film assessment clarificationfergusonfilm.weebly.com/uploads/7/5/1/8/75184707/ib_fi… · ·...

Film assessment clarificationSeptember 2015

Film assessment clarification 1

Contents External assessment: Independent study 2

External assessment: Presentation 6

Internal assessment: Production portfolio 8

Film course frequently asked questions 16


Introduction This document is intended to provide a clarification for the Diploma Programme (DP) film assessment tasks. Teachers are encouraged to use this document in conjunction with the published Film guide (2008). The information provided here does not replace any of the instructions or criteria contained in the guide. It is intended to unpack and explain the assessment guidance in more detail.

External assessment: Independent study Students must produce a script for a complete short documentary production exploring an aspect of film theory or film history, based on the study of films from more than one country. The documentary should be targeted at an audience of film students in the 14 to 18 years age range. (Film guide 2008 24)

Clarifying the assessment task The independent study must be presented in the form of a written dossier composed of the following three items.

• Rationale, which clearly specifies the theoretical or historical topic

• A documentary script (that is two column-script in vertical format)

• Annotated list of sources

The documentary should be targeted at an audience of film students in the 14 to 18 years age range. Examples of the topics students may choose to investigate are outlined below.

Please note: All examples given here are for clarification only, and teachers are encouraged to work from their areas of strength in both history and theory.

The musical genre

A genre theory examination of the codes and conventions of the musical film and the way they are expressed through cinematic techniques in different cultures.

• At standard level (SL), the study could be Stanley Donen and Gene Kelly’s Singin’ in the Rain (1952) and Ashutosh Gowariker’s Lagaan: Once Upon A Time In India (2001).

• At higher level (HL), these films could be studied in addition to Takashi Miike’s The Happiness of the Katakuris (2002) and Baz Luhrmann’s Moulin Rouge! (2001).

The influence of expressionism

A historical examination of the influence of the Expressionist movement in Germany on later film genres, films and their directors.

• At SL, the study could be of Robert Wiene’s The Cabinet of Dr Caligari (1920) and Tim Burton’s Edward Scissorhands (1990).

• At HL, these films could be studied in addition to Fritz Lang’s Metropolis (1927) and Scarlet Street (1945).


Images of women in action

A gender theory investigation of the way women are portrayed in sports films, particularly in terms of their treatment by the camera and in the light of “the male gaze”.

• At SL, the study could be Gurinder Chadha’s Bend It Like Beckham (2002) and Robert Towne’s Personal Best (1982).

• At HL, these films could be studied in addition to Penny Marshall’s A League Of Their Own (1992) and Omung Kumar’s Mary Kom (2014).

The outsider

An auteur study of how representations of “the outsider” are constructed with particular reference to the jidaigeki/Chanbara films of Akira Kurosawa, and their Western remakes by John Sturges (and, at HL, Sergio Leone).

• At SL, the study could be of The Seven Samurai (1954) and The Magnificent Seven (1960).

• At HL, these two films could be studied in addition to Yojimbo (1961) and A Fistful of Dollars (1964).

The male gaze

Laura Mulvey’s feminist film theory applied across different film cultures.

• At SL, the study could be of Quentin Tarantino’s Kill Bill: Vol 1 (2003) and Takashi Miike’s Audition (1999).

• At HL, these two films could be studied in addition to Luc Besson’s La Femme Nikita (1990) and Dennis Dimster’s Double Identity (2009).

Development of noir

Use formalist theory to analyse the historical development and changes in film language from noir to neo-noir.

• At SL, the study could be of Andrew Lau’s and Alan Mak’s Infernal Affairs (2002) and Carol Reed’s The Third Man (1949).

• At HL, these two films could be studied in addition to Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner (1982) and Jules Dassin’s Rififi (1955).

Focus on editing

How editing techniques are used to blur the line between fantasy and reality for an audience.

• At SL, the study could be of Hayao Miyazaki’s Spirited Away (2001) and Jean-Pierre Jeunet’s Amélie (2001).

• At HL, these two films could be studied in addition to Wes Anderson’s Grand Budapest Hotel (2014) and Sam Mendes’ American Beauty (1999).

What are examiners looking for? Examiners are looking for evidence that the audience has in some way been enlightened. To what extent have the rationale and argument been explored and developed coherently with some depth and complexity? The rationale should be clear-cut and interesting, firmly rooted in cinema history or theory. The script should read like a visual documentary, not an essay. The student will need incisive and well supported analysis skills, complete command of film language and the required audio-visual format. Effective integration (and comparison at HL) of a variety of films, supported by substantial depth of research should be present. The student voice should be clear, accessible and informed.


The audio-visual format

The visual column should describe what we see, preferably in film language. The audio should be the student’s voice as narrator and make insightful analysis and observations. Good independent studies will “cut” meaningfully from one scene to the other in unfolding the thesis or argument. Average independent studies will string scenes together. Students should pay attention to the minimum requirements in terms of number of pages and page layout. Time codes of scenes from selected films or for the student’s script are not necessary.

Research

An annotated bibliography is part of the requirements and the best students will evaluate the relevance of these resources in regard to their rationale. A deep knowledge of genre, theory, practice or technique is expected. The independent study is not four text analyses (or two in the case of SL) linked together by a common thread. Appendices should not be submitted.

The student voice

An informed and engaged commentary is ideal. Attributed quotes are permissible, but guest or expert narrators should not be used. The narration should not be a mini essay. It should connect with an educated film audience of the student’s peers in tone and content, but still be film literate. This obliges the student to use film language and have substantial evidence of text analysis, which shows how the thesis being argued is presented cinematically.

Guidance for completing the assessment In this assessment task the students are required to move beyond their own observations of film language (primary research) into secondary research in order to support their ideas with evidence from film academics, scholars, cineastes and practitioners. The following key questions may help students in examining each film.

Who made this film?

In general, most students will approach this question from the perspective of the auteur theory. Students should understand that they have accepted a theoretical position when they do this.

What can we tell about the film-makers?

Frequently, this question will lead students to deeper questions of film history. However, it might also lead them back to a consideration of the style of the film, since they will begin by making judgments about the film-makers by looking at the structure of what they have created. When students do this, they are employing formalist film theory (analysing the film by looking at the effects the film-makers wanted to achieve with their practical work from initial design through shooting to the final edit). This is called deconstruction, taking the individual elements apart in order to look at how the film-makers communicate.

So, answering this question will involve a student’s own viewing of the film (primary research) and usually secondary research too (looking through print, internet, and other media sources for information from academics, scholars, cineastes and practitioners).

For whom was this film made? How does it address its audience? What is the nature of our engagement with the film?

Frequently, these questions will focus students on issues of film history and film movements.

What outside influences can we perceive in terms of finance, ownership, institution, and sociocultural context?

This question touches on both film history (the reason why films are made) and representation (the way history, institutions, and especially people, are represented by film, which is what gives film its sociological context). Ownership and institution will have profound effects on how issues and people are represented. A deconstruction of film technique will be employed when considering parts of this question. However, when sociological contexts are examined, there should be an examination of how social institutions are represented, how people are represented, and what their power relationships are.

What tradition is identifiable in the film?

This question leads us to both genre history and genre theory.


To what other works might it be connected?

This question leads students to consider large questions of both history and theory. For example, if the focus is the auteur theory, a student might consider how a collection of films by the same director are connected, or equally as important, how the work of different directors might influence the work of one specific director. If a student’s focus is genre history, he or she might consider how the evolution of conventions and audience expectations have influenced acting portrayals or set design in modern film.

How do you know?

This is certainly the most important question. In all cases, in this section of the course, students will be drawing on their own primary research (the viewing of films and textual analysis) and on secondary research (the work of academics, scholars, cineastes and practitioners).

Frequently asked questions Do the different films required for analysis for the independent study have to be from different countries of origin?

