I did an interview with an environmental activist.
I did an interview with an environmental activist.
Excellent production Dave.
If were a documentary it would have been nice to hear both sides to get good balance, but as a one sided activist piece I think you did an excellent job!
I liked the interview footage and sound quality although I wasn't entirely sure about the slight looking down on the subject (although this may have been intentional to make him look vulnerable). I liked the move to the close up for his final speech.
Whilst i might disagree with the propaganda, I thought the speech at the end was superb - well worded, sincere and convincing.
What worked against the video (from a propaganda point of view) was the whole of the middle section where he seemed to be going on about how hard done by he was. I had no sympathy at all. If you don't want your skin ripped off then don't superglue yourself to someone else's property on someone else's property. And stop banging on about your rights when you have not respected someone else's rights to be in that position ("they should have negotiated with me to come down" - yeah! Just like he negotiated to get up there in the first place.) This is the problem with many of these activists - they seem to think they can ignore others rights but claim foul play if there's a hint that their own rights have been violated. Whilst it can be argued that on private land he is only costing the company whose rights he is violating, once the police are involved and the ambulance service is involved and the NHS is involved it is costing ME. The guy spent six hours at hospital at MY expense and at the expense of everyone who pays taxes in the UK.
During the whole of the middle section I just wanted to punch him.
So, my advice, if you want to convince those of us who are basically in favour of exploring the prospects of fracking, is leave out all the stuff which emphasises the law breaking aspects and the personal right aspects and stick to the story and the message.
Thanks guys, You are right David it would have been good to get the other side of the story. I have found the other side are not as willing to talk to me but it could have been more balanced.
Tim, I made this piece from two perspectives firstly those who are involved love to see others who have been in action so from that point of view it's an easy audience. The second more difficult aspect is to try and humanise the activists. Over the last 7 months, that I've been involved with this project, I've found these people to be very different to how I originally expected them to be. I'm sure most of use (of a certain age) will remember Swampy and his friends. living up trees and in tunnels etc. That was my image of these people.
I have come to see them in a very different light. They actually come from all walks of life. Some are just drop out types, these people are usually weeded out eventually. A lot of them are normal every day folk like you and me. When living on a campsite it's hard to keep up your personal appearance so they do tend to look a bit rough. Some are from a professional background, teachers, housewives, builders, artists, all walks of life. They are people who have made a decision to sacrifice their time to fight a cause that they believe will affect everybody in the country if it's not stopped, rightly or wrongly depending on your view. I have come to admire them for standing up for what they believe in, with no desire for personal gain.
I think the mainstream media have presented them in a way which alienates them and presents them as though they are all Swampy types, trouble causers or even terrorists. I am trying to redress the balance of that and re-humanise them so when people see the police bashing heads, they might just feel as though it's not ok to treat people like that.
Anyway I don't want to make this thread about the politics, I just wanted to point out the reason for making the piece and who it is aimed at etc. The middle section was supposed to show that the police think it's ok to torcher these people. In the court documents the police said they were applying pain to him to take his mind off the pain they were causing while ripping his hands apart. I obviously failed to get that message across.
The camera angle was just me rushing to set things up, I had about 30 minutes to do the interview, including setting up the camera and lights. It's been an interesting learning experience to change from what I have done in the past to doing all run and gun type shooting.
Thanks for taking the time to view and comment guys.
The onsite footage was professional
the diary-room setup had good audio and proper lighting
i'm with Tim as far as (not) including the "poor me" aspect of the interview
other than that it was a great job
Thanks for viewing Zam. Diary Room set up !? I think you've been watching too much Big Brother.
I agree with Tim about the whinging parts, the bit about being super glued I didn't sympathise as much as the ribs etc, but all-in-all he has his point of view and whether we agree with each and every statement, he has the right (in a country with free speech) to make them. This is where the balanced views of the other side would have helped - though I totally understand why it's not there.
Actually, I was fine with him up to the last minute or so where he started talking about not caring what was legal/lawful etc. We can be as passionate as we like about things, but once we break the law we lose any moral high ground we may have had. Peaceful protest can work just as well as violence and intimidation. It may take a little longer, but in the end you carry more people with you.
Keep us up to date with the fracking developments. I know it's something you're really interested in.
Very strong minutes in the end. The first to thirds could have been probably cut down a bit. I would have liked to see some legal mumbojambo supporting his accusations.
If nothing else, you've certainly got us talking about it, so "job done" from that point of view.