PROGRESS:
Basically the only thing that has happened since my last post was our pitch, which went very well. I felt confident going into the pitch, because we had a strong grasp on what we were planning on accoplishing with our documentary. Also, we had done some research beforehand, which translated to us sounding like we really knew what we were talking about (we actually did, but you know, it still sounded good). Overall, the pitch went well - we thoroughly presented our idea to the people, got some solid feedback, and gained some more confidence in the process.
READING RESPONSE:
The second I read the title, I immediately felt better about my group - we had already delved into some solid research about our topic, and it had already proved useful during the pitch. This piece provided valuble information about not just the fact that doing research is beneficial, but specifically what kind of research is good research. I think the "quantity vs. quality" section was very helpful and rang true - you can always have a lot of research, but how much of that research is actually going to help you move forward with your documentary and actually strengthen your message? The quality of the research is very important, and I think our group knows the difference between crappy research and quality reasearch.
Thursday, January 20, 2011
Thursday, January 13, 2011
Blog Post/Reading Response #2
PROGRESS:
Not going to lie, up to this point I was pretty iffy on our potential topic of panhandling, but after a talk with Ms. Hodge this week I feel WAY more confident and ready to do this documentary. Ms. Hodge helped us narrow our focus down to pandhandling in South Minneapolis, and suggested possible interviewees, such as the Minneapolis Police Department. We also did some research and found a couple local groups that deal with panhandling and homelessness and wrote down their contact info, we plan to contact them soon. I feel we're almost ready to move on from to pre-planning and pre-shooting, just a few more things to do.
READING RESPONSE:
I thought this piece was interesting in the way it read - very subjective, with dashes of humor and wit. It's a nice change of pace from the usual boring pieces we're given in school today - no offense, teachers. Yet at points it got a little over the top, I felt this especially when I read about "Mr. Brainwash." I thought this title was a bit unneccessary, but I quickly forgot about this once I saw that the documentary "Catfish" was referenced - this is literally THE worst movie I've ever seen. I distinctly remember saying, and I quote, "I would rather eat a 10 dollar bill, that would be a better use of my money," after seeing that film. Anyways, the rest of the reading was less interesting to me than the beginning. It was useful in the ways that it portrayed the variations and representation of the modern documentary.
Not going to lie, up to this point I was pretty iffy on our potential topic of panhandling, but after a talk with Ms. Hodge this week I feel WAY more confident and ready to do this documentary. Ms. Hodge helped us narrow our focus down to pandhandling in South Minneapolis, and suggested possible interviewees, such as the Minneapolis Police Department. We also did some research and found a couple local groups that deal with panhandling and homelessness and wrote down their contact info, we plan to contact them soon. I feel we're almost ready to move on from to pre-planning and pre-shooting, just a few more things to do.
READING RESPONSE:
I thought this piece was interesting in the way it read - very subjective, with dashes of humor and wit. It's a nice change of pace from the usual boring pieces we're given in school today - no offense, teachers. Yet at points it got a little over the top, I felt this especially when I read about "Mr. Brainwash." I thought this title was a bit unneccessary, but I quickly forgot about this once I saw that the documentary "Catfish" was referenced - this is literally THE worst movie I've ever seen. I distinctly remember saying, and I quote, "I would rather eat a 10 dollar bill, that would be a better use of my money," after seeing that film. Anyways, the rest of the reading was less interesting to me than the beginning. It was useful in the ways that it portrayed the variations and representation of the modern documentary.
Thursday, January 6, 2011
Blog Post/Reading Response #1
PROGRESS:
So far we have established a solid group - Josh, Ryley and I. We thought that since we worked together so well on the PSA that we should just continue to work together for the documentary. We have a few loose ideas that have been tossed around - most prominently the topic of panhandling. Ryley is very interested in this issue, and feels like we can make a strong documentary around it. I'm unsure how I feel about the topic at the moment, but I'm sure we'll find common ground and work something out. Other than that, we've just kind of discussed some timing for possible renting of equipment and filming and such, with me going out of town in a couple weeks and missing an entire week of school. So far, so good I'd say.
READING RESPONSE:
From this piece, "Directing the Documentary" by Michael Rabiger, I learned a few concrete ideas about what a documentary should do, how it should be filmed, and tips on presentation. The reading was actually very imformative about planning, content, ideaology, and presentation. One line that I believe relates directly to the documentaries that we are going to produce is, "the documentary seems concerned with unconvering further dimensions to actuality and implying some kind of social criticism," (1). The topic of our documentaries in VOICES are just that - social issues. What I also gathered from this reading was what makes a documentary successful - one line in particular stood out to me, "successful documentaries, like their fiction counterparts, also need a good story with interesting characters, narrative tension, and an integrated point of view," (4). This was very clear and helpful, and I'm sure we'll check back with this piece when going through a mental checklist of what our documentary has and what our documentary needs.
So far we have established a solid group - Josh, Ryley and I. We thought that since we worked together so well on the PSA that we should just continue to work together for the documentary. We have a few loose ideas that have been tossed around - most prominently the topic of panhandling. Ryley is very interested in this issue, and feels like we can make a strong documentary around it. I'm unsure how I feel about the topic at the moment, but I'm sure we'll find common ground and work something out. Other than that, we've just kind of discussed some timing for possible renting of equipment and filming and such, with me going out of town in a couple weeks and missing an entire week of school. So far, so good I'd say.
READING RESPONSE:
From this piece, "Directing the Documentary" by Michael Rabiger, I learned a few concrete ideas about what a documentary should do, how it should be filmed, and tips on presentation. The reading was actually very imformative about planning, content, ideaology, and presentation. One line that I believe relates directly to the documentaries that we are going to produce is, "the documentary seems concerned with unconvering further dimensions to actuality and implying some kind of social criticism," (1). The topic of our documentaries in VOICES are just that - social issues. What I also gathered from this reading was what makes a documentary successful - one line in particular stood out to me, "successful documentaries, like their fiction counterparts, also need a good story with interesting characters, narrative tension, and an integrated point of view," (4). This was very clear and helpful, and I'm sure we'll check back with this piece when going through a mental checklist of what our documentary has and what our documentary needs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)