The films selected should be from at least two different countries. At HL, the four films could be from four different countries, or three from one country and the fourth from a different one, for example. It is important that the films selected are treated equally in the independent study.

What is the correct format for the independent study?

The correct script format for the independent study has two columns, which allow the visual and auditory components to be put side by side. The descriptions of video and audio elements must be both detailed and specific, as well as adequately linked. Scripts must be 8–10 pages long at SL and 12–15 pages at HL, using an accepted size of paper (for example, A4 or US letter) and students are required to use the 12‑point Courier font (not in block capitals) and single spacing.

How do you define the country of origin of a film?

Generally, dedicated websites like IMDB display the film’s country of origin. This is nearly always the country where the main production company of the film is based. However, in the case of an international co-production that involves several production companies located in different countries, students are advised to select a different film with a less ambiguous origin.

Can the student create a fictional narrator for the independent study?

No. The prime voice of the documentary must clearly be that of the student, who will also act as the narrator, on-screen host and/or voice-over. Existing experts or celebrities may appear in the documentary, but only when students ensure that any comments or ideas that they attribute to these guest speakers are fully supported by detailed references in the annotated list of sources, allowing the examiner to verify them in case of doubt.


External assessment: Presentation In this component, the student is required to make an oral presentation to the teacher of an analysis of an extract lasting no more than five minutes from a prescribed film. The list of films prescribed by the IB is published each year in the November edition of the Diploma Programme Coordinator’s notes and can also be found on the online curriculum centre (OCC). It is not carried over from year to year. (Film guide 2008: 25)

Clarifying the assessment task The heart of the presentation task is detailed textual analysis showing how meaning is constructed in filmic terms. Students are permitted to explore character and themes but will need to show how these are explored within the grammar of film-making.

At both SL and HL, students must demonstrate an understanding of the film’s position in its sociocultural context. This does not simply mean offering a brief history of the times in which the film was made.

Students should avoid spending time summarizing the narratives of their chosen films. Likewise, descriptions of what students see or hear, however detailed, are not substitutes for close textual analysis. Students should discuss how or why film-makers use specific techniques to represent elements such as major themes, ideas and character.

Students should avoid listing the cast and crew of the film or simply quoting box office receipts as these rarely assist analysis.

Although it is possible for students to follow the extract through a shot-by-shot approach, this is not necessarily the most efficient or effective method to use for the presentation as it can often lead to much repetition. Students should identify key elements in the extract and the extract’s relationship to the film as a whole, and explore how meaning is constructed in the chosen extract. This could begin with the director’s intentions.

Analysis in the presentation task should be seen as an evaluative interpretation. Close analysis is more valuable than very heavy reliance on simple analysis such as “black shadows signify something bad”, “high angle camera shows power” or “red means danger”.

What are examiners looking for? At both SL and HL, examiners are looking to reward those students who are able to fully integrate a thorough and perceptive insight into the themes, issues and sociocultural contexts of the selected films as a whole with a close, detailed textual analysis of their chosen extract.

HL students should avoid providing simple lists of awards when indicating how films were received by audiences. Likewise, brief quotations from critics or scholars are not sufficient when addressing the requirement of “reference to the responses from audiences and reviewers, critics or scholars at the time of its release and/or subsequently”. Students should offer some form of discussion of these responses.

Successful students in this component are most often those who offer a straightforward response to the task making sure all the requirements are met and that redundant material is altogether avoided.

Guidance for completing the assessment Teachers are encouraged to use the following script as an introduction to each student’s recording, to avoid any confusion regarding the timing of each presentation.

“This is an [SL or HL] film presentation for [name and number of school/college]. This candidate is [name and number of the candidate]. The presentation will be on [title of the film]. The scene chosen is [identify the scene as on the coversheet].”


Then say to the student:

“You may begin your presentation.”

This will enable the examiner to more clearly identify when to begin timing for each student.

Frequently asked questions Once a student has started his or her presentation, is he or she permitted to stop and start again?

Only if the student becomes ill and cannot continue. These special circumstances must be reported to the Diploma Programme coordinator.

What if a student brings in a prepared script?

The student may not use a prepared script to be read word for word. The supervising teacher must remove the script and the student must be rescheduled to undertake the presentation with notes only at another time.

Should a student have a free choice of the prescribed films?

The guide states that teachers choose three films from the prescribed list. Teachers are required to make this selection of three as they deem appropriate for their cohort of students and allow the students to then make a free choice from these three.

May students choose a film that they have been taught at any time during the course?

Under no circumstances is this allowed.

May students choose a film if they have been taught about a film by the same director?

This is acceptable.

May students choose a film if other films from the same genre have been taught?

This is acceptable.


Internal assessment: Production portfolio This component consists of a student’s completed film project and its accompanying documentation.

Students submit a single production piece. (Film guide 2008: 35)

Clarifying the assessment task In all cases, students must keep evidence of their work in their role in their production journal. Excerpts from this journal should be used as evidence to develop their commentary. This evidence may consist of any graphic or photographic material, which can be worked into the body of the commentary to present a complete picture of the production process or the student’s work in his or her chosen role. These might, for example, consist of sample drafts of scripts, photographs of set design or lighting design or other work during production; screen grabs from the edit process or other graphics related to technical work could also be included.

The commentary should present a complete picture of the production process as well as present the student’s work in his or her chosen role. The artistic and logistic analysis of the finished film, along with other observations, will require all students to participate throughout the entire production process, regardless of the selected role. It is likely that some details of the collaboration with the director, at least, will be present.

What are examiners looking for? In this task examiners want to see a well-made film that fulfils the descriptors in the criteria. This might not be the best film that students could ever make: that film might be longer or shorter, violate some of the formal requirements of the task, or ignore some criteria. Examiners want to see the best film that students can make that meets the assessment criteria.

At least 20 marks out of 50 will be awarded based on the commentary, so it is important that students plan for this and gather supporting evidence as they make their film.

In the commentary, examiners first of all want to see documentation of all the relevant production stages, with special emphasis on each student’s work in his or her chosen role. When a student is focused on his or her individual role, they are expected to reflect and evaluate on their work both artistically and logistically. What did the group do? What did the individual student do? How did the film work out?

All of this should be supported with graphic and photographic evidence woven into the writing (no appendices). There should also be a critical evaluation of the project as a whole. This should take the form of a clear appraisal of the final film, and not as a blurb that says how wonderful the final film is or a simple reflection on what the student learned.

For HL students, it is crucial that the creation of the trailer is discussed in the body of the commentary, since it is required by criteria A and B.

As for the film itself, examiners want to see the most creative work that students can produce. The work should demonstrate students’ understanding of film language and showcase their professional and technical skills. Examiners want to see a film that has been well planned before it is shot and that demonstrates technical competence in all the roles. Finally, examiners want to see students create as much of their own original work as they can, such as video inserts, sets and location design, music or soundscape, costuming and props, and so on, as appropriate to the demands of the film. Of course, students must work within a limited amount of time, so they start their planning as early as possible and be as creative as they can be within the constraints of the task.

For HL students, it is important to remember that examiners must see a trailer that shows they individually have the editing and narrative skills necessary to create an effective trailer. This must be their own individual work.


Guidance for completing the assessment Cinematographer

A cinematographer’s portfolio will be focused on the production stage more than most other roles. Since the responsibilities of the cinematographer involve the creation of the image—both in terms of camera angle and movement—and lighting, much of the cinematographer’s work will take place during the shoot. Evidence for the role of cinematographer in this assessment task might involve (but is not limited to) the following.

