Student
|
Baseline
|
P1
3 x Short film analysis
18/11/15
|
P2
Film paperwork
(Group 1 min)
4/3/16
|
P3
1 min Film
(Group/Indie Edit)
23/3/16
|
RESUBMISSION
P1 DUE 11TH Dec
|
Roopa A
|
MM
|
P
|
M
|
M
|
M1
|
Calvin A
|
MM
|
P
|
D
|
M/P
|
M1
|
Kenny A
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M/D
|
|
Lawrence A
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M/D
|
|
Nigel C
|
MM
|
M
|
NYA
|
X
|
|
Jordan C
|
MM
|
P
|
D
|
M/P
|
*no resubmission
|
Ashley D
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M
|
|
Ugonna E
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M/P
|
|
Deniesha F
|
MM
|
M
|
D
|
M/P
|
|
Eunice G
|
MM
|
M
|
D
|
M/P
|
|
Luke G
|
MM
|
NYA
|
M
|
M
|
M1
|
Dejhanea G
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M
|
D1
|
Tommy G
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M/D
|
|
Kiera G
|
MM
|
M
|
NYA
|
X
|
|
Rosie H
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M
|
|
Tamaira L
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M/P
|
D1
|
Micheal O
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M/P
|
D1
|
Tim O
|
MM
|
M
|
Pass (resub)
|
X
|
|
Ese O
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M?
|
|
Maya S
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M?
|
|
Shanee S
|
DM
|
M
|
M
|
M?
|
|
Dan S
|
MP
|
M
|
M
|
M/D
|
|
Dan T
|
MM
|
P
|
Pass (resub)
No contingency
Storyboard incomplete
Recees and Call sheets lack detail
No contingency in budget
Risk Assessment basic and not
convincing of having actually scouted the hazards on the site
|
X
|
*no resubmission
|
James W
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M/D
|
M1
|
Student
|
Baseline
|
P1
3 x Short film analysis
18/11/15
|
P2
Film paperwork
(Group 1 min)
4/3/16
|
P3
1 min Film
(Group/Indie Edit)
23/3/16
|
RESUBMISSION
P1 DUE 11TH Dec
|
Roopa A
|
MM
|
P
|
M
|
M
|
M1
|
Calvin A
|
MM
|
P
|
D
|
M/P
|
M1
|
Kenny A
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M/D
|
|
Lawrence A
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M/D
|
|
Nigel C
|
MM
|
M
|
NYA
|
X
|
|
Jordan C
|
MM
|
P
|
D
|
M/P
|
*no resubmission
|
Ashley D
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M
|
|
Ugonna E
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M/P
|
|
Deniesha F
|
MM
|
M
|
D
|
M/P
|
|
Eunice G
|
MM
|
M
|
D
|
M/P
|
|
Luke G
|
MM
|
NYA
|
M
|
M
|
M1
|
Dejhanea G
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M
|
D1
|
Tommy G
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M/D
|
|
Kiera G
|
MM
|
M
|
NYA
|
X
|
|
Rosie H
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M
|
|
Tamaira L
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M/P
|
D1
|
Micheal O
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M/P
|
D1
|
Tim O
|
MM
|
M
|
Pass (resub)
|
X
|
|
Ese O
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M?
|
|
Maya S
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M?
|
|
Shanee S
|
DM
|
M
|
M
|
M?
|
|
Dan S
|
MP
|
M
|
M
|
M/D
|
|
Dan T
|
MM
|
P
|
Pass (resub)
No contingency
Storyboard incomplete
Recees and Call sheets lack detail
No contingency in budget
Risk Assessment basic and not
convincing of having actually scouted the hazards on the site
|
X
|
*no resubmission
|
James W
|
MM
|
M
|
M
|
M/D
|
M1
|
Shovel
Ashley Davy
22.3:D – imaginative
and mood (the candles go out breaking continuity so non-linear?) has strong
twist and many shots. BEST angles mood and meaning as well as produced with
excellent mise en scene and technical quality
16.3:D flow, pace and special
effect done well, with trans BEST
16.2 M
Kenny Akale
22.3 : D excellent variety and framing, using use of focus
and lighting with candles, angles mood and meaning as well as produced with
excellent mise en scene and technical quality
James White
22.3 D excellent variety and framing, using use of focus and
lighting with candles, angles mood and meaning as well as produced with
excellent mise en scene and technical quality
16.3 D a couple of jumps, good – cut away used for death
theme and a montage – more controlled? Foley v good and layered
Black Oak
Tommy Griffin
16.2 prep M
16.3 M/D WT D uses stock footage squirrel purposefully
establishing detail/innocence, sound works with images, Needs alternative
editing or non-linear to get the D. Also complete the story... 5 min to D.
