Exam Question: “Sometimes working within constraints produces the most interesting work” (Branston and Strafford) how have you used real media conventions to produce interesting or effective coursework productions?
Throughout my two productions (Thriller opening and Music Video) I have adhered to many set conventions and I have also subverted the conventions. I feel that these conventions have helped me to an extent as they have improve my creative mind, and they have helped me to produce pieces of work that have engaged audiences because I have used the common conventions. But I also feel that these conventions have held me back, and therefore this is where I have broken the set ‘rules’ to try and enhance my creativity. I shall now discuss specifically how these real media conventions have helped me produce interesting and effective productions.
Branston and Strafford’s quote raises many questions related to the conventions of productions. It makes me wonder whether I produced better work because I stuck to the conventions of the genre. But I then thought I could have of possibly bent the rules within my thriller this is because I made it sticking to the conventions extremely tightly and I therefore feel that I made my thriller quite predictable. I feel that my work progressed within the second year as I didn’t stick to the genre completely and I therefore feel that it produced a better music video. But I also feel that I wouldn’t have of produced any work at all if I didn’t have the conventions as guidelines, as the conventions gave me a set idea of how to produce a piece of work that would suit audiences. There are many other people that have had similar ideas to Branston and Strafford; they have all produced ideas about the many forms and conventions of genres within productions.
The idea of a piece of work fitting in within a genre or sub-genre is discussed by Chandler he states that “the conventions of each genre shift, new genres and sub-genres emerge and others are ‘discontinued’”. This makes me think whether I actually stuck closely to the genre conventions within my productions. I feel that I stuck closely to the common forms and conventions of my thriller genre. This is because I had been taught the rules and I thought that this is what I had to do to make the best work, therefore I used the convention of flashbacks and colourisation effects such as the black and white effect. Whereas in my music video I subverted the common convention of using many close up shots. This was because I didn’t think it suited my narrative or genre. I therefore feel that I have progressed throughout my two years as in my second year creating the music video I used the conventions that I felt suited my work the nest and I managed to break the rules to create an overall better production.
I personally feel that it is hard to agree on a set of rules and conventions. This is also discussed through Bordwell. He states that “one could..argue that no set of necessary and sufficient conditions can mark off genres from other sorts of groupings in ways that all experts or ordinary film goers would find acceptable”. I kind of agree with this statement and this is because I feel that everyone’s ideas are different and we all want to mould the conventions to suit are needs.
This made me think about how far I followed the set of rules/conventions within my production. I have found that I followed more rules and conventions within my thriller film and this was due to me ‘playing it safe’ and not really knowing how to break the rules or mould them to my own productions. For example I followed all the set conventions for the thriller genre and these included the build up of tension and the black and white scenes. In my music video I was able to mould the set genre conventions to fit my creative ideas and I therefore feel that I have progressed within my two years. In my music video for example I broke the set convention of using many close up shots and I feel that this again shows my progression as I felt confident enough to do this.
McQuail suggests that “conventions give the producers a framework to work with – a set of guidelines. This is somewhat different to Branston and Strafford’s ideas and this is due to them seeing the conventions in a different way. McQuail is discussing that the conventions give people a template to work with and that it gives people a guideline on what to work with. I do slightly agree with this as within my thriller production the genre conventions helped me make an opening sequence that engaged the audience and this was due to it being similar to other thriller films. Without these conventions I’m not sure I could have produced a piece of work that worked as well, they made me feel secure in the work that I was producing. Whereas within my music video production, the set conventions just made me want to break them and this was due to them not suiting my ideas. But I felt happier breaking the rules in my music video once I knew what the set conventions were. This was so that I could choose which rules to break without the end product looking terrible.
Overall throughout my two productions I feel that Branston and Strafford’s idea is generally extremely relevant to my work. This is because I have used conventions and set rules within both of my productions and I have also broken the set rules and moulded them to suit me. Therefore I feel that ‘working within constraints’ does actually help to produce interesting work as it does give you a set of guidelines as stated by McQuail, but it also gives you the opportunity to bend the conventions as suggested by Bordewell.
No comments:
Post a Comment