Photobooth: final cut

This is the final cut of my short film, Photobooth.

Final magazine spread

Final Poster

This is the final version of my poster:

I chose this version over the poster with rows of the same version because I really like the variety of shots included. 

After I casted a vote between 10 of my friends, they all agreed that this was the better version.

Using a variety of photos looks more realistic and show more candid moments between them- it didn't seem as posed. 

I have also added the PG certificate in black and white by the film title. 

Evaluation Question 4

Evaluation Question 3

What have you learned from your audience feedback?

I have used four different methods of research to collect audience feedback for my short film and ancillary tasks. This spans from film screening with anonymous audience survey sheets, to the use of Facebook groups, Facebook messenger, Instagram, direct messenger and Snapchat to gather information from young people about what they thought.

Film screening

To get some audience feedback for my short film, I ran a screening of my short film alongside my friends' trailer, and we all invited friends of different ages to come along.

For me, it was really important that I invited friends of slightly different ages who had never seen the film before. It was beneficial to have lots of other people that I wasn't as close with to attend the screening, so their opinion wouldn't be as biased. 

I created a questionnaire for audience members to fill out after they had seen the film so I could gage how well it was received, whether they understood the plot, their favourite parts and whether they disliked anything. 

Below is the questionnaire I created. 

Here are the results that I received:

'Could you briefly, in a few sentences or less, summarise the plot of Photobooth'

Everyone summarised the plot well, understood the plot and exposition. The length of responses varied, some explained the ending and other not mentioning it, but the film seemed to be universally understood.

What was your favourite part of the short film, and why?
(responses are in black, my comments are in red, until the Facebook group section)

'The shot at the end (damn that blur), the ident, the lighting was gorgeous'

'Lovely camerawork/cinematography- it really has the feel of a short film'

'[Liam] being a low-key savage as well as the natural camerawork'

'The camerawork throughout was good'

People really appreciated the look and style of the film as well as the camerawork and lighting. I was pleased that one person said that it 'really has the feel of a short film'. 

'Bit with the friend, classic advice and said right'

It was nice to here that the scene with the most dialogue, that I hoped would feel natural, felt like a real life conversation.

'That first shot of Roddy on his computer, the start'

-The beginning 

People really liked the beginning, and even when I talked to people afterwards they said that the opening scene was one of their favourite moments. 

'Use of the flashback, gave context through the plot and confused the timeline which is less generic'

I liked that this response recognises that i didn't want to tell the plot generically in chronological order.

'the way the music faded out when he addressed her outside the station. The fade out to fuzzy when someone left the room'

This response recognised the powerful use of music and specific motifs I used. 

'When he sees her for the first time in the Photobooth because it is clear there is a lot of history there but you don’t know what it is. And I like the white light around Rachel.'

'When he sees her again in the photobooth, because it reminds you of when they were together'

'The ending, the whole vibes with the music and sadness yet relief of closure with Jack' 

'I loved the ending, so emotional yet something said that there may still be hope'

I got lots of comments about the ending of the film that I was really happy with. I'm pleased that people connected with the characters enough to feel the emotional strain of the scene even though we have such little backstory. I'm glad people could still enjoy the slightly open ending.

Is there anything you disliked about this short film? If yes, could you explain what it is and why you didn't like it?

'Flashback was a bit incoherent' 

'I didn’t really get the 1st in-station flashback- was there a flashback to Rachel asking for a photo when he saw her?'

Some people found the flashbacks confusing but I thought it was important to tell the story in this order as it made the reveal greater at the end. 

Maybe I needed to make transitions clearer? But equally I don't know how I would've done this after the sae time pressure.

In response to the second reply: yes, the first flashback we see is when Jack sees her at the booth, and he is reminded of when she asked to take a photo with him several months ago.

'Not really. Some issues with the sound in places.' 

'There’s a lot of background noise.' 

'Really picky but some highlights were blown and the bedroom scene was a little noisy. Otherwise fantastic!' 

Some people found issues with the sound, which I absolutely take on board and will want to improve in my future work. 

