Digital Story critique exercise is probably my favorite. Partly, because there are so many stories out there and in some way or another they all deserve attention. Partly, because I just love watching and hearing, experiencing (indirectly) someone else’s life. It really is like watching films. I love watching films. Movies. Any movies. I see the digital stories the same way. I watch them like a watch movies. Even if I am not watching them I still stare at the screen, listening to a voice, observing pictures. I am watching.
Martin Scorsese’s On Framing is the digital story I picked for this week’s critique. Two reasons: it resonates with my focal theme of Impact and I really like the story. Several things I discuss include Ohler’s evaluation traits for project planning, media development, flow, organization and pacing of the digital story.
My favorite part is probably when Scorsese was asked if he liked Westerns and he says: “I loved the idea of horses and loved the idea of open spaces, to which I would probably never get to see, although I was not physically made for that sort of thing, to live that way. I’ve got certain dreams about it.” And you can see thought out the rest of the story how this dream, a desire, had influence on his work, made an impact on the way he directs the narrative of his films. Perhaps that’s the element of the story that connected to me: the impact. In this narrative was the impact that westerns had on Scorsese in a sense that defined him as a filmmaker, a storyteller through the lens, through the frames. The digital story here is about Scorsese on framing but it could almost reinterpreted in very metaphorical way. Frans in terms of technical film cuts, chunks of life, of dreams, of memories. I am not certain if the interview by English was the 5 min and 20 seconds long or this was the length of the story from otherwise longer interview.
Media development of the 5 minute and 20 seconds is simple and yet elaborate. I revisited the story a few times. Watch it with my eyes following every movement, paying attention to each frame. Watch it with my eyes closed, listening. Listened to it with my eyes closed, looking at every intonation of the voice. I cannot decide. Seems like Ohler’s evaluation traits aren’t enough criteria for evaluation of such work. But I am unable to produce different ones yet. soon.
Definitely an incredible animation in terms of production. Especially the first few frames. but it got distracting. I found my mind wondering between the pictures and frames and the imagination of Scorsese and English dialoguing: Scorsese sitting on a director’s chair with a boom mike hanging from the ceiling, English wiping his glasses and smoking a cigarette, dark room only a small projector light….The animation took a little of that. My imagination of the surroundings, and my focus on the words. But on the other hand, the animated characters painted the story. But again, a little different story than the one painted in my mind. Wouldn’t it be better to see Scorsese sitting on the chair, squinting his eyes why talking frames? ….but may be the interview wasn’t even filmed. So what if it was just the voice over the black screen? No. I think the production was immaculate. It was a story next to the story, a story within the story. It worked! For me.