Thursday, 29 September 2011

WS - Marking a piece of 2011 A2 Coursework

The latest task that we have been given as part of the coursework is to take a piece of A2 coursework from last year and, using the mark scheme, attempt to grade the piece of work and to look at the specific areas that our own work will be marked on. The video I was asked to look at was the work of George Scaife and Elizabeth McPhail. The song they used was "Land Down Under" by Men at Work.

Below is my view on what the product deserved for each category:

  • Holding a shot steady, where appropriate. Excellent. Throughout the video, the camera is kept very still where this is appropriate. There are times when this isn't the case, but it appears to be a deliberate tactic, and not shoody camera work. An example of holding the shot steady is at the beginning of the video, between the "start and 0.12" 
  • Framing a shot, including and excluding elements as appropriate. Proficient. A very good example of excellent framing of a shot comes at "2.36" where a character is grappling with a Koala bear, and in the top corner of the screen in the background is a sign reading "Koalas Next 4KM". However, there are times when the framing isn't wuite perfect, for example the scenes on the moorside where graffiti is visible (my interpretation is that this isn't deliberat). This is unfortunate because the scenes such as this work well and the setting works well for the part of the video. This could be just a sign of how low budget Music Videos can be problematic, as the setting can not always be completely perfect. 
  • Using a variety of shot distances as appropriate. Excellent/Proficient. For this category I was torn between grading it as excellent and Proficient. I have highlighted Excellent in bold because I am swaying more towards that grade than proficient. Some of the variation in shot distances is very clever and good. An example of this is at "0.52-0.57". What is very good about this sequence is that it quickly changes the distance of the shot whilst showing the same scene throughout this five second period. However, the possibility of it being Proficient comes from some of the other parts of the video, where the distances are very similar for a number of shots. This may however, be a very harsh criticism.
  • Selecting mise-en-scene including colour, figure, lighting, objects and setting. Excellent.The video really seems to grasp the meaning of the song and a lot of this is down to the mise-en-scene. This particular song is actually quite a challenging one to find excellent mise-en-scene for. This video achieves it however through all the relevant, stereotypical Australian items used as well as the settings used. A very challenging part of the video must have been the differing climates between where they had to film and Australia. They have successfully managed this by selecting carefully when to film, and the thought and planning that seems to have gone into this is extroadinary. One example of the clever selection of mise-en-scene is "2.18" while another example is at "2.34".
  • Editing so that meaning is apparent to the viewer. Excellent/Proficient. This is another area where I am not completely certain what grade the video would have recieved for this category. Generally, the video is very good and easy to follow, but some parts/effects are difficult to understand in parts, for example at "0.37". The effect here and at other points in the video can be confusing, although again this may be a very harsh view.
  • Using varied shot transitions, captions and other effects selectively and appropriately. Proficient. There are a very limited amount of shot transitions, although it could be argued that transitions would ruin the flow of the video. The jump cuts used in the product do work very well. The effects look good on screen, although some of them are unclear as to why they are used to me.
  • Using sound with images and editing appropriately for the task. Excellent.  The imagary and the lyrics are very well linked in the video, and the lip synching is generally very good. An example of lip-synching is at "0.13". The editing and footage in the video is most certainly to an excellent standard, as are many other aspects of the video.

No comments:

Post a Comment

All comments are moderated. Please ensure all comments are appropriate.