Term 1 Tasks

Spaced Analysis
The episode 'Gone' opens with the two leads running down a side street from an unseen chaser. A car pulls up in front and several people exit it. This is the first piece of noticeable
camera work in the episode. Whip pans and the use of shaky cam deliver the message that these people are in a hurry to leave the vehicle quickly. It creates a sense of panic for the
two characters, Tim and Daisy, as the speed and aggression of the driver and passengers is demonstrated. The camera is then positioned between the shoulders of these thugs and
the shoulders of Tim and Daisy. This allows the audience to attach themselves in a greater way to the scene as they are thrust into each crowd. It gives a grounded, almost realistic
feel to the scene. Throughout the episode this technique is used to give this feeling. By having people's shoulders border the frame it gives the space a tighter and more inclusive
approach.
The use of zooms also feature prominently, in this scene to demonstrate the intimidating nature of the thugs. It is clear to see that the camera has been positioned far away from the
actors and the zoom levels increased. This is to put emphasis on the shakiness of the handheld shot, inducing the same panic and fear that the two main characters are feeling. As the
end of the scene approaches and the tension builds a dolly zoom is employed to exaggerate the suspense in the actors' faces.
It is at this point that the music becomes noticeable. From the beginning an ominous tone is present but it is not noticeable what with the commotion of the confrontation. However,
this changes when Tim and Daisy decide on their escape method. The song reaches its climaxes as the title card shows, signifying the end of the flash-forward.
The music is used to bridge the scene into the next, where it is apparent that the images just witnessed are a future event in the episode due to an unorthodox approach at a
timestamp. The camera movements are of a different nature, the whip pans ever so slower in order to show a calmer environment. To establish the environment in which the
audience has been transported to the camera flows around the interior of the flat. It starts with Daisy at the kitchen, preparing her stew, and travels in a downward motion to Mike
who is sitting on the chair. Without stopping the camera travels further downwards to reveal Colin sitting on the floor. This also reveals the source of the jangling noise: a set of keys
being shown to the dog. This noise is one of the few that accompany this new environment. For the same reason that many of the shots are intruded by edges of other people the
only noises audible are the stew bubbling and the keys clinking.
This is broken when Tim enters and strikes up conversation with Mike the ramblings of Daisy are added to this ambient background. It is only slightly muffled but enough to tell the
audience that it is Mike and Tim's conversation we need to be listening to.
When Daisy begins to explain the source of her herb. Asian music strikes up quickly as she explains her 'travels' and the wise, old 'herb merchant', leading the audience to believe that
she sourced it from far off. Once the illusion breaks a simple four-note tune is played on a trumpet: a juxtaposition of the first piece of music. I also believe that the trumpet is used as
a gesture to its historic use in comedy.

