Looking Back

I'm not going to beat around the bush: this semester was not as well organized as the last semester (FilmP 150). Blog announcements were sporadic and sometimes non-existent so that throughout most of the semester I had no idea when they were due. The Final Cut project was a prime example of how messy things were this semester. Having to film the project in one hour was a problem I was able to get over quickly because I understood it wasn't a huge production we were working on. But then editing the piece was simply disastrous. I lost the audio on my piece during the transfer, then kept running out of memory while I was working on the piece. By the end of it all I was greatly disappointed with the fact that we had to work on computers which were not well equipped for the the assigned project.

The Flash portion of the class was not much better. The lectures on Flash were convoluted and difficult to understand. By the time I sat down to work on the Flash project I really had no idea where to begin. I had to mess around with Flash on my own while watching online tutorials to finally figure things out. The lectures were not able to successfully prepare me for the project but I got through it anyways. As a film major, I was bothered with the fact that I was spending a large amount of time learning Flash because its something I'll probably never work with again. Having this class be a two semester long course seems pointless to me because it is a very basic course and there were things that as a film major I had no interest in learning (such as Flash). There should be a single semester long introductory course for film majors and a separate one for media majors. An introductory course should not be two semesters long.

With all that said, not everything I have to say about the class is negative. Incorporating the Natalia Almada presentation into the semester was a nice departure from the usual lectures. I also liked that the midterm was a creative pre-production project instead of the usual in class exam. Although the blogs were not dealt with as well as in the last semester, I like how they are incorporated into the course work because it gives students a chance to freely explore relevant course material. Ultimately I think there are some things that worked well throughout the semester, but there is plenty of room for improvement for future semesters.

Speaking With Animation - "Papiroflexia"

I came across this animation while browsing through youtube. It was labeled "Orgami World", although the title that appears in the actual animation is "Papiroflexia." The animation was done by Joaquin Baldwin. I chose this animation as the subject of my post because it was both well animated and creatively engaging.

As both a film and creative writing major, one of the things I scrutinize in any piece is story. The story in this animation is simple, creative and effective. The short narrative basically follows a man who is able to transform the world around him into origami. As we follow the man, we see him transform the urban landscape around him into a beautiful natural state. At the end of the piece, the man transforms himself into an origami bear, completing the transformation from crowded city into serene nature. It's a very creative, yet straightforward story; which is what ultimately makes it so effective. The simplicity of the story does not mean that it lacks depth. On the contrary I think that the simplicity of the actual narrative emphasizes the thematic depth of the animation. The two most compelling themes which caught my attention were that of city versus nature (or chaotic order versus serene wilderness) and the ability of the individual to make a difference. The piece is very imaginative and inspires an equally creative response from the viewer.

The animation also works if it is considered from a more technical standpoint. One of the things that stuck out to me most was the use of sound in the piece. The harmonious soundtrack is juxtaposed with the harsh city noises to further develop the theme of city (or civilization) versus nature. Another juxtaposition I noticed in the piece involved the use of colors. The main character himself sticks out in the dull and dark colored urban landscape because of his bright color. As he changes things from their urban state into a natural state, they become brighter in terms of color. For example, when he changes the car into a deer it goes from being a dark gray color to a brighter brown. The dull gray airplane is transformed into a more vivid blue bird. In the scene with the quick transformation of the buildings and roads into trees and paths, the sun comes out and illuminates the entire landscape, casting it in a bright array of colors which highly contrast the stark colors of the urban landscape which has now been fully transformed. The use of such juxtaposition further develops the thematic opposition of city and nature.

Since the environment in the piece is essential to the animation it is important that the landscape be represented in an effective way. In my opinion the use of space in the animation is what makes it so special. The way in which the character slowly travels through and transforms his environment is very creatively and (more importantly) effectively executed. Though it was a cartoon animation, the movement through the piece was not choppy, but very smooth and even lifelike.

The use of depth to create a greater sense of space is extremely important in a story which is about a character who is changing that same space which he is traveling through. There were plenty of objects in the foreground and background (signs, buildings, cars, etc.) which effectively created a sense of depth in the piece. If you look closely at the background, the sky itself looks like a crumpled piece of paper. It was little things like this that made this animation flow so smoothly. The style of the animation is very important as a complement to the theme and story of the piece. Ultimately, all these element help create a very compelling animation.

Video and Flash

As a film major, I found the video project a lot more entertaining and less demanding than the animation project. The video project went smoothly for the most part: preproduction was important in setting up the rest of the project. After Jake
(my partner) and I planned out the film, it was pretty much smooth sailing from there. All we had to do was find someone to act in the film (which one of Jake's friends did very well), shoot the project and finally edit it. Since the actual shoot was only about an hour and fifteen minutes long (which I initially thought was a ridiculously small amount of time to shoot a project in) we had to limit ourselves in terms of locations. But I think we did a good job with managing our time: in the end we were able to get the coverage we needed to in order to accurately cut all the shots together. We also got some very nice shots we had not originally thought up. After the shoot, the editing took a bit of time because we had a lot of material to work with. We actually ended up having to cut out a whole scene from our original plan because it didn't work in terms of continuity (screen direction) with the rest of the film. We also lost our audio- but we quickly fixed that by placing a soundtrack to fill in for the diegetic sounds we had recorded (which weren't essential to the story). Besides those two concerns, editing went over smoothly and we ended up with the film we had originally planned to shoot (more or less).

In order to get the animation project completed, I traveled a bumpier road. As a film major I initially thought the animation project was a waste of my time, but as I worked on it I realized it wasn't very different from the video project. Preparation was just as vital in the flash project as it was in the video project. Before actually jumping into the project, I had to carefully consider what I was capable of doing and how I would go about it. I also noticed some similarities between Flash and Final Cut, such as the use of time lines and key frames in the editing process. The one thing I found much harder was the fact that I was not merely capturing staged action anymore, but was forced to actually create and manipulate staged action. Though Flash jargon makes it seem like a more stifling medium (especially when it comes to actionscript), both film making and creating animation demand a lot of authorial creativity. Actionscript was tough, I'm not going to lie. Most of what I heard in class was forgotten the second I sat down to complete my interactivity project-- or perhaps I never fully digested it. It's difficult to teach something that's not as theoretical as it is practical and that's why I think I couldn't retain a lot of the material covered in the Flash lectures. When you're sitting in a lecture hall trying to take notes on how to work in Flash it's not as useful as sitting in front of the computer and actually working on Flash. It took some messing around with Flash and actionscript until I kind of figured things out (enough to finish my project), but I think it was time well spent.

By the end of both projects I was able to more fully appreciate both the work that goes into making a film and the work that goes into creating an animation. My interest in Flash has actually been whetted by the animation project. As both a film and English major, I appreciate cinema and literature as the outstanding mediums of storytelling that they are. In literature I see the predominant storytelling medium of the past. In cinema I see the predominant storytelling medium of the present. And in computer driven mediums like Flash I see a chance of becoming the predominant storytelling medium of the future. It's a simple rational behind why these mediums progress in such a manner, because each one has something to offer which its predecessor does not. Film has the visual element which lacks in literature and computer driven mediums have the interactivity which film lacks. I'm not saying that cinema will one day become obsolete, just as literature enjoys the same popularity as it has in years past, but new interactive mediums have the potential to revolutionize a dimension of storytelling which film lacks: user participation.