Hey Courtney! First of all I couldn’t open you’re first link... said it was private.
Listening to you’re second interview I think that Diana seems a little nervous. When she talks it doesn’t seem like it flows until later on. However, even though she warms up its still a bit choppy. I think that you’re questions aren’t open ended enough. A lot of them are like this one "how many stories have you heard about dog attacks (I think thats what you said)". There she will most likely answer with a number which she basically did I would make this question more like tell me about stories you’ve heard about people being attacked by dogs. I think if she were to have to answer with stories more than what she thinks may be the case she would be able to talk more and have more to say. For Carol I would have to say the same things you’re questions need to be more open ended so that you’re subjects talk more. I think you just need to work more on you’re questions to make them open ended so that you’re interviewee’s have more to say. Which will make it easier for you to edit and will make you’re stories flow more together. Also just a note let who you are interviewing finish what they have to say then ask another question. It could be good and if you interrupt them you can’t use that audio.
Hey Courtney, I, like Lauren, had issues opening up link 1 (of 3), as it told me I need to private access to the clip. Maybe your settings when uploading it were changed from when did the other 2, but its a pretty easy fix you can do on it whenever.
I am just going to list my thoughts on each of the other 2 clips separately below:
Clip 2 - Diana seems nervous and pretty "uptight". She answers your questions like she is reading them off of a teleprompter, instead of them "coming from the heart" (cheesy I know). When you set up the interview, did you and her kind of make small talk before you began or did you just dive right into it? Did you guys record in a comfortable setting (a house) or a professional setting (office/ pound)? I don’t know much about Documentary filmmaking, but I know there are ways of getting people to feel comfortable and open up. Just saying!
- I thought that it was interesting that she commented on how she thinks Pit Bulls develop bad behavior from other dogs, versus how they may be raised by human owners/ breeders. You could maybe go down this route and see what turns up.
Clip 3 – Carol does answer some of your questions more thoroughly and in-depth, but she seems to be having some of the same issues Diana in that she doesn’t sound 100% honest. I hate to say it but I think you need to really “push” your subjects more… on some of the questions, your interviewee’s (Diana mostly) seems to give you a straight-forward, yes/ no kind of an answer.
- I like how Carol didn’t pick up on the kind of “lock-jaw” you were referring too!
My gf and I have recently been looking into getting a puppy, so we have been making trips to the Dog Pound on a regular basis… and I would say about ½ of the dogs there are either Pit Bulls or Pit Bulls Mixed. It’s a real shame, because they were all over 1 year, which means they are no longer puppies and therefore, there is not very much interest in them as family dogs.
So first of all the way you ask the questions is a little weird. Since you're just reading them off of a page and you kinda sound like you don't care, it makes the whole interview seem less inviting I think. Like in your first clip you ask "Do you think this is true?" and the girl just says, "No." I think if you were a bit more welcoming you would have gotten more of a response out of her rather than having to pull it from her in a follow up question. Just try to have more of a conversation rather than reading scripted questions.
I like Ian's comment too about clip 2. If you just start with a conversation to kind of warm her up, then lead into the dog stuff she might be more relaxed.
I'm still really excited about your film since I LOVE pit bulls!
I like all of the questions your asked. It's just the way of delivering them is a bit odd. Once you stopped reading from your paper, it got a lot more interesting! It was more like a convo instead of a Q & A session ya know? It flowed a lot better. I don't think it sounds like you don't care; you sound like a robot, but a caring robot. :)Just let the questions come to you, have your notes in front of you, but have it be more of a conversation.
I really like Stephanie. She seems like someone who knows her stuff. I would def use her for the doc. But you were already planning on that right? She's good. She's knowledgeble, kind, she has a good voice. I think she'll be a great asset for your doc!
For the Diana interview I had a hard time hearing the questions because I think you were far away. But I like her voice. She seems like a very nice person. I agree with Lauren that the questions should be more open ended. Let the "interviewee" ramble on. There's nothing someone loves more than being able to voice their opinion on something they're passionate about.
I like the Carol interview. She's a good person to interview because of her opinions. I would try to get more out of her though. Is there a reason why this interview was only 4:25 mins long? I wanted to hear more from carol! lol
Ok so I found this guy (Manny). His neighbor was leaving his house in a rush, so Manny went over to see if he could help. Turns out the neighbor is dog sitting for a friend. The dog is a pit bull. That pit bull attacked the neighbor's dog so that neighbor was rushing to the vet with his dog. He asked Manny to close the gate to the yard bc he didn't have time. So Manny went to the gate to close it and the pit bull attacked him. It bit his arm/hand and then Manny had to go to the hospital also. He spent at least 5 hours there. And he lost part of his finger.