22.3 M technical quality of
camera and lighting good, range of shot types used appropriately, rule of
thirds consistent, breaks continuity 180 deg rule during shock point, not a
completed mystery or twist clear. Roopa is moving but dead? Shallow focus in
place, lighting used in the scene with mystery character but too
dark/uncontrolled.
Roopa
22.3 technical quality of camera and lighting good, range of
shot types used appropriately, rule of thirds consistent, not a completed
mystery or twist clear. Roopa is moving but dead? Shallow focus in place,
lighting used in the scene with mystery character but too dark/uncontrolled.
16.3 M/P cross dissolve, jump
cuts sound is too immediate and footsteps, on-board sound is still audible –
less proficient. Has minor technical flaws and is rather short. Enough for M.
Luke Gray – final cut is only 1 shot, rough cut ONLY marked
22.3: M technical quality of camera and lighting good, range
of shot types used appropriately, rule of thirds consistent, not a completed
mystery or twist clear. Roopa is moving but dead? Shallow focus in place,
lighting used in the scene with mystery character but too dark/uncontrolled.
16.3: M/P – sound issues here
with on board camera sound, however there is flow but the scene with james is
not well/polished and out of sequence? Jump cuts at the end and no resolution.
Paranoia
Dan Storey
16.2: M
16.3 M WT D sound used to establish crime and track sets
mood, works with images, continuity mostly though the walk into camera shot
though imaginative is not achieved. Lacking pace but structure clear.
22.3 M WT D costume, props,
location and mise en scene a range of shots used with appropriate framing, some
clunky edits walking to camera, seems underdeveloped however like a teaser
rather than complete narrative (twist is not apparent to audience). Depth of
field skills used well in places and have meaning at times using focus pulls.
Lighting is restricted to natural some shots use day for night and grading some
not? Genre is clear. Non-linear missing with the absence of a flashback or
montage for the D at the end?
Lawrence Akintayo
16.3: M WT D continuity and clear structure, sound and
images ok til music drops and foley starts. Pacing issues shot walking into
camera is achieved quite well but music break disarms it.
22.3: M WT D colour grading
mostly consistent , lots of wandering to build but the flow on body and reaction
shots are good, character established, depth of field and focus effective is
sometimes have meaning. Technical quality is good – lacking the non linear
effects for higher again ends with no resolution and twist not a twist –
episodic?
Shanee Simpson
22.3: D - Uses montage at the start to establish location
effective, pace is more controlled as it colour
grading. Higher out of all. We see the note here which makes it clearer.
Non-linear has been used here in the montage.
16.3: D doesn’t pull off the walk
into the camera shot, sound and images works well consistently and continuity
maintained v. well with sense of pace and structure. Uses montage at start.
Develop for Non Linear flashback etc?
Dollz
Tamaira Lynch
16.2 M (i said it was D but the paperwork must be produced
for a Log)
16.3: M WT D off the walk into camera well, continuity
maintained and sound establishes genre. Doesnt really score with drama or
tension which is a major issue. Especially when the horror begins. Pace is
lacking as well as the horror feel. Is relatively clear what is happening and
continuity is maintained mostly. Lacking creativity or imagination in the
editing techniques – as a horror this is a key requirement for supernatural
effects and fear/mood.
22.3: M/D WT D a good range of
shots and angles – mostly rule of thirds. 180 degree rule used. Lighting not
beyond natural of ceiling lights – not clear this is a horror. Mise-en-scene is
quite well used – some shots are framed well but some are not level – needs
correcting. Some good frames on the escalators showing symmetry and depth.
Looses the tension with the journey. Colours
and prop and blood used well but the horror of the voodoo not apparent and the
story just ends? Episodic? Lacking visual conventions of horror looked at in
your short film reports. Lacking non-linear content to tell story or focus on
the doll – too much journey home. A good range of shots though. Glowing red at
the end is good and attempts to colour fix the red,
Ugonna Emineke
16.3: M WT D off the walk into camera well, continuity
maintained and sound establishes genre. More effective at scoring with the drama
for tension but overuses the same track. Especially when the horror begins and
he is stabling or glowing red. Pace is lacking as well as the horror feel – need to inject flashbacks more or the
premonitions to the Doll which you do once to break it up. Is relatively clear what is happening and
continuity is maintained mostly. Lacking creativity or imagination in the
editing techniques – as a horror this is a key requirement for supernatural
effects and fear/mood.
