For my final project I decided to create a roughly 2 minute short skit, focusing on continuity as well as post-production effects involving sound. The reason I chose this was because earlier in this semester I recorded a similar skit which involved 2 characters, but I had the same person play both characters. I wanted to do this again because having 1 person play 2 parts surprisingly forced me to really focus on continuity and framing to make it seem as though both people existed in the same timeframe. Even though it was challenging, I found it to be a lot of fun and made me get pretty creative when filming and editing.

Regarding the actual video, I have written a simple script of two friends joking with one another, until one overreacts and creates a outrageously unrealistic conflict involving supernatural abilities. I mainly created this storyline so I could mess around with sound effects and music a lot, but it ended up having a rather funny tone in some moments. For filming I ended up using a nearby trail, and just had my actor (my sister) use 2 different outfits to play 2 different characters. I also had her do a different voice for each character so things didn’t get too confusing and you could tell they are supposed to be 2 separate people. Before filming I also ended up creating a checklist of scenes that were necessary to film, a method we discussed in class briefly, and it was very helpful to make sure I had enough footage to create my storyline properly.

For my group’s one-minute video, we decided to create a short centering around the planning of a group heist operation. While the entire story is based on the planning part, for the sake of keeping things interesting we plan to do cutaways of the plan actually being executed while it is being discussed. Then, in the middle of these cutaways, members of the group will speak up with other possible obstacles they might have to deal with, which will then prompt another cutaway slightly different from the last. To give an example, we have an entire cutaway of the full plan, but then a group member suggests the possibility of a guard being outside the building. Then we go over the same plan and do the same cutaway, but this time it would include how we would deal with that obstacle. We hope it will come across slightly comedic while also keeping an overall serious tone.

To do this, we only need a couple things, such as a dimly lit empty room for filming the actual planning bits as well as a room to “break into”. There are mostly smaller things we will need, such as an object to “steal”, a keycard (cougar card) to use to “break in”, and an additional person to act as a guard. For the shots in the planning room, we may also need extra lighting to help make things seem more dramatic. With these things we should be able to shoot our one-minute video without issue. 

Shooting for the interview was quite different from our other projects we have done in class. It is a lot more difficult in my opinion, because you can’t control what the person is going to say and how they are going to say it. It’s hard to get good clean sentences, especially to open and close the interview video. However, I did enjoy asking questions and getting to hear the responses. It was hard to think of questions that would result in the most interesting information, but I found that just a few good questions allowed for the interviewee to expand on them quite a bit. I also found slight difficulty in shooting a variety of different shots of the actual hobby. Because the hobby I am interviewing about is jigsaw puzzle-building, it is mostly just sitting at a table trying to find pieces. I did my best to match what I was recording to what was said in the interview, but I feel I struggled with getting more interesting shots that didn’t look like every other one. 

I think I did well with setting up the interview shots themselves, with the positioning and lighting. I tried to utilize what I had. I found an old ring light, but it was quite bright so I ended up using a dim lamp to counteract the dark shadows it casted like we learned in class. 

Audio wise, I struggled the most. I don’t have a microphone, so I attempted to use a secondary phone to record the audio closer up. However, the phone I used was a bit older than mine, so the audio sounded much worse than the one that came from the one recording the video. Because of that, my audio is not as clear as I wanted it to be. Still, I did my best to utilize premiere pro’s noise reduction effects and clean it up the best I could. Next time I will definitely be testing my audio recorder before I use it.

34:15-36:48

Faron has been issued death threats by local drug dealers, so he moves back home. In this clip, he says he’s not scared, just worried. He also talks about how no matter what, if he runs or not, they will likely find him, and he really just shrugs it off. His words give a sense of hopelessness and anxiety that the visual evidence helps convey through his actions and body language. We see him putting on his old Amish church clothes, reminiscing on past interactions and questioning his religious choices. We see him cleaning, going through his cassette tapes, like he is trying to distract himself. His body language is fidgety and slow, the way he talks with long pauses and distant stares. The contradictions between his words and actions make you feel as though he is trying to put on a brave face, pretend that he doesn’t care, but is actually scared about what could happen. 

