This is more of a personal blog post designed for my teacher at college specifically to read. If you're not her, then it's probably best you don't read on, because there's not really going to be any funny goofs and gaffs to be had here.
Basically, I presented you the idea that I'd like to work on the documentary about the ghost mystic lady person, and that, as someone who really isn't willing to believe this stuff, would love to see if she could shed some light on just how it works and if I can believe it's real, and I am definitely interested in finding that out, but there's more to it than that that I wasn't comfortable sharing with the class, really. Obviously, the better place for it is therefore on the internet.
One of my best friends was working in his father's factory during the summer (family trade and all that, you know how it is) and was hit on the head by a loose electric panel from the roof (to my knowledge, but I have not asked too much about it at risk of seeming insensitive), which has had him in hospital since mid-July. It's really sucked for me and his twin sister, and my other good friends have found out recently, too. The whole situation has been terrible, and the fact he's been unable to communicate has been really hard on their family and has made it really hard to be there. A lot of my time has been spent trying to make things less, for lack of a better word, shit, with his sister (also one of my best friends) and the last few months of summer were really awful for everyone.
What I really want to know, above whether or not this woman believes she can talk to ghosts, is whether there's any way she can "contact" my friend, so I can just feel less awful about the whole situation and how powerless I feel. All I really want is just anything to make things feel less awful and miserable for everyone, because I just don't really know what else to do.
Sorry this wasn't a hilarious, interesting idea or anything, but it's something that really means a lot to me and I want to do to make things seem a bit better for a little while.
Monday 26 September 2016
Wednesday 21 September 2016
Unit 62: Digital Production for Interactive Media - Digital Video Technlogies
We were asked to make short videos using a website to explain technologies used in digital videos.
It might not work.
https://website.mysimpleshow.com/#/myVideo/y3YKm
It might not work.
https://website.mysimpleshow.com/#/myVideo/y3YKm
Sunday 18 September 2016
Factual Film: Catfish (Spoilers in 5th and 6th Paragraph)
Catfish is a 2010 90 minute documentary by directors Henry Joost and Ariel Schulman. It features the two following their friend and colleague, Yaniv (Nev) Schulman (Ariel's brother) regarding his relationship with somebody he met online.
After his photograph was featured in a newspaper and shared online, a girl from another state contacts budding New York photographer Yaniv Schulman regarding their interest in art, which forms relationships with the family. Things seem too good to be true, and Yaniv is interested in finding out why they refuse to meet with him.
Catfish, in general, is going to have you interested in what seems like a film plot, which makes it all the more interesting to see it progress as factual footage. A lot of films recently copy documentation styles using "found footage" as a new found horror cliche, and the style looks like it's truly copied from films like this, that do show footage by people who aren't industry professionals actually trying to solve their own mystery. You become interested in the same problems Nev has in trying to piece together the puzzle, and, without providing spoilers for how it ends (which is something you wouldn't expect in a documentary) you almost feel sympathetic rather than angry towards how things end up turning out, as if you can almost relate despite feeling like she did some generally harmful, leaving you with this mixture of emotions that documentaries don't tend to leave you with, and would be much better found in a drama of some sort. While it's not going to give you this massive burst of knowledge like Louis Theroux or the previously mentioned Lift, and it's not going to give you this plot to think about for weeks that shows like BoJack Horseman and Breaking Bad leave you with, it's going to leave you feeling like you've experienced a journey with a real person, which is something unique to this film.
The film was fairly objective, not providing any particular opinions about anything, more interested in telling a story, making it an interactive and/or reflective documentary that is more interested in telling a story and getting the information out there than trying to conduct research or observe things, because it is a real person's story rather than a factual film to give opinions.