I think that the style of the interviews needs to be a little different. It seems like the interviewees are not that interested in the subject. I would suggest changing the style to more of a conversation, like maybe the questions should not have such an exact answer. Give them questions where they can add more commentary.
I'm in agreement with Sandra in that I think this should feel more like a converstation and less like a formal interview. That's really my biggest issue with what you have so far. It felt too scripted that I had a hard time seeing how this would fit together on screen.
I like the variety of people that you have though, and it was interesting to see the different definitions of lockjaw between the three of them. I'm glad to hear that most of them are thinking positively about these dogs and I'm looking forward to the more negative interviews to contrast these ones.
I think the key to this piece will be making your subjects comfortable with telling their story. I've been shooting a documentary this semester with a fellow student and we've felt that our interviews always go a lot smoother if we just sit and have a conversation with the subjects first and then naturally come back to those topics when the camera is rolling. You might even consider adding in some "fluff" as in some questions you don't necessarily intend to include in the documentary but just to help your subjects feel more at ease.
Overall I think you have an important message and I really look forward to seeing a first cut.
So far so good. I feel that you need more of the stories here. I know this is just a pre-interview but I don't think it is necessary to have the interviewees state definitions of some things like you have in the beginning.
I would avoid having your voice in the background. Whenever I have seen a very good documentary, I never hear the questions being asked (but thats just me). Just make sure they can answer questions without your voice needing to be there. Kinda just let them talk and tell their story, and if they fail then just point them in the right direction. It makes it flow a lot better and then the editor has a lot more options of how to cut it!!!
So overall this is some good stuff, and there are some interesting points covered and potential opportunities to dig deeper when you have future interviews.
The big thing though, as everyone of course has already stated, is your approach with these. Make it conversational. Most people have been saying this because it sounds weird and uncomfortable. That's true for the most part, but if you were to interview like this come shoot time your real problem would be apparent when you try and cut together various clips and segments - if you don't have conversational, flowing dialogue to work with your cutting and meshing of audio is going to be rough and choppy and even if you mixed it all up, they'd still sound like Q&A sessions, and that's no fun :(
So have more fun with these! They're interesting to listen to, and they'll be that much better and prepare you that much more for the real deal. Having conversations will also lead you to questions you may have not of though to ask...I know Adam has mentioned it, but double check with him to see if he does in fact have the full skype recording of Mark Jonathon Harris from H.I.T. a while back. He touched on some really interesting stories/techniques about when he interviewed subjects for his doc.
The first interview was good, I think Stephanie will be interesting to document. I liked the fact that she dismissed 'lock jaw', you could juxtapose this with what Carroll said about it.
Also the bit about how pitbulls can be family pets? I would like to hear more about this, because nobody really talks about them in this way. To me, this was interesting and could play for some nice contrast. I also thought the reference about the huskies would be good to use, they look more attractive, but they are equally or more threatening. Overall she was a good interviewee.
As for Diana, she needed to be loosened up, I couldn't tell if she was for or against pitbulls? Then Carrol, who will be great to contrast with, especially her view on 'lock-jaw'. I'm really interested to hear her experiences with pitbulls that have given her this view of them. Also, the fact that she owns nice cuddly dogs will play a good part in explaining her stance on pitbulls.
So far, in the beginning, it just seems a little biased and insincere. Something about it seemed a little staged and less sincere....kinda took me out of the emotional aspect. It kept me from connecting with your subject
The person you're interviewing just seemed a little silly and I just didn't buy it. Now, I'm sure it was all sincere and such, but there's gotta be some way to keep it more serious and really pull at your viewers emotionally.
One note, I think instead of going by the book, bullet by bullet, you should ease into your questions from the answers you've been given. Give it more of a flow. You started to get into the flow a few times, but would then drop back into just going by the list. I understand that was the assignment, but it would be good practice to add improv into all of this and get some more interesting information from your interviewees.
Clip 2
I really liked this woman, her voice in general sounds really sincere and she seemed more like she was in a conversation. Again, you started off like you were reading off of it. I think you need to get into the habit of keeping it more conversational, like your interviewee. She sounds very sincere and I really believe what she's saying.
Clip 3
Like the second interviewee. I really liked this woman and really bought what she was saying.
Overall
You've got some good stuff here. I think it will be really interesting to see it visually cut together. Again, I think you just need to keep it more conversational and divert from the path to dig into certain things the people are saying. I'm interested to see where you go with this. I would of liked to have heard more from the last interviewee. She seemed to be rounding out documentary. Felt like there was more we didn't hear from her.
Courtney, can you get a vet to interview? I understand that the girl that works at the shelter probably knows her shit, but no one's going to question a vet - especially when you ask questions like 'is a pitbull's bite worse than other dogs'?' and the girl you're interviewing makes a lot of 'um' noises during her answer.
