Script Was a Democratic Process

¶ … script was a democratic process i.e. It was the script that most of us elected to use. My personal reason for choosing this script was based on what I considered at the time to be the most fluent, the least complex, and the easiest to produce. It was the most realistic, within the time constraints. It had a role for everyone and it had all the elements required to fulfill the criteria for the production of the video. It also appeared to be easily adaptable i.e.

using existing areas of the IOE as a location for scenes in the film. My main focus was on the continuity features of the end product. The roles that were assigned to individuals were a result of discussions within the group. For example, my role, mainly because other members of the group considered it the most daunting and did not want to do it, whereas I did not mind. We considered that there should be a director, camera operator, etc.

Our decision in the end was that everyone should partake with all the different roles so we would all have some experience of them all. Although we considered that elements such as lighting and costumes are important in movie making we decided that for the purpose of this production, the available light sources would be more than adequate, and as far as costumes were concerned the addition of a man's coat for one of the scenes would suffice.

We did consider a hat and sunglasses to be used as part of a disguise but omitted them in the end. Our original title " Package of Innocence" was changed to " A Case of Innocence" the reason being we did not have a suitable package and a case was readily available. Such a change would not have made a noticeable impact on the content of film. Several changes were made to the original script/story board during discussions about the actual filming.

This was due to the realization that some of the scenes we originally agreed on would be too difficult to shoot within the allocated time frame. Also some of the props would be too difficult to obtain in time.

There were other problems with the script, such as location and how much time would be spent on each shot; lack of experience also played a crucial role in the scripting; storyboarding and shooting of the film- the learning curve required to arrive at the end of the shoot was very steep. The fact that we were doing this as a group helped enormously and demonstrated the value of teamwork. As a group, in my opinion, we worked very well together.

Each member was willing to contribute as much as he or she could in spite of their minimal amount of experience, with some members having more of an idea than others.

It is very clear that if we had met a couple of weeks or so prior, much of the issues we encountered could have been resolved before the residential, in fact we did try to meet but we did not manage to do so for two main reasons: Two people trying to arrange to meet up at the same time is often difficult enough, so five of us trying to meet at a convenient time for everyone involved proved to be very frustrating.

When after several attempts, we did manage to arrange to meet on Thursday the 07 of '05, we could not do so due to the disruption of bombs going off in the transport system. Three of us managed to meet briefly on Thursday the 19th of '05 but it soon became clear that it was necessary for the full team to be there, their input was required. Throughout the filming and editing of the production of "Case of Innocence" our main focus, as I see it, was to ensure continuity.

To this end we added captions where we felt the continuity was not clear or breaking down and we were heading into a montage territory. The idea of course was to ensure the audience believes they are seeing one continuous action. During the shooting we tried as much as possible to ensure our appearance remained consistent and the lighting and settings were the same shot to shot.

During the editing process however, we had to make adjustments to the lighting due to the fact we had to cut different shots together. It was also necessary for us to re- shoot one of the lift scenes and one of the players carrying the case which we had missed before. The speed of some shots also had to be adjusted to the speed of a previous cut.

We had difficulty editing the murder scene, which was supposed to show a flashback, so in the ended we decided to leave it as it was filmed. Due to problems importing sound onto the MAC platform from the recording device our music was stored on, we were unable to use our original choice. We believe it was an incompatibility issue with the software. However, we were able to resolve the issue and added the music at the end of the editing process.

The choice of music was a choice made by the group. We enjoyed the music and felt it added more to the film making it more "cinematic." We had similar issues with the new broadcast we needed to use and had to re- record it using the microphone facility on the camera. The news broadcast was an essential part of the story. It gave more meaning to the flow of the story. I believe the scene in the lift was relatively successful.

We stayed within the rules of continuity editing, although we had to edit the shot sequence to obtain the desired outcome. Changes to the original script: Re: Shots-list: Shot no. 6 was dropped, it was too difficult to soot and get to the right location. Shot no 8. We decided it would be better if the main character were seen listening to the radio and sitting, waiting tentatively for a phone call. On receiving the phone he would turn the radio off, pick up the keys, and leave the room.

Shots 11 and 13 were replaced with the lift sequences. I agreed with this change. I believed at the time it would add more drama to the script and more complexity to the shoot without any undue penalty in terms of time. It was risky considering the main character would be taking the chance of being recognized. I also liked the idea because it was a public place, the general public e.g. passer by's might get caught up in the filming providing us a crowd scene.

Differences between the two edited versions of the video production: Version 1: The title remained as "Package of Innocence." Cuts to the street shots were made five times. I felt this was unnecessary and interfered with the continuity of the film. The choice of music was different but nevertheless appealing. The news broadcast over the radio was used Version 2: The title was changed to "A Case of Innocence." Transitions were used more frequently The radio announcement was not used.