Spaced Analysis
The camera work is important during the short conversation between Sophie and both Tim and Daisy. As Daisy answers the ringing phone the camera pans quickly to the left, the
direction in which she is facing. The shots cut between the two as they converse and this does not happen again until Tim starts speaking to Sophie. The shots of Sophie as they speak
are all stationary except from two separate shots. The first comes when she starts to explain that she won't be able to meet Tim that night. Up until this point the camera has been
inside of her office but as soon as she starts to lie (as Tim suspects) the camera suddenly moves to the outside, filming through the glass. This is symbolic of the gap that has now been
created due to this potential fib. An interesting choice of editing backs up this theory. Sophie mentions that her boss, Damien, is keeping her late but at the mention of his name the
shot cuts back to Tim as though Sophie has to hide her emotions. The camera is once again in her office as she begins to speak more confidently about the reason behind this. It only
returns when another gap is created as they both exchange farewells. The second camera is angled slightly away from the left side of her office, where Tim has been shown to be
through the various pans and cuts. It is as though she is turning away from him, hiding something.
The use of zooming onto characters faces is once again used during the conversation between Tim, Brian and Mike as they discuss their relationships. At the start of the conversation
each of the characters are framed with large portions of their torso being visible. The camera is level with Tim as he is the focus and the dominant character in the scene, being the
most reasonable. Brian is looked at from below as though from the point of view of Tim, as is Mike but it is less visible. As the scene progresses the camera slowly encroaches almost
to the point at which the frame is filled by each of their faces. This would seem to add emphasis to the discussion as they begin to break down their topic, but it actually helps to
deliver the punchline of the joke.
As Mike draws his imagery gun and Tim reacts the camera cuts between the two until Mike 'fires'. The camera, positioned behind Tim shakes in a slowed motion as they both produce
noises that match the speed of their actions. These two elements combined give the feeling of slow-motion but not enough for the joke to be lost. The camera pans as Tim draws his
weapons, following his hands, in a mocking parody of the style of action films. Throughout this sequence grunts, groans and shouts are all made by each of the characters and the
scene is never silent. The actions and reactions are always shown, with one characters firing a gun and the impact of this being shown directly afterwards. It helps to create a more
intense sequence and especially aids the moment at which Daisy walks back in the room to see her fellow flat mates no longer talking about their love lives but pretending to shoot at
one another.
As Tim and Daisy begin to leave Mike takes a seat upon the sofa. As the scene is not going to show what happens to the pair of them it stays with Mike. The shot of him is completely
level, though now the shots of Tim and Daisy are taken as if from Mike's perspective: the camera pointing up at them. This is one of the many subtle elements that director Edgar
Wright employs to create the show.

Conflict Analysis
Changing Lanes stars Samuel Jackson and Ben Affleck and is a film about two people who become involved in a traffic collision. From this point their days spiral out of control as they
both loose a grip on their lives. The film explores each of their characters and the direct impact of the collision and its implications. Although the film revolves around only a single day
it is written in such a way as to fully reveal each characters motives and backgrounds. This still image depicts the moment after the collision.
The choice of the colour grading is instrumental to this scene. The use of colours has been carefully chosen to match the characters feelings in this moment. Having both been majorly
setback on the way to their destinations the mood is sombre at the thought of them not arriving in time. The car is in a saturated beige to again give this feeling of despair, a brighter
colour would suggest a positive outlook on the situation. Behind the two characters sits a suspension bridge and a distant city. These are in a cold colour scheme, primarily blue and
grey. Not only do the colours represent the glum looking futures of both these characters but they also illustrate their warmth (or lack of it) to one another. The still shows Affleck's
character advancing on Jackson's as he throws up a hand in protest. Being complete strangers they do not have a rapport between each other as the colours would suggest, cold and
uninviting like their relationship.
The costumes are an appropriate choice for each of their characters. As both of them are commuting to hearings they are dressed in suits and overcoats. Affleck, who appears to be
on the offensive in the still, is dressed in dark clothes as his character has a less honest reason for appearing in court. He also is refusing to give details and trying to resolve the
collision with a cheque. Jackson is dressed in lighter colours though still not brightly dressed. He is currently refusing Affleck's payment and is determined to resolve the damage
above board. He is also on his way to correct the mistakes he made during his marriage and his absence as a father. Though he may still be appearing in court in order to defend
himself, his intentions are far more honest than Affleck's who is trying to keep himself and his firm out of jail.
The use of props has been thought about. To show the gap in class and lifestyle between the characters they both have different props present in this still. Being wealthier than
Jackson, Affleck is shown to be holding multiple papers as he confronts him. This shows him as the prestigious solicitor that he is, continuing to cling to his work as he sorts out a
dissociated issue. Tucked under his arm is his briefcase with his documents inside. Meanwhile Jackson is standing beside his car, a dirty beige colour with rust in more than one
location. Although not seen in this image, Affleck's character owns a Mercedes.
Much like the colour scheme, the lighting has been adapted to represent the mood and the emotions felt by the characters. The although the sky is bright it is overcast and covered in
cloud. Most of the city and bridge are lit but large portions are still left in the shade so that they appear cold and grey. It would also appear that the foreground is totally in the shade
as no direct light is shining onto any surface. The meaning of this very literal, that the characters are in, a or about to be because of this, a dark period.