Pre-production Production Post-production

• Test shoots using different focal lengths, camera placement, and so on

• Lighting tests in the actual locations

• Checklist of equipment for the shoot

• Evidence of collaboration with the director to negotiate how mise en scène, locations and lighting will be handled

• Documented workflow showing your set-up sequence

• Map of each location showing camera placement/camera movement

• Notations on storyboards

• Map of each location showing lighting

• Map of each location showing character blocking/movement

• Evidence of camera preparation, movement, angles, shot design (the main focus of this role)

• Description of choices made when selecting shot types with justifications

• Evidence of how lighting design was used to create mood, atmosphere, and perhaps even genre

• Evidence of consultation with the editor about the coverage needs for the film

• Evidence of alternative shots and why you chose the one used in the final film

• Identification of problems encountered during shooting and how you solved them

• An evaluation of your camerawork and lighting on an artistic level as well as technical level

• Identification of influences from films you have seen—name the cinematographer

• Evidence of continued contribution with director and editor through advice, assistance and any scheduled re-shoots as a result of the editing process

• Consideration of how your film could have been improved (without blaming equipment or other people involved)


Editor

An editor’s portfolio will be focused on the post-production stage more than most other roles. The main area of focus will be the pacing and rhythm of the final film, and making sure the cut effectively communicates to the audience. Focus in the commentary should be on pacing and narrative rhythm, the creation of tension, as well as editing styles (continuity or montage) and the effects of specific edits (straight cuts, dissolves, fades in and fades out) in terms of narrative purpose. The commentary should be focused on creativity and creation of narrative, mood, and atmosphere rather than discussing how the editor dealt with mistakes. It may be necessary to discuss how the editor used editing to cope with problems that occurred in the shoot. Evidence for the role of editor in this assessment task might involve (but is not limited to) the following.


• Test shoots using different focal lengths, camera placement, and so on

• Evidence of planning with the cinematographer on shot types to help editing

• Influences of editing from films you have seen—name the editor

• Notations on storyboards to plan a rough edit plan or pre-visualization

• Researching the editing program necessary for the specific production

• Evidence of collating rushes from the filming, labelling and storing the footage to enable an organized edit process

• Evidence of discussions with the director and justification for choices

• Test edits

• Evidence of continued contribution with director

• Before/after evidence using screenshots of your editing software

• Before/after evidence of colour correction or special effects (such as screenshots of various stages of development)


Sound designer, recordist or mixer

This role is a combination of roles, and like the director, will probably require the student to distribute equal time during each part of the production. For a sound designer, recordist, mixer to be assessed in this task, the finished film should rely on the use of sound as an integral part of the production process.

During pre-production, the commentary should present evidence of the sound designer carefully going over scripts and storyboards with the director in order to decide what sound will be necessary for the production. In some cases, this may require foley (sound that is performed, such as knocking on a door or the sound of footsteps), which will have to be recorded by the students themselves and not taken from existing sound effects libraries. In other cases it may require designed sound, that is, recorded sounds that will be altered in a program such as GarageBand® or Audacity®. Sometimes for safety reasons students may need to use sounds from a pre-existing sound package (such as explosions). If original sound work can safely be created, however, then the work of the sound designer, recordist and mixer will be much easier to evaluate. During production, sound must be captured on set. This may require working the boom mike, making sure sound capture is accurate, and many other tasks that are the responsibility of the recordist. During post-production, the major role will be as the mixer for the project, creating a mix of sound effects and dialogue to create a pleasing effect for the audience, as well as mood, atmosphere and drama.

Please note: in a “real-world” scenario of film production, the creation of music would not necessarily be the responsibility of the sound editor/sound designer; music would generally be written by a composer. For the purposes of this film assessment task, however, the role of music composer is not available. Sound editors/sound designers are expected to be responsible for the final sound mix (which includes the music, as well as foley, sound effects, dialogue, ambient sound, and so on), but it would not be fair to mark these students for the creation of an element that is outside the structure of the film course. For this reason, any


music used in the film should be created with the input of the entire production team and should, ideally, be original (please refer to the new copyright and creativity statement below). If the creation of the soundtrack is the responsibility of the sound designer, recordist or mixer, it may be a focus of the commentary. However, it should not outweigh the other responsibilities outlined above.

Evidence for the role of sound designer, recordist or mixer in this assessment task might involve (but is not limited to) the following.


• Test recordings in the actual locations—make note of problems/solutions and make note of best settings on the recorder

• Making a checklist of equipment

• Making a workflow showing your recording set-up sequence

• Evidence of discussions with the director and justification for choices

• Map of each location showing placement of the recording equipment

• Problems during recording and how you solved them

• Influences from films you have seen—name the sound designer

• A list of foley sounds needed for the film—should include times

• Evidence of capturing sound on set as part of the shoot

• Evidence of how you created the foley sounds and how this was captured

• Evidence of collating sound material, labelling and storing the footage to enable an organized edit process

• Description of choices you made with justifications

• Consideration of how music has been composed or created with a composer and the director

• Consideration of what has influenced the musical score

• Consideration of how effective your sound design is on an artistic level as well as a technical level



Screenwriter (referred to as Writer in the guide)

A screenwriter’s portfolio will be focused on the pre-production stage more than most other roles. Finding the idea, research, treatment, and finally script development as the project moves through pre-production will be the focus of much of the commentary. The student should be sure to include samples of research, of how drafts of the script developed, and how other parts of the pre-production phase (such as the creation of storyboards) affected the development of the script. Casting may also be significant and other preparation may be central to development of the script.

The screenwriter’s commentary should present a complete picture of the production process as well as present the student’s work in his or her chosen role. Among other observations, the artistic and logistic analysis of the finished film will require all students, regardless of their role, to participate throughout the entire production process. It is likely that some details of the collaboration with the director, at least, will be presented.

If a student is taking on the writing role, the script should (in almost all cases) have dialogue as an aspect of the work. With a silent film there is so much work focused on the creation of image by others that the screenwriter role will be hard to assess. Evidence for the role of screenwriter in this assessment task might involve (but is not limited to) the following.


• Multiple drafts of script with explanations of developments/changes

• Evidence of characterization development

• Clear influences from movies—name the screenwriters

• Pitch

• Treatment

• Correctly formatted script

• Identifying costume/props that help characterization

• Evidence of contribution to the shooting script

• Challenges faced during shooting and how you solved them

• Any on site re-writes during production

• Any assistance given to the director when working with actors

• Evidence of any further input, such as additional dialogue, provided during post-production

• An evaluation of your script on an artistic level as well as technical level



Director

This role requires the student to distribute equal time during each part of the production. The director’s role involves overall control of the artistic and dramatic aspects of the film, guiding the technical crew and actors to transform the script from page to screen.

The director’s commentary should present a complete picture of the production process as well as present the student’s work in his or her chosen role. Among other observations, the artistic and logistic analysis of the finished film will require all students, regardless of their role, to participate throughout the entire production process. Evidence for the role of director in this assessment task might involve (but is not limited to) the following.


• A clear explanation of the vision or concept behind the film, including the reasons for wanting to make this film

• A description of the target audience and the intended reaction of this audience

• Evidence of research into the genre/style of the film

• Clear influences from other films—be specific and name directors/cinematographers/composers/costume designers, and so on

• Evidence of consultations with the cinematographer/editor/sound designer—include notes, emails, storyboards, photos, drawings where appropriate

• Evidence of location scouting

• Evidence of casting decisions

• Evidence of permission to shoot at locations

• Evidence of scheduling with call sheets

• Production notes for each day of shooting—before and after: a set of expectations for the day and a list of what was achieved or not achieved; notes on ways to solve problems

• Ongoing discussions with key production team members and actors and evidence of instructions to them

• Evidence of working with the editor and discussion of decisions made and why

• Changes between the initial script and the final version, as well as an evaluation and justification of the changes

• Discussion of reactions to the final cut

• Evaluation of the film, both technically and artistically. Did it achieve the original vision?


Creativity and copyright statement Student work must not contain any copyright material.

Students must not seek permission to use any copyright material, whether audio or visual. Even if copyright material is legally obtained, this is a violation of the course’s intended outcomes.

