playing
appears to be run down and shoddy, and the
audience for the band is not very large. The
band all where dark clothing, somewhat
blending in with the low lighting of the venue.
9. Lyrics
• The lyrics are about a girl who the singer feels is
perfect, while he feels like an outcast in
comparison. He sings about wanting to fit in with
everyone else, but knowing that he doesn’t. (“I
don’t belong here”)
• During the chorus they show more emotion than
the rest of the song, suggesting that the lyrics
relate to them and almost as though they are
angry at themselves for not fitting in.
10. Personality
• The band all remain quite passive throughout
the video, not seeming to put much energy
into the performance. They have brief bursts
of energy and emotion when the chorus
comes in, but this only lasts for the chorus.
11. Branding
• There is not really any branding for the band,
although the image for the band is that they
are usually quite depressed
12. Taking over me - Lawson
http://www.mtv.co.uk/mostwanted#360313
13. Representation of the artist
• The artist is represented as being quite happy
and cheerful, being almost a polar-opposite of
Radiohead. The song’s video is a mixture of
narrative and the band playing.
15. Camerawork
• The camerawork is a lot of long shots during
the band playing, while during the narrative
there is a lot of close-ups of the two
characters. Radiohead was almost entirely
close-ups, usually of the main singer.
16. Editing
• During the narrative parts of the video, there
is a lot of jump cuts in quick succession,
possibly indicating that things are moving
quickly in the narrative. The band parts tend
to be longer clips, with fewer cuts. Radiohead
often had cuts between the band and the
audience, similar to this between the band
and the narrative.
17. Sound
• Just like Radiohead, there is no extra sound in
this music video. A difference however is that
all the sound in the narrative parts of the
video is non-diagetic, as the characters can
not hear the music. The same sound is also
diagetic though, during the band areas of the
video.
18. Mise-en-scene
• This music video has a lot more colour in it
than Radiohead’s video. The video shows a lot
of bright colours, daylight, and a desert. The
characters of the narrative and the band are
also wearing bright clothing, instead of all
black clothing like Radiohead.
19. Lyrics
• The lyrics of this video mostly seem to indicate
that the main character of the narrative/the
singer is happy because he is falling in love
with someone. This is a large contrast to
Radiohead, who were singing about not being
able to be with the person they were in love
with, although both bands sing about love in
general.
20. Presentation of Genre elements
• Music videos have developed and changed a
lot over time. Based on our research, old
videos tend to be entirely about the band.
Newer videos have a large focus on a
narrative, as well as seeing the band play.
