Lack
of Prestige, our finished film as it would eventually be called in a nod to Chris
Nolan’s 2006 film about magicians and as a reflection of the unscrupulous
nature of our own characters, manages to convey a humorous narrative with
likeable characters whilst demonstrating reasonable special effects with a
soundscape that sets the tone and brings the piece to life. The emotional link
to our two-minute exercise is admittedly tenuous as that was a dark portrayal
of anger whilst this takes the form of a light-hearted comedy for the most
part. The magician’s sudden change of character is supposed to be
representative of this outburst of rage, and the stylistic use of reverse
footage creates a stronger link between the two. The reversal of the events in the tunnel was
a late decision in the edit as the original wipe that was planned looked like a
Powerpoint effect in practice, and so instead we had the magician rewind time,
which makes the connection between the two films much stronger in my opinion.
With both films I think we achieved
what we set out to do in the end. The two-minute successfully presents a
narrative of infidelity and violence told through experimental means of using
the non-sync sound criteria by visually working backwards from the end and
telling the linear story with the audio. Every aspect of the film was well
planned and the execution was relatively straightforward as a result of this. Lack of Prestige on the other hand was
subject to many alterations during the scripting, shooting and editing of the
production. The original script was re-drafted and simplified several times
which allowed for a much more coherent narrative that was realistically
achievable in a ten minute time frame. Several characters and confusing motives
were omitted or condensed which made for a simpler shooting schedule that would
allow the crew to focus on the camera tricks and other effects required. The
shooting itself didn’t run all that smoothly with the actors arriving late and
delaying production by almost two weeks with cancellations. The fact that they
were friends of the director and not professionals had pro’s and con’s. The
downsides were the obvious setbacks and laidback approach they took, with
several scenes being relatively improvised, which resulted in some jarring
continuity in the cuts. The benefit was that the performances were quite
natural, as the script had been tailored with them in mind for the roles.
Several elements of the script were altered and improvised last minute due to
the remaining time we had with the actors. Their late arrival meant that the
bike scene would no longer take place in the day and in a remote location,
reducing the comedic effect, and also that he transformation of the woman back
into the homeless man in the tunnel was scrapped owing to the spatial
difficulties of a three-way split screen in the location and the limited time
we had left.
In the edit a few sequences were
removed that really tightened up the finished cut. Whilst filming these seemed
essential but once a detached decision not to include them had been made the
benefits in narrative pacing become instantly apparent. Aside from the aforementioned
reversal, further exposition from the characters’ first encounter was removed
which ultimately proved unnecessary, despite everyone being fond of the shot.
Another was a split screen sequence of several angles of the characters walking
in their magician’s attire, which was supposed to be set to a rhythmic song.
Whilst I had made the song and it worked with the footage its short duration
and placing within the story felt a little too jarring and so it was dropped.
The late discovery and inclusion of
several special effects really helps solidify the magic and elevates it above
simple split screen trickery. The muzzle flash had been a concern with regards
to making the shooting look real, and we had initially tried a flash of white
on the screen that wasn’t all too convincing. The puffs of smoke that accompany
the vanishing and appearance of objects really do lend credence to the
illusionary notion of smoke and mirrors, and helps to distract from the
repeated use of split-screening to achieve this effect. Whilst discovering them
earlier may have allowed for some more ambitious stunts to be planned I think
it is a good job we didn’t as it could well have just become and indulgence in
camera tricks and effects instead of a well rounded balance between these
tricks, the plot and comedy derived from the script and characters.