The expectation of the film course is that students will be the original creators of, or have a significant role in the creation of, any audio or visual material that they use in their work. Therefore, for the purposes of the production portfolio, a hierarchy of different levels of creativity can be shown, which directly corresponds to the five levels of criterion E:

• simple addition of existing non-copyright audio-visual material

• basic manipulation of existing non-copyright audio-visual material

• substantial manipulation of existing non-copyright audio-visual material

• innovative interpretation of non-copyright existing audio-visual material or creation of basic original audio/visual material

• creation of sophisticated original audio/visual material.

Audio material

Students are permitted to include music that is not subject to copyright laws. An existing musical composition that is not subject to copyright, or that has been made available on an online repository and licensed by the creator to allow others to use their work in certain ways (commonly known as creative commons licenses), would be permitted. It should be understood that this is not as creative an endeavour as making an original soundtrack, and so marks awarded may be limited.

Students would either need to arrange for the musical score to be performed specifically for the film, or source an existing performance of the musical score from a creative commons website. In such cases, the student must comply with the principles of academic honesty and the terms and conditions of the creative commons license (if creative commons materials are used) so that the writer, performer and/or source are clearly and accurately referenced in the credits and the commentary. Collaboration with local musicians or other students to help create the soundtrack is permitted. Students must clearly explain how the music contributes to the overall tone of the film to demonstrate the creative process involved. Copyright-free software may also be used as appropriate.

Sound effects sourced from creative commons websites or copyright-free software are permitted.

Please note that any music used in the film should be created with the input of the entire production team (as explained in the sound designer, recordist or mixer role description above).

Visual material

Students must avoid including visual material subject to copyright in their work, such as extracts from TV/film appearing in the background of a scene or video games/video game animations being used as an integral part of the narrative. Original creation of such visual material will be rewarded.


Frequently asked questions Can students use copyright free music?

Students are permitted to include music that is not subject to copyright laws. An existing musical composition that is not subject to copyright, or that has been made available on an online repository and licensed by the creator to allow others to use their work in certain ways (commonly known as creative commons licenses), would be permitted. It should be understood that this is not as creative an endeavour as making an original soundtrack, and so marks awarded may be limited. (See the creativity and copyright statement above.)

Can product brand names and logos be prominently present in the portfolio films?

Teachers and students are advised to inform themselves of their local laws and regulations regarding copyrights and the fair use policies. As a rule of thumb, students should avoid filming or referring to any product, logo, brand name and trademark that shows a company or its product in a detrimental way. However, if a student is walking away from the camera and we see the logo of the backpack company but it does not feature prominently, is non-distinctive and no reference is made to the product, then students would not necessarily need to get the company’s permission. To avoid potential pitfalls, however, it is advisable not to include film logos, unless they cannot be removed like on cars or buildings, and do not feature prominently in the film. Existing logos on objects could be replaced by fictional logos by the student’s art department.

Can SL and HL students collaborate on the making of one portfolio film?

Due to the different assessment expectations, it is not recommended that SL and HL students work together on one project for submission. However, if circumstances require that they collaborate on a single project, the SL students must produce a significantly shorter film than the HL students, which can be challenging.


Film course frequently asked questions The following questions about the general film course have been compiled from teacher queries raised on the Diploma Programme film forum on the OCC.

Can the Diploma Programme film course be delivered in one year?

The film course is conceived and designed as a rigorous two-year course to allow students to develop and reach their full potential as critical, well-informed and creative young film-makers with adequately developed film-making skills and techniques. Students are expected to be familiar with, among other things, film history, socio-economic forces that have shaped modern films, national cinemas and alternatives to mainstream Hollywood cinema, the main film theories, as well as a wide range of cinematic film-making techniques, to prepare them adequately for the three assessment components at the end of the two-year course.

How can the various electronic accompanying forms be accessed?

All three assessment components need to be sent with the correct accompanying forms completed by students and teachers. Links to electronic copies can be found in section B6d.2 of the Handbook of procedures for the Diploma Programme, which is published annually on the main OCC film page.

When and where are the deadlines for assessment published?

The deadlines for submitting the predicted grades, the marks for internal assessment and latest arrival dates for the three assessment components are stated in the Handbook of procedures for the Diploma Programme, which is published annually on the main OCC film page.

Can I show a film that is rated 18 in some countries?

Local laws, cultures and rating systems of films vary worldwide. A film could be rated 18 in one country but 12 in another, therefore teachers are advised to use their own discretion and understanding of the laws and sensitivities of their local community when deciding if a film is suitable for viewing. Some teachers inform their students and parents at the beginning of the course that, for educational purposes, the students may be exposed to certain controversial films.

May 2017 subject reports

Page 1

FILM

Overall grade boundaries

Higher level Grade: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Mark range: 0 – 13 14 – 29 30 – 42 43 – 54 55 – 67 68 – 79 80 – 100

Standard level Grade: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Mark range: 0 – 13 14 – 28 29 – 40 41 – 53 54 – 67 68 – 80 81 – 100

Production portfolio

Component grade boundaries


Mark range: 0 – 7 8 – 15 16 – 23 24 – 29 30 – 34 35 – 40 41 – 50


Mark range: 0 – 7 8 – 14 15 – 21 22 – 28 29 – 34 35 – 41 42 – 50

May 2017 subject reports Group 6, Film

Page 2

The range and suitability of the work submitted

The films showed a wide range of understanding and skill in terms of expression in film language, just as the commentaries showed a wide range of understanding of the artistic and logistic requirements of the individual production roles. For the most part, the commentaries presented a solid picture of both the production process and the individual work in the chosen role. It is important for students to remember that the assessment task is to create the best 4 to 5 or 6 to 7 minute movie possible. Many students, in their desire to create the best movie possible (instead of the best movie for assessment), conceive of a project which does not meet the descriptors of the criteria, requires inappropriate sound or visual design work, or is simply too long. It is important to support the commentary with graphic and photographic evidence, and many students did a good job of this, though many did not - particularly when it came to selecting specific evidence supporting their chosen role for assessment. One problem that occurred at times for students who did a good job of selecting evidence was when they used captions with the evidence to the degree that the word limit was exceeded. Captions should contain the minimum information possible to ensure the examiner understands the significance of the illustration and must not include commentary, as this will be considered part of the commentary and therefore included in the word count. To some degree, for some students and schools, the requirement of discussing ‘inspirations’ in the preliminary planning or pre-production sections are being focused on to such a degree that they are overshadowing the students’ original work. While it is good to have an idea of films, ideas, and issues which were pivotal in the creation of the film, in some cases there are so many filmic ‘inspirations’ mentioned that the work begins to seem inauthentic. It is more important to talk about the student’s personal creative process in their role, than spend too much time discussing work from other filmmakers. Though this can provide insight into the student’s work if used wisely, it frequently seemed to be a distraction from focusing on what the student actually did, and occasionally leads to the suspicion that the student did more imitation than creation.

Candidate performance against each criterion

Criterion A

The most common problem in terms in attaining the highest descriptor levels here was failure to present graphic or pictorial evidence supporting the work in the individual chosen production role. Focus should be on work done in the role at each production stage - and the best work did this clearly with good use of supporting evidence. At higher level, the failure to address the creation of the trailer in the body of the commentary was sometimes problematic here. (Films that were too short or too long also sometimes negatively affected this criterion because of poor planning.)

Criterion B

As in criterion A, the failure to use graphic or pictorial evidence to support the logistic or artistic decisions made in the student’s chosen role was frequently problematic. As well, many students did not present a ‘clear-eyed’ critical evaluation of the final film, presenting instead a piece about how satisfied they were, or a simple consideration of the project in general terms and not specifically focused on the completed film. At higher level, as in criterion A, the failure


Page 3

to address the creation of the trailer in the body of the commentary was sometimes problematic here.

Criterion C

When the commentary was focused on the artistic and logistic decisions a student made in their role, the student’s clear understanding of their professional and technical skills sometimes raised this mark higher than the mark awarded for criterion D (communication in film language, which also provides evidence for this criterion). Commentaries that lacked focus on role were unlikely to raise this mark above the mark awarded for criterion D.