At the start of the film, Nev states that his brother should "Set it up, organise a time with me, put together some materials, emails" if he wants to document the story. Oddly enough, (spoilers) this is what it turns out had been being done to him all along by the woman on the other end, organising a series of elaborate hoaxes with which to trick Nev into making the woman feel more confident and happy. It is a quote that, if you think about, shows that Nev really did believe the conversations were genuine at that point in filming, that was likely shown to reflect on how the events later evolved from there to show that Nev had been given what he asked for all along, and how his opinions changed as his suspicions grew.
If the documentary had been planned, they arranged all these dates and emails, then the aesthetic of the documentary would have changed, and some of the scenes that have this sense of intensity to them, such as (spoilers) approaching the farm or the house for the first time, or when he approaches Angela, would essentially lose that feeling of authenticity and journey that the film provides, making it look more as if it was just a setup or a general announcement to people, which would lose the charm and interest of the film for me. It provides an insight at a different kind of documentary that the world could really appreciate more of, in my opinion.
Catfish has been part of the start of my second year of college, in which we will be making factual documentary films with probable inspiration from the film.
After his photograph was featured in a newspaper and shared online, a girl from another state contacts budding New York photographer Yaniv Schulman regarding their interest in art, which forms relationships with the family. Things seem too good to be true, and Yaniv is interested in finding out why they refuse to meet with him.
Catfish, in general, is going to have you interested in what seems like a film plot, which makes it all the more interesting to see it progress as factual footage. A lot of films recently copy documentation styles using "found footage" as a new found horror cliche, and the style looks like it's truly copied from films like this, that do show footage by people who aren't industry professionals actually trying to solve their own mystery. You become interested in the same problems Nev has in trying to piece together the puzzle, and, without providing spoilers for how it ends (which is something you wouldn't expect in a documentary) you almost feel sympathetic rather than angry towards how things end up turning out, as if you can almost relate despite feeling like she did some generally harmful, leaving you with this mixture of emotions that documentaries don't tend to leave you with, and would be much better found in a drama of some sort. While it's not going to give you this massive burst of knowledge like Louis Theroux or the previously mentioned Lift, and it's not going to give you this plot to think about for weeks that shows like BoJack Horseman and Breaking Bad leave you with, it's going to leave you feeling like you've experienced a journey with a real person, which is something unique to this film.
The film was fairly objective, not providing any particular opinions about anything, more interested in telling a story, making it an interactive and/or reflective documentary that is more interested in telling a story and getting the information out there than trying to conduct research or observe things, because it is a real person's story rather than a factual film to give opinions.
At the start of the film, Nev states that his brother should "Set it up, organise a time with me, put together some materials, emails" if he wants to document the story. Oddly enough, (spoilers) this is what it turns out had been being done to him all along by the woman on the other end, organising a series of elaborate hoaxes with which to trick Nev into making the woman feel more confident and happy. It is a quote that, if you think about, shows that Nev really did believe the conversations were genuine at that point in filming, that was likely shown to reflect on how the events later evolved from there to show that Nev had been given what he asked for all along, and how his opinions changed as his suspicions grew.
If the documentary had been planned, they arranged all these dates and emails, then the aesthetic of the documentary would have changed, and some of the scenes that have this sense of intensity to them, such as (spoilers) approaching the farm or the house for the first time, or when he approaches Angela, would essentially lose that feeling of authenticity and journey that the film provides, making it look more as if it was just a setup or a general announcement to people, which would lose the charm and interest of the film for me. It provides an insight at a different kind of documentary that the world could really appreciate more of, in my opinion.
Catfish has been part of the start of my second year of college, in which we will be making factual documentary films with probable inspiration from the film.
Tuesday 13 September 2016
Factual Film: Lift - Beginning of Year 2
Lift is a 2001 25 minute documentary by director Marc Isaacs. It features him sat in a lift (elevator) in a London flat block where he begins talking to residents of the building.
There is no plot and there is no real intention to the film, besides simply showing the residents of the block in a situation that everyone is familiar, yet uncomfortable with, showing them in the most simple form, answering basic universal questions and explaining their lives.