Conflict Analysis
The setting of the shot is probably the most important regarding the meaning of the scene. As it is trying to portray the gritty and unfortunate nature of the event the choice of the
camera position has been thought through. The camera near to the ground and several lanes across from the action taking place. This grounds the frame and gives the impression
that the audience are included into this scene. A car can be seen driving past which adds to this as many people have seen this sort of scenario unfold as they drive along. The
positioning of the landscape behind has been very cleverly placed. It diminishes the situation, comparing this 'little' problem against a vast backdrop of so many other, bigger
problems.

Amy Analysis
To what extent does Kapadia use filmic techniques to generate a response in the climax of Amy?
As the film arcs into its final ‘act’ and the story becomes much more recent events are gone into detail much further than they were before. Media from other sources is also used as
an additional reason for the demise of the singer. An example of this would be an extract from ‘The Graham Norton Show’, a joke describing Amy Winehouse as a ‘mad person’ is
used as the audience cries with laughter, the audio continues as images of Amy sitting a darkened room looking very unhealthy appear. Although the film shows the harassment of
the paparazzi throughout it is not as predominately shown as it is in the final act. A technique used by the editor is the use of Winehouse’s calm song and vocals over silenced footage
of photographers charging the singer down, flashes creating a strobing effect. This juxtaposes the anarchy that is her short walk from her house to her car with the peacefulness of
her singing. It is often stated that it was an escape for her.
Media from sources such as chat shows appear throughout the film but in the last half hour or so they take a turn in terms of their content. The clip from the ‘Graham Norton’ came
across as ignorant as having just been informed of the many reasons for her breakdowns, which is why it was inserted in that place. A previous clip shows Winehouse being
interviewed by Jay Leno, the conversation friendly, but he is shown again much later making crude jokes towards her drug problem. Also, pineapples. In many ways the media
became hostile towards Amy, provoking a response from the audience who have been fed a narrative and flare up at the hostilities. I believe that the media was not ignorant with
their remarks but becoming tired of celebrity refusing help, though this is not the side of the fence the audience sees, as Kapadia has told the story that way.
The final interview before the film reaches her death is one from her childhood friend as she describes a phone call between Amy and herself. Towards the end of this interview light
strikes of a piano can be heard and it transitions to the next scene. An establishing shot of London is shown, and a specific date is shown, the death date of Amy Winehouse. The
music continues as footage from outside her house shows her bodyguard and a police officer conversing. An interview with him is then played and the audio, having undergone
‘franken-biting’, contains dramatic pauses to enhance the effect that is has on the audience. It then establishes further that the singer would have easily traded success for anonymity,
something that is not new to the film but has not been stated so clearly before.
During the scenes of Amy’s funeral, a slowing of the framerate is used powerfully as a member of the funeral party exits the cemetery. He is the focus of the shot as he begins to
weep into his hand. During this period the music has built up, the piano now accompanied by a guitar. This scene earns a response from the audience as it shows how much the death
of Amy Winehouse has affected this individual.