Criterion D

Many students showed the ability to communicate competently in film language, even when their ability to explain and support their chosen role was limited. Frequently this was the highest scoring category for students.

Criterion E

At both higher level and standard level, the most common problem here was the use of visual or audio material created without the involvement of the student filmmakers (i.e. Copyright materials, stock footage, freeplay music, unaltered loops from music creation programs). This limited the mark for creativity. At the same time, frequently, students showed real creativity and originality in all areas of film creation, from planning and writing, to soundtrack and score, and to visual image.

Recommendations for the teaching of future candidates

Teachers should be careful to present the task as an assessment and help the student film makers focus on meeting the assessment criteria. That is, students should plan from the outset to make a 6 to 7 minute film at higher level and a 4 to 5 minute film at standard level, which can be accomplished competently with resources at hand. Throughout the course, teachers should build in experiences in which the students use evidence collected from production work (for short films used to teach skills for example) in order to practice gathering graphic and photographic evidence to support the artistic and logistic work in film production roles. If this has been practiced over the two years of the course, it will be much more natural when the student comes to final assessment. Further, students should practice at least one short film in which they created their own composition as a background and have some experience creating foley.

Further comments

The film guide requires that students have had significant creative input in all audio and visual materials present in their work. Students (and teachers) continue to confuse this idea with the idea of ‘copyright’ in general. Students should focus on the creation of their music and soundtrack, whether created by themselves or as a collaboration with local musicians using input from the group. Each student must briefly describe the creation of the music, or the


Page 4

interaction between the group and the musicians. (That is, “George created our music,” is not enough detail about how the input was managed.) Students who do not do this are unlikely to be awarded higher marks in criterion E. Each student is individually responsible for a brief description of music creation.

It is also important that the student be free to structure the commentary in such a way that they can focus on their individual role (probably the most practical template here would be to discuss the pre-production, production, post-production, critical evaluation of the completed film, and at higher level, the trailer. In some cases, a template had been developed that was more general, which led to students spending a long time discussing production elements that were not related to their role. Acting was an example. In practical terms, the only role in which acting or role authorship is a focus is directing. Others - like semiotics - are of questionable value to some roles.

Work from some schools was so generalized that it was hard to understand what role the student had chosen, and too much time was spent going over other roles. When the assessment is based on work in a chosen role, this is extremely problematic. Finally, all schools should include the opportunity for students to watch short films and not just feature films as part of the course. The structure of the short film is fundamentally different from the feature film, and ultimately it is a short film which the students will make. Understanding the structural differences will avoid many problems.

Independent study



Mark range: 0 – 3 4 – 7 8 – 10 11 – 13 14 – 17 18 – 20 21 – 25


Mark range: 0 – 3 4 – 7 8 – 10 11 – 13 14 – 17 18 – 20 21 – 25

FergusonFilm

Typewritten Text

Comments on sample work Comments on accuracy of teacher's application of assessment criteria It’s important that in the planning and research the candidate focus on the role chosen. Also , the usage of cinematic language is important to enhance the written commentary. Comments on suitability of the work Not addressing the music affects the maximum grade for the criterion E.

FergusonFilm

Typewritten Text


Page 5


The key aspect of this task is to engage with a question of cinematic theory or history. Therefore, students should have had a thorough grounding in both areas so they can make informed choices about topics. A significant number of students choose naturally self-limiting topics, such as car chases, fight movies, crime and romance; or sometimes a technical focus like music or colour. It is vital that these choices be linked to larger film movements, theories or genres, such as film noir or gaze theory to name but two. In a similar manner, if a student chooses a more thematic topic, like “coming of age”, it is vital the study is done through the prism of film and not merely plot and character. So, aspects like lighting, colour, mise en scene, framing, editing, proxemics (to name a few) are all part of film language that need to be considered.

This approach of focusing on filmic depictions or linking with theory or history will give students the opportunity to achieve higher marks by enhancing the scope and depth of the argument. The choice of films or film cultures is also critical, particularly the engagement with non-Western film cultures. Comparing British and American film cultures is not an expansive range. Students should also be aware that it is permissible to do “well worn” topics, such as the Western, German Expressionism, Horror and Animation. There is no descriptor for originality of topic or thought or insight. So, try a familiar topic with a fresh and in-depth approach.

The strengths and weaknesses of candidates in the treatment of individual areas

The focus needs to be deepened on audience engagement. Remember that the viewer is a film literate peer so the commentary should not be “dumbed down” by an overly colloquial and generalised approach. It is strongly recommended that students read aloud their commentary which should sound like an informed and passionate conversation. Specific film terms should be used often and with precision. Students need to be mindful of the following oversights or errors, which limit audience engagement:

• A misalignment, or even worse, neglect of providing a balance between the audio and visual columns.

• An unstructured or incoherent structure which makes it difficult to follow the thread and spine of the argument.

• Merely giving a history lesson or technical instruction about cinema without relating knowledge to the development of the proposition unveiled in the rationale. Text analysis of clips or scenes from the chosen films should feature prominently as proof of the developing thesis.


The independent study needs to be planned for over the two years duration of studying the film course. It should be viewed as the culmination of a thorough examination of film theory and history, as outlined in the film guide. Teachers need to ensure that students have been prepared by scaffolding tasks which develop a deep understanding of content and skills in using the required format. This task should not come as a surprise to a student any more than the


Page 6

expectation of just giving students a camera will mean they can make a short film. Unfortunately, some students are ill-prepared by poor teaching. Students should not fail to adhere to the formal requirements, but a significant number do. Students should receive informed feedback on their choice of topic, selection of films and a detailed evaluation of their draft; it appears that a significant number do not. It is also strongly recommended that teachers put students in touch with academic sources of a more scholarly nature to enrich the depth of argument. The best students are capable of interrogating the worth and relevance of sources in the annotations of their bibliography in light of the skills developed in Theory of Knowledge. Standard level students in particular should realise that examiners do not expect inferior or weaker argument compared with higher level.

Overall, the cohort of both higher level and standard level students in 2017 registered a good improvement in managing both the form and content of the independent study. Those teachers who have read and acted on the advice in these reports deserve praise for helping their students successfully negotiate the complexities of this demanding but rewarding task.


Page 7

Film presentation



Mark range: 0 – 3 4 – 7 8 – 9 10 – 12 13 – 16 17 – 19 20 – 25


Mark range: 0 – 3 4 – 7 8 – 9 10 – 12 13 – 16 17 – 19 20 – 25


While there was a wide range in the quality of presentations this year, fewer candidates scored in the lowest markband. The Social Network and Spirited Away were the most popular choices. The most successful candidates clearly practiced in advance and spent time honing their organization and structure. They also ensured that the content of their presentations included all the assessed elements. Failure to include all the elements was the most common factor that prevented many excellent presentations from scoring in the top markband. Many strong students delivered good presentations but failed to make pertinent links between their extract and the film as a whole or failed to discuss reactions to the film (at higher level). Others dealt with the sociocultural context by simply giving detailed information but without linking it to the film. It is good to see that the majority of candidates focused on the extract rather than on the film as a whole.

The strengths and weaknesses of candidates in the treatment of individual areas

Candidates should examine the sociocultural context of the time period depicted in the film as well as the time of the film’s release, where appropriate. With certain films, this may also include reactions to the film in the years after its release. This requires research on the student’s part and all material from other sources, whether quoted or paraphrased, must be cited on the cover sheet. Citing by reference in the presentation is recommended. This can be done in the following manner: “In his video essay, Tony Zhao pointed out that…”. Tony Zhao’s online video essay would then be cited on the cover sheet.

Too many of the weaker presentations still begin with the delivery of plot summaries, long lists of facts, information, quotes, Rotten Tomato ratings, box office earnings and other statistics.


