EVALUATION

The original idea for my production followed a group of 5 friends as they navigate their way
through a volatile and tremulous life set in the early 1990s. Although there have been
natural changes to my plot and characters throughout my research and pre-production
processes, I feel as if I largely followed my brief and was successful in creating a high-level
production. In order to follow my brief, I ensured that I didn’t show the use of drugs, nudity
and unnecessary swearing. However, as my film is a socially realistic film and meant to
showcase down to earth lower-class life, swearing became an essential and necessary
element to my film. Although, I still made sure to not swear excessively throughout and only
swear where it lends to my story. The length of my film was influenced by my competition,
which stated that my film had to be under 45 minutes in order to qualify for said
competition. However, in my personal brief I detailed that I intended to make my film
between 15 and 25 mins for it to stay interesting, whilst also containing all the information I
need. The success of my production and the influence of my brief can be seen in my student
peer survey results.
My chosen competition/film festival was the UK London film festival. I feel as if this was the
best suited to me as I used it in my previous FMP and it allowed me to have complete
creative control with little to no rules and limitations needed in my work in order to enter.
The only downside and caveat was the entry fee being rather expensive sitting at £35. I
chose to enter the best student film subcategory of the competition. This allowed me to
make a film with no creative restrictions other than it had to be under 45 minutes. I also
planned out my completion so I could enter the main category of the competition in order
to apply for both branches of the competition I needed to make the film under 40 minutes.

 All practical work must be mine

 No footage or written work from previous units may be used or
resubmitted in your final project
 All written work must be your own and any sourced work must
be Harvard referenced properly
 The work submitted must follow this brief
  I must pay £35 to submit my short film by June 1st into the short
film category
 I must pay £22.50 to also enter it into the student short category
and on the same June 1st deadline
My film must be under 40 minutes to be classed eligible for both
categories
My film falls under the genre bracket of socially realistic/conscious film. I feel as if I nailed
this genre in the most part however, there are always things I can improve on. I feel as if I
could have established the gritty world more effectively. For example, in my film due to
problems I had during filming I had to change many locations from council flats to newer
houses that didn’t really fit the
90s lower class aesthetic.
Another area in which I will
absolutely improve on as move
up to study filmmaking at
university is my small detailing
in world building. For example,
at some points in my film
modern cars and TVs can be
seen the background, this is
something I should have
considered in my planning and should have planned on filming in time neutral areas. In my
conventions research I researched a variety of different conventions and devices used in
socially realistic films. This led me to researching the use of close up’s and extreme close ups
in films like La Haine and This is England in order to show emotions in scenes and to add
depth to scenes. Another convention of the genre was the use of a certain period that was
particularly volatile and bad. This helped me develop the idea of setting my film in the early
90s, as I originally wanted to set the film in the late 90s but after some research I discovered
that life was actually pretty good in the mid to late 90s. Camera conventions also became a
major part of my research as this is my chosen specification, I researched lots of great
camera angles and shot compositions and the connotations each one held. One thing I did
during my research and planning process was draw major inspiration from films like La
Haine and this is England, this can be seen in lots of my shots:
LA HAINE (1995) FOOLS GOLD (2022)

I feel as if I did my topic justice in some areas but again could have improved in others. I feel
as if I nailed the sub text of social commentary relating to the failing of the housing system
and crash of the economy in 1991 after Margaret Thatcher’s reign of terror. However, I feel
as if I could’ve added more exposition into my story and portrayed the characters as being
effected as a result of the housing crash more effectively than I did in my film. This would
have made the characters more relatable and made the audience root for them more in the
end which is an essential part of the film. I feel like I did absolutely achieve the gritty 90s
style of cinematography. I used a lot of handheld footage and added dust and grain to my
production during the editing process to achieve the style. One way in which I feel as if I
could have done my topic more justice is by explaining what insurance fraud and what the
housing and governmental situation in the early 90s was like as in some of my feedback
some people said they didn’t really understand what was going on with regards to robbing
the pub. This is where my topic research could have been more in depth. Although, I did a
lot of topic research I struggled to find any sufficient research into insurance fraud in
relation to property and people robbing their own buildings and property. Had I possibly
looked for more research in relation to the topic it may have helped me properly
communicate the plot device to the audience. In regards to the state of the government, I
feel as if I did more than enough research into this topic and educated myself on the ins and
outs of government politics and Thatcherism from the early 80s up until the early 90s. That’s
why I feel like I included more than enough information in my film with regards to the poll
tax riots and other political things taking place In early 90s England, some of which are still
relevant and applicable to the youth of today.