The highlights being blown were my technical mistake with the lighting settings on the camera. I definitely won't make the same mistake again!

'No!! (Though I wish it was longer!)'

'Could’ve been longer. More Alfie!!' 

Was pleased people wanted it to be longer. Obviously I wasn't allowed to go far over the 5 minute duration so this was why I didn't extend it.

'Lack of explanation of the betrayal, but does work well'

'It’s not clear who the friend is' 

These were things that I chose not to explain. I think it doesn't matter who the friend is as it's clear they still have a close connection. My main intention was to establish that he was a friend, and this was achieved. 

I didn't want to explain the betrayal as I wanted to leave it up to the viewer to decide what happened. I'm pleased they still recognised the desired affect. 

'No, although I was confused.'

A comment that summarises many people's views!

Not many people actually disliked the film, but they only found some of the plot difficult to grasp. I realise this is because I don't use a linear narrative, but I don't mind that my audience didn't always understand what was going on; it meant they had to work harder to figure out what was going on.  

Though it was not my intention, it could be argued that Rachel is objectified in this short film. Do you agree with this?

Most people replied with a simple no, which I was very happy about. Below are the other more detailed answers about why she isn't objectified:

'There is a sense that Rachel is an object of desire- but also something unattainable- but no, I don’t feel that she is objectified unnecessarily' 

'No- however I think she is clearly shown as an angelic, worshipped figure' 

'No, he just loved her'

The above responses show that Rachel is clearly an object of desire, and she is woshipped and unattainable, but this doesn't necessarily mean she's objectified in a negative sense. He wants her back but not as an object he can own. He admires her beauty but this is not shown negatively. the response below sums up my thoughts really well:

'No, I think it was clear that the feelings with Jack were much more emotionally and mentally connected' 

This response goes further with the ideas explained above: she is not an object of physical or sexual desire, he wants her back for who she is, not what she is. 

'Doesn’t pass the Bechdel test, but it served more about Rachel’s desires than anyone’s else’s, so no' 

This film does no pass the Bechtel test (though I argue this is not the sign of a bad film, so long as the women in it are represented fairly). The response still recognises that this does not mean she is objectified. 

'Nope! I think that Rachel is the holder of power in this film. She conforms much more to the femme fatale than the damsel in distress'

One response shows how Rachel is the one that holds the power in the scene. I like the fact that she is a 'femme fatale' not a 'damsel in distress'- she is beautiful and powerful, not beautiful and weak. 

I'm pleased people understood that she is not objectified. He does, however, clearly admire her beauty as sees her as angelic. There is a very fine line between the two, but I think I stayed just on the right side of it.

Summary- what did I learn from the audience survey?

• The film was overall received incredibly positively 
• people rarely watch short films overall
• Everyone could understand the plot 
• lots of the things people disliked were as a result of time pressure, and also my decision to not mention aspects of backstory and character. 
• The plot was hard to follow in places due to the flashbacks, but everyone still understood it. There is a lot to take in at once during this film. I can't imagine, however, how I would do the differently considering the time pressure.
• No one thinks that Rachel is objectified
• Cinematography style and tone was seen to be strong throughout
• The open ending was received well

• Surveys allow me to limit questions. For the objectification question, these were answers I expected to receive. It means I can collect the kind of results I want. it does mean there is less room for individuality.
• People weren't inclined to put in a lot of detail. Some answers were helpful, others weren't at all.
• The questions were very formal, so I got very formal responses. 
• You can't have a conversation with the participants but it is anonymous, which also has it's benefits: people won't fear what I may think of them afterwards as I don't know who wrote what. 
• It did mean that I couldn't then respond or open up a dialogue with people, which I found quite limiting.

Setting up a Facebook group

To get some more feedback I made a private Facebook group with friends so I could share the short film with them. It was very important to me that I asked both men and women of a range of ages between 15 and 19. We had 36 members in the group.

