2) We attempted to create continuity in a number of ways. Firstly, we made Shot 1 an establishing shot of Character A and B in the classroom. This introduced the audience to the setting, and also included the door in which Character C would enter. Furthermore, in Shot 3 we used a master post to bring Characters A and C in the same geographical space. Shot 3 featured both Character C walking into the room through the door and Character A at her same original position at the desk. We also tried to create continuity by using a variety of angles and camera movement to build the audience into the narrative. Shot 4 featured a pan left of Character C walking just before he tripped, and Shot 5 was a high-angle of Character C standing up after he fell.
3) Unfortunately we did not achieve full continuity. In Shot 2 you cannot see Character C enter the door that he comes out of at the beginning of Shot 3 which is confusing. Additionally, the cut between Shots 2 and 3 is not seamless and we didn't create a "match on action". At the end of Shot 2, Character C is right up against the door however at the beginning of Shot 3 he is not there. In Shot 3 Character A doesn't react to Character C walking into the room which looks fake. Shot 4 is lacking a prop for Character C to trip over, so it is not logical. Finally, between Shots 4 and 5 we break the 30° rule as the shots are too different.
4) In hindsight to improve the narrative flow I would make many changes. In Shot 2 I would make Character C start walking from outside the building around the corner out of frame which would be more natural. I would cut down Shot 3 and 4 as there is a delay at the beginning of Shot 4 which breaks narrative flow. In Shot 3 I would make Character A turn around and react to the entrance of Character C so that it looks more natural. Most importantly, I would swap Shots 5 and 6 so that Character A's reaction to C's fall is immediate. Previously, the reaction was in Shot 6 which meant it looked delayed and unrealistic.
No comments:
Post a Comment