The strength of this piece lies in
the amusing dialogue and the realisation of the characters through the art
direction and reasonable performances. The sound helps to instantly establish
the comedic tone with the timing of musical cues and sound effects whilst
creating a mysterious and tense atmosphere when necessary. It has a playful
nature that makes the camera tricks (magic) and character interactions an
enjoyable experience to watch unfold. Less successful elements are the quality
of some shots; whilst some are very nicely lit, grainy shots would be a
somewhat inevitable result when shooting exterior locations at night with
limited lighting. There are also quite a lot of continuity errors that may go
unnoticed upon first time viewing but are inescapably obvious after reviewing
the footage as much as we have. These include smaller incidences such as the magician's shirt collar being open and closed, the obvious difficulties in
maintaining consistent cigarette lengths, and more jarring matches on action; such as which hand the cigarette or cane will be in, and even characters
positions. Greater attention should have been paid to some of these issues on
the shoot as it results in some of the editing looking a little sloppy, but
there were no alternatives to use.
The shoot itself had a number of difficulties that mostly stemmed from the use of exterior locations. The inability to control the environment meant that there were multiple disruptions to shots in the form of passing pedestrians and cars, and even further disruptions to the sound, which would pick up any and every disturbance even if the camera did not. The lack of power outlets also resulted in several equipment failures that meant the shoot had to be abandoned, despite bringing numerous batteries to prevent this occurrence. The actors were also quite unfamiliar with the script and so would quickly rehearse the lines whilst a shot was being set up before the camera was rolling which led to messed up lines and improvisations, some of which worked and some of which didn't. The lack of slating was also very frustrating when it came to linking up the video and audio, and should have been taken into greater consideration.
This is all in marked contrast to the first films shoot, which had been thoroughly shot-listed and properly slated, and whilst the schedule did run behind, everyone involved was familiar with the task at hand, from the actor's lines to how the action would play out in each shot and the whole process was subsequently much more efficient. Whilst this is partly due to better group planning and organisation on the first exercise I think the second film was just a much more ambitious undertaking in the scope of its production.
The non-sync sound element of the first film was also liberating in the post-production stages as it allowed for the edit and sound to be done in tandem and then brought together in the final stage with only a few alterations required, whereas in the second instance the picture lock wasn't finished until the last minute leaving only one night to do nearly all the sound which was both stressful for the designer (me) and detrimental to the overall quality of the finished film.
Once shooting had wrapped on both films I would then log and label all the dialogue. The first film allowed for me to select the best audio takes without having to worry about what happened on screen, whereas the second I just had to work with what had been selected in the edit. I would then write down an in-depth list of every sound effect, foley and atmos track required for the piece and set about obtaining and creating them. The sound design in the two minute exercise was created entirely by me, and I found recording every effect and movement to be a very enjoyable process and the violent requirements allowed me to be very creative. The second was rewarding in its own way as I was free to use my imagination when orchestration the magical effects, however the limited time available inhibited the development of some of these ideas. I usually come up with an idea for the score before shooting beings based on the tone of the script, and the directors vision based on production meetings, and record a basic rendition in Logic that can be adapted once the picture is finished.
I worked reasonably closely with both directors when designing sound for the films, but was also left to my own creative devices once we had established what they wanted. I would periodically show them what I had produced and we would discuss what worked and what needed changing. This was quite an organic process and yielded beneficial results that left everyone satisfied. I also worked quite closely on the production design of the second film, providing costumes and helping to acquire props which was a good pairing as we both shared a similar vision of how the characters should look.
The shoots themselves were somewhat more stressful (chiefly the second) as their was an awful lot of co-ordination required. The first shoot was much more professional with a simple script and shot-list that was well executed as everyone was familiar with it. The second was much more disorganised as we had spent less time as a group on the pre-production so were not as clued up as to what shots were required, whilst the frequent disruptions of the locations would leave us waiting around for long periods until we were able to go for another take. This and the actors late arrivals meant for constant schedule setbacks and improvisations which led to some tensions and arguments on set over how a shot should be executed. I tended to stick clear of these as it wasn't really my department and we didn't need another cook in the kitchen, so to speak. I did have the pragmatic solution of the post credits scene offering a vague explanation as to what happened to the girl following the last minute alteration of the climax on set, even if it isn't entirely apparent that they are supposed to be the same character.
