Microfilmmaker Magazine - Final Film Critique: The Jigsaw of Life, Pg. 3


	Final Critique: The Jigsaw of Life, Pg. 3

One of the biggest visual problems with this film were camera exposure issues. Many of the scenes were shot outside, and nearly all of them were washed out. On the one hand, this does give the flashback sequences a dreamlike quality to them, but if that's the case then the scenes that occur in the "present" should be the clearest, and they seem to be just as washed out as the others. It would probably have been a good idea to use an ND filter while shooting outside to minimize the washout effect. While post color-correction filters in editors like Final Cut Pro can help you white balance after the fact, restoring a washed out image is very difficult as much of the image is lost.

In addition, there are a couple outdoor scenes in which the characters had harsh shadows on their faces. Unless the director specifically wanted this look, it really seems too awkward and inconsistent with the rest of the outdoor scenes. Plus the shadows make it difficult to see the actors' faces. An easy way to correct this would be using a bounce card on the shadow side to reflect the sunlight back and give it more of a natural fill. Bounce cards are easy to find or make - a sheet of white poster board or foam core usually does the trick, and I've even known people to use the windshield reflectors that are meant to keep sunlight out of one's car. Also, hanging a thin white sheet just off camera could also work as a good diffuser to make the light less harsh. One just has to be careful about grip shadows or sudden gusts of wind.

Since most of this story is told in flashback, and especially from the point of view of more than one character, it can get rather confusing for the audience to figure out exactly where they are in the story. Perhaps the best flashback scene is the one in which Duncan goes to see Father Michael after the death of his mother, and vents his anger by beating up his former stepfather. This scene is preceded by the token flash of white transition, and the scene itself is shot in black-and-white, which is an easy way to show a flashback. This scene is clearly a flashback, but since it occurs in the midst of Duncan thinking back on his life, it is essentially a flashback within a flashback, which can get rather confusing for the audience.

It may have been a good idea to come up with a standard convention for all the flashback scenes within the movie to differentiate them in some way. Since they all occur within various stages of Duncan's life, one possible idea is to show the scenes of Duncan as a child in black-and-white, giving the implication that this is a much older memory, then the scenes with Duncan at University could be a little more colorful, and the trip to Ireland could be only less colored than the confrontation scene, which takes place in the present. Since both Keith and Clara also have brief flashbacks within the story, it might be interesting to alter the scenes coloration just a little bit to differentiate between them, such as giving Keith's flashback's a slight tint of red to match with his underlying anger. So long as it isn't over-done, this could be a nice, subtle effect. In any case, this technique is pretty easy to pull off in digital editing. Also, there should be a transition of some kind to indicate each flashback transition. The most obvious one is the white flash. Even though it's been kind of over-used, it's a convention that your audience will recognize. And with all the flashback scenes that make up the movie, you don't want your audience to spend the first half of the film trying to figure out what one weird transition means.


Eventually a confrontation between Keith & Duncan...	...force them to both explore their own pasts.

Use of Audio
Most Hollywood studios would probably be skeptical of indie British films, simply for the fact that they would worry that an American audience wouldn't be able to understand it. However, I don't think this is the case with this film. I was able to understand nearly every word, even with the thick Irish accents of Pete and his daughter. The only dialogue that I couldn't understand was due more to the clarity of the audio than the pronunciation of the characters.

The great part about this fact is that American audiences do love British films - Guy Ritche and Monty Python are huge over here - and that's probably due to the accents more than anything else. This film has some great dialogue, and it's definitely enhanced by the mood given by the accents of the characters.

One of the hardest things to deal with in indie filmmaking is getting the audio to sound right, and unfortunately it seems like this movie ran into quite a few problems in that department. In the opening scene where Duncan and Keith confront and fight each other, the tension is spoiled by the sound of wind that can be heard in the background. Later, when Duncan goes to see Lee after getting in a fight with Father Michael, the noise of cars driving by can be heard in the background. And several times during the film, the audio doesn't sound near as crisp as it should be.

It would definitely be a good idea to look into performing ADR (the replacement of production audio after initial shooting) on a lot of the audio in this film. And as much of a pain as that can be, it could also be the difference between getting bought and getting passed over. On the first indie film I worked on, we had numerous audio problems throughout the film, and ended up re-looping the entire movie. Now, however, it sounds great. That is definitely something that should be looked into. [Note from The Editor: We will be doing a review of a software package called VocAlign which can simplify ADR as well as writing tips on performing ADR in our March 2006 issue.]

I really loved the score in this movie. There were some really great moments in this script that were enhanced by the underlying music. My one complaint was that, in the scene with the Irish dancers, the clapping of the people didn't always match the clapping sounds in the music. Since there is no dialogue over that scene, the mistake is really obvious, so the best way to correct it would probably be to just re-edit it.

Use of Budget
It seems as though the director made pretty good use of such a low budget (£10,000; approximately $18,000). The most obviously well-spent money was in getting such a talented cast and a good musical score.

However, I think it may have been good to set aside some of that for post-production uses, such as re-looping the sound and fixing some of the lighting issues. Also, it would have been good to invest in an ND filter for the outside scenes, and for either some stock footage or just a day of running and gunning for great landscape shots.

Lasting appeal
I really did enjoy this movie, but to be honest I'm not sure whether a lot of my non-filmmaker friends would. The confusion of multiple flashbacks, the washed-out outdoor scenes, and a few awkward camera angles and movements really shoot it in the foot. I hope that some attention can be given to correcting these issues.

Conclusion
This is a really a compelling story. It's got great acting, an excellent score, and a really positive message. It's too good a story to be let go of, and I would encourage the director to correct the few mistakes that are evident, if that's still possible. If that can be done, this will definitely be an amazing movie!

Content

      7.1

Visual Look

      6.1

Use of Audio

8.7

Use of Budget

7.0

           Lasting Appeal

           6.0

Overall Score

  7.1

Click Here to Find Out How We Critique Films