Responding to the brief

The brief of the auteur project was quite simple. Choose a well-renowned auteur and create an original short based on their particular style of storytelling. I chose Martin Scorsese as my auteur as not only did I love his films (The Irishman, Goodfellas, Mean Streets, The Wolf of Wallstreet) on principle but there was something so magical about how he told stories that just always intrigued me. It’s quite the feat to be able to grab someone’s attention for three hours however somehow he pulls it off perfectly and that is something I strive to be able to do with my productions. There were several stages before filming. First of all, we needed to identify how Martin Scorsese’s style was distinctive.

I pondered over what this might mean for a while and it eventually led me back to Andrew Stanton’s TEDtalk back in 2012 in which he explained the pillars of storytelling through anecdotes of his time at Pixar. The main point that seemed to arise throughout was a simple three words. Make. Me. Care. So that is what I had to do. We started to write a script. We had a group of 5 which we split into one group of two and one groups of three. Nia and I worked on a rough draft of the script just so we had an idea of what we were working with before pitching it to the group. Eventually, we swapped scripts and collectively we decided to go with the script that Nia and I had drafted. We built upon an outline (Which I always write first before I start any project) and debated areas of the story. For example, Nia wanted to add voiceovers and although it is a staple of Scorsese, I wasn’t sure how to fit it in and it didn’t seem right to just cram one in there for the sake of ticking a box, so we arrived at the compromise of adding a single voice-over to explain the character of Joel Curtis. When making edits to the script I wanted to include brevity and clarity in the script to create an atmosphere in the script. There were points where I wanted to specifically add tension into the script (such as during the final moments) which meant adding white space at certain points where I knew that silence would the loudest sound. This was key as tension was something that I wanted to work on during this film as it is a key part of Scorsese’s style, and was something I always wanted to build upon.

The post-production was by far the most arduous task as it involved watching and rewatching the footage to the point of borderline insanity but that’s the sacrifices we make for cinema (just ask Stanley Kubrik). It had been a while since I had used premiere pro so it was good to have a refresher on the workspace and various commands and shortcuts. I knew roughly how I could improve my workflow so that I could do the maximum amount in the least amount of time so I split it up into stages: assembly edit, rough cut, stylistic choices, final cut, finished production. The assembly cut was exactly how it sounded. It involved no fancy editing techniques or crowd shockers, it was simply about matching audio to video and putting it in the right order. The rough cut was when things began to get a bit more technical, I started to consider the flow of the scene and how I could capture the most attention without adding effects. This was done by using certain cuts and transitions such as L-cuts (such as with the gunshot), J-cuts (such as with the voice-over), pans, and more. The stylistic choices were when things got fun.

I added black letterboxes as well as a 35mm film overlay to give the film a more cinematic look. Some could argue it did nothing however I think the small changes can make the biggest differences. The final cut was about making the final finishing touches whether that was tweaking exposure levels, or changing the colour, or snipping a few frames of a segment, and last of all was the finished product which was the final watch through to look for any snags which eventually I could find zero of.

The only way I could some up this task was a good introductory project for the many highs and lows of the filmmaking process. Some elements did make me want to pull my hair out and lob my laptop out of my bedroom window but then there were moments where every slipped together like a perfect jigsaw that made all the trouble seem ever so slightly worth it. capturing the essence of how Scorsese makes his films, I don’t think we did that bad of a job but there were certain areas that we could’ve improved on but that was from a filmmaking standpoint rather than a Scorsese-imitating. If I were to redo the project I would 100% work on planning a lot more. As well as that I would pay more attention to details such as continuity and audio as there were times when I did have to improve or just say “that’ll do” out of fear of not getting it done in time. But overall I did think this project was successful not just in the way it went right but how I can learn from the things that went wrong.