22.3: M/D WT D a good range of
shots and angles – mostly rule of thirds. 180 degree rule used and match on
actions extensively good pace at start. Close ups shows significance
appropriately. Lighting not beyond natural of ceiling lights – not clear this
is a horror. Mise-en-scene is quite well used – some shots are framed well but
some are not level – needs correcting. Some good frames on the escalators
showing symmetry. Does not really work with the depth of field focus or the
exposure settings but the basics of shot types are there and effective. Colours and prop and blood used well but the
horror of the voodoo not apparent and the story just ends? Episodic? Lacking visual
conventions of horror looked at in your short film reports. Lacking non-linear
content to tell story or focus on the doll – too much journey home. A good
range of shots though. Glowing red at the end is good and attempts to colour
fix the red,
Micheal Oladokun
16.3: M WT D off the walk into camera well, continuity
maintained and sound establishes genre. More effective at scoring with the drama
for tension but overuses the same track – yours has diegetic sound though so
more realistic. Especially when the horror begins and he is stabling or glowing
red. Pace is lacking as well as the horror feel – need to inject flashbacks
more or the premonitions to the Doll which you do once to break it up. Is relatively clear what is happening and
continuity is maintained mostly. Lacking creativity or imagination in the
editing techniques – as a horror this is a key requirement for supernatural
effects and fear/mood.
22.3: M/D WT D a good range of
shots and angles – mostly rule of thirds. 180 degree rule used and match on
actions extensively good pace at start. Close ups shows significance
appropriately. Lighting not beyond natural of ceiling lights – not clear this
is a horror. Mise-en-scene is quite well used – some shots are framed well but
some are not level – needs correcting. Some good frames on the escalators
showing symmetry. Does not really work with the depth of field focus or the
exposure settings but the basics of shot types are there and effective. Colours and prop and blood used well but the
horror of the voodoo not apparent and the story just ends? Episodic? Lacking visual
conventions of horror looked at in your short film reports. Lacking non-linear
content to tell story or focus on the doll – too much journey home. A good
range of shots though. Glowing red at the end is good and attempts to colour
fix the red,
Dejhenea Gregory
16.3: M incomplete edit and looses structure to become
confusing however this does establish the Doll’s supernatural appearance
earlier. If this is non linear premonition it is rather confused though to be
effective. Pulls off the walk into camera well, continuity mostly maintained
and sound establishes genre but not mixed completely – can hear the tannoy
announcement which breaks flow as well as ‘action’ etc. Ending lacks pace and
structure. Overall lacking careful
editing to create horror feel – need to inject flashbacks more or the
premonitions to the Doll which you do once to break it up. Is relatively clear what is happening and
continuity is maintained mostly. Lacking creativity or imagination in the
editing techniques – as a horror this is a key requirement for supernatural
effects and fear/mood.
22.3: M/D WT D a good range of
shots and angles – mostly rule of thirds. 180 degree rule used and match on
actions extensively good pace at start. Close ups shows significance
appropriately. Lighting not beyond natural of ceiling lights – not clear this
is a horror. Mise-en-scene is quite well used – some shots are framed well but
some are not level – needs correcting. Some good frames on the escalators
showing symmetry. Does not really work with the depth of field focus or the
exposure settings but the basics of shot types are there and effective. Colours and prop and blood used well but the
horror of the voodoo not apparent and the story just ends? Episodic? Lacking visual
conventions of horror looked at in your short film reports. Lacking clarity in
the non-linear content to tell story or focus on the doll – too much journey
home. A good range of shots though. Glowing red at the end is good and attempts
to colour fix the red, not enough to tell the story properly.
Followed
Deniesha Freeman
16.3: P WT M editing has jump cuts at start which breaks the
flow – she moves location, unclear and her conversation jumps. Issues with pacing
here and structure – form is recognisable more as a trailer not a short film.
There is no clear beginning middle or end. The footage is incomplete to allow
you to be creative or imaginative or maintain a sense of genre that fits the
mood – the structure is missing key shot or scenes because they were not
filmed. Sound shows some attempt to work with images with the track.
22.3: M/P Some variety of shots
and some examples of framing that use rule of thirds and depth. Some controlled
use of low key lighting but uses available sources for some effect.
Establishing shot used and some close ups for suspense, mystery or convention.
Overall although the shots are steady and have some strengths in use of variety
of angles etc there are not enough set ups used to give fluency and consistency
to the whole sequence – the shoot is basically incomplete to tell the story or
the twist effectively. You could have used non linear editing to show some of
this as flashbacks. You production skills lighting, shooting etc are proficient
hence Merit but the short film is under produced to be effective in the editing
to make the mood or story effective/clear.
Eunice Gardner
16.3: M/P editing generally has flow and some techniques like
cross cutting. It has one jump cut at the start which breaks the flow – she
moves location/and her conversation jumps. Issues with pacing here it is far
too conversational and tedious and not tense indulging dialogue and ruining the
actual drama – this has no place in the film really and should be done away with.
The structure is clear and does has a disruption but not middle or end– there is
no twist apparent or shock factor. The footage filmed is incomplete to allow
you to be very creative or imaginative or maintain a sense of genre that fits
the mood. Sound shows some attempt to work with images with the track but there
are clear issues in the mix with the plane overhead and a girls voice over the
last scene.
