Overall, I think we are finally getting there. What needs to happen next (in all areas) is to look at the skits/designs as being character-centric. That mean’s understand the internal/external dynamics of the characters and how that changes their performance and therefore the skits. Simply put, they need to personify the themes in how they act to each other instead of rely on ‘set decoration’ cheats.
Skit 1: This is much better. Certainly less ‘story’ and more focused on the characters themselves. What’s missing now (as mentioned above) is an understanding of the characters themselves (that’s where the performance is going to come from). The skit diverts away from character to the encroachment from the ‘spy audience’ when there is more for the characters to do first. For example, what if the go to fight and a flash goes off, they both duck. Next the stand and back into each other as they look around, scared. They bump into each other and then spin around meeting face to face, then ‘gently fight’ (or hug) so as not to upset the balance of things. It’s ‘paranoia and fear’ as performance. Does that make sense?
Skit’s 2 and 3: What I would like you to do for these is to look at them in the same way as I mentioned for skit 1. How can you personify the themes through the characters actions and performance? For example, in skit 3, the theme is mostly described through the inclusion of ‘buttons’. However, the boxers themselves should exhibit the ‘threat of annihilation’. The same as in skit 1, where their actions should describe ‘paranoia and fear’. A few more notes:
1) One thing I find a little confusing is that you haven’t added any dates to your skits. A major oversight!
2) Chalk board graphics are not ‘degree level’ graphic design. They are ‘pub graphics’. This document should reflect your studios ‘brand’. I don’t see that on your blog either. Who’s role is that?
3) People don’t normally write S.U, they use the word ‘Soviet’
4) The designs are a good start but will need to change in relation to some of the comments above. However, it was good to see these as part of the submission.
5) Overall, this submission reads as though the group hasn’t quite gelled together yet. Its quiet a fractured OGR, particularly in branding/design terms. The document has different page designs and the blog is very basic still. I'd expected a bit more work too. Try to decide who is going to do what and get all areas of this project moving, quicker.
Overall, I think we are finally getting there. What needs to happen next (in all areas) is to look at the skits/designs as being character-centric. That mean’s understand the internal/external dynamics of the characters and how that changes their performance and therefore the skits. Simply put, they need to personify the themes in how they act to each other instead of rely on ‘set decoration’ cheats.
ReplyDeleteSkit 1: This is much better. Certainly less ‘story’ and more focused on the characters themselves. What’s missing now (as mentioned above) is an understanding of the characters themselves (that’s where the performance is going to come from). The skit diverts away from character to the encroachment from the ‘spy audience’ when there is more for the characters to do first. For example, what if the go to fight and a flash goes off, they both duck. Next the stand and back into each other as they look around, scared. They bump into each other and then spin around meeting face to face, then ‘gently fight’ (or hug) so as not to upset the balance of things. It’s ‘paranoia and fear’ as performance. Does that make sense?
Skit’s 2 and 3: What I would like you to do for these is to look at them in the same way as I mentioned for skit 1. How can you personify the themes through the characters actions and performance? For example, in skit 3, the theme is mostly described through the inclusion of ‘buttons’. However, the boxers themselves should exhibit the ‘threat of annihilation’. The same as in skit 1, where their actions should describe ‘paranoia and fear’.
A few more notes:
1) One thing I find a little confusing is that you haven’t added any dates to your skits. A major oversight!
2) Chalk board graphics are not ‘degree level’ graphic design. They are ‘pub graphics’. This document should reflect your studios ‘brand’. I don’t see that on your blog either. Who’s role is that?
3) People don’t normally write S.U, they use the word ‘Soviet’
4) The designs are a good start but will need to change in relation to some of the comments above. However, it was good to see these as part of the submission.
5) Overall, this submission reads as though the group hasn’t quite gelled together yet. Its quiet a fractured OGR, particularly in branding/design terms. The document has different page designs and the blog is very basic still. I'd expected a bit more work too. Try to decide who is going to do what and get all areas of this project moving, quicker.
We can chat in more detail on Thursday.