These were the two messages I sent out to the group:

It was very important that I emphasised I was open to both positive feedback and constructive criticism.
As stated above this is something I wanted to share with a closer group of friends because firstly, they'll be more inclined to reply and, as my friends, they'll be happy to give me criticism if I ask for it rather than people I don't know as well feeling scared they could offend me.
I also stressed the importance of anonymity once I used the replies for my coursework.

I got a range of replies from friends, some commenting on the post, others messaging me privately with their comments if they didn't want to necessarily let others on the group see their thoughts. They great thing was that I gave them the option to reply however they wanted and with whatever they wanted.

Here are the screenshots of the replies I received:

My friend found the flashbacks made the narrative harder to follow. I'm pleased she still understood the storyline even though it was hard to follow. I would, however, rather have it this way than make it too easy to follow.

Strengths:
open ending
cinematography

Was surprised and flattered that the two responses above thought a sequel could happen. I think this shows that they were invested in the story and that they really wanted to know what might happen next!

I understand that this person wanted the relationship to have a longer setup but through my research and planning, I know that not very much can be established in five minutes. Still very pleased they only thought it was a minor thing!

Strength:

amazing film, really good quality

The comments from the person above still suggest that it still hits hard even though we don't get to see very much of their relationship, which I was really pleased about. My aim was to make the ending as emotional and confusing as possible despite the fact that we barely know these characters as it is such a short film. 

Strengths: 

emotional investment despite running time

I was so pleased with this reply. My friend later explained that he thought it may be harsh but it was actually the exact opposite- the confusion he felt was exactly what I set out to achieve.

Strengths:
sound
cinematic visual aesthetic

Strengths:

slick and mysterious 

editing 

visuals and sound worked with the tone of the narrative

My friend who sent the message above gave me some amazing specific points about aspects of the film. 

Close-up on Liam- they thought it would be better if they were both in shot while Rachel was in focus. While I understand this, it wasn't meant to be exactly Jack's POV so we could have a close-up on him. It also gave him this angelic halo which would show how he almost doesn't feel real to Jack, and that he aspires to be in his position, with Rachel, instead of on the other side. 

I like the fact that they picked up on the sound at the beginning: when I heard it back in post I thought that I had got it right, that Jack would sound further away, but in fact that is wrong as if you are filming with the camera, you always sound louder than the person in front of it. While I know this was a mistake, I still like how it turned out, ad that we have the focus on Rachel instead of Jack.

The background when Jack sees Liam again- when I first edited the film I did take the sound completely out. However, after showing it to some friends in the early editing stages, we thought it would be more powerful if the sound stayed in, and the sound becomes contrapuntal as the visual slow down and the background noise stays at the same speed. It was my intention to make it with more focus on Jack's perspective, with time almost looking like it's slowing down when he sees her again. 

Strengths:

Jack and Alfie scene: 

character dynamic

lighting from laptop, shows desperation on Jack's face

Some of this response has been taken out to keep it anonymous.

I was pleased they recognised that although we don't see much of the relationship, which many people have said is a shame, they recognised this is due to time pressure and that I still established a lot very quickly.

Interestingly they picked up on the acting. Personally I don't see it, but then again I am biased; it may also be due to my script, as it is the first one I have ever written so it may not feel that natural. I don't get marked on acting so it's not an issue for me in terms of marks. Again, I still think that my actors are great, but then I chose them!With more time I think I would've had more rehearsals with my actors, but I'm really pleased with what we achieved in the time frame. 

Strengths:

Story established quickly in short time frame

lighting in past and present

the boys' scene

I was really happy with this very detailed response. 

This friend established one of my greatest concerns/plot holes of the whole film: the scene with Jack and Liam.

Though Rachel ghosts Liam, she also does completely disappear. But if he was so worried, why did he not go to the police? In my head there is a reason why he doesn't feel inclined to do so that I do not show in the film. Maybe, in retrospect, I could have included this. 

My friend thought that this scene was made too sinister for the situation- he did only ghost her, she's not dead. I do agree with this, but then again with more time I might have outlined more about the whole situation of the ghosting. Looking back, it could be slightly less sinister, maybe more sentimental? I think I did just about get the balance right between the severity of Jack's mental state and the heartache he feels.

