CONTEXTUAL: Gender Research (Gender research notes - Suffragette [Dir: Sarah Gavron, 2015] notes)

Film opens with shots of women wahsing clothes
looking up at them from a puddle - reflecting back on history
v/o mem speaking against women's vote
on screen text explains story - reminscent of shakespeare storytelling
shot of character undressing immediately focus pulls - opposes female gaze
character looks into doll store window as bells gongs, foreshadowing suffragette attack on store
male character sits at head of table
females repeatedly looked up to
brings up questions of law and establshment
husband controls money and makes son salute king
mom pulls son away from horse - freud refrence?
Bechdel test passed
Dark room red lighting conotes villainous characters
Man looked up to by camera reflecting character's fear
Predominately female roles
female characters start as camera's main focus once entering room but becomes swamped by male characters
Camera moves closer, ending with cu's on face + h&s
men lose power, become looked down on again by camera. Camera tracks in on her face as she takes full attention of room and audience. She is focus on screen but he is viewed over her shoulder.
Dark lighting when in bed with husband, somber
Female characters shown as good with kids, male characters show no interest
not super-fast cuts during violent scenes, gives feeling of classical horror genre
Hard, naturalistic lighting during interrogation
he holds power, but no light, she has streak across face
she drops to knees down to husbands level as he berates her
All gather for arrival of Pankhurst
Begins obscured by hat and door shutting - enigma
long drawn out shots create tension and action is contrasted by police approaching
umbrella and flame symbols of protection and safety after being kicked out
close up on eyes with his lips included in shot
he puts card between hands - she does not take it
Main character begins wearing more masculine seeming clothes: collars, overcoat and hat
Character leaving because of baby followed by shots of nature, washing on lines and children playing - connotes growth and change
i began crying when Maude's kid got taken
camera follows behind inspector, making him seem more important than audience
long shots for force-feeding, minimal sound design other than screaming
bev shot of spiralling staircase to show inspector losing control
quick cuts as deciding to attend derby, film's pacing increasing towards end
sound stops as Emily dies
She adopts coat as she adopts role
she sits in a large, dark church lit only by candlelight
Red jacket
White imagery
Camera blurs as she joins march, they all become one
cuts to archive footage of march

DOCUMENTARY: LECTURE [Ideas Lab w/ZSale [08/03]]

'The School that Turned Chinese.'

Think about characters

What fascinates you?

Watch: 'Searching for Sugarman' (Dir: Malik Bendjelloul, 2012)

Ideas that can be empathised with

Sources and contacts
What do you have specialist knowledge of?
Look at other media
Get behind the headlines
Best sellers/Most watched etc
TED talks can be fruitful (for presenters and experts too)

Research: Norma Percy

BBC Three documentaries are usually extreme and character driven

Think location (E.G gym in a town with weight issue)
'Secret History of our Street' - looks at one street a week, gives a social history of the UK

When investigating - go digital!
User generated footage is gold

Watch: 'Sri-Lanka's Killing Fields' (Dir: Callum Macrae, 2011)
Watch: '9/11: The Falling Man' (Dir: Henry Singer, 2006)

Watch: 'Our War, Into the Hornet's Nest' (Dir: David Salzberg and Christian Tureaud, 2014)
Immersive
Characters
Unfilmable by a crew
Asks questions
Socially and politically relevant
Honestly compelling

Affect the audience's heart, mind or wallet!

DOCUMENTARY: Dreams of a Life (Dir: Carol Morley, 2011)

Interviews from reporters
Shots of abandoned flat - recreation
Interviews with old friends, speaking to crew and with crew
People speaking in hindsight - sentiment obscures truth

First way in through lover
Interviews paired with recreations of her, throughout life and death - mostly based on assumptions and second hand knowledge from FRIENDS ETC

Uses research timeline of life to help progress story

Sequences typically very dark, with naturalistic lighting
Focus always on Joyce
Interviews are still, tripod shots
Sequences handheld

Introduces recorded clip of voice

Very little actuality

Finishes with real image of Joyce

DOCUMENTARY: LECTURE [Intro to Factual Programming w/HCurston (3/8)]

Actuality = Real moments the crew keep up with but can't stage
Sequences = Staged, directed moments

Fact and fiction borrow from each other - retelling reality

Different genres involve different degrees of intervention
EXPECTATIONS OF INTERVENTION:

Watched: Hidden Kingdoms - BBC One
Re-tells reality by filming marmosets in a studio
Similar to recreating train set from Nightmail
More interesting than graphics
Can seem dishonest - producers usually include 'making of' to evade this

Current affair programming
Often reporter led, dealing with weighty subjects
Less observational, more constructed
Journalism and story over character and actuality
Freedom of speech and free press - reality shaping capabilities

Voyeurism vs public interest

DOCUMENTARY: Britain Through a Lens (Dir: Chris Durlacher, 2011)

Social movement by John Grierson

Original documentaries made as social message, hoping to unite Britain. Hoping to lessen the building class divide with appreciation of the working man without making them a joke.