We then see dark clips of the view from inside a moving car of farms, which then cuts to Faron looking out the window while smoking. This, I believe, is likely dramatization, as the clips suggest that Faron is specifically looking out at the barns, while we have no actual way of knowing what he is looking at. Still, it conveys a feeling of “what if” from Faron, like he is in major turmoil over his choices. Seeing it as it is shot, Faron looks out at grassy fields and barns, reminiscent of Amish culture we have previously seen in the film. Faron stares out the window while smoking a cigarette, something that contradicts Amish culture itself. It showcases that this is his life now, but also possible regret and longing for what was.  

Shooting a documentary about local nurses during the COVID pandemic, without being allowed to film in a hospital, is a tricky issue. While most of the action is happening in the hospitals, since you can’t get any footage from inside of them I think a better story to focus on would be something like how the nurses are being affected by the pandemic, outside of their work (mentally). With this, visual evidence from inside the hospital is not technically necessary, as that won’t be the main focus of the dialogue. The proof of the chaos inside the hospitals instead comes from the nurses, recounting stories, maybe getting footage of them at home. You could even get time lapse footage from outside of the hospital in order to showcase how busy it is with the cars and people coming and going. To quote the reading,

“In editing, you abstract visual evidence that will serve as an accurate analog of the events that were filmed. And you organize it into a statement that will communicate to your audience—honestly, directly, and forcefully—what you know about the event.” (pg 101)

To create a story you don’t need to see every single detail of it. You create an abstraction of events, give just enough information that the viewer can grasp an understanding of what is going on. To do this, you could get a couple shots of a messy house, piled up laundry or dirty dishes in a sink. Take shots that emphasize how isolated the nurse is, alone at a dinner table, or looking at pictures of their loved ones. This, paired with a heartfelt interview where they recount how the current state of the world and their job has been causing extreme mental stress and loneliness, gives perfect visual evidence to pair with what the interviewee is saying, thus doing a good job at communicating information to the viewer.

Other footage that would work well could be things like, the nurse waking up to a loud alarm clock early in the morning for their shift, getting ready for work in an empty home. Touching on the topic of what the nurse does to help relieve stress, getting footage of them reading, exercising, or maybe even shots of any medications they take. The reading focuses a lot on connecting your dialogue with your visual evidence so the viewer has an easier time understanding and believing what you tell them, so all this footage would depend on the questions you decide to ask and what the nurse decides to talk about.

The work I chose for this blog post was “Lake Como Remix”. This work comes from early versions of Google Earth and Google Street View, which were then glitched to create an otherworldly experience of the tunnels in the Lake Como District of Italy.
These glitches cause extreme distortion of your surroundings. You can go through the images presented as the world, allowing you to see beyond it, revealing dark atmospheres and strange shapes and textures. The landscape around you occasionally moves as you do, in a strange manner reminiscent of early AI videos. It gravitates in one direction, which feels incredibly strange to see considering that when you are in Google Earth the only thing “moving” should be you.
These effects challenge your views of the “world” in which these Google applications offer you. It breaks the illusion of a physical space, revealing the artificial nature of it, which at least for me proved to be a little unsettling. I assume that is at least part of the goal for this work, considering the music track that is layered over the video enhances this feeling.

I skimmed over each of the videos, and I also wanted to mention the video “Poof”. I was so surprised when I saw that it was made by AI. It looks so real, I had never seen any AI video like this. Even the different shots showcase continuity in the short film. Before seeing this, I thought AI still had a long way to go before being truly usable in professional cinema. It opened my eyes to how current AI can be seamlessly used as a tool in filmmaking, and it likely already is.