Page 8

None of this content is rewarded in the marking. Weaker candidates simply described the use of film language (often in great detail) without any evaluative analysis. While most candidates concentrated on how film language created meaning and on the director’s intended effect, the poorer presentations devoted too little time to the evaluation of film language.

Better students used their allotted time to focus on the extract with pertinent links to other parts of the film. Stronger candidates used more academic resources in their research and discussed the comments of critics and experts, rather than simply providing quotes and moving on. The top candidates often used quotes from their research as jumping-off points to agree with or to challenge the views of experts and critics.

Selecting the right extract is an important part of the successful presentation and teachers should teach strategies for selecting extracts that work to the students’ advantage. Well-chosen extracts give students opportunities to discuss all the areas assessed in the criteria. Stronger candidates often selected an extract that included more than one scene, thus allowing for comparison and contrast between the scenes.

The Social Network and Spirited Away were the most popular choices; however, the quality of presentations varied widely. Weaker presentations on The Social Network focused on character conflict, plot and the history of Facebook while paying limited attention to how Fincher used film language to create meaning in the extract and how these choices linked to the choices made in other parts of the film.

Weaker presentations on Spirited Away tended to concentrate on symbolism and colour while ignoring most other elements of film language. The composition, camera movement, camera angles, blocking and depth of field that are found in live-action films are also present in Spirited Away and should be discussed in a film presentation.

Stronger presentations avoided treating the historical and socio-cultural context as a separate category but integrated it into their presentations and made specific links to the film under discussion. Depending on the film selection, the historical and sociocultural context may include the time depicted in the film, the time of the film’s release or both.

When discussing genre, weaker students tended to simply identify the genre and its characteristics while stronger students discussed how the film changed, conformed to, or subverted the genre. They integrated this throughout the presentation rather than treating it in a separate section.

Candidates should be reminded that that they must include the film’s genre or the sociocultural context or both. The film a candidate selects should determine which of these options are best suited for inclusion. A significant number of candidates omitted a rationale for selecting the extract. Weaker candidates often dealt with it in a single sentence. Better candidates used this as an opportunity to introduce the presentation.

There are still too many instances of teachers allowing candidates to read from a prepared script. This is academically dishonest.


Page 9


Focus on the extract.

Get to the analysis as quickly as possible. Weaker students waste too much time in giving background facts and information that will not be rewarding in marking.

Use "What were the intended effects of the director's choices?" as the overall guiding question for an evaluative analysis of film language rather than addressing “director’s intent” in a single sentence.

Avoid retelling the plot and being overly descriptive.

Pay special attention to the following words in the rubric: “coherent”, “evaluative” and “detailed”. Teachers should ensure that students understand the expectations connoted by these words and phrases.

"Coherent" relates of structure, planning and how convincing the conclusions are; it does not refer to fluency of delivery. Weaker presentations tended to plod through a checklist of "director's intentions", "genre". This hinders the coherence of the presentation.

“Director's intention” should be embedded throughout the presentation rather than be dealt with as a separate section.

In discussing reactions to the film (at higher level), citing the Rotten Tomatoes score, the IMDB ranking and the box-office earnings is of little value. Better candidates used quotes from experts as a launching point for their own opinions, comments and analysis. Some standard level students included a section devoted to reactions to the film. This is not required at this level and used up valuable time that could be spent on analysis. Discussing the film’s “target audience” is not required though many students include this.

Some candidates find it difficult to make links to the rest of the film in terms of anything other than plot. Genre conventions may be a useful way to do this, as well as directorial intent, foreshadowing, repetition of stylistic features, and script structure.

Students are expected to research their film. The strongest candidates could integrate research on either genre or sociocultural context smoothly with the interpretation of the scene. Weaker students’ presentations showed no evidence of research or used sources that could not be considered scholarly or academic. Targeting university sites and academic film magazines will yield good quality resources.

IA Feedback

School John A. Ferguson Senior HighSchool Moderator: 036503

Subject: FILM Level: HL Component: PRODUCTION PORTFOLIO

Internal assessment feedback form: group 6

Name of teacher/s responsible Juan Moreno

A) COMMENTS TO TEACHER ON SAMPLE WORK - Suitability or appropriateness of work in meeting IArequirements

Did the work submitted meet the component requirements? Yes

What are the strengths of the work? A good range of film styles and genres attempted by students who were often familiar with the generic conventionsof these styles

Which aspects of the work need improvement? Students should be encouraged to integrate more actual evidence of relevant pre-planning appropriate to their rolein the form of excerpts from material such as, storyboards, draft scripts, shot lists, call sheets etc into theirportfolios. Evaluations were an area for improvement for many of the students. They should be encouraged to reflect on theirlevel of success in their assessed role as well as considering the logistical success of the film making process andhow well the artistic intentions of the film were met, giving specific examples where appropriate.Evaluations should consider both the artistic and the logistical elements of the film as well as looking at thestudent's own performance in their assessed role.Students should be reminded that their trailers are an integral part of their work and that they should be fullydiscussed at all stages of production.

B) CLERICAL/PROCEDURAL

Was the sample work and documentation received by the due date? Yes

Was all of the required work submitted? Yes

Was a completed copy of form 6/FPPHCS or 6/FPPSCS attached to each candidate's work? Yes

Were the marks for each sample candidate entered clearly and correctly? Yes

Film guide 23

First assessment 2010

Assessment component Weighting

External assessmentIndependent studyRationale, script and list of sources for a short documentary production of 12–15 pages on an aspect of film theory and/or film history, based on a study of a minimum of four films. The chosen films must originate from more than one country. (25 marks)

Length of the rationale: no more than 100 words

Length of the script: 12–15 pages

50%25%

PresentationAn oral presentation of a detailed critical analysis of a continuous extract from a prescribed film. The extract must not be longer than 5 minutes. (25 marks)

Maximum length of presentation: 15 minutes

25%

Internal assessmentThis component is internally assessed by the teacher and externally moderated by the IB at the end of the course.

Production portfolioOne completed film project with an associated trailer and written documentation encompassing and connecting both: no more than 1,750 words. (50 marks)

Length of the film project: 6–7 minutes (including titles)

Length of the trailer: 40–60 seconds

Length of individual rationale for the film: no more than 100 words; length of individual rationale for the trailer: no more than 100 words

Group work: The film project may be undertaken as a group project, but all accompanying documentation must be individually produced. While students at SL and HL may work together in a production group, they cannot present the same edit of their film projects for internal assessment due to the different assessment requirements.

50%

Assessment outline—HL

Assessment

External assessment

Film guide30

External markbands—HLIndependent study

Marks Level descriptor

0 The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

1–5 There is little or no understanding of the film history/film theory topic. Engagement with the target audience, scope and depth of argument, the use of sources and the

described and poorly linked. Films referred to may have limited relevance to the topic and there are very few or no relevant points of comparison made between the chosen films.

6–10 There is some understanding of the film history/film theory topic. Engagement with the target audience, scope and depth of argument, the use of sources and

elements are fairly well described, although links may be inconsistent. At least two of the films referred to relate to the topic and some relevant points of comparison have been made between the chosen films.

11–15 There is an adequate understanding of the film history/film theory topic. Engagement with the target audience, scope and depth of argument, the use of

well described and satisfactorily linked. At least three of the films referred to relate to the topic and most of the points of comparison made are relevant although they may be superficially or incompletely developed.

16–20 There is a good understanding of the film history/film theory topic. Engagement with the target audience, scope and depth of argument, the use of sources and the

described and are, in the main, aptly linked. All films referred to clearly relate to the topic and points of comparison are explored with care and coherence.

21–25 There is an excellent understanding of, and engagement with, the film history/film theory topic. Engagement with the target audience, scope and depth of

and audio elements are detailed, clearly and coherently described, and are aptly and proficiently linked. All films referred to clearly relate to the topic and insightful comparisons are made coherently and with precision.

