Wk 7 Group Video Prod.

1. 

   Kordell Tan

   1 March 2016

   Group 3
   Lorena Rubalcava
   Carlos Nava
   Kordell Tan
   Alfonso Madrigal
   Maison Chiu

   Observing the different uses of frame cuts, the Space Odyssey used very sudden cuts that made the audience really use their understanding of what is going on in the film to induce what the next image or frame/scene is about, while in Serenity, the frame cuts used in this chapter were more subtle and the fluid transition allowed the audience to piece together exactly what was going on. Of course given the different time period of both kinds of movies, the use of frame cut can differ due to the fact that media technology did not have the practical capabilities of performing certain kind of frame shifts.
   The director’s use of cut in Space Odyssey symbolized a fast forward in time to the rise of technology while the director of Serenity used frame to communicate information about the scene of the situation.

   Reply
2. 

   Hannah Mandias

   1 March 2016

   Group 16:
   We thought that The Space Odyssey’s cut felt somewhat guided. By following the trajectory of the bone, the cut was well-placed and the transition was smooth. We also found that Space Odyssey utilizes the cuts to signify jumps in time. Serenity’s cuts were a lot more abrupt in comparison but added a sense of suspense. In addition we found that Serenity’s cuts were used to signify jumps in perspective from different characters.
   Odyssey changed in time at moments and Serenity changed in focus of different events. Odyssey had a much simpler flow of things but we all had an interest in furthering watching serenity.

   Christopher Chadwick
   Joshua Hyun
   Hannah Mandias
   Enrique Plascencia
   Vanessa betancourt

   Reply
3. 

   annieronning

   1 March 2016

   Group 10:

   Gina Householder
Peter Bay
Anthony Sanchez
Megan Stevens
Aaron Satterfield
Annie Ronning


   After watching the two videos, our group agreed that we liked the second video better. The transitions between the cuts were very smooth and fluid and it made all of the different cuts seem like one whole video. In the first video, as the bone was being tossed into the air, the picture changed to a video of a satellite in space. Although the transition was cool, it was abrupt and not as fluid as the cuts in the second video. The second video also had more excitement and suspense, which made the cuts stand out much more and it attracted the viewer’s attention. Both videos displayed good cuts, but the second video was the favorite of the group.

   Our group also agreed that editing is a very large part of filmography. Editing is what makes a video enjoyable to watch and even though it is vital to the success of movies, music videos, etc, it often goes unnoticed. As one is sitting in the movie theater, the cuts, transitions, and edits in a movie are not the things the audience thinks about. On the same token, if the editing in a movie was extremely poor, the viewer would definitely take notice. There are numerous responsibilities that take place behind the scenes of film-making and editing is a large part of it. As we’ve learned today, editing is an important, specific, and detailed-oriented task that can make a video much better or much worse.

   Reply
4. 

   davidbensite

   1 March 2016

   Editing is a very important communicating medium in film. The narrator is always the camera, never the main protagonist. This is because the main protagnist never conveys the whole image on screen; the camera does. Every camera movement and movement in front of the lens portrays an important message that can be interpreted. This type of conveying by movement is called kenisis. In summary, everything in a film has meaning and is controlled which is the reason you have so many positions in production, editing, sound, directing, costumes, set and property design, everything. there are so many positions because all these variables need to have a consistent meaning. Editing, especially since the 40’s and 50’s when it started becoming a widely used meaningful and avant-garde style (editing with actual purpose in soviet montage cinema) was important and will be important to a films overall story telling. Joss Wheadon and Stanley Kubrick both are very crafted in directing their editors to create a film that potrays a meaningful message over cuts.
   Group 14
   David Brown
   Glenda Castillo
   Margarita Reyna
   Elizabeth Moledo
   John Stouras

   Reply
   1. 

      mbferns

      1 March 2016

      in addition the second film was much better then the first and conveys that not only does the timeline in which it was recorded matters but the directing and editing come into heavy play as well.

