Influences: German expressionism

In order to get the right type of creepy tone I looked at some German Expressionist films, most notably The Cabinet of Dr Caligari. In this film, the cinematographer Willy Hamister, as was the trend with many german expressionist films, used a technique called chiaroscuro lighting, which is creating a strong contrast between light and dark. In order to achieve this he had to create large, sharply defined shadows to litter the shots. These help create a very creepy, highly formalistic atmosphere to the whole film. In this shot we see an example of chiaroscuro lighting, with the Somnambulist and the virgin he is kidnapping being spotlit, against a background decorated with abstract patters made of shadows. The spotlighting, though it appeared very deliberate, creates this contrast between the dark and the light which contributes to the overall strangeness in the tone of the film. This technique is used at numerous times throughout the film to similar effect, as well as several other techniques present in this shot.
   Another thing to note is the type of light used in this shot. The lights in the film all seem to have very sharp edges to them, allowing for very defined and powerful, rather than soft and naturalistic, shadows to be created. This can be seen most clearly in the shadow on the wall of the somnambulists arm, the edge of which is very sharp indeed. These defined shadows on the walls almost create the sense that the scene is being haunted by its own shadows. The art direction is also key in creating the chiaroscuro because of the colours of the costumes. The somnambulist is dressed all in black, while the virgin is in white. This compliments the type of lighting used very nicely as simply in the costumes there is already a contrast, symbolic of binary opposites of purity and corruption, being put into practice. These two factors work together nicely to create a very striking image, with heavy contrast and a sense of terror.
   I intend to utilise some of these techniques in our film. For example, I will be trying to use lights which create very sharp shadows, in order to create a similar sense of looming terror around the scenes. I will also, to some degree, create a similar sense of terror using spotlighting, though not overtly. Hopefully the cluttered background will stop the spotlighting being the focus of the shot but not disguise it altogether. The cluttered sets may present a challenge in trying to surround the characters with shadows in a similar way to this film, as we will be trying to keep the elements of the set fairly visible even if they are out of the spotlight. I will hopefully be able to use the sets to create abstract patterns around the characters. Another challenge will be working with the art direction in terms of colour palette. While this film in some ways benefits from being black and white, if we are choosing to shoot in colour we may need to pay some attention to how contrast can still be created, perhaps by using contrasting colours in the shots.

Liverpool Post production

Coming back to Sheffield to edit, our first task was to transcribe each interview. Of the four we transcribed (Though we only used three) I took Suresh and Veejayras. Once we had the finished transcripts we went through them and highlighted the sections we felt were most interesting and relevant. We also planned what we wanted to include and made an edit plan, dividing the film up into loosely separated sections with each participant introducing themselves, talking about their organisation or giving their view on a set theme. The transcripts allowed us to look at what we wanted in the edit plan then scan the highlighted transcripts for sections that could deliver this, while also allowing us to see what was most interesting and trying, if possible, to make space for it in the interview.

It became clear from early on that Brian, the owner of an antique bookshop with a great passion for books who we had interviewed, would not el into the structure of the film as much as we would like him to, as he seemed far too much like an odd one out. While filming, one of the places we had arranged to film in, a record store, refused to let us interview them or anyone in the store, and we weren't able to find another person who would be as interesting as the others and provide some company for Brian in the film, and so with regret we had to cut his section from the film.

While editing I tried to instruct the editors on how to give a good rhythm of cutaways along with the interview. Often me and the editor (who did an amazing job) would clash with me wanting more of the footage to be cutaways while she wanted more of it to show the subjects. In the end the balance we have achieved between these two is better than what either of us would have done alone and so I am glad I sat in on all the edit sessions.

Me and the sound editor worked together on the music, as I was the only person in the group with experience of making music. Originally we had wanted music that reflected different religions, however we did not have time to record this, and weren't sure what music we could use to represent atheism, and so took to Garageband to compose the music ourselves. The process of making the music was that I would play a couple of loops, put them together and show them to the sound editor, who would then give feedback, and I would go away and change it. Although I was the one physically composing, since we were working as closely as we were on it I think both of us take equal credit for what was produced.



The edit plan we drew up was this: Editing Plan

• 5 Sections.

• 1 Intro section
• 3 Middle sections
• 1 End section

Title

• Intro: How would they describe religion?

• Annie
• Michael
• Suresh & Veejayra

Bridge with cutaways

• Section A: Who are they & Introduce organisations.

• Annie
• Michael
• Suresh & Veejayra

Bridge with cutaways

• Section B: Founding the Organisation & Why they were needed.

• Annie
• Michael
• Suresh & Veejayra

Bridge with cutaways

• Section C: Effects of Religion.

• Annie
• Michael
• Suresh & Veejayra

Bridge with cutaways

• End Section: Where is religion heading?

• Annie
• Suresh & Veejayra
• Michael

Filming in Liverpool: Interviews

As director, and the person who had made initial contact with most of the interviewees, it was decided I would interview all the participants. I was fairly comfortable with this, having had some experience of conducting interviews in the past. When meeting each participant, I made sure I spoke to them a bit while setting up the shot and equipment so that they wouldn't feel like they were being interviewed by a stranger. Also, to ease them into the process of putting the question in the answer, we asked them each a number of random practice questions, normally including their favourite film. Fortunately all of them were familiar with this as they had all done recorded interviews before.

