Film Treatment
Film Treatment
The Production Bog
Corbon Hibberd/07926654325
03/02/23
Log line
3 young, aspiring workers attempt
to create a film, but with clashing ideals and a director in over his own head,
that may prove difficult.
Characters
I have chosen to not give traditional names to my characters as
they will not add to the story but take away from it. The intent to make the
audience feel as if they can slip themselves or anyone they know into the place
of the characters. By giving them names that outcome becomes less likely.
Director- Casual clothing. He is a lazy, lofty
standards man who wishes for everything to go his way. If he wants to he will
go through illegal methods to get what he wants. He has known the editor since
secondary school and only ever had a good relationship with him. Puts on a kind
face when in front of the public. Abuses his workers when ever given the
chance. Kinder in his younger years. Abuses his power.
Editor- Casual clothing. Knew of the
director since primary school but only gave him a chance during secondary
school. Has always had talent and determination when it comes to editing but it
has been fading and is almost gone when we see him in the film. Wishes to leave
this project behind to pursue work under a bigger company. Work never ends.
Level headed, realistic.
Actor- Self-proclaimed big shot.
Big headed, believes everyone is destined to love him once they learn of him.
Brought in to the cast as the director offered illegal substances on a regular
basis. Designer, expensive clothing. Has a belief that he has power over the
director but gets belittled when he shows even slight signs of problems with
him.
Narrator- Man behind the camera for
the entire flick. Asks the questions to the other characters. Attempts to be
neutral but sways towards the editor.
Overview
We open the film with an interview with the director who comes
across as calm. This is followed by the actor coming in resulting in the
director exploding with anger. Lights cut out followed by the title card drop.
We start a back and forth of the director stating a ‘fact’ followed by the
editor giving the facts. We then have an interview with the editor where he
explains the reasoning for the documentary. The director bursts into the room
and insults him. A scene within a forest follows this as it is filming day. The
actor plays out a scene whilst the director pays no attention to the ongoing
scene. The actor, who is obviously under influence of drugs, runs to the
director with complaints. He is forced to carry on his scene. The film then
cuts to an interview with the editor who is no longer under influence of the
previously discussed drugs. We follow this scene with a montage of conflict
between the director and his actor and his editor. The scene cuts to the other
as he is about to swear, or throw some kind of insult, at them but he never
gets the chance. It then cuts to our final scene where the director has just
gotten off a phone call to the production company as they called to cancel the
project.
Act-One
Interview with D-We open with a very calm,
and composed director who comes across as more intelligent here than he ever
will in the rest of the film. From his body language to his spoken language, he
is like a different person. The narrator here is also currently on a neutral
standing regarding the 3 other characters within the film. This scene takes
place in a clean office with work piled up nicely. This to further enforce how
he is represented within the first part of this scene. Just after answering the
narrator’s question the actor comes into the room, although they are kept off
screen, interrupting the interview with a question about his outfit. The
director cuts him off in a rage forcing the actor to leave the room. The light
within the room cuts out and the scene is now just pure black. The director
complains and demands it gets fixed. The title card then drops.
Conflicting Facts Scene-The scene
starts in the same position as the last one. Office being used for an interview
with the director. He is asked a simple question but avoids answering with the
truth. The audience know this as we cut to the editor working on the project surrounded
by mountains of work who gives a counter fact to what the director has just
said. This goes on until the director gives his last point on the question
which like before has a counter fact from the editor.
Act-Two
Interview with E-This
carries on from the last scene as if they are the same scene. The purpose of
the scene is to reveal how the director treats his workers by the editor first
telling us how often he works and by showing the director entering the room
just to verbally abuse him. This is to stand in contrast to why the actor
walked in on his interview.
Filming Day Scene-Cuts
from the previous scene to the director and actor walking towards a forest
which doesn’t go on for long as we cut to within the forest. The actor is off
in the background playing out his scene whilst the director lays back and pays
no attention to him. The actor comes running over to the director complaining
that he has spotted a sasquatch and can not work. This is to suggest he is
under the influence of previously mentioned drugs. He runs off to continue the
scene as the director forces him to. The director then continues to show a lack
of experience when it comes to his profession and the scene ends.
Interview with A-This
scene is set out the same as the interview with the director just with the
actor instead. The actor (now no longer under influence) shows off his true
colours as an egotistical man.
Tyrannical Director scene-This scene is a montage of different confrontations between the director
and the other two characters. Every time it’s about to cut it cuts out rude
language about to thrown at either the actor or editor. The next following word
then merges with the previous one to have a smooth transition between each cut.
Act-Three
.jpg)
Comments
Post a Comment