The sinister tone is also aimed more at Jack's actions, staying up all night trying to find her. At this point in the story, he is at the brink of losing control and inhibition.

To summarise, it was too much to include in this short a scene. The two contrasting tones of danger of Jack's obsession with finding her and the positive message from Alfie had to be established immediately, and therefore had to be quite hyperbolic. With more duration time, I would've spent much for time on the background of the ghosting, therefore making it less sinister. 

Strengths:

colour palette: cool for present, warm for past

Rachel's echoed voice before the first flashback

the ending: ethereal music, blurred background, glowing lighting around Rachel

Summary: what did I learn from the short film feedback on the Facebook group?

• My film was really well received. Positives always outweighed the negatives.
• There are some issues with plot and narrative that mostly a consequence of time pressures
• Everyone loved the aesthetic, style, tone, lighting, cinematography
• Lots of people wanted a sequel! People were really invested in the film and what would happen next to these characters, or wanted more detail about the backstory (this also opened up discussion in the comments)

• I gave everyone a very open question, still encouraging people to tell me any constructive criticism
• No everyone replied to my question as I they were not pressured to do so.
• I had a range of comments, of varying lengths and detail, as there is no word or time limit.
• People felt very comfortable in telling me their ideas, and I got some very honest answers. I think this is helped by the fact that all the participants were my friends, and as I asked for it, they were happy to give criticism.
• The question I asked was informal, so most of the responses were informal. This meant no one was pressured to phrase things in any particular way.
• Respondents had plenty of time to form a reply, and could watch the film as many times as they liked. This meant they could really think about their answer.
• For those who wanted to give detailed replies, it meant they could mention very specific points in the film.
• It gave me the chance to open up a conversation. I could like any comments that were posted and reply to them with my thanks, or if a message is sent I can have a discussion with them and respon to their ideas. Making a group also means other people can comment on replies, so there was also a large informal discussion about a sequel suggestion! 
• The respondents are, of course, biased. As my friends, they will probably all want to be nice about it. If the people in the group didn't like it, they may not have wanted to tell me. 
• Despite this, many of my answers were much better than the ones I received from the survey. 

Posting on Instagram

I didn't originally intend to include this as audience research, but considering such positive feedback I received, I really wanted to include it. 

I posted 6 images, along with the first 50 seconds of my film (not including ident and opening credits) to my Instagram account. I wanted to share some of my work with my friends and family.

I chose a variety of images, mostly of the actors in the film because my followers would easily recognise them. I also tried to show a variety of colour palettes.

It was actually great way to give a taster of the film to a large audience of just over 300 people, in theory, if they all managed to see it on their feed (which is quite unlikely, but it still would've reached a lot of people).

Within 5 hours I received 95 likes and 23 comments (not including my own replies). Thos allowed me to again, open up conversation but also personally say thank you.

What amazed me the most was that I got comments from friends saying that they wanted to see the full film. This was easily done through sending a Youtube link via Instagram direct messenger. Not only were the responses so positive, but they were also people that I really looked up to, which meant even more. On response commented in particular on the framing and cinematographer. 

I was really overwhelmed to the response overall, and as it reached so many people and had such a positive response I thought it was important to use as audience feedback.

Update: the next day

The post received 111 likes in 22 hours, and has 35 comments overall.

Summary: what have I leant from the Instagram post?

• Instagram is a quick and easy way to share images and videos of your work with a large audience
• Lots of people really liked it, and I received lots of positive feedback in the comments
• I was able to comment back and thank people
• By sending through a link to the full film via direct messenger, that all opened the door to positive dialogue about the film.

Creating a poll for the poster

Using the same Facebook group I had created before, I posted my poster, and set up a simple poll for people to vote on:

I kept it down to a choice between two, to keep it simple and make it easy for respondents. 

I used snapchat to notify friends about my recent posts in the Facebook group, encouraging them to vote.