Meeting the requirements: Any student who does not meet all the formal requirements cannot be awarded a mark within the top two markbands at HL. These are: correct length and format, inclusion of rationale, an annotated list of sources, number of films required for study and reference to films from more than one country.

External assessment

Film guide 31

Presentation



1–5 There is little or no evaluative interpretation of the extract, displaying a very limited understanding of how meaning is constructed through the use of film language, and a very limited awareness of the extract’s relationship to the film as a whole. There is little or no explanation for the selection of the extract. The critique shows little or no awareness of the film’s genre and/or its place in a broader sociocultural context. There is little or no analysis of the director’s intention. No reference is made to the responses to the film from audiences and reviewers, critics or scholars at the time of its original release and/or subsequently. This presentation is likely to be exclusively descriptive.

6–10 There is a limited evaluative interpretation of the extract, displaying some understanding of how meaning is constructed through the use of film language, and a limited awareness of the extract’s relationship to the film as a whole. There is a limited explanation for the selection of the extract. The critique shows some awareness of the film’s genre and/or its place in a broader sociocultural context. There is a limited analysis of the director’s intention. Limited reference is made to the responses to the film from audiences and reviewers, critics or scholars at the time of its original release and/or subsequently. A substantial amount of the presentation may have detailed descriptions, but offers only limited analysis.

11–15 There is a coherent evaluative interpretation of the extract, displaying an adequate understanding of how meaning is constructed through the use of film language, and a satisfactory awareness of the extract’s relationship to the film as a whole. There is an adequate explanation for the selection of the extract. The critique shows a satisfactory awareness of the film’s genre and/or its place in a broader sociocultural context. There is some analysis of the director’s intention. Some apt reference is made to the responses from audiences and reviewers, critics or scholars at the time of its original release and/or subsequently. There may be some descriptive elements but the presentation offers adequate analysis.

16–20 There is a coherent and detailed evaluative interpretation of the extract, displaying a good understanding of how meaning is constructed through the use of film language, and a good awareness of the extract’s relationship to the film as a whole. There is a clear explanation for the selection of the extract. The critique shows a good awareness of the film’s genre and/or its place in a broader sociocultural context. There is a sound analysis of the director’s intention. Clear reference is made to the responses from audiences and reviewers, critics or scholars at the time of its original release and/or subsequently. There may be brief elements of description but analysis is thorough.

21–25 There is a coherent, incisive and richly detailed evaluative interpretation of the extract, displaying an excellent understanding of how meaning is constructed through the use of film language, with an excellent awareness of the extract’s relationship to the film as a whole. There is a persuasive explanation for the selection of the extract. The critique shows an excellent awareness of the film’s genre and/or its place in a broader sociocultural context. There is insightful analysis of the director’s intention, and examples of responses from audiences and reviewers, critics or scholars at the time of its original release and/or subsequently have been discussed. Simple description is negligible and analysis is clear and thorough.

Internal assessment

Film guide 41

Internal assessment criteria—HLProduction portfolioA Planning and researchThis criterion is concerned with the documentation of the production process as a whole, from preliminary planning, pre-production, production and principal photography, through to post-production, including the planning and research required for the production of the film trailer.



1–2 There is little or no planning for and research into production processes for the film itself and the trailer. Little documentation of the relevant development stages is displayed.

3–4 There is some planning for and research into production processes for the film itself and the trailer. Some documentation of the relevant development stages is displayed, but this documentation is likely to be incomplete, either lacking sufficient detail in parts or omitting stages in the process.

5–6 There is adequate planning for and research into production processes for the film itself and the trailer. Documentation of the relevant development stages is satisfactory.

7–8 There is good planning for and research into the production processes for the film itself and the trailer. Documentation of the relevant development stages is mostly thorough.

9–10 There is excellent planning for and research into the production processes for the film itself and the trailer. Documentation of the relevant development stages is comprehensive. Planning of production and documentation has all been clearly integrated with the production of the individual film trailer.

Internal assessment

Film guide42

B Reflection and evaluationThis criterion is concerned with artistic and logistical analysis of the relevant production processes and the evaluation in the individual student’s written commentary on the project as a whole, including the roles of the student and others (where appropriate).



1–2 There is a limited artistic and logistical analysis of the relevant production processes, with little critical evaluation of the project as a whole and of the individual film trailer.

3–4 There is some artistic and logistical analysis of the relevant production processes, with some critical evaluation of the project as a whole and of the individual film trailer.

5–6 There is a satisfactory artistic and logistical analysis of the relevant production processes, with satisfactory critical evaluation of the project as a whole. There is satisfactory analysis of the different artistic and logistical processes required for the production of the trailer.

7–8 There is an effective artistic and logistical analysis of the relevant production processes, with good critical evaluation of the project as a whole. There is also an effective analysis of the different artistic and logistical processes required for the production of the trailer.

9–10 There is a highly effective artistic and logistical analysis of the relevant production processes, with excellent critical evaluation of the project as a whole. There is also a highly effective awareness and analysis of the different artistic and logistical processes required for the production of the trailer.

Internal assessment

Film guide 43

C Professional and technical skillsThis criterion is concerned with professional and technical skills (including organizational skills) that may be demonstrated during the production processes or in the finished product itself.



1–2 The student demonstrates little or no ability in the professional and technical skills (including organizational skills) necessary for one principal production role, and makes limited use of available resources and technology. Little use is made of available resources and technology in the construction of the individual film trailer.

3–4 The student demonstrates some ability in the professional and technical skills (including organizational skills) necessary for one principal production role, and makes some use of available resources and technology. Some use is made of available resources and technology in the construction of the individual film trailer.

5–6 The student demonstrates satisfactory ability in the professional and technical skills (including organizational skills) necessary for one principal production role, and makes competent use of available resources and technology. There is also satisfactory use made of available resources and technology in the construction of the individual film trailer.

7–8 The student demonstrates good ability in the professional and technical skills (including organizational skills) necessary for one principal production role, and makes effective use of available resources and technology. There is also effective use of available resources and technology in the construction of the individual film trailer.

9–10 The student demonstrates excellent ability in the professional and technical skills (including organizational skills) necessary for one principal production role, and makes highly effective use of available resources and technology. There is also excellent use of available resources and technology in the construction of the individual film trailer.

D Effective use of film languageThis criterion is concerned with evidence of the student’s effective use of film language, as seen in the finished product.



1–2 The student demonstrates little or no ability to communicate effectively in film language both in the film itself and in the individual film trailer.

3–4 The student demonstrates some ability to communicate effectively in film language both in the film itself and in the individual film trailer.

5–6 The student demonstrates a satisfactory ability to communicate effectively in film language both in the film itself and in the individual film trailer.

7–8 The student demonstrates a good ability to communicate effectively in film language both in the film itself and in the individual film trailer.

9–10 The student demonstrates an excellent ability to communicate effectively in film language both in the film itself and in the individual film trailer.

Internal assessment

Film guide44

E Originality and creativityThis criterion is concerned with originality and creativity in the film-making process (referred to as “creative intelligence” in the level descriptors below). This may be demonstrated by freshness of approach, by intelligent work that goes either with or against the conventions of the genre, or by problem solving. Another key indicator is the level of audience engagement with the work.

This criterion is intended to provide a holistic assessment of each student’s contribution to the finished film and of the trailer that they have made as an individual.



1–2 There is little or no evidence of creative intelligence in the film-making process and little or no awareness of the appropriate generic characteristics of a film trailer. The film production and trailer are of limited interest to audiences.

3–4 There is some evidence of creative intelligence in some aspects of the film-making process and some awareness of the appropriate generic characteristics of a trailer. The film production and trailer are of some interest to audiences.

5–6 There is adequate evidence of creative intelligence in most aspects of the film-making process and an adequate awareness and implementation of the appropriate generic characteristics of a film trailer. The production and trailer engage audience interest satisfactorily.

7–8 There is good evidence of creative intelligence in all aspects of the film-making process and a clear awareness of, and effective implementation of, the appropriate generic characteristics of a film trailer. The film production and trailer engage audience interest well.