We wrote a list of questions together which were adapted slightly for each interview, for example "What do you get out of christianity?" would be "What do you get out of Hinduism?" These questions served as great icebreakers and often after their answer I would ask one or two more questions on that topic in order to probe the subject deeper. Also, they often answered some of the questions I had written before I got the chance to ask them, meaning I would be able to cross off three questions in one sometimes.

Our interview question were:

• What is your [said faith or belief]?
• When was the first time you encountered this faith or belief?
• Did you grow up in a religious household? 
• What elements of [said faith or belief] do you particularly like and why?
• If someone came to Earth and didn’t know what faith was, how would you describe it to them?
• What does your faith or belief mean to you?
• Are there any incidents or experiences that have led you to believe in this?
• What impact do you believe faith has on someone’s life?
• What do you see in your generation in terms of faith?
• Where do you see faith in the future?

Filming In Liverpool: Sound

We faced many challenges to do with sound while filming in Liverpool, both with locations and the equipment. I chose to make sure each interview was covered with two microphones in case one cut out or didn't record properly. In Annie and Michaels interviews these were both plugged into the camera, going directly to sync up with the video, whereas Suresh and Veejayra interview was recorded straight to the camera with the shotgun mic and into a zoom with a pair of Radio mics.

The reason for recording with the boom and radio mics was that while the boom gets very good directional pick up of the sounds, we thought it important to be covered, and radio mics are much more discreet than lapels or any other kind of mic. However, in Annies interview as well as the one at the temple, the Radio mics cut out, leaving half the interviews captured only from the boom. This however was not too much of a problem as the boom didn't cut out at all.

In Annie and Michaels interview, we had a lot of background sound to deal with. In Annies, it was the constant blowing of the wind and Michaels had the sound of people in the pub. One of the solutions to this would be to use some of the cutaway footage to illustrate that the background sound is coming from somewhere, and stop it seeming distracting as the audience will understand why it is there. Also, as the mics are all pretty good quality the background noise is never intrusive, although a little annoying. In Annies interview, the better sound came from the Radio mic, as this was shielded from the wind more than the Shotgun. However, as it cut out on is halfway through we will only be able to use its sound for some of the clips.

Filming in Liverpool: Cinematography

As a director, filming presented both challenges I had anticipated, and unexpected ones. Namely, that due to cancelled interviews and not getting the permission to film in certain places we had hoped for we had to abandon the passions section of the plan and focus solely on the broad range of religions in Liverpool.

In terms of cinematography, me and the group thought it would be a good idea to film each interview with two cameras. The first, with the shot set up by our Cinematographer and then monitored by our sound editor (Who would also keep an eye on the sound levels as we were capturing directly onto this camera) would be static. The second, set up and monitored by our cinematographer, would have the freedom to move more and ideally be used for cutaways once we come to the edit. Initially we wanted the main shot of each interview to be on the same side, indicating that these different people are all on the same side really, however with Annies interview, the best view we could get was opposite to the one we had already filmed for Michael, so we chose to use the cutaway camera to place everyone on the same side at the end of the film.

For the interview we conducted at the Hindu temple, we chose to interview the couple who run the temple together. This meant that the framing of the interview had to be different, as we wanted the main shot to include both subjects. We went for a straight on shot, with me interviewing them from the side of the camera, and the couple positioned in front of one of their statues, then having the second camera moving around in order to get a good variety of cutaways.

As well as the interviews I wanted to get a range of cutaways at the location of each interview in order toile a sense of space to each location and to provide footage to help make the interviews flow better (footage to cut to in order to disguise an edit in the interview) and to flow between one another in a cleaner fashion. The cutaways in each location will help to enhance the interview by illustrating things the interviewees are discussing, such as the sculptures on the beach, pub scenery or the statues in the temple. The second type of cutaways we needer were general ones of Liverpool and so often when walking between locations I would have to be on the lookout for good cutaway material. 

Documentary research: The Runners

The runners is a short film with a similar premise to Humans of New York, but where the people who are asked are out running. By asking the people in this kind of situation, where they are not expecting it, the answers are different to what they would say in a conventional interview scenario, and arguably more genuine. As well as the variety of interesting questions posed to the runners, it uses a variety of shot types, rather than just cutaways, to keep itself visually interesting. This is one of the most influential documentaries for our idea in terms of the questions being asked and the unconventional nature of the set up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6F7T1EGSoMQ

Broadway Idiot

During pre production of our documentary I watched (Admittedly with no eye towards this being an academic exercise) the documentary Broadway Idiot. The documentary shows the process of adapting the rock album "American idiot" into a broadway musical. It is constructed mostly of intertwined interviews between the band and the producers, charting their journey to make the musical happen and how they both discovered how similar a working class punk rock band and upper class musical directors could be.

On watching it I was struck by how it was in fact quite similar in some ways to the film we planned to make. For one, it strives to show the universality of human nature, in depicting seemingly very different people and showing how that they think is actually very similar. It also focuses on the building of something, which was something we wanted to get out of our interviews as all three subjects had started or been involved in starting up projects from scratch which had become very big. Even structurally, with the intercut interviews bridged by cutaways, this mirrored my vision for our film.