Factual Analysis 1
I believe that a documentary can be objective, however it would not be very successful in terms of cinematography or narrative. For a documentary to be interesting and concise it
must be subjective as otherwise it would lack the necessary requirement and resemble more a list of facts. The why documentaries such as the ones produced by David Attenborough
or Louis Theroux is because they take in the subject and empathise with it and are open in their opinions. Because The Mighty Redcar is very subjective it is so successful. It would not
be hard to make an objective documentary about a less affluent area that would appeal to the masses, such as poverty porn does, but to make one that is subjective would be so
much more successful and it is. However, I believe it does come with a price, that by documenting this town it would have a reverse effect of poverty porn. Though it does appear to
have honest intentions there is a message of hope underneath it all.
I think that all documentaries should be taken the same way as all television should, that not everything is true. Although the filmmakers may have had honest intentions their views
and perspectives can easily be changed in the editing suite. Although The Mighty Redcar seems to be a project for the people by the people it may have not been entirely truthful. As
shown by Charlie Brooker shots can be spliced together or taken out to give an entirely different narrative. Looking at Dylan’s journey in the first episode it seems to be an easy ride
from making music in his room to performing in pubs to being spotted. The filmmakers may have used poetic licence for it to appear a quicker and seemingly easier path to success,
all in the spirit of positivity.
The expression ‘take it with a pinch of salt’ is fitting. Although misinformation is not always unintentional it is a safe way to watch television as your opinion should not be formed
around a single program or even from a single channel.
There is no way to find out if the content of documentaries is true without independent research into the subject and even this may be false. In terms of fact this is the case, but
documentary makers can also be untruthful by neglecting certain parts of the truth. Frankenbiting is an obvious way of doing this as it can twist the words of anyone into the shape of
the director’s narrative.
The truthfulness of the documentary is left to the filmmaker and the audience may trust this, though it is safer to assume that they will have warped some details in their favour.

Factual Analysis 2
There is a visible gap between the representations of people in TMR and of those in Benefit Street and Skint. In the two latter shows these people are shown negatively as to make
the audience feel much better about their own lives. In TMR all the people are shown to be hard working and tenacious although not entirely successful. Their spirit is the focus of the
show and their struggle to overcome unemployment or financial issues empowering. In the other two shows this is not the case. Skint shows an unfortunate side of life for those born
into less affluent families and areas but it is not presented in the same way as TMR. It shows the lower working class with flashy edits and music and the production is distant from the
content; a barrier between those filming and those filmed. Benefit Street is a similar show but on another level of disrespect. Instead of giving a fair idea of a working-class residential
area it presents the audience with a compilation of poverty porn. The way in which the show is edited is ‘comical’ in the sense that it is only to show how desperate people lives are.
This is only to make the audience feel better. One scene that stood out to me was a conversation between a mother on the street and the crew. The chatter is normal until the
woman exclaims “Oh sh*t, doctors' appointment”. To me this a prime example of this show’s intentions, showing an unfair collection of disorganised and poverty-stricken moments in
less fortunate people’s lives. A clear difference between the agendas of both TMR and Benefit Street is the setting of the shot, more specifically the establishing shots. In TMR these
were high quality shots showing the town, for example James standing on a nearby hill with a flag blowing beside him. In BS these are unrelated clips of the worst of life, people
hanging around the street and shouting to each other. This is not to say that this does not happen in Redcar but the BBC show has a much more positive angle that it is trying to push.
An argument is that the TMR is a reverse poverty porn, aimed at those in that situation to make themselves feel hopeful and inspired. TMR will have cut many shots out to achieve
this but comparing the two on the surface BS and Skint are negative shows that appeal to negative people, whereas TMR is a direct opposite.
This leads to the aims of each of these shows. They are both to make the audience feel better, however the audiences are different for each of the shows. BBC has no advertisements
for products so instead it features adverts for its shows and TMR was one that I thought stood out during the time period in which it aired. It was presented as a ‘real life soap opera’
and showed many shots of the Redcar in its short adverts. Admittedly I was sceptical due to shows such as BS and Skint, but the adverts did appeal. The use of the local student as the
narrator was a reassuring factor that this show was different to others that are broadcasted on the BBC. Normally someone with more experience and sounding extensively middle-
class would provide a description of the show. The use of a Redcar resident told me that this show was primarily aimed at those in similar situations to the Redcar residents, not
necessarily on the same scale of poorness but ultimately feeling the stretch of the working life. Although the viewing of BS did not have any adverts, Skint did and it also featured on
the same channel, Channel 4. Being sponsored by Mitsubishi I would have thought it to be aimed at a low middle-class audience and from the information I got from the other advert
I remember a believe this to be the case. The second advert was one from eBay. It showed a pleasant household in which a father played with his kids, but the brand was what
intrigued me as eBay is a site notoriously known for its auctions of second-hand items. The advert even stated that not everything from eBay was ‘used’ as that product came out of
the box. This may mean nothing, but it would be interesting to see where Amazon adverts appear as it is a site that sells new products and appeal more to the middle-class or at least
those with a higher amount of disposable income.