      Group 14
      Marlon Fernandes

      Reply
5. 

   Colleensiongco

   1 March 2016

   Cuts, transitions, and angles help portray different messages in film. In 2001: The Space Odyssey, the angles and cuts of the animals when they came to life appeared to be traumatic and empowering. The edits back in 1968 were impressive considering the technology available at that time period. Our group believed that the message and storyline was depicted through transitions and angles to create ambiguous imagery. Within Serenity, the cuts were unexpected, interchanging the scenes, and promptly changing the storyline. Jumping from scene to scene, new characters were introduced with further developed the storyline.
   GROUP 12
   Martin Diaz
   Andrew Hana
   Katherine Shinno
   Erick Diaz
   Colleen Siongco

   Reply
6. 

   Jesus

   1 March 2016

   Group 20
   The first film was not as entertaining compared to the second film. The second film grabbed our attention more and was more interesting. We came to the conclusion that it was due to the fact that the first film was made in the 1960s, while the second one was made recently. The second film had better editing and transitioning from scene to scene compared to the first one. The second was also more dynamic, more animate than the first one. There was a chase, killing, and dialogue in the second one. While the first one was simple and less dynamic. We concluded that editing does factor Into filming exclusively and impacts the film. We saw that difference in editing when we compared both those films, which the second one had superior editing compared to the first film.

   Jesus V.
   Rebekah J.
   Katherine P.
   Brianna H.
   Jhonaton R.
   Kyu J.

   Reply
7. 

   eliyee

   1 March 2016

   Group 4
   Elijah Yee
   Florenz Balthazar
   Leah Pérez
   Anthony Estalilla
   Tyler Kedis
   Hilario Saucedo

   We believe that cuts and editing are a major of film. However, we find that the most important part to the art of film is perspective and acting. Perspective explains how a film and story is told. It is very important how a story is told and how the plot unfolds. Perspective can also refer to camera angles and how the film is shown. Acting is very crucial because you have to play the role. The role is the thinking, emotions, and personality of the character. The complexity of the character and his/her personality is how the story of the film is told.
   Between the two films, the difference in the time period, style of fighting, and method of survival were emphasized by the use of cut and editing. With the first film, 2001: A Space Odyssey, the frames were still while the second film panned the camera with every frame before they decided to make a cut. Also, transitions in the first film didn’t make sense since the cut scenes that didn’t need to be cut. However in the second film, it was nice to see that each cut brought in a new story and plotline.

   Reply
8. 

   Symone Pallett

   1 March 2016

   The first movie is 2001: Space Odyssey and it was filmed with very simple shots. To show the very simplistic times the shots were very stable and allowed the actors to do all of the actions. There was also many jump cuts in order to distinguish different scenes and periods of time. The second movie was Serenity. The cuts made the scenes seem more dramatic and adds suspense. The camera was angled up on one scene to show that he is superior over the other guy.

   Enrique Vega
   Tareena Woods
   Symon Pallett
   Andrew Andrade
   Leon Phung

   Reply
9. 

   Group 6

   1 March 2016

   The two films shown during class today both were interesting films. The film ‘Serenity’ was fast paced, with many cuts, which appealed to our group a little more than the first film. The ‘editing’ of the serenity made the transition from opening credits to the actual film a little more fluid. Adding intensity for the viewer as well. Serenity’s scene changes were relative that helped captivate the viewer and remain intrigued with the storyline.

   The first film utilized cuts in a more primitive way but seemed to have been more relative to the film. The scene changes didn’t seem to have tied into the previous scene as well as they had in Serenity, but still made sense because the first movie was much more abstract.