Throughout my entire production process, research, planning and pre-production, My

characters have continued to evolve in order to deepen my story and plot. My original idea
featured 5 young characters navigating early 90s Britain, however, through research I
realised that using 5 characters would not only be hard to source actors for but would also
create a less personal and me the story harder to relate to for not only my target audience
but also a general audience. I feel as if once I had my 3 main characters that all showcased
relatively different personality types in order to showcase how different people lived in the
poverty of the 90s, I continued to evolve them to better benefit the story. For weeks I
tussled over which of the three friends was going to work/own the pub. I originally planned
for the two main characters to meet up and then go and see their friend in the pub later on,
however after much research I decided to make the main character Charly the owner of the
pub. This made it much easier to make the character relatable and allowed me to fully show
and explore the progression of pub being closed to then robbing it.

I must admit during my production process I faced many more problems than I have in my
previous work cycles. It started when I misjudged the amount of filming that I was going to
have to do in order to make a competent story and plot. It took me roughly 3 weeks longer
to film than I had initially anticipated this put me under a lot of stress and effected my
editing process. Therefore, I believe a lot of my final edit is quite unrefined and janky with a
lot of quick cuts and cut always to hind imperfections in my film. This was also because I
failed to make a sufficient shooting time schedule which meant a lot of my shots were
rushed or not exactly how I wanted them or even left out entirely. I have once again been
let down by my lack of forward thinking and preparation even though I planned so heavily in
the early stages in my production which I feel may have blinded me to the amount and of
filming and the sheer scale of the production I was trying to produce. This was the first
production that featured more than 1 location which I feel was something that crept on me
quite a lot as I didn’t realise that it would take much more planning which I didn’t do to the
best of my ability. I found myself towards the end of my filming process just wanting t finish
my film because I was so far behind my schedule that towards the end I feel like I got
burned out and some of my motivation went out the window, which I can only be blamed
for, the film became less of making a good film that I was proud of and more of a film that
would just tick boxes for a distinction which I hoped I still achieved.

In this unit and the unit before I fully realised and developed my love for cinematography in
filmmaking, I found myself straying from wanting to be a director and just wanting to be a
director of photography as I believe there is something truly beautiful about telling a story
with just music and a camera. In this unit in particular my skills with a camera and my
understanding of cameras have improved 10 fold. I feel as if I was finally able to put exactly
what I wanted on screen and almost treat my camera like a paintbrush. Although one
downside to my emphasis on improved camera work that I failed to foresee was the added
time and energy that was then lacking in other areas of my production which caused some
imperfections in script and the overall film.

In comparison to my other work I feel as if fools gold holds up adequately to the. However,
having my both my first year FMP and my second year FMP both be on the same level, if not
the first one even better, is something I am absolutely not proud of. I put much more effort
into my research and planning this time around and I feel as if in part, that my film went
wrong all the same and still felt rushed and unfinished in parts. My camera work was much
better than in previous productions which is something I am proud of

If I were to do the exact same production again, one thing I would do differently is make the
script and film simpler. Although film was by no means complex, it only featured 4
characters and 5 locations, however that alone is much more than I have had to deal with in
past productions. In the past I’ve only ever filmed in 1 location for a production. While I
think it’s obviously a good thing to test myself I believe I bit off more than I could chew and
should have attempted to ad maybe 1 location instead of 5.

All in all, I feel like I made a good industry standard short film. However, the thing that pains
me so much is that it could have been so much better. I know my standards and they are
much higher than that on show throughout this production. Although this being said I have
learnt a wealth of things from not only this production but all the extensive planning and
research I painfully put into it, finally showing me that research really does matter.