Final Task
1. As my fanzine features and targets a very specific audience that is mainly seen as negatively or at the least incorrect in their views, I had to produce my content in a specific way as
to not create an unfair representation. Fanzines do not target the masses so can take upon whichever view they wish without fear of political or social backlash. I chose an objective
view, despite this, or at least tried to approach it from this view. The content of my fanzine is all hypothetical as it built upon fictional events that would cause fictional destruction, so
it is difficult to measure against factual pieces. I believe that despite my objective intentions the produced work has come across as a positive representation of ‘doomsday preppers’.
This is partly because of the nature of the topic, albeit surrounded by the theme of apocalyptic destruction it revolves around survival against all odds. This is what my fanzine focuses
on: survival against nature and the ruptured society that it has created. It would make my fanzine much fairer and less biased to a more positive audience, leaving out the negative
aspects has made it a product of something that I was trying to avoid, constructed media.
From the start of my fanzine it is clear to see that it is a work of fiction and reading through there are noticeable gaps if it were to be an in-depth guide. This relates the analysis of
documentaries and how far one should accept all content that is read. In terms of opinions and facts my own production can be critiqued as surviving can be done in multiple ways
and many of the suggested ways may not suit the readers environment, for example why bunker down in your home when you live on a farm many miles from the nearest town?
Looking at other depictions of similar situations that my fanzine covers I can see that my own is clearly portraying a positive representation. Although not a fanzine, looking at Max
Brooks’ World War Z there is a noticeable difference between the levels of negative and positive aspects. His is a realistic (as you can get) overview of a worldwide zombie apocalypse
that does not hold back on details whether they are deemed positive or negative. Similarly, in the book The Mammoth Book of Special Forces Training by Jon E Lewis it depicts all
aspects of survival not just the highlights and highpoints as my own book does.

Final Task
2. The visual design of this book [A] is like what I have achieved with my own fanzine, although this is more serious, and the contents focus on function over fashion, I believe the
impactful design and font choice is something that I aimed for. The use of the stenciled font is something that I have used myself as it appears functional and faux-military. The basic
design is something that I hope I have not done myself, not because it is a bad choice but because I want my own work to appear busy and full of visually enticing
pieces. Therefore, most of my images are drawn by myself.
I specifically like the ‘rough around the edges’ look and this is evident in my own work. The faded text and the dirty marks give the piece character and a history. My own work was to
be done as though crudely written with limited resources, few photographs and hand-written text to give it this feel. This is apparent on the front cover of this book from the
unpolished visuals.
I also took inspiration from Sam Martin’s The Curious Boy’s Book Of Adventure as this is a bush craft/ outdoors book containing very appealing visual design. I particularly like the
drawings and artwork [B], and this is something that directly influenced my work. I feel that the book and my own product have different tones, but the visuals are comparable. Mine
may be slightly more rugged and sketchy whereas Martin’s are cleaner and crisper, but the results are very similar if not the same.
Though the visuals may be on a similar level the tones of the two products are entirely different. Martin’s book targets a younger audience and focuses on ‘adventurey’ survival such
as bridging brooks and creating fish hooks whereas mine focuses less on survival but still for an older audience. Much of Martin’s content overlaps with Lewis’ in his book on special
forces but the tones are again different.
[A] [B]

Term 1 Tasks

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to Term 1 Tasks

More from Cameron Whapples

Recently uploaded

Term 1 Tasks