Film Openings

Saw 1: You can tell this film involves action and fights just by loooking at the first shot as it is a big fan or some kind of machine. The music also is intense which makes the viewers realise it's not a happy comedy film. The music is like triller but there's this excitement where the audience must find out what's going on. The colours that is used are all dark, bold colours such as grey and black which are typical colours that show a sign of horror and represent evil or tells the audience something bad will happen. The costumes that the characters are wearing are also black which shows us that they are the "bad guys".  All the machinery and equipment shows that this may be a horror film but also combined with action. We also hear a man shouting "HELP" which tells us that he may be trapped by the bad guys and is trying to escape.

Skyline: The openeing of this film shows what the film is about. The audinece can guess that is's a science fiction film as they first open the film with stars in the sky. As it's dark it kind of gives the audience a hint that there may be bad thing happening in the film. It also shows the city with all the bulinding lights on which may mean , that city may be destroyed or the film setting will be in that city. The city is also dark which is also a sign that a negative thing will happen. The lights show that it is a busy city where working class people live.

Step-Up: When the film first starts, it shows a group of girls doing ballet. The second clip shows a group of street dancers. This shows the audience that the film is about dance. They also have an upbeat soundtrack playing which shows the film is up-beat. The starting of the film shows clips from ballet to the street dance and keeps repeating. This tells me that the two dance groups may be totally different types of dancers and they then have a competition about dancing.

The Quiet Task

 

I did the camera work in this video. It was better than the other video where I did the camera work too but I still have space for improvemnet. I also did some of the editing for the video which I think helped me explore more. This was the first time I edited a video so I was quite nervous but also excited by all the things you can turn a simple video into. I look forward to editing other video's and hopefully will be better at it.

Lighting

I took part in this video by directing the actors who where acting to be models. I told them how to walk and when to get on and off the stage. The video was to use "lighting" like my group did. However, we could have made major improvements as the use of "lighting" wasn't as effective as it should have been.
I would'nt say I gained any skills from this role of directing but, I have learned that directing the characters is not as easy as t seems as they sometimes may not agree with the tasks you want them to do. If I do direct again, I will make sure I check that each memeber of my group is satisfied with what they are doing.

One Perspective

 

For this video I took part in the camera work. By doing this, I learned how to use the camera properly. However, I could have improved with recording as I dd not use a tripod to film. Since I did not use the tripod, the filming was not steady enough.
From this I have learned that using a tripod is really important.
I need to use the camera more often in order to improve my recording skills.

BBC HWK

1)            The BBC is supposed to be impartial. Has it ever been accused of being biased (the opposite of impartial)? When and why? (Use the internet to research; check your sources carefully - is the website you are using BIASED itself?

5^th of March 2007:
Robin Aitken, a former BBC reporter for 25 years, has launched his new book Can you trust the BBC? to much acclaim. But Aitken's approach is old-fashioned. His view that the BBC's news and current affairs output over the past few decades and now is biased relied on the use of a defunct political concept: 'left-wing.

Speaking alongside Peter Horrocks, head of TV News at the BBC, and Jean Seaton, professor of media history at the University of Westminster, Aitken argued that the BBC may be free from commercial bias, but not from political or cultural bias. Aitken says he spotted plenty of examples of the BBC's institutional bias while working for the corporation. Having been a reporter in the 1980s, he claims that the BBC didn't like Margaret Thatcher's government. Today, the BBC doesn't cover 'unfashionable subjects', he says. More recently, the BBC called Blair a liar over claims about weapons of mass destruction (WMD), and treated Alaistair Campbell as if he were mad. For Aitken, the BBC had an editorial construct that it held to regarding the WMD story. The question they missed, he said, was: what is it we are fighting for in Iraq and, is it worth fighting for?

During my research of the BBC, I had found many scenarios where the BBC where biased however, I chose to look into the above scenario as I found this convincing. It seems that the BBC can be biased at points but are trying to be impartial as they were accused of breaking its own guidelines by screening an episode of The Vicar of Dibley which promoted the Make Poverty History campaign. There was a report made which was quoted by former political editor Andrew Marr, who said the BBC has an "innate liberal bias". There are websites that talk about the BBC being biased. However, many of these websites are biased themselves.

2. Why do you think it is important for the BBC to be impartial? (Think about the way it is funded.)

I think it is very important for the BBC to be impartial as everyone has their own say and every individual deserves to be heard. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and if the BBC are biased, it is not fair as they are funded by the public through TV license so they should get a say. The BBC shouldn’t be biased, they should be fair. Instead of being biased they could always talk about different opinions without taking sides and deciding what is right and wrong.

3. Do you think it is POSSIBLE for a media institution to be impartial? Why/ why not?

It is possible for media institutions to be impartial as they can always include everybody’s opinions rather than their own. They do not have to state only one particular opinion and argue for or against it. Media institutions can have a website where anyone can state their opinions.

4. What are the advantages and disadvantages of trying to be impartial, for a media institution?

An advantage of a media institution trying to be impartial is that they can look at all different views and opinions from different audiences.

A disadvantage about being impartial maybe that there will be more debates about what people think is right and wrong.