Listen to Britain (1942)
-No v/o
-Government propaganda

Industrial Britain (1931)
-First v/o
-Ordinary man shown as hero

Nightmail
-Meticulously researched
-Accompanied by poem and music
-Immersive, giving heavy sense of being in the action
-Real people but performing script (based on real conversations)

First Days (1939)
-Celebratory look at the start of WWII

Diary for Timothy
-Told through letter to child
-Can be uncomfortably honest (!!!)

DIRECTIONS: Critical Evaluation

 Initially I'd say this unit has been most productive as a learning exercise, helping me pinpoint aspects of my directorial approach that can be improved on and helping me to better appreciate how much a director has to consider.
 My primary objective was to direct an episode of The Office to look like a documentary, using continuous shots and minimalist editing to give an alternative, spontaneous approach to the show. Whilst I think using continuous shots was effective in making the episode look more like a documentary, I had to sacrifice cut-aways which The Office usually most effectively uses to pick out reactions, bringing subtle comedy to the forefront of an otherwise occasionally melodramatic show. However, I do not think this has too dramatically impacted my piece as it forced me to search for other chances and ways to let those reactions be seen.
 Losing the chance for comedic reactions, I became very aware that I would have to replace this element through another aspect of the show and, influenced by Otto Bathurst, decided to experiment with using non-diagetic sound effects to highlight certain moments in the film. Although this could be argued to contradict my creative vision, I think that the added elements of sound design add a surprising twist to the piece that achieves the comical effect I was hoping for.
 A major aspect of my film I found very effective was leading what would usually be two seperate scenes into one another. Slightly inspired by Edgar Wright's usage of people passing in front of the screen to wipe, I used Jan pulling Michael in front of the camera to move the focus onto them and away from Jim and Karen. I think it was effective at highlight the connection between the two plots instead of showing them as unconnected scenes happening under one roof.
 One of the major downfalls of my production is my obvious issue with daylight continuity and the effect this has on the believability of my film. This is an obvious oversight on my part as the director and by choosing to shoot in chronological order I could have gained a more chronological movement of time and not jumped confusingly between day and night. Given more time I would have liked to attempt to fix this issue with colour correcting software but did not feel I had the necessary skills to attempt this with my minimal schedule.

DIRECTIONS: Director's Statement

 The key aspect of my creative vision in my re-directing of 'The Office' came from an aspect of the show that annoyed me when I first watched it. The premise of the show is a faux-documentary watching the lives of office employees and I occasionally found the cuts and coverage always too clean for this. Whilst I understand this is because 'The Office' was in reality a comedy drama filmed with a multi-camera set-up I thought I would take this opportunity to see how the show looked filmed how I had always imagined - more like a single camera documentary than a drama.

Location

 For David Wallace's house I wanted a location that would reflect a mid-high income of the CFO of Dunder Miflin. I chose a detached house with an intimate, homely interior that also reflected the episode's romantic themes. On a shoot with a bigger budget I would have looked at acquiring a location such as those pictured below that would have better reflected Wallace's career. However, the shortening of the episode made this less of a necessity, enabling a location that reflected the episode as opposed to a singular, minor character.

Production/costume design

 My original intention for costume design was significantly more formal than the final product. Given a bigger budget, David and Michael would have worn suits: David's stylish and tailored to reflect his high status and Michael's being a tailored suit that seems a few years old. Jim's outfit would have been more smart-casual, mixing either a plain shirt or stylish t-shirt with a casual blazer. Karen's outfit would have been sophisticated but slightly more playful than Jan's pricey, sophisticated dress. 

 

Sound design 

My plans for sound design are heavily influenced by the episodes of Teachers directed by Otto Bathurst and his use of occassional diagetic sound effects for humour purposes. Whilst this varies from my idea of producing an episode that feels more like a documentary than the original, I believe it is an unexpected and effective way to emphasise some of the show's subtle comedy. 

Camera approach

 To try and reflect the intended documentary style I filmed each scene as one continuous shot. As an attempt to try and emphasise this naturalistic style and make my actor's actions seem comfortable I did not give them much direction in stage directions except where to move etc, instead allowing them to act as they felt the character would.
 However, as a contrast to this I repeatedly showed Jim and Karen through a face-on two shot of the couple sat on a sofa, hopefully conveying a feeling of intimacy between the pair. This shot choice was influenced by my research into Edgar Wright and Otto Bathurst.
 One of my initial creative ideas was to, in the scene where Jan drags Michael into the bathroom, have her pull him through the party and down a long hallway and into a bathroom at the end where the camera would be placed to show the party on one half of the screen and the hallway leading to the bathroom on the other.

Mood/tone/visual style 

I wanted to show Jim and Karen's relationship to be more comfortable and healthy than Michael and Jan's so had them sitting in all of their interactions on comfortable sofas whilst Jan and Michael would be stood and almost always moving in order to reflect the idea that their relationship was unstable and progressing towards the end. 
 One of my main ideas was to keep the majority of the action happening in one central room in the house, reflecting the show's usual setting of an office. This was to convey an idea that even though the characters have escaped the close quarters of the office, they are still forced together in their off time as well. To emphasise this connection, I twice transition one scene into another without cutting and instead just turning the camera's attention.

Editing

My approach to editing was very minimal, keeping with my one-camera documentary vision. I filmed no cut-aways or extra footage to cut to and as such most of my editing was in making sure sound design was crisp.