I worked well with the editors on both films and they were very helpful in doing their best to ensure I had something to work with. With the limited time for post on the second production I was still given a few rough cuts to prepare the rough sound cues around and we both bounced ideas off one another about what we thought would work in our respective mediums.
Whilst researching articles for music in film to aid in my crafting of the score, I noticed an interesting conjecture surrounding the restrictive relationships possible between film and music, Gorbman (1980, p.189) observes that the relationship is 'limited largely to the concepts of parallelism and counterpoint. Either the music "resembles" or it "contradicts" the action of mood of what happens on the screen.' I took this into consideration and made little effort to challenge the notion in my own scores, with the music often accentuating the actions of characters on screen, as well as the use of sound effects to animate camera movements. Rather than simply resemble the mood however I did seek to enhance it through musical devices. Some of the more dialogue heavy sequences were initially somewhat flat and bereft without any musical flourishes and they really do help to create a sense of mystery and intrigue.
Overall I'm pleased with the two films we produced. The main issues were all shooting related and inevitable delays had a knock on effect on the rest of the process. The pre and post-production aided in rectifying many of these issues but more time to carefully craft the shoots themselves would have been hugely beneficial, which isn't to say our producer didn't do a great job of keeping everything on track despite the obstacles and setbacks. We generally worked well as a team and shared a similar vision for the outcome of the final product, as some of the stronger moments in both films came about as the result of in-depth group discussions in pre-production. Despite the stark differences in tonality of each film I think each succeeds in what it tries to accomplish. The non-linear narrative style of A Short Story in Brutality forces a higher level of engagement and concentration from the audience as they seek to unravel and the film's events, whilst positive audience reactions to the comedic elements of Lack of Prestige reinforced our intensions when they laughed at all the anticipated cues. Being so immersed in the projects made it difficult to have objective outlook on the finished films and so it was very rewarding to be assured that the comedy we were making was actually funny. I'm largely satisfied with the sound I created for both films, composing music that makes a dark film darker and a score that compliments the lighthearted tone of the comedy, and getting to explore a range of techniques for creating and enhancing sound effects to simulate both the real, and the extraordinary.
Bibliography:
The shoot itself had a number of difficulties that mostly stemmed from the use of exterior locations. The inability to control the environment meant that there were multiple disruptions to shots in the form of passing pedestrians and cars, and even further disruptions to the sound, which would pick up any and every disturbance even if the camera did not. The lack of power outlets also resulted in several equipment failures that meant the shoot had to be abandoned, despite bringing numerous batteries to prevent this occurrence. The actors were also quite unfamiliar with the script and so would quickly rehearse the lines whilst a shot was being set up before the camera was rolling which led to messed up lines and improvisations, some of which worked and some of which didn't. The lack of slating was also very frustrating when it came to linking up the video and audio, and should have been taken into greater consideration.
This is all in marked contrast to the first films shoot, which had been thoroughly shot-listed and properly slated, and whilst the schedule did run behind, everyone involved was familiar with the task at hand, from the actor's lines to how the action would play out in each shot and the whole process was subsequently much more efficient. Whilst this is partly due to better group planning and organisation on the first exercise I think the second film was just a much more ambitious undertaking in the scope of its production.
The non-sync sound element of the first film was also liberating in the post-production stages as it allowed for the edit and sound to be done in tandem and then brought together in the final stage with only a few alterations required, whereas in the second instance the picture lock wasn't finished until the last minute leaving only one night to do nearly all the sound which was both stressful for the designer (me) and detrimental to the overall quality of the finished film.
Once shooting had wrapped on both films I would then log and label all the dialogue. The first film allowed for me to select the best audio takes without having to worry about what happened on screen, whereas the second I just had to work with what had been selected in the edit. I would then write down an in-depth list of every sound effect, foley and atmos track required for the piece and set about obtaining and creating them. The sound design in the two minute exercise was created entirely by me, and I found recording every effect and movement to be a very enjoyable process and the violent requirements allowed me to be very creative. The second was rewarding in its own way as I was free to use my imagination when orchestration the magical effects, however the limited time available inhibited the development of some of these ideas. I usually come up with an idea for the score before shooting beings based on the tone of the script, and the directors vision based on production meetings, and record a basic rendition in Logic that can be adapted once the picture is finished.