As it progresses, Marc and the audience learn more about the residents. They learn about the Indian man who shows up with different foods (and possibly doesn't know what a banana is), the Jewish woman that feels lonely, the schizophrenic man and the man trying to pull, as well as some other short scenes with other residents that almost help you learn about the building. It might not feel like you've learned anything, but it does make you start to consider the lives of those around you with more interest. You begin to think about them and their lives that you'd never know because you're simply never going to talk to them about it, and it makes you wonder who and what they are. Maybe today you walked past a murderer, or the next hit Hollywood director. The film almost makes you realise that you'll never know this, and it makes you understand humans more than it makes you particularly learn anything, presenting itself as one of the most unique documentaries possible.
I think the documentary was a mostly objective, performative film. It evokes and implies emotion with little to no interaction and/or bias. Marc interrupts very little to the average lift goers routine other than to occasionally ask them how their day went, or what they dreamed of, and he never particularly presents his opinions, stating any facts or figures and instead opting to observe behaviour.
I think the fact that Marc was present in the film with a large camera, taking up almost a third of the available pace, it encourages people to almost start feeling uncomfortable about his presence, which both encourages and forces the story at different points. The lonely, old lady uses the camera to express herself, while other people such as a religious Irish woman are simply represented by the camera, but could have behaved as they did whether or not it was there.
I also believe that, had the film explored people outside of their lift lifestyles that the film would have lost a large portion of its appeal. The film builds up to its nothingness in this seemingly natural way because we are always in the lift and we, unlike Marc, can't opt to leave it at any point, we have to be there and experience the people who enter. If any planning, set up or following of the people had been used it would have removed the confines of the lift, removed the natural flow of people talking to 'the man in the lift' and removed the constant stream of nothingness that kept the film interesting.
Lift has been part of the start of my second year of college, in which we will be making factual documentary films with probable inspiration from the film.
There is no plot and there is no real intention to the film, besides simply showing the residents of the block in a situation that everyone is familiar, yet uncomfortable with, showing them in the most simple form, answering basic universal questions and explaining their lives.
As it progresses, Marc and the audience learn more about the residents. They learn about the Indian man who shows up with different foods (and possibly doesn't know what a banana is), the Jewish woman that feels lonely, the schizophrenic man and the man trying to pull, as well as some other short scenes with other residents that almost help you learn about the building. It might not feel like you've learned anything, but it does make you start to consider the lives of those around you with more interest. You begin to think about them and their lives that you'd never know because you're simply never going to talk to them about it, and it makes you wonder who and what they are. Maybe today you walked past a murderer, or the next hit Hollywood director. The film almost makes you realise that you'll never know this, and it makes you understand humans more than it makes you particularly learn anything, presenting itself as one of the most unique documentaries possible.
I think the documentary was a mostly objective, performative film. It evokes and implies emotion with little to no interaction and/or bias. Marc interrupts very little to the average lift goers routine other than to occasionally ask them how their day went, or what they dreamed of, and he never particularly presents his opinions, stating any facts or figures and instead opting to observe behaviour.
I think the fact that Marc was present in the film with a large camera, taking up almost a third of the available pace, it encourages people to almost start feeling uncomfortable about his presence, which both encourages and forces the story at different points. The lonely, old lady uses the camera to express herself, while other people such as a religious Irish woman are simply represented by the camera, but could have behaved as they did whether or not it was there.
I also believe that, had the film explored people outside of their lift lifestyles that the film would have lost a large portion of its appeal. The film builds up to its nothingness in this seemingly natural way because we are always in the lift and we, unlike Marc, can't opt to leave it at any point, we have to be there and experience the people who enter. If any planning, set up or following of the people had been used it would have removed the confines of the lift, removed the natural flow of people talking to 'the man in the lift' and removed the constant stream of nothingness that kept the film interesting.
Lift has been part of the start of my second year of college, in which we will be making factual documentary films with probable inspiration from the film.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)