Issues in downloading the audio from the media used to store the recording prevented this. The news segment was re- recorded using the facility on the camera, but due to time consumption we were unable to incorporate it into the editing. The street scene was used only once. A number of captions were used in between cuts to help give meaning to the flow of the video.

Chosen Script (original): Phase 1 - Treatment Idea1 - pre-title sequence of a contemporary noir movie Film Title - Package of Innocence Key Prop/Props - Parcel, long coat, door, etc. Narrative: flashback is shown of someone being murdered, the main male character sees but no one is aware of this.

The main character has been involved in a number of crimes in the past and now has decided to lead a life without crime, to try and be an asset to the community, but he is now being framed for the murder that he witnessed. He is seen as the likely suspect due to his criminal background. He knows the only way to rove his innocence is to retrieve a particular parcel.

Although he is unaware of the parcel's location, he discovers that the parcel is being kept by a female who refuses to hand over the parcel until she knows exactly what is going on. She then decides to try and help the main character. Shots: Start with flashback shots of the murder. In between the murder shots, shots of the setting are shown. Moving into a shot of the main character walking down a crowded street as he tries to hide his face.

A with a shot of someone in the crowd turning around as if they have recognized the main character. Shot of the main character knocking on a house door. Female character answers the door. Shots of the conversation between the main character and the female character discussing the parcel. Shot of the female character showing she has the parcel. Close up of the parcel with the film title. Master shot/establishing shot of the murder-taking place.

Two shots used for the murder scene as well as an introduction to the conversation between the main male and female characters. Close up shot / reverse shot between main character and female character while in conversation. Close up shots of the main character as introductory shot to show the star of the film. Cut away shots were used in the murder or of the conversation dialogue between the main character and female character. Sound effects of a voiceover, conversation with the extra diegetic music/sound.

Narrative disruption/event: Showing the parcel at the end of the sequence although the audience does not see what is in the parcel, left at a cliff-hanger. Location: Indoor shots of the murder, with outdoor shots of the setting, and the city in that the film is set within. Characters: Main protagonist male character (ex-criminal/ex-con) Female character (femme fatale, strong, independent and mysterious) Murder victim character Murder character Script: Voiceover is heard throughout the shots of the murder explaining his dilemma.

Conversation between the main and female character discussing the parcel, such as: Main Character: "Do you have it?" Female Character: "Have what?" Main Character: "The Package." Female Character: "I might have." Main Character: "Have you opened it?" Female Character: " Not yet. Why? What's in it?" Main Character: "The truth." Music: Guitar/rock music Shot List: Phase 2 - Shotlist Pre-title sequence of a contemporary noir movie Film title: "Package of Innocence" Shot detail/Sound: Shot of the text of the production company e.g.

Universal Pictures Panoramic shot of the busy London city, buildings, cars in traffic, and people rushing (up to down pan shot) Two-shot from a distance of the flashback: with the murderer grabbing the victim, causing a struggle between them (dramatic narrative significance) Another panoramic shot of the busy London city (left to right pan shot) Continuing the two-shot (from shot 2) from a distance of the flashback: with the victim being murdered Zoom in shot from the busy London city street into a window of where we can see the back of the main character from a distance Over the shoulder shot of the main character turning the radio off (not seeing the face) from the voiceover of the news reporting the murder just witnessed Torso shot of the main character putting his coat on and then opening the door to leave the house Full shot of the main character walking down a crowded street hiding his face with a person walking past in the opposite direction Zoom into a torso shot of the person who walked past, turning around, taking a glance at the main character as if they have recognized him Over the shoulder shot of the main character knocking on the door of a house Torso shot of the female character answering the door of the house Close up of main character saying "Do you have it?" Shot reverse; close up shot of the female character saying "Have what?" Shot reverse; close up of the main character saying "The package." Shot reverse; close up shot of the female saying "I might have." Shot reverse; close up shot of main character saying "Have you opened it?" Shot reverse; close up shot of the female character saying "Not yet.

Why? What's in it?" Shot reverse; close up shot of the main character saying "The truth." Torso shot of a female character showing she has the parcel Zoom into an extreme close up shot of the parcel Ending with the opening title of the film appearing over the parcel in the background. Course Reading Assignment 8.David Bordwell and Extract from Film Art Continuity Editing) (New York: Kristin Thompson McGraw-Hill, 2001, 6t Edition) 9 V.I. Pudovkin 'Asynchronism as a Principle of Sound Film' Film Sound.

Theory and Practice (New York: Columbia University Press, 1985) 10. Mike Wayne 'Theorising Video Practice' (London: Lawrence & (Wishart, 1997, pp. 76-109) 8. David Bordwell and Extract from Film Art Continuity Editing) (New York: Kristin Thompson McGraw-Hill, 2001, 6t Edition) CHAPTER EIGHT: The Relation of Shot to Shot: Editing Thompson (McGraw-Hill, 2001,6 th edition) Around 1900-1910, as filmmakers started to use editing,.