Film & TV Language: Editing video feedback and learner response

1) Type up your feedback/comments from your teacher.
Grade given: B+

WWW:

• Very well developed pre-production (espacially script)
• Good lighting on protagonist
• Performances very convincing and well shaped
• Close up shots in the beginning (enigma codes)
• Use of music- effective
• Use of slow motion
• Use of POV shots
• Cinematography- angles

EBI:

• Sound- dialogue was not loud enough (use external mic)
• Focus on protagonist when he's speaking
• One shot on screen was too brief (at the end)
• 180° rule broken

2) Type up your feedback from fellow students.
WWW:

• Lighting was suitable as it focused on the protagonist
• The slow motion used when Samantha was walking towards the door was effective as it was a climatic scene
• Match on action was used well- when Samantha smashed the file on the table, while opening the door, etc.
• Multiple angles were used
• Good choice of music
• Diegetic and non-diegetic sound used
• Shot and reverse shot used
• Good use of props
• Good actors

EBI:

• Should have used more shot reverse shot while Andrew was talking
• The sound while the actors were speaking could have been clearer (use external mike next time)
• The 180° line rule was broken

3) Now reflect on your video. Did you meet the brief and successfully include the three key editing aspects we have learned?
I successfully included the key editing skills of match on action and shot/reverse shot. However I broke the 180° line rule.

4) What were the strengths and weaknesses of your final film? Write a detailed analysis picking out specific shots, edits and any other aspect of film language you think is relevant.
Strenghts:
The opening sequence of my video was very powerful. The dramatic non-diegetic music and use of close-ups on the shoes and case file created enigma codes that left the audience intrigued. Information was withheld from the audience as Samantha's face was not revealed until she opened the door at 0:16. Furthermore, Andrew's face was also withheld until 0:19. The audience could only see the handcuffs on his hands, which again is an enigma code that creates mystery.

My use of match on action was also effective. Specifically, the part at 0:39 when Samantha smashed the case file on the desk. This was an abrupt action code which highlights how serious the situation is and leaves the audience shocked. I also used match on action when Samantha was placing the pictures from the crime scene on to the table. The audience were able to see the atrocious murder which would have allowed them to sympathise with the character.

Weaknesses:
One weakness of my video is the fact that I didn't have any straight shots of Andrew speaking while he was being interrogated. If I had included these, it would have made Andrew more believable in the eyes of the audience when he stated that he 'did not kill' his girlfriend. They would have been able to see his face expressions and sympathise with him. The main reason I chose not to add any shots like this was mainly a filming issue. The lighting in these particular shots was very different and not as effective as the shots used in my final product. Therefore, next time, I will make sure that I check each shot after it has been filmed to ensure this does not happen again.

5) Learner response: what aspect of editing did you find most difficult? How will you further develop your editing skills prior to starting the coursework in June?
The aspect of editing that I found most difficult was trying to align the match on action shots perfectly. However, with some practice I managed to learn how to do this. I will further develop my editing skills by devoting more time to practise editing and try new techniques when it comes to editing (use YouTube).