Here is the link to the rough cut of my interview:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1O0xULdLAqBTmROMXhUUGNQcjg/view?usp=sharing

Our original idea focused on the theft store as the main “subject” but our new idea seems more stronger. After talking to Kevin Easterling, he informed us that the reach of the community based wifi project expands beyond the thrift store and that that is not the main aspect.      

Broadly, our film will follow the topic/issue of affordable and accessible broadband in the Lehigh Valley. Through interviews with Kevin Easterling, other Rider Pool fellows, Allentown community members, and possibly a sociologist, we will investigate the  significance of the  revolutionary concept of the “community wireless network” and how/why it is unique to Allentown’s “digital desert communities”. For B-roll, we are thinking of filming Center City Thrift, which serves as one of the hubs for the community access to wifi. Maybe this could be our film’s hook. We are also thinking of getting b-roll of his meeting with the Collective Impact Fellowship which is a program through the Rider Pool Foundation. We are still revising our initial idea, but the film will still nuance the theme of community through Easterling’s project of community based wifi.We might need to think of another film title besides “Center City Thrift”.

“A thrift store in Allentown shifts the paradigm of the roles local businesses play in their community by providing a community based wifi program”. -Ayanna, Annie, and Reggie

This is one sentence with tension that my group came up with last week. Since then, our topic has changed slightly (new post coming soon with changes)

I really enjoyed Robert Seidman’s talk “Tales of a Generlaist” because he used clips from his films to exemplify what he has accomplished in his career as a screenwriter. He argued that being a generalist is beneficial to your career because you can make yourself more marketable. Of all the clips he showed I especially liked the introduction to “Riding the Rails” by Michael Uys because the narration of the subjects characterizes them until we are able to actually see their faces.

A few things that I took note of in the talk that were most striking to me were the following:

-is the narration/language appropriate/fitting?

-a story is carried by the music

-what’s the hook of the story?

-the meter is always running

His question, “what’s the hook of the story” is significant to us right now as we begin to film our final documentaries.

Interview Pitch/Planning/Visualization

For the “Watchable Interview Assignment”, I plan on interviewing Jordan Page, a student/performer who is passionate about fashion, style, and makeup. Jordan is unique and commands the attention of a room with just his presence. I will get b-roll shots of Jordan doing his makeup and choosing his outfit in his room. I also plan on filming Jordan walking around, possibly on campus or in Allentown. I hope that the interview film will highlight Jordan as rising influencer

Interview Questions (not in order)

-when and why did you become interested in makeup and fashion?

-who/what inspires you stylistically?

-how do you identify and how has your identity impacted the way you are expected to present yourself?

-what does makeup/doing your makeup represent/symbolize to you?

-do you feel represented in the makeup industry? how can this change?

-describe your relationship with makeup.

-do you think you influence others? in what ways?

-why is make-up important to you? what role does it play in your life?

Pitch: What is the story?

Based in downtown Allentown, PA, Center City Thrift will follow a unique thrift shop which provides free community wifi. The owner, Kevin Easterling, uses profits from the shop to provide this internet access through numerous hub spots in the city. This film will interrogate the accessibility and necessity of public wifi in the city of Allentown. The film will explore how a store such as Center City Thrift helps provide access to not only inexpensive clothing and household goods, but also to what should be considered a luxurious commodity; one that is expensive, but becoming vital in our 21st century society. We plan on telling this story through interviews with Easterling, community members, and customers of the shop.

-Ayanna, Annie, Reggie

Notes: Things we are thinking about?

-the birth of the store and why he wanted to support the community access to wifi program

-Who do we want to interview/consider?

-Kevin Easterling

-maybe a sociology professor?? (to talk about accessibility and how institutions limit that)

-maybe people who frequent the shop//community members 

-Visual components and aesthetics

-B-roll of the shop and Easterling working in the shop…

Brooke Gladstone’s talk focused on the construction of media in our lives. While she mentioned that she had a different opening to her speech, I think it was fitting that she opened with a brief study of the mass shooting in Las Vegas. She questioned how reliable the information we receive is and challenged us to question ourselves about where we seek out our information.

