AS

Blogs

1. Eloise (Beware of the Unexpected)

Coversheet- teacher comments absent from construction category. All
candidates given the same marks for all categories- unacceptable. Big
handwriting disguising few comments?

Blog on Weebly well organized but relatively thin in all areas- only enough to
justify level 2 for research and planning. Evaluation- unwise choice of format as
candidates have no real chance to show their digital skills and are heavily led by
tutor. The soundcloud really appears to be an essay read aloud. Again level 2.

Construction- a lot of found material at the beginning which obviously has to be
discounted. Some attention to titles, though grasp of conventions is limited.
Audio is interesting at start, but much weaker as it goes on. There is a clumsy
zoom after 57 seconds and the overall camerawork, mise-en-scene and editing is
very limited. Direction of actors poor. Voiceover unconvincing. Level 2/3
borderline. Has something of a feel of a trailer by the end.

Overall score 60.




2. Neil (Strings)

Detailed coversheet with close reference to all areas. A very substantial number
of posts.

The whole process of research and planning is very detailed and thorough. Level
4 is justified. Evaluation uses a range of techniques to respond to the questions.
Low level 4.

Construction- colourscheme gives a clear sense of branding and layout is
effective throughout. Typo in a title on the cover and some over-use of fonts, but
overall the work is effective, with some good images. Low level 4

Overall score 81

3. Joe (The Path of Descent)

Very detailed coversheet.

The process is detailed well, with 45 posts. The final film should be at the top of
the blog, as there are several drafts. Research and planning is accurately marked
in level 3. An interesting range of responses and creative approaches are in
evidence for the evaluation and though some are text-heavy, they merit high
level 3 overall.

The film opening has a lot of strong elements, including some good camerawork,
cross-cutting and use of music. Titles have been thought through carefully. At
times it does veer towards the conventions of a trailer, but nonetheless, it does
justify level 4.

Overall score 82

A2

Ned (Music video)

There are some useful comments on the coversheet. The blog seems to be very
substantial, but it should be noted that half the posts are from AS. Nonetheless it
is a pretty thorough and well illustrated account of the journey of the project.
The mark of 15 if anything may be slightly low.

The evaluation is quite thorough and uses a range of approaches. Again it would
be possible to tip this into level 4.

Digipack is quite simple, but carefully thought through and the website just
exceeds the minimum requirement for the task. Both marks seem about right.
The video is well shot, well lit and cut with great pace, with some good
choreography, appropriate to its genre.

Overall the marks would not be adjusted.



Kira (Trailer)

The coversheet is completed well and justifies the marks with comments.

Research and planning totals over 40 posts, which details the process of the
project very well. Many of the posts are quite substantial and illustrated
effectively. Decisions and revisions are articulated well. Level 4 is appropriate.

Evaluation is detailed but unambitious in terms of the creative opportunities
deployed. It does justify level 4 however.

Construction of the poster and magazine cover is documented well and there is
skill shown in the use of the programs to create each, but as with the trailer there
is a sense that the overall brand doesnt quite work. The tagline does not really
match with the trailer and the images on the poster/magazine could have come
from a completely different film. The trailer itself becomes quite funny
(unintentionally) even though it is well shot, cut together well and uses the
conventions of trailers. There is good use of sound and titles. However, given
that the mark allocated is only borderline level 4, overall it is justifiable.

Overall no adjustment.

Eliza (music video)

Very detailed comments from teacher. Some good coverage of elements of the
process, though relatively few posts. Mark allocated is low level 3, which is
justifiable. Evaluation contains a range of creative approaches and justifies level
3.

The digipack is very well made and appropriate to the artist. Website is excellent.
The question is how much did this candidate contribute as it is not clear from the
coversheet.

Video is well shot, well lit and well edited but perhaps lacks variety. The male
element doesnt really work. Hard to justify full marks, though it is clearly level 4.

Overall we would need to see the rest of the candidates from the centre to be
able to decide whether or not to adjust the marks.