   Group 6

   Sean Hernandez
   Carlos Madrigal
   Destiny Farihi
   Devon Carus
   Gabriela Hernandez
   Jennifer Lee

   Reply
10. 

    crystatim

    1 March 2016

    Group 13: Nancy Tran, Christopher Moore, Eduardo Castillo, Crysta Tim, Ngozi Ekwedike, Brandon Nhem

    Both “Space Odyssey” and “Serenity” are set in the future that display different stories, but at their core they share similarities. Both share the main essence of film: editing. The most noticeable editing tool used in the introduction scenes of each movie are the cuts. In “Space Odyssey” there is a cut comparing the Neanderthals to the future technology of space when displaying a bone that cuts to a space craft. In “Serenity” there is a cut comparing a past event to the current reaction by showing the past event taking place, then the cut going from a hologram of the past to the scene in which the hologram is being watched. These are two great examples of how a cut can bring two scenes together to tell a story or compare two objects/events/people. We see editing as one of the three essences of film. The other two are cinematography and acting: without strength in these two areas, it doesn’t matter how skilled the editing is, the film will not be strong. These three compiled things are what make a great movie. If any of these areas are severely lacking in a film, that film will not be fulfilling its maximum potential as a work of art.
With regard to the directors, Kubrick is both an editor and a director in his movies, so we conclude that he takes some part in each of the three key factors of film. His style appears to be more prolonged and technical to captivate his audience. On the other hand, the cuts and other editing tools in Whedon’s films bring about a sense of urgency in their quick-paced changes, which is meant to intrigue to the audience. Though the styles of these two director’s works are different, they remain the same in wanting to capture and hold the attention of their viewers, just as any film director hopes to do.


    Reply
11. 

    Shannon McGuinness

    1 March 2016

    In both movies there are many cuts that offer a significant viewpoint in the film and offers a unique standpoint to the audience. In 2001, the most influential cut was the scene of when the bone thrown up in the air turned into a satellite. We believe that the director was trying to demonstrate human desire for power. By neglecting the details of what occurred in human history, it creates a powerful message that while technology may improve, the same concept of selfishness and aggression towards ones goals is repeated throughout time. In Serenity, there are multiple cuts which makes it dynamic, and forces us to quickly adapt to the time zone and ideals of the specific era. We believe that Serenity was mainly to demonstrate the new special effects of the time by allowing for many different scenes while 2001 demonstrates a longer viewpoint in one area. Additionally, Serenity shows that people are trying to impose their power and ideals upon others in a horrific way. Both films were meant to reveal that power leads to violence and greed, issuing pain upon our own species for personal goals.

    Shannon McGuinness
    Charles Watson
    Aaron Dela Rosa
    Bianca Dominguez
    Jamie Filosa

    Reply
12. 

    The Hoax Reaper

    1 March 2016

    Group 5
    Maria Barreda
    Christopher Williams
    Mia Miller
    Rosa Velazquez

    We believe that both films were a combination of editing, story telling, creativitiy that made the story work. The second “Serenity” really got our attention with the special effects and the surprises it gave. We like how much action was in “Serenity” and how much faster it was than the first movie clip. Serenity came out in 2005, it was very advanced for its time. The types of edits used in both clips have been used before and will continue to be used in the future. The use of cuts have an affect on the films because they give information in muitlple ways. It helps set the mood, give character meaning, gives the scene purposes to the story, and keeps the watcher interested. Good cuts are never noticed because the editing is on point, but bad cuts are noticed if the watcher can see the cuts happening. We did not like “2001: A Space Odyssey, Stanley Kubrick, 1968”, it was a really slowly paced, not a lot of action, and slow cuts. Overall we thought “Serenity” was a better film than “2001: A Space Odyssey” in edit/cut, music, action and story telling.