Within 7 hours I had received 15 replies (an update after the screenshot of the poll was taken) with all positive replies, saying they loved the poster.

I was really pleased when I received two messages about the poster, even though these respondents said they 'loved it', I still got back some really good constructive criticism.

I received this message from a friend over Facebook messenger.

This respondent picked up on something that other people also noticed during the process of putting the poster together- why is Jack (referred to in the message by his real name, Roddy) not by himself in the last photo, considering that it is his POV and Rachel has left him?

My intention for the final photo was to almost recreate, or at least reference, the photo in the booth that Rachel takes by herself in the final scene. Jack is left alone, but that is what the photo is mean to symbolise, so that's why I wanted her by herself. 

What was brilliant about this form of feedback is that I could actually have a conversation with the respondent. When I told them about my decision, they understood the meaning completely. Naturally, it is important to note that my intention for the symbolism is not clear enough, but once explained they understood. I liked that I had a chance to explain my thoughts too. I enjoy opening up the conversation as this is what I wanted all three of my products to do.

This is a message I received through Snapchat from my friend, who is really into graphic design.

She said that she wasn't keen on the orange text, she would've preferred dark blue or dark cyan, as the blue and orange clash. 

I later explained that blue didn't work as it was too harmonious and not bold enough, but red may have been good. I went with the orange because it had a paler pastel undertone like the blue. The red would be incredibly bold.

It was still really interesting to hear her comments, and I understand that the orange and blue might not work for everyone!

Again, just as with the last message, I really loved how this opened up a conversation.

Interestingly, though I mentioned leaving a comment on the post if someone thought I could improve on something, both respondents chose to ask me over a private message. This could be because they didn't want to ask in front of the others in the group, but I really liked it as it felt more like an intimate one-on-one dialogue. 

Update: the next day

By the next day I had received many more replies on my poll about the film.

I received 19 'loves' and 1 dislike (you can see this on the bars, but a number does not appear as I had to blur out profile pictures).

I got two really great comments on the post:

This person put a 'dislike' on the poll, and picked up on a comment that my other friend mentioned the day before. The great thing was that I could reply and explain what my intentions were, which in turn got a great response, agreeing with what I said. I think after this they would've said they like it, because the rest of the comments were positive.

Again, this is another good bit of constructive criticism I received that I could reply to, and after talking to my friend she understood my position. Despite this, she still said she loved the poster, which really great.

Summary: what did I learn?

• The people who chose to respond all really liked the poster
• My idea about the final photo of Rachel by herself may not be interpreted in the way I want it to be by everyone and perhaps I should have found a way to make this more explicit, though looking back I don't know how I would've done.
• I could have spent more time going through specific colour fonts, but I am still very pleased with the outcome

What I have learnt from this part of the feedback, building upon what I have already learnt from my previous research for this evaluation question, is that I value conversation about the film rather than anonymous surveys that leave no room for a dialogue afterwards. 

Even if these conversations were anonymous I would still value them. I find it really interesting to hear, even if it's over social media, someone's opinion, and it means I have a chance to both defend, even unsuccessfully, my decisions, and/or learn from my mistakes. 

This is more important to me than any closed response, it's too impersonal and limited. 

A dialogue is the most important critique you can get. 

Evaluation Question 2

How effective is the combination of your main product and your ancillary tasks?

I have made this video explaining the links between my three final products: the short film, the poster and the magazine spread. 

All three products promote an arthouse drama, in the form of a short film, so each text must in some way conform and convey these genres. 

All three use the techniques of:

• colour
• title
• font
• image

to convey the important themes in the short film:

• relationships 
• camera
• memories
• the photobooth

I made this video with images of my texts as well as clips from the film, with my voiceover. 

I decided to make this with very few notes so I could speak freely to the camera about the entire production process and my thought process behind it. 

Evaluation Question 1

In what ways does your media product use, develop or challenge forms and conventions of real media products?

Genre

There are two forms of genre that my product both conforms to and subverts: the genre of the short film and the genre of the narrative/plot. 