22.3: M Some variety of shots
and some examples of framing that use rule of thirds and depth. Some controlled
use of low key lighting but uses available sources for some effect.
Establishing shot used and some close ups for suspense, mystery or convention.
Overall although the shots are steady and have some strengths in use of variety
of angles etc there are not enough set ups used to give fluency and consistency
to the whole sequence – the shoot is basically incomplete to tell the story or
the twist effectively. You could have used non linear editing to show some of
this as flashbacks. You production skills lighting, shooting etc are proficient
hence Merit but the short film is under produced to be effective in the editing
to make the mood or story effective/clear.
Jordan Crook
16.3: M editing generally has flow and some techniques like
cross cutting. It has one jump cut at the start which breaks the flow – she
moves location/and her conversation jumps. Issues with pacing here it is far
too conversational and tedious and not tense indulging dialogue and ruining the
actual drama – this has no place in the film really and should be done away with.
The structure is clear and does has a disruption but not middle or end– there is
no twist apparent or shock factor. The footage filmed is incomplete to allow
you to be very creative or imaginative or maintain a sense of genre that fits
the mood. Sound does not fit the genre (with neither Thriller nor Horror) although
later this works but drop out then wind chimes? - and there are clear issues in
the mix with the plane overhead and a girls voice over the last scene.
22.3: M Some variety of shots
and some examples of framing that use rule of thirds and depth. Some controlled
use of low key lighting and uses available sources for some effect well.
Establishing shot used and some close ups for suspense, mystery or convention
and kidnap does quite well as well as hiding the attacker. Overall although the
shots are steady and have some strengths in use of variety of angles etc there are
not enough set ups used to give fluency and consistency to the whole sequence –
the shoot is basically incomplete to tell the story or the twist effectively.
You could have used non linear editing to show some of this as flashbacks. You
production skills lighting, shooting etc are proficient hence Merit but the
short film is under produced to be effective in the editing to make the mood or
story effective/clear.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Calvin Adisa
16.3: M WT D editing maintains a good flow and techniques like cross cutting. There are no jump cuts. Better use of pacing here but still too conversational and tedious and not tense indulging dialogue and ruining the actual drama. The structure is clear and does has a disruption but not middle or end– there is no twist apparent or shock factor. The footage filmed is incomplete to allow you to be very creative or imaginative or maintain a sense of genre that fits the mood - but you use conventions of fades to move from scene to scene. Sound fits very well with the images the genre (Thriller) although an issue in the mix with the plane overhead.
22.3: M Some variety of shots, framed well and some examples of framing that use rule of thirds and depth. Some controlled use of low key lighting and uses available sources for some effect well. Establishing shot used and some close ups for suspense, mystery or convention and kidnap does quite well as well as hiding the attacker. Overall although the shots are steady and have some strengths in use of variety of angles etc there are not enough set ups used to give fluency and consistency to the whole sequence – the shoot is basically incomplete to tell the story or the twist effectively. You could have used non linear editing to show some of this as flashbacks. You production skills lighting, shooting etc are proficient hence Merit but the short film is under produced to be effective in the editing to make the mood or story effective/clear.
Knock Knock who’s there
Ese Omamogh
22.3 M WT D lacking control over the camera – all shots are
wavering in 1st minute and focus goes in and out on phone – all of
this is unclear and can be cut cant read them anyway? Jogs again at the door. A
god variety of angles and shot types used however appropriately to create
mystery. V. Effective use of angles and depth of field when getting the tools
from the box to hide identity and create depth. The attack scene is under-developed
and needs more footage to be more effective. Use of lighting to create shadows
and OSS. Canted angles used on returning victim and the lingering shot of
neighbour is a nice stylish touch. But this is preceded by a HUGE camera jog. 2nd
attack again is lacking footage to be more effective in the mood. A good use of
mise-en-scene and the house has been used well (stairway and large hall) to get
across the genre with the balaclava and fake blood. Symbol was not really
lingered on to make this clear to the story. Non linear montage would be useful
to speed up the attack or use of cross-cutting of the 2nd victim
coming home to find the 1st victim.
16.3 M WT D Clearly a thriller
with some sense of pace, lacking during attacks. The narrative is clear with an
equilibrium disruption but left open ended. Not sure of the twist however, sound
has been used well and a range of shots but the attacks lacks the drama they
ought to have. Especially the 2nd attack lack editing pace and the
sound needed. Last shot on phone makes no sense to resolution? Continuity maintained with only one or two
obvious jump cuts on balance with a long sequence. She is laughing when dragged
into bathroom which should be cut more precisely. For D you should use more
imaginative techniques such as montage or flashbacks and work with the sound in
more detail.
