Send in the media you thought, for a moment or a year or a lifetime, was a Disney product which actually was not!
For example; We thought that Chitty Chitty Bang Bang ('68) was Disney since it had singing, fantasy, Dick Van Dyke, and were introduced to it about the same time as Mary Poppins ('64). Alas, it was not...
A lot of media gets lumped in with Disney stories because of similar qualities they have and because artists do change companies. We want to see which not-Disney story is most Disney-esk.
Nominate the media you thought, for a moment or a year or a lifetime, was a Disney product which actually was not!
For example; We thought t
In a twist, we are not accepting any Disney-made media (shocking isn't it?). A finished product which has been purchased by Disney with a studio/rights deal is allowed, so Yes you can submit Anastasia ('97). It can be a show, movie, comic, book, whichever.
Nothing is guaranteed a spot, so submit what you want to see in the tournament (but don't spam us with the same submission over and over please). Submissions will help determine which category of tournament this will be. (Mini, Month-long, Regular) If you want to submit a file image instead of a link use this form.
Pictured above: The Iron Giant ('99), Chitty Chitty Bang Bang ('68), Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron ('02), The Land Before Time ('88), The Pagemaster ('94), Mirror Mirror ('12), The Swan Princess ('94), An American Tail ('86), Anastasia ('97), Hook ('91)
so, uh, announcement. i'm currently overhauling my side blog @plutodeclassified into an unreality studyblr arg. feel free to follow for content where i play a beleagured journalism student with a very weird housemate and occasional batshit shenanigans interrupting the regularly scheduled slackademia programming
This is our final assessment adaptation. The original scene is in the earlier post.
Producer: Abhi Dutta
Director: Claire Bird
Sound Designer: Suhong Ma
Cinematographer: Madeleine Burston
Exegesis:
This assessment was an interesting exercise in group organisation. Overall, we were a pretty effective group given the various constraints we were working against, as we made a reasonably polished final product that I’m pretty pleased with. Each team member performed their given role well (Abhi as Producer, Claire as Director, Suhong as Sound Designer, and myself as Cinematographer), but we greatly employed group collaboration to get many tasks done effectively.
In terms of pre-production, Claire deserves a lot of credit for building the costume and showing up with a large storyboard sheet. I created a shot list from screenshots and listed all the angles and lighting set ups. In the end, we found examining the original film much more useful as a quick reference to the scene. The team worked together for the management of schedules and equipment collection and drop off, as well as the provision of on-set snacks. Abhi, Suhong and I did a secondary screen test of Claire’s initial location scout, where we assessed lighting, did some sound tests, and collected some footage to practise our darkening effects in editing.
During production, we all enacted our roles pretty well. Suhong recorded pretty clear dialogue, Claire was a prepared and efficient director, Abhi managed the overall set as well as acting for a large portion of the film, and other set help. If I could have changed something during the production, it might have been to spread it out over a couple of nights to give us more time to perfect each shot and take a couple of each, but storms throughout the week meant we had to postpone our shoots a couple of times, and as such a few of our shots are rushed. And again we were limited by the battery power of our lights and equipment, neither of which were easily chargeable in the park. I would have also tried to use tracks for some of the shots where the camera is moving, but I think the shots came out clear enough and almost add to the intensity of the suspense. I would also have tried to record some foley work while we were out in the field, but the volume of the traffic and a broken zoom recorder again limited our options there.
Aside from all the camera work during production, most of the work I did was in post-production. I volunteered to edit the piece at the very beginning of this project, because I enjoy developing my skills in this area, and I think that’s where the work really comes together in the detail. We managed to match each shot, but in some cases our shots are a bit longer in a way that I couldn’t cut, without creating extra breaks in the scene. As a team we decided that we’d prefer the longer shots to random cuts in the middle of scenes to maintain similarity to the original. I edited together the final sequence with the music and dialogue, with Suhong, who was a great help in locating and placing sound effects for us to use.
The biggest obstacle we struggled with was time, in a variety of ways. As we filmed in the late evening, we were faced with rapidly changing daylight, which Claire came up with a neat solution to, in the form of adding the additional line “It’s getting dark”, and doing the earlier part of scene in the light, to improve the continuity between shots and explain the lighting change. That problem was compounded by the fact that our battery powered lights had a 2 hour time limit, so we had to limit how much of our filming was done in the dark, and spread it out over two days. In some of our shots, one of our lights had died, so we tried to judge the most effective placing of our remaining light to maintain visibility but retain the original lighting effects.
Despite our difficulties in filming, I’m pleased with the outcome and how it compares with the original.
Link to our pre-production google document: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1IV0dKhvFd0ITzbxfM4FO_jNMIPoSSb6hPDAjXhX56AU/edit#gid=0
To Kill a Mockingbird movie clips: http://j.mp/15vV0dT BUY THE MOVIE: http://amzn.to/tGAzK7 Don't miss the HOTTEST NEW TRAILERS: http://bit.ly/1u2y6pr CLIP D...
This is the original sequence from To Kill a Mockingbird that we remade for our final assessment (next post). Our scene starts a few seconds before this clip and ends at 2:40.
Mandy (Anne) is very free-spirited and poetic, but much more logically-minded and rational. Definitely just as conflicted and verbal about her thoughts, always in denial about romance (her words), and similarly argumentative.
Eliza (Jane) also values her schoolwork, and plays Words with Friends against her father. She’s louder and more outgoing than Jane, and definitely more of a hipster. But just as sarcastic. She likes reading classic novels, much like Jane, but more for the ego-boosting than the academic merit.
Abigail (Ruby) would not consider herself very much like her character. She’d pick reading and learning over flirting, any day. But both Ruby and Abigail are kindhearted and love their friends.
Tanner (Gilbert) sees some similarities between himself and Mr. Blythe: they’re both driven and passionate about their goals in life, and they both have elaborate plans for their future. Tanner would humbly say that Gilbert is more intelligent and organized, and agrees with Gilbert that rivals-turned-lovers is the best kind of romance.
Ravyn (Diana) also sees some similarities, but just as many differences. Ravyn and Diana both care a lot about other people and put the needs of their family and friends first, and they both love to read. However, Ravyn is more outspoken and extroverted than Diana. Ravyn has a bit of fiery side- in contrast with Diana’s somewhat passive nature. Also, Ravyn loves public speaking- which is definitely not Diana’s favourite.
We'll be having a fun fan Google Hangout (say that five times fast) today at 9 pm EST. That's Saturday, December 20th, 2014, at 9 pm EST. We'll share the link here, on Twitter, and on Facebook.
Everyone is welcome! We'd love to talk to you and look forward to meeting everyone.