I worked reasonably closely with both directors when designing sound for the films, but was also left to my own creative devices once we had established what they wanted. I would periodically show them what I had produced and we would discuss what worked and what needed changing. This was quite an organic process and yielded beneficial results that left everyone satisfied. I also worked quite closely on the production design of the second film, providing costumes and helping to acquire props which was a good pairing as we both shared a similar vision of how the characters should look.
The shoots themselves were somewhat more stressful (chiefly the second) as their was an awful lot of co-ordination required. The first shoot was much more professional with a simple script and shot-list that was well executed as everyone was familiar with it. The second was much more disorganised as we had spent less time as a group on the pre-production so were not as clued up as to what shots were required, whilst the frequent disruptions of the locations would leave us waiting around for long periods until we were able to go for another take. This and the actors late arrivals meant for constant schedule setbacks and improvisations which led to some tensions and arguments on set over how a shot should be executed. I tended to stick clear of these as it wasn't really my department and we didn't need another cook in the kitchen, so to speak. I did have the pragmatic solution of the post credits scene offering a vague explanation as to what happened to the girl following the last minute alteration of the climax on set, even if it isn't entirely apparent that they are supposed to be the same character.
I worked well with the editors on both films and they were very helpful in doing their best to ensure I had something to work with. With the limited time for post on the second production I was still given a few rough cuts to prepare the rough sound cues around and we both bounced ideas off one another about what we thought would work in our respective mediums.
Whilst researching articles for music in film to aid in my crafting of the score, I noticed an interesting conjecture surrounding the restrictive relationships possible between film and music, Gorbman (1980, p.189) observes that the relationship is 'limited largely to the concepts of parallelism and counterpoint. Either the music "resembles" or it "contradicts" the action of mood of what happens on the screen.' I took this into consideration and made little effort to challenge the notion in my own scores, with the music often accentuating the actions of characters on screen, as well as the use of sound effects to animate camera movements. Rather than simply resemble the mood however I did seek to enhance it through musical devices. Some of the more dialogue heavy sequences were initially somewhat flat and bereft without any musical flourishes and they really do help to create a sense of mystery and intrigue.
Overall I'm pleased with the two films we produced. The main issues were all shooting related and inevitable delays had a knock on effect on the rest of the process. The pre and post-production aided in rectifying many of these issues but more time to carefully craft the shoots themselves would have been hugely beneficial, which isn't to say our producer didn't do a great job of keeping everything on track despite the obstacles and setbacks. We generally worked well as a team and shared a similar vision for the outcome of the final product, as some of the stronger moments in both films came about as the result of in-depth group discussions in pre-production. Despite the stark differences in tonality of each film I think each succeeds in what it tries to accomplish. The non-linear narrative style of A Short Story in Brutality forces a higher level of engagement and concentration from the audience as they seek to unravel and the film's events, whilst positive audience reactions to the comedic elements of Lack of Prestige reinforced our intensions when they laughed at all the anticipated cues. Being so immersed in the projects made it difficult to have objective outlook on the finished films and so it was very rewarding to be assured that the comedy we were making was actually funny. I'm largely satisfied with the sound I created for both films, composing music that makes a dark film darker and a score that compliments the lighthearted tone of the comedy, and getting to explore a range of techniques for creating and enhancing sound effects to simulate both the real, and the extraordinary.
Bibliography:
Gorbman, C. (1980) 'Narrative Film Music',In Yale French Studies No.60, Cinema/Sound. Connecticut: Yale University press. p,18




































