The document discusses a preliminary film task involving an interrogation scene. There were some initial problems but the filmmakers were able to adapt. Issues included uncooperative actors, not having enough time to film from all angles, technical mistakes like a microphone pole in shots. Overall the filmmakers felt they met the brief but could improve by giving more filming time, having a solid cast, and practicing camera skills. They were pleased with the editing and felt it was a good learning experience for their main task.

1. Preliminary task
THE INTERROGATION
We started with a few problems in our preliminary task which led us to a setback. After
resolving the problems and starting again, due to it being the most efficient option, we were
able to begin planning. The idea of an interrogation to us seemed to fit the brief perfectly as
many TV crime dramas have proven.
While filming I found that our organisation and ability to adapt was very useful due to the
fact our actors weren’t hugely co-operative. When we realised our problem with the
background we were able to find ways to make the mis-en-scene a little more accurate.
For example putting up this
sheet (although it fell down and
we didn’t realise until editing.)
This adaptability also helped us when we discovered we didn’t have enough time of the
same light to film everything from every angle to cut together during editing therefore we
had to film only the angles we planned to include and hope our previous takes could be
used as back up. The mistakes we made were due to lack of practice with the camera such
as having the microphone pole dipping in the shot which we had to edit out. Our main
mistake was not giving ourselves enough time to film as I felt that really effected our overall
piece due to how harsh our cuts are. From this I’ve learnt to make sure that we have a solid
cast of actors before we plan in too much detail and to give a couple of days to filming just
in case something doesn’t go to plan such as the weather changing or a technical error.
Despite the shot quality not being the best I think we met the brief very well. The one thing
we didn’t include was the character walking to the seat due to how much it would affect the
mis-en-scene.
As you can see
here the next
shot is sitting
down.
In my opinion the piece is interesting and has a good, even if unresolved, story line. The
change of scenery I feel keeps the audience involved and interested as our interrogation
room is plain and the angles and dialogue are the main focus then. Our match on action
was successful after editing and the added sound effects, when I do this shot again I will
make sure I don’t talk during the shot so we get an authentic sound that perfectly matches

2. the movement although I feel our timing with the sound effect edited in matches the image
to the best of our current ability. We kept our dialogue down to the minimum while making
the plot still making sense and I believe it matches the genre and tone that is needed in our
piece. I believe that we stick to the 180-degree rule throughout although our cuts and
chosen angles don’t empathises this. However, I believe we met the brief to the best of our
ability at this current stage.
I think our technical skills were very good considering this is our first real attempt. Our title
placement in the piece I feel completes The Interrogation due to the change in scenery after
our title.
The title is
between our two
settings.
Despite our plan of the title being at the front, due to the change in scenery and tone we
wanted to get across we felt to emphasis this we should position our title in between the
scenes yet still sticking to institutional conventions. Due to the amount of talking I did while
filming and not realising this until editing a lot of sound editing had to be done, for example
the door handle sound effect. Deciding what music to use was the hardest part of sound
editing as many pieces climax to early or late but I believe the music we used connotes what
we want it to. Our filming could have been improved on due to some shaking panning and
shots, although it does add to the effect at the beginning I feel it looks rushed. What we
shot was appropriate to the task despite going on a slight tangent in the woods to have an
understandable plot. Our framing during filming was accurate however due to having to edit
out the microphone pole our framing was hugely affected. This is something I have learnt to
check now during filming rather than notice during editing.
This shot was much
bigger and included all
three characters, yet due
to the microphone pole
being in shot we had to
zoom in with editing.

3. We had a variety of shots included in our piece yet due to the limited number of shots I feel
we couldn’t show a consistent style which I will aim to include in the main task. As I
mentioned earlier our mis-en-scene lacked accuracy due to rushed planning yet I feel we
managed to make it better than it would have been although this led to a plain setting. For
the main task I believe that we will need to use more accurate props to improve the mis-en-scene.
Without editing our piece wouldn’t have worked, we had to speed shots up, slow
shots down, zoom shots in and cut many down to a useful size. However I feel the amount
of editing we had to do was a very good lesson on how to fully use the programme which
will be very useful in the main task. We didn’t use many fades due to the fast pace we
wanted to achieve but we included a few when needed to ensure a smooth viewing for the
audience. We had to be very selective of our material due to the mass of extra shots we
took which were very useful in the end. I believe we adequately used the effects although
next time we could include more to maintain smoothness throughout. I feel in our main task
it will be beneficial to document our filming process to be able give full analysis our
successes and failures therefore be able to improve on them, also I think it will help us see
errors more accurately on set.