    Reply
13. 

    bezmidd

    1 March 2016

    Group 15: Meng Chu, Julio Garcia, Jessica Addonizio, Bez Middleton, Adilene Leon, Tiffany Tran

    As a group we felt that the first film took time to establish, while the second film moved in a faster pace. This made the second film more entertaining than the first. The second film had more of an element of surprise and suspense. Whereas the editing in the first film didn’t really captivate or pull the audience in. The actors in the first film made the film more interesting, but the editing in the second film is what really makes Serenity memorable. Because of the fast paced cuts in the second film, the audience are bound to feel as though they’re in the movie, or that they are experiencing it first hand. This is due to the quick, suspenseful cut aways. We felt as though editing pays a major role in the popularity of films, it is important to have good editing to have an entertaining film. The first film had minimal acting, especially with it muted, and it was mostly shots and cuts of the scenery, with quick edits as well to help make the film more interesting. The second film had a lot more acting going on, but what really made it was the intense shots and quick cutting to give a suspenseful mood, which was pulled together with the editing. Overall we think that editing is what makes a film because the way the film is put together will get a reaction from the audience. How well the film is put together will show how much the viewers enjoy the movie. Of course the acting would also be important but overall it’s the editing.

    Reply
14. 

    Amber Bolden

    1 March 2016

    Group 7:
    What makes film unique is the editing and the cinematography because of the way it cuts to a different scene and the angle of the camera. In Stanley Kubrick’s quality was different from Joss Whedon, Kubrick’s quality was very old but super impressive for a 1968. In the Whedon film, he had more cuts and it was very unique on how when the man stabbed the girl, it went to a completely different scene and situation. The second film was more lively and more fast pace, compared to the first one which was very slow moving camera work and focused more on the animals and what actions they were doing. Some important things to making a film, we think, is your eye for the camera. The way you see things through the lens of whatever you are using, is very important because you can capture the thing that is most important to you and that the audience would want to see through your eye and way of life. Overall, we thought that these 2 videos were an interesting way of expressing film and what the makers of the film saw with their artistic eye.

    Molly Poyer
    Amber Bolden
    Francesca Butler
    Reuben William Dyce
    Francisco Miranda

    Reply
15. 

    kyleshishido

    1 March 2016

    Group 17
    Ciprian Robielos
    Kyle Shishido
    Elida Ramirez
    Xiomara Barnes
    Tiffany Van Gilder
    Ramtin Yousefi
    We believe that the essence of film is a combination of all of the elements. The cinematography, editing, and movement within the frame is the essence of film. In both films, we thought the first film’s editing was simpler than the second film. In 2001: Space Odyssey each shot was given 4-5 seconds before immediately cutting to the next shot. While in Serenity, they used multiple cutting techniques before each scene. For example, in the intro to Serenity, the cuts used fades to transition to the next scene. Later, the cuts were more sudden as seen in the lab scene. After that they used more subtle techniques again when the characters escaping the lab become holograms to signify a time jump. These time jumps are interesting because they leave the audience without a sense where they are in the story. How much time has passed? It could be days or months in between scenes. In 2001: Space Odyssey, the cut made a transition of millions of years within a few seconds and with only the toss of a bone.

    Reply
16. 

    jonathanbehzadian

    1 March 2016

    Group 8
    the essence of film
    In the film serenity we noticed how the editing and more specifically the jump cuts gave the audience a broader perspective. The editing also provided a unique way to progress the narrative. We agree that the “cut” within a film is difficult to embed, but necessary because other transitions like “ripple” and “fade out” effects are considered tacky and amateur in the film industry. Although we agree that editing is partly the most important part of film we think there are other aspects that are extremely important toward producing a successful film such as: sound tracks, and the storyline of a film. We believe that without the right sound effects, and soundtracks it is difficult to maintain an audiences attention.
    Valentina Ramirez
    Christian Aguirre
    Alyssa Castro
    Dominique Gomez
    Jonathan Behzadian
    Jayson Fields

    Reply
17. 

