My biggest revelation was how much difference it made to establish clarity in post-production. I spiced up a lot of elements between the rough cut and the final one. In the scene where he was reading the letter leading to the montage of him researching without any results, I added the lines of the letter on the screen because it was not clear why he was so stressed in the rough cut. Also from Grant's advice I should try revealing the killing scene sooner, I decided to mix the killing scene with the scientist's scene of discovering his findings. I also added a lot of additional takes in a faster pace according to Tim's comment. The edit was basically using the same clips but in a different manner, trying to catch all the beats. The result was a final cut that was much more effective than the rough one.
2. Shaka King's "Mulignans" provides a social commentary on the issues that exist between Italian and Black Americans in Bed-Stuy. What are some issues that you would like to explore in your work? What would your commentary be?
…show more content…
He was the most constructive critic I've experienced out of all. His criticism for my PROD 200 rough cut was that it used too much handheld it lost its delivery as a whole. He said that he didn't buy it. His comment on my film was really true. At the beginning I have always thought of utilizing handheld to make the scenes look as real as possible. But apparently, using too much handheld not professionally resulted in unnecessarily excessive camera shaking. This made my film looked really amateur in the end. I cannot help but feel a bit discontent in the final cut even I tried to eliminate many of the weird jaggy handheld shots. As a successful cinematography, Tommy really criticized in depth (by this I truly mean scene by scene) all the other shorts which gave me insight into my friends' works and how I can improve myself later on in terms of