Filmed this video for fun, thought I would share it

The opening scene for shameless feels very chaotic, while at the same time purposefully showcasing certain information to lead the viewer to an understanding of its characters. The camera shots are typically close ups, with multiple things happening at once, which leads to a very claustrophobic feeling in some moments. We see characters running past the camera many times, which leads us to believe they are in a rush and enhances the stressful feeling. The camera also moves around during shots, which adds another layer of movement to the chaos. Continuity is used to help keep the story together and keep the viewer from becoming confused. If these clips were not filmed the way they were, the story would be incredibly difficult to follow. 

While things are going on in the background, the camera focuses on specific things like items or characters. With doing this, it is able to quickly convey relationship dynamics between the characters, their current situation, as well as information about each person’s life.

For example, many of the shots highlight the family’s financial situation. Even without dialogue, you can see issues such as the broken washing machine, the kids passing cash around, things like that. We also get information like who is likely the parent figure in the house from the way the camera follows the character around the house as she completes tasks. 

Overall this scene does a good job at using continuity to maintain a solid storyline and convey information even during chaotic moments. 

The scene I will be using as an example of continuity is the train scene from Duel. This scene uses a lot of continuity edits, but in particular mostly cut in/match on action shots and shot reverse shots.

In the beginning extreme long shots are used to showcase the setting (a train track). To start the action, a shot reverse shot is done to get the initial reaction of the main character when the truck hits his car for the first time. We see him being jolted by the hit, then a cut to the front of the truck against his car, and then back to the main character as he begins yelling.

From then on, there are a lot of cut-in shots, which are used in multiple different ways. For one, we get shots close to the car window so we can focus on the main character, and then cuts to longer shots that allow us to see the rest of the car. This allows us to see what is going on both with the main character and outside of the car, where the truck is hitting. It is also used to get a close up of the certain areas of the car being affected. For example, a long shot is done on the car, then a zoom in onto the wheels which are being pushed towards the train. This helps the viewer understand the truck’s intentions of pushing him into the moving train. 

We see a lot of shots of the main character also turning around, or looking outside his window, to then immediately cut to the truck hitting him, his car wheels struggling to move the car, or the train getting closer, and then back to his face (shot reverse shots). 

Overall these continuity shots help the viewer understand the intentions of the truck driver and the dangerous situation the main character is in.

For a little context, this scene takes place at the end of the movie. A serial killer these detectives have been tracking has turned himself in and led them to a remote location. At that remote location a package is delivered (a box). One detective separates from the other (who is watching the killer) to open the box. At this point the viewer likely already has theories of what might be in the box before it is opened.

Find the entire clip here:

Medium (waist up). I also think this shot is using the rule of thirds. He is holding a knife to cut the box open.

Medium close up (on the box + his hands)

Close up (face), you can see him concentrating on cutting the box open.

Close up (top of box + his hands), he gets the box cut open

Close up (face), Cuts to the other detective (who is watching from afar) and the killer. Also maybe using the rule of thirds.

Extreme long shot. As it has just cut from the other detective watching, it implies this is what he sees.

Close up (top of box again), this time the detective opens it. The close up allows you to see the blood on the cardboard better.

Close up (face) a quick shot to get his immediate reaction (shock)

Medium close up on the now open box

Close up (face). The detective is now standing up, notice the slightly low angle so we know he is looking down at the box.

Close up on the open box

Close up (face) again

Close up (face), a cut to another character in a helicopter, watching the detectives to ensure their safety. I didn’t screenshot the part where he had binoculars on, but even without that since he is above them you can assume he saw what was in the box as well.

Close up (face), now the detective is looking over his shoulder.

Extreme long shot, showing us the detective was looking over his shoulder at the other detective.

Close up (face), he is looking at the contents of the box again.

Close up (box)

Close up (face)

Before the box is even opened the viewer has theories of what could be in it. The blood on the top of the box, as well as the detectives reaction (looking back at the other detective) really hints that whatever is in the box has something to do with a person close to the other detective. In my opinion the back and fourth between the detective and the box does a good job showing he is unsure how to handle the situation next.