The genre of the short film:

After a lot of research at the start of making my Advanced portfolio, using sites like Vimeo and Youtube, I found a few conventions within the short film genre:

The film is, usually, either

     An arthouse drama, revolving around an intense event that we get a short glimpse into

     A comedy, with a joke and a punchline at the end.

Short films often have open endings (even if there is a conclusion, there is still a sense that the characters' stories have not yet ended). 

There is no boundary to its duration, other than it not being feature length. Short films can last anytime from 30 seconds to one hour. 

They're a vocational practice. They're made by filmmakers, for other filmmakers. 

In order to make my work feel like a 'real short film', I had to conform to all of these conventions.

Already I had a restriction, as this course requires an approximately five minute short film. This therefore meant that I would have to establish a situation between the characters very quickly in order for the audience to understand what's at stake.

I chose to go with an arthouse drama short film

There is no real restrictions on narratives at all for short films, but arthouse films fall into this category for certain reasons. They often include open endings, which is something I considered when I was first putting together my research. 

An opening ending would also really useful considering the duration restrictions of my short films, and would allow for there to be many different interpretations of what happened to their relationship, and having parted at the end whether it is truly the end of their relationship/story.

For the moment Rachel leaves at the end, I had two texts in mind that I wanted to take inspiration from. First, even though it is a feature length film, La La Land is the perfect example of an open/closed ending relationship. The reason why I say it has both is because there is a sense of closure, but also that there is unfinished business. I thought that this would be the route I would use. 

Another film that has a similar ending is Volume, but this time the girl the protagonist is in love with isn't in the scene. Instead, she is symbolised through the distant house that she has left behind which the protagonist looks towards longingly. The final shot tracks away from him, leaving the protagonist by himself, having to figure out his life without Georgia, the missing girl. 

Characters

There were certain conventions seen in mainstream media that I wanted to conform, develop and challenge when it came to developing my characters. 

Firstly, I wanted the man to be more hung up on the relationship than the woman. In lots of mainstream romantic dramas, we follow the woman's heartache once a relationship ends, and often the man causes the disequilibrium and is the much less emotional of the two. Some of the short films that I looked at, like Hotel Chevalier and Volume, focus on the man's heartache and loss while the woman causes the problems, and is less innocent than the man. Like these short films, I wanted to subvert the stereotypical roles of men and women in relationships. 

In my short film, Jack is the more emotional of the two. He is ruled by his infatuation for Rachel and we follow his story rather than hers. He is the victim in the relationship, not her. 

Rachel, on the other hand, holds the power in the situation. She is the one who leaves Jack, and as one participant of my audience survey observed, she plays the femme fatale role rather that the damsel in distress. Rachel isn't solely cold-hearted though; she still feels guilt for what she's done, and doesn't have the strength to face up to the consequences of her actions, hence why she ghosts him and runs away when she sees him again at the station. She holds power but it isn't overpowering. 

stills from Hotel Chevalier

Rachel is almost worshipped by Jack, and he sees her as an angelic figure. Gilbert and Gubar observe that women in literature in the 20th century are either seen as pure and angelic or demonic. This applies to film too: in Memory 2.0, the female protagonist is seen by the man as angelic, and is often bathed in bright light, sometimes backlit so it looks like she has a halo. Here I wanted to use Laura Mulvey's theory on the 'male gaze' to show Jack's point of view, that she is an angelic figure. However, I didn't want Rachel to completely conform to this: Jack sees her in this way, but her character is certainly flawed, and causes him a lot of pain. Therefore I wanted to use this halo idea for the lighting and colour, and juxtapose it with her actions betrayal. This makes the viewer uncomfortable as she is admired by Jack even after he discovers the truth.