    Danielle Garcia

    1 March 2016

    Group 1:
    Danielle Garcia
    Lainie Le
    Jennifer Garcia
    Kimberly Gutierrez

    The major difference between both videos is the time period they’re taken place in. For instance, the “2001: Space Oddesey” was made in the 1960’s while the second video, “Serenity,” takes place far ahead in the future. The settings were different as well since the first video was taken place in a rural setting, where there was dirt, branches, bones, and rocks. However, the second video was placed in an Eutopian society. The area where the students were was very clean and organized. Everything seemed controlled, such as the students in the classroom. Another difference we noticed is that in the first video, the characters were mainly hostile animals, while the second video had futuristic humans. “2001: Space Oddesey” was focused on how mammals were barely learning the basic concepts of hunting and killing, while “Serenity” was focused on how society has already developed. One final difference is that the first video was easier to understand since the story line was easy to follow. However, my group found the second video a bit more complicated to understand because the story line was moving too quickly. We felt like the second video was skipping ahead of time and possibly missing key points. The main comparison between the two videos was that they were both filmed well. However, we felt like the first video’s quality was less clear than the second one. The first video had a fuzzy screen while the second one had a super clear quality. But overall, both videos had great cuts and were interesting videos to watch.

    Reply
18. 

    madisonbraverman

    1 March 2016

    GROUP #18

    Regan Cameron
    Madison Braverman
    Ashley Batres
    Rejina Hernandez
    Alexander Lucero

    Both clips we watched in class were edited very well. The first film: A Space Odyssey, showed the progression of life and really analyzed human evolution . The film did a great job at accurately executing the images of space within a film. We found it fascinating to find out all the scenes were filmed in a studio including all the action scenes.
    In 1968, the film was very advanced as it was the first space movie and inspired movies in the future. The film had very abrupt shifts when compared to the newer film.
    On the other hand, the Second Film which was made 4 years later in 2005, Serenity was also a space film, with other science fiction elements. Compared to the film “Space Odyssey”, the technological advancements were clearly visible making all the shots more clear as well as having better transitions. Our group liked how in the beginning of the film the transitions were choppy and there were multiple angles giving the film a more alluring, and dramatic, affect. The scene where there was a sharp, yet smooth, transition, or cut, from the world that the main character was in to when her forehead was stabbed, really amplified how angles and cuts could be utilized to give a more dramatic feel, which is what the clip was aiming for. Also, the cut from the girl standing in the hallway, to hiding under the ceiling, giving the viewer a momentary feeling of worry over the characters being caught. It’s setting was also more advanced and that transition from a space movie made in 1968 to one made in 2005 was very noticeable.

    Reply
19. 

    amantsblog

    1 March 2016

    Our group thought the first cut in 2001: A Space Odyssey where the monkey threw the bone in the air and transitioned to the satellite floating in space was much slower and less smooth compared to the second cuts from Serenity. We thought it was very obvious that there was a cut there. This cut was also transitioning forward in time, whereas Serenity had multiple cuts that are more like back tracking. As for the cuts in Serenity, they transitioned very quick and the scenes flowed nicely. We thought the scene where the girl was stabbed by the pen, but was actually in a lab being experimented had a surprising cut. We agree that editing does define a film, but we also believe the sound effects also have a big part in blending the cuts together as well. Editing and cutting films and taping them together kind of has its own language. By adding audio and sound effects, this allows the audience to perceive what the editor wants the audience to absorb.

    Sam Tan
    Catherine Chin
    Jing Huan Ooi
    Marylin Try

    Reply
20. 

    Nicole

    6 March 2016

    Hi Dr. Zucaman,
    I noticed our group accidentally posted our comment on the art activity page instead of this page for the video discussion. I’m pasting it here just in case you don’t see it, but if you go to the group video instruction page, you will see that we posted the comment last Tuesday.

    Group 11
    We, collectively as a group, thought that cuts are a good transition from scene to scene. Cuts are visually appealing transitions. If it was a series of photographs, the cut in photographs wouldn’t get the same visual appeal. Sometimes those cuts don’t make sense as we have to wait later in the movie to connect the dots. Cuts are the essence of film. We also thought the Space Oddessy was a little more weird compared to Serenity. The concept of the second movie was more appealing.
    Justin Marquez
    hunter mervosh
    Nicole Chovit

    Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.