GW: TV NEWS VERSION TWO

Following on from the feedback I received from the Big Crit with my peers and my own feelings I decided that I needed to amend the Fake TV News piece. The main issue was that of the news reporter and his attire leading to a spoofy feel to the piece. This was not my intention as I want the audience to buy into the TV news piece and installation as a whole.

Re-shoots
So I went back to Aldeburgh with the actor and a small crew and re-shot the news reporter element. I made sure he was in straighter attire and in a less lampoony style and delivery as well as dialling it down a little. I was annoyed that the sun was out and the day was ferociously windy but it went well. However back in the edit it looks good and less contrived and moody visually. The sound is OK especially as the wind the day we shot was ferocious but this time I kept the microphone out of shot and this worked.

I decided not to re-shoot the IV with the climatologist. there were some thoughts that he was a bit over the top and actorly and I can see the point. However from working on TV crews some people are more media savvy and experts used a lot can tend to over-perform for the cameras so I felt that this was not a huge issue.

TV NEWS FINAL from Jon Saward on Vimeo.


Edit Changes

• I replaced the footage of the reporter.
• I changed the voice over of the reporter and re-recorded it to make sure that the person purporting to be Ben Wright was a he. I was going to add some manifesto footage and it would be visible that it was a man and made it reflect that he was now not anonymous
• I lost a line from the end of the womans IV which kept it cleaner and shorter.
• I added in less of the photos of Ben Wright. I re-touched some of the ones I used to make it less uncanny valley.
• I replaced some of the Ben Wright photos with archive film footage of demonstrations. This gave a lot more authenticity to the piece and made the movement seem much more tangible and larger in scale.
• Replaced the newspaper headline with one that my props maker had made and this cerated a link to the artefacts that would be displayed in the installation..
• Replaced one of the book cover with one that my props maker had made, again this would be used in the installation.
• Shortened the title card at the beginning to 10 seconds and added Ben Wrights name to it. This gave the audience 10 seconds to get the clues from this and knock 30 seconds off of the piece.

The main issues raised that I felt related directly to the TV news piece I had to address were as follows and underneath is how I feel I have now addressed these. I am much happier with this piece. It is possibly the best news package ever in terms of all of the archive footage and photos but I feel it adheres to the codes and conventions of the news and feels real.

It needs to take us in more at the beginning. It has a comedic layer and seems a little "spoofy". Spinal Tap flavour. Is this intentional?
The re-shoot plays straighter in terms of costume and delivery. I feel this takes the audience in more.

The professor looks scripted. What is the in-between? Does it matter that it may be seen by viewers as a spoof?
As mentioned above I did not mind this and professional rent a gobs/media whores that are used a lot on TV can over-perform.

In the club or in the know? Should audiences get the "in" joke? How much do you allow the viewer to be in the know?
I feel that now it plays straighter this is less of an issue. It does feel close to the 99% real that I am looking for rather than the 90% of version 1. I feel that the clues are there but harder to find so a reward for those that do.

The photos need more work to seem real. A little too uncanny valley. Less pictures as main man looks too similar in them all.
These have been reduced in number and the ones left re-touched to make better. I have included less too and added the aforementioned archive film footage.

Link more the fictional characters with real historical ones? For instance highly influential Silent Spring book by Rachel Carson.
This will happen in other pieces.

Is the work historically and factually correct? Is this important? Fact checking.
I got feedback from my friend at Greenpeace and all good.

Possibly needs more on the "what if" factor and where we are now.
I felt that this is strong enough in a 4 minute news package BUT I must make sure i address it in the other content that complements this piece too.

Humour can be a good vehicle for triggering emotion and creating memories of what is happening.
The humour is there if you get the fact that the news piece is not real so it is still there just more disguised and less obvious.

How will the piece work in a gallery? Is it stand alone? Consider presentation in the gallery.
I have been doing this

What is the intention of the piece? Stronger call to action?
I still feel this would be clear once all of the elements are curated in the installation in a room or single space. It is hard to tell from the one piece.