In one part of the talk, she printed tweets from Twitter that had gone viral about missing family members, which were all in fact hoaxes and were spreading false information. She also dissected TV news and radio news stories that imply they have not yet received confirmation on what’s going on, which essentially means they aren’t sure what’s happening. Gladstone’s talk overlapped with Kirsten Johnson’s film screening, as they both explored the ways in which stories are constructed and how we, as the creators, are responsible for creating and “construing it in the best way we can”.

As I reflect on Kirsten Johnson’s talk, I seem to think about what Michael Rabiger explores in his book “Directing the Documentary”. Chapter 4 focuses on developing your ideas, and one section specifically focuses on using the medium of documentary film. He writes, “A tough test of any idea is to imagine that you must make it as a silent film. This lets you discover quickly whether you are thinking like a journalist or a filmmaker. Choosing the latter forces you to create with the camera instead of the microphone” (Rabiger 49). If Rabiger were to watch Cameraperson, I think he would understand and see that Johnson is able to create with both her camera and microphone. Her cinematography and action are extremely strong, but I think it’s her voice (her actually voice that we hear from behind the camera and the general choices she makes about sound in the film) that makes her film work as something not only worth watching and admiring, but worth studying as a critical piece of documentary film. I think most of us can agree that Kirsten Johnson and her film Cameraperson challenge Rabiger’s notion. How would Cameraperson differ had she only focused on making the film with the camera as her primary tool for storytelling instead of using both camera and microphone (sound) as ways to explore her role behind the camera and the significance of the stories we decide to tell. One thing that was striking from her talk after the screening was when she stated, “We want the audience to learn how to watch the movie”. Lastly, her advice to think of filmmaking as a full body experience/action will be helpful for us when we began filming our projects. She said that breathing affects how we hold the camera, and ultimately the places we can move to/see next. So, being mindful of our breathing and the way we carry/position our bodies will help dictate what we are able to represent and how we do so.

I think one story that would be good to explore is “Criminal at the Age of  5”. Not only does it directly connect to social issues/factors, it could e complex enough to leave an impact on the Lehigh Valley community + other places. It will be interesting (and challenging) to see how the visual element of this story is created.  With whichever documentary stories we decide to explore as both a visual and oral text, they should all nuance the topic/theme so that they either relate to social issues or can can connect to communities/issues outside the Lehigh Valley.

When we first read through Kirsten Johnson’s Director’s Statement, what first stood out was the way she uses binaries to explore her thoughts regarding documentary work. First, she opens by writing about the “joys of being a documentary cameraperson”, such as sharing intimacy and using documentary film as a way to engage with others and the world. She then introduces the dilemmas she faces “while holding [her] camera”. Within this is another binary: the “concrete” problems versus the implicit problems. Johnson mentions framing, focusing and choosing “the direction to follow”, but seems to be more concerned with the troubles audiences usually don’t think of. The implicit troubles all seem to relate to the themes of trust, cooperation and intimacy. Joys of doing documentary work versus the dilemmas documentarians face and the concrete challenges such as framing a shot as opposed to the implicit troubles Johnson highlights are just two of the binaries she constructs in her exploration of her experience as a cameraperson. At the end of her Director’s Statement Johnson writes, “We know that this fragmentary portrait is incomplete and are interested in the ways it points to how stories are constructed”. The end of her statement reminds me of the term “location”. Robert Coles (1997), the author of Doing Documentary Work, offers the theory of location and its implication in documentary film. He conceptualizes location through his description of what documentarians bring to their work and field. Coles (1997) writes, “Each of us brings, finally, a particular life to the others who are being observed in documentary work, and so to some degree, each of us will engage with the others differently, carrying back from such engagement our own version of them” (5). Here, Coles is highlighting the fact that because each person brings a unique location, or set of personal experiences to the projects they take on, their engagement will differ from others. In another sense, who you are affects what you see, and accordingly, how you tell a story. Similarly, Kirsten Johnson suggests that the way we construct stories might be based off the problems we uncover in the work we do.