9–10 There is excellent evidence of creative intelligence in all aspects of the film-making process, and there is excellent awareness of, and imaginative use of, the generic characteristics of a film trailer. The film production and trailer engage audience interest with great success.

Film guide 23

First assessment 2010

Assessment component Weighting

External assessmentIndependent studyRationale, script and list of sources for a short documentary production of 12–15 pages on an aspect of film theory and/or film history, based on a study of a minimum of four films. The chosen films must originate from more than one country. (25 marks)

Length of the rationale: no more than 100 words

Length of the script: 12–15 pages

50%25%

PresentationAn oral presentation of a detailed critical analysis of a continuous extract from a prescribed film. The extract must not be longer than 5 minutes. (25 marks)

Maximum length of presentation: 15 minutes

25%

Internal assessmentThis component is internally assessed by the teacher and externally moderated by the IB at the end of the course.

Production portfolioOne completed film project with an associated trailer and written documentation encompassing and connecting both: no more than 1,750 words. (50 marks)

Length of the film project: 6–7 minutes (including titles)

Length of the trailer: 40–60 seconds

Length of individual rationale for the film: no more than 100 words; length of individual rationale for the trailer: no more than 100 words

Group work: The film project may be undertaken as a group project, but all accompanying documentation must be individually produced. While students at SL and HL may work together in a production group, they cannot present the same edit of their film projects for internal assessment due to the different assessment requirements.

50%

Assessment outline—HL

Assessment

Film guide 45

Students should be familiar with the following cinematic words and phrases.

Ambient sound Natural background noise on television, film or radio. In the same manner, ambient light refers to natural, available light that is not enhanced in any way.

Audience All those who receive or interact with any media product. A target audience is the group of people to whom a product is particularly aimed. This may be identified as either “mass” (or mainstream) if it is targeted at a very large number of people, or “niche” if it is targeted at a smaller, more specific group of people.

Camera angle The position of the camera in relation to the main subject. It could be a high angle, low angle, worm’s-eye view or aerial view.

Cinematographer The person responsible for camera and lighting. Often referred to as the “director of photography”.

Continuity editing Sometimes referred to as “invisible” or “academic” editing, this is the unobtrusive style of editing developed by Hollywood that is still the basis of most commercial productions. The basis of continuity editing is to cut on action so that the whole sequence looks natural.

Diegetic/non-diegetic sound

Diegetic sound is that which appears to come from a recognizable source within the narrative world of a film, radio or television text. Non-diegetic sound is that which appears to come from a source unconnected to the narrative world of a text. An example of non-diegetic sound would be a film musical score. Diegetic sound would be the sound of crashing waves on cliffs or birdsong, even though these may be added in post production.

Digital The conversion of sound and visual to transmit information in a code using the numbers zero and one.

Dubbing A process whereby sound is added to film. This may take the form of adding music or additional sound to dialogue, or it may refer to the addition of an entire soundtrack, including dialogue.

Editing The selection of material to make a coherent whole. In film and television an editor uses a variety of methods to move from one sequence to another. This is referred to as a “transition”.

Form The structure, or skeleton, of a text and the narrative framework around which it is based. For example, a feature film commonly has a three-act structure. Some structures are determined by a genre and its corresponding codes and conventions.

Glossary

Appendices

Glossary

Film guide46

Frame As a noun, this refers to the single area on a strip of film that holds a single image (or a single still image on video). As a verb, it means to adjust the position of the camera or to adjust the camera lens to compose the required image. An image can be framed to construct a close-up shot, long shot or medium shot.

Genre The classification of any media text into a category or type, for example: news, horror, documentary, soap opera and so on. Genres tend to have identifiable codes and conventions that have developed over time and for which audiences may have developed particular expectations. Media texts that are a mixture of more than one genre are called “generic hybrids”.

Mise-en-scène Literally, everything that is “put in the scene”, or put in the frame to be photographed (appropriate to the time and era portrayed). This usually includes production design, set, location, actors, costumes, make-up, gesture, proxemics and blocking, extras, props, use of colour, contrast and filter. Lighting is often included within mise-en-scène. Camera shot composition, framing, angle and movement are also sometimes referred to as mise-en-shot.

Montage The term is taken from the French “to assemble”. It has several meanings in the context of film and is not exclusively used to refer to “Soviet Montage”. (1) It is used as a synonym for editing. (2) In Hollywood cinema it means to edit a concentrated sequence using a series of brief transitions creating the effect of the passage of time or movement over large distances or for expressionistic moods. (3) Thematic or “Soviet” montage was developed by Sergei Eisenstein by arranging striking juxtapositions of individual shots to suggest an idea that goes beyond meanings within an individual shot. He called this “collision montage”. (4) Any sequence that creates a particularly significant effect mainly through its editing. The shower scene in Psycho would be such an example.

Narrative The way in which a plot or story is told, by whom and in what order. Flashbacks, flash forwards and ellipsis may be used as narrative devices. Tsvetan Todorov, Bordwell and Thompson and Robert McKee have all presented interesting ideas about narrative development.

Post-production The period and the processes that come between the completion of principal photography and the completed film or programme. This includes the editing of a film or programme, along with titles, graphics, special effects and so on.

Pre-production The entire range of preparations that takes place before a film or television programme can begin shooting.

Primary research Research information or data that you collect yourself. Sources for this may include interviews, questionnaires, analysis of films or television programmes that you undertake yourself. (See also secondary research.)

Production Either the product itself or the actual process of filming.

Qualitative research Research undertaken through observation, analysing texts and documents, interviews, open-ended questionnaires and case studies. It is reasoned argument that is not based upon simple statistical information. Overall, qualitative research enables researchers to study psychological, cultural and social phenomena. (See also quantitative research.)

Glossary

Film guide 47

Quantitative research Primarily, this is statistical data most frequently obtained from closed questions in questionnaires or structured interviews. Quantitative research may calculate how many males in the 15 to 25 years age range watch a particular television soap opera, for example, but qualitative research is necessary to determine why they watch it.

Realism The dominant mode of representation in television, mainstream films and print. The term usually implies that the media text attempts to represent an external reality: a film or television programme is “realistic” because it gives the impression that it accurately reproduces that part of the real world to which it is referring. However, the concept is much more complex than this brief definition. One suggestion is to think of “realisms” rather than realism.

Representation The process of making meaning in still or moving images and in words and sounds. In its simplest form, it means to present or show someone or something. However, as a concept for debate, it is used to describe the process by which an image can be used to represent or stand in for someone or something, for example, a person, place or idea. Inherent in this second definition is the notion that there may be a responsibility on the part of the producer of any representation, with regard to accuracy, “truth” and the viewpoints and opinions that such a representation may perpetuate. Representation is used to describe the manner in which segments or individuals in society (for example, women, the elderly, ethnic minorities) are portrayed in the media.

Secondary research Research information taken from sources other than your own work, such as academic studies, reviews or essays, whether in printed format or from other film texts such as documentaries or interviews.

Stereotype An oversimplified representation of people, places or issues, giving a narrow and/or exaggerated set of attributes. Stereotypes are frequently thought to be entirely negative but this is not necessarily the case.

Style The “look” of a media text; its surface appearance. It can be recognized by the use of colour, mise-en-scène, lighting, music, camera angle, movement, framing, dialogue, editing and so on.

Synchronous/asynchronous sound

Synchronous sound is where the sound matches the action or speech in film or television. Asynchronous sound is when there is a mismatch—the most obvious example occurs when lip-synch is out, that is, when the words spoken and the lip movement of the actor on screen do not match.

Teaser trailers Short film or television trailers shown before a full-length trailer.

Tone The overall impression that is given by a media text—serious, comic, romantic, sensationalist and so on.

film assessment clarificationfergusonfilm.weebly.com/uploads/7/5/1/8/75184707/ib_fi… · ·...

Documents