Stills from Memory 2.0

Rachel's 'halo' from the natural light in my short film

Colour

Colour is a vital part of many short films I researched, and also a really important feature in my short film. In order to differentiate between the past and the present, I used colour: a warm palette for the past, to reflect the better, happier times in their relationship and the way that Jack looks at the past through rose-tinted spectacles, whereas the present is very cool toned, and reflects the harsher reality of the situation he finds himself in. Volume uses this sort of pastel colour palette for the past and present: the first group of images below is a time when the two protagonists are together before the woman disappears, and the second set of photos is a present event, when the man discovers his dad was having an affair with the now missing girl. Immediately the audience recognise the change in tone and intensity by this use of colour.

my film: past

my film: present

Another key influence for colour/tone is the scene in Memory 2.0 when two men are having a conversation in one of their bedrooms. The lighting is low-key  and they are red lens flares in the background of each shot due to the shallow depth of field. I recreated this for my scene with Jack and his roommate Alfie using red fairy lights, and put them in the background of my shots and shot with a shallow depth of field. Other than this I used one bedside lamp, and the light from the laptop screen for the first half of the scene. For location, I used my male friend's bedroom, which makes the scene look more realistic as the posters on the wall and the bedsheets would be things that a young man like Jack would likely have in his room. The conversation is intense but there's still a feeling of trust between the two men in Memory 2.0. This is the tone that I also wanted to have in my film, so I tried to write a natural script, and a realistic conversation that two guys would have if one of them had to give the other serious advice. Below are some stills from my short film that take inspiration from the scene on the left.

stills from Memory 2.0 shown above 

with the light from the laptop and the red glow behind

Alfie is lit only from the side from the lamp and the fairy lights which makes the back of his silhouette glow

He is again only lit from the side and he has a strong red glow from behind him.

Narrative/structure

The most important aspect of my film is my use of flashbacks throughout. This means that the film does not have a linear narrative, with the plot being told in chronological order. I liked that this was not the generic way that most short and feature films tell a story.

The film structure is told with this timeline:

• several months ago: house interior
• present day: station interior
• several months ago: station exterior
• a few days ago: Jack's room
• present day: station interior - street scene

I was inspired by the flashbacks in Low Tide when creating the structure of my film.

Low Tide uses one scene with a gun to link all of the scenes together, After cross cutting to a different time period, it would always return to the gun scene. The main problem with this short film is that the story mad very little sense to me. Clearly there were big problems in their relationship, but I didn't understand the significance of the gun, and why they seemed to be playing this Russian roulette game. The entire narrative, not just the ending, was left far too open to interpretation for me. I think this was not helped by the way the narrative was structured. You can assume certain things from the colours used in the film, which did assist in knowing when the events could have taken place, but there was no purpose behind seeing certain flashbacks, they didn't do anything to show much about their relationship and what was going on in the gun scene. I wanted my flashbacks to be necessary to reveal something about my characters, not just pointless conversations that have no real relevance to characters' arcs. Low Tide taught me how I shouldn't be structuring my film. It couldn't be 'too clever' and shouldn't mean that a viewer has to rewatch the film in order to know what's going on. The flashbacks had to be necessary to drive the story on.

The second row of film stills shows the story in the present day. We return to this point at the end of the film, shown in the last row. The other two scenes are sandwiched in the middle to explain Jack and Rachel's relationship and the impact it has had on Jack and his friends. 

The structure challenges Todorov's theory of narrative:

• we begin with a feeling of disequilibrium, as the words 'we'll stay together, won't we, not matter what happens' imply that this is exactly what won't happen
• the second scene feels like a small return to equilibrium as there is no dialogue, the editing is low paced and Jack seems to be alright getting on with his life
• Seeing Rachel again sparks another disequilibrium as we can tell from his facial expression that something is wrong
• We watch the next scene with the knowledge that there is a problem, even though there is no disequilibrium in this scene. This juxtaposition makes the viewer uncomfortable and builds the tension towards what has really happened between them.
• We return to the disequilibrium we felt before the scene outside the station in the next scene with Jack and Alfie. Disequilibrium is fully established, as the problems of the relationship are explained through this conversation.
• Disequilibrium continues and builds as we see Jack and Rachel meet again after all this time.
• The ending establishes equilibrium as Rachel moves away out of Jack's life. But there is still a  feeling of an open ending as we never really know why she left him.