Try to ask your questions in a way where the interviewee will basically repeat the question, so instead of you asking 'how many dogs have you had?' and they just respond 'two' you need to get them to say 'I've owned two dogs in my lifetime' - makes it easier to cut/flow together with other interviewees/for the audience to understand. (This especially goes for your grandma, which I understand is hard to do with someone in their 70s)
I'm also going to caution against asking medicalish questions to regular ol' people, unless you're going to give the correct answer and point out the misconceptions (ie: grammy grams)
i had much more detailed notes but for sum reason when i clicked to post it said me session ran out or sumthing and it all got deleted. so here is the short version
interview 1- sketchy beginning, you sounded like you were reading she sounded uncertain of her answers. you should start all interviews with name, age, and profession, otherwise i don't really understand why their opinions on the subject mater, for instance what makes this girl qualified to answer these questions...oh and you two say 'like' too much..
interview 2- I like that you are getting different age groups, maybe you could ask any of your interviewers if they have every been bit by their own dogs like playing or sumthing, this interview brings up a lot of issues like the media, maybe you could come to a conclusion on WHY the media "picks" on pitts. you should customize questions on the person you interview. since this person is older you can ask if pitts or any other dog had the same reputation 30 years ago.
interview 3- specify what you mean by lock-jaw when you mention it, cause I thought lock jaw was cause when you get cut by something rusty and it effects your blood-stream
the first interview was definitely the most informative and relevant.
Personally I also think the first interview could have been a little more serious. Your subject almost seemed as if she was just agreeing with you because she was your friend. I'm sure thats not the case, but it came off that way to me. I liked the second interview better although at times Diana (I think that was her name) doesn't seem very interested in the subject matter. Im sure cutting with help with all of this so no worries. It's weird that she has no idea what "lock jaw" is, but I guess that might help your argument. Is your third interviewer correct with her definition of lock jaw? or wait shes talking about the disease. My bad
Nothing much other than agreeing with previous comments.
Second two were a bit stiff... I was actually a little uncomfortable listening to them as if I was a third person in the room kind of listening in to this scripted conversation.
Dunno if you need to push more, or just do a little more pre-interviewing/trust-building like what Crystal's been talking about in doc class to get things a little smoother and more comfortable.
"What is lock-jaw?"
"That's where their... I think lock-jaw is where they can't um... open their mouth or close their mouth, it's sort of locked in a certain position."
"Do you think pit-bulls have lock-jaw?"
"Actually I've never really heard of that. To tell you the truth..."
"Really? You've never really heard of a pit-bull biting someone and then, LOCKING THEIR JAW?"
"Um, not really."
"Hmm, okay..."
When you transcribe it, it's even a little funnier. Is lock-jaw really that well-known a subject? I've heard the term but never knew what it meant. Like Dom said, it could be funny if you were to contrast that with what interview 3 said about it. ;-)
Hey Courtney!
ReplyDeleteFirst of all I couldn’t open you’re first link... said it was private.
Listening to you’re second interview I think that Diana seems a little nervous. When she talks it doesn’t seem like it flows until later on. However, even though she warms up its still a bit choppy. I think that you’re questions aren’t open ended enough. A lot of them are like this one "how many stories have you heard about dog attacks (I think thats what you said)". There she will most likely answer with a number which she basically did I would make this question more like tell me about stories you’ve heard about people being attacked by dogs. I think if she were to have to answer with stories more than what she thinks may be the case she would be able to talk more and have more to say. For Carol I would have to say the same things you’re questions need to be more open ended so that you’re subjects talk more. I think you just need to work more on you’re questions to make them open ended so that you’re interviewee’s have more to say. Which will make it easier for you to edit and will make you’re stories flow more together. Also just a note let who you are interviewing finish what they have to say then ask another question. It could be good and if you interrupt them you can’t use that audio.
Good work so far though
Hey Courtney,
ReplyDeleteI, like Lauren, had issues opening up link 1 (of 3), as it told me I need to private access to the clip. Maybe your settings when uploading it were changed from when did the other 2, but its a pretty easy fix you can do on it whenever.
I am just going to list my thoughts on each of the other 2 clips separately below:
Clip 2 - Diana seems nervous and pretty "uptight". She answers your questions like she is reading them off of a teleprompter, instead of them "coming from the heart" (cheesy I know). When you set up the interview, did you and her kind of make small talk before you began or did you just dive right into it? Did you guys record in a comfortable setting (a house) or a professional setting (office/ pound)? I don’t know much about Documentary filmmaking, but I know there are ways of getting people to feel comfortable and open up. Just saying!
- I thought that it was interesting that she commented on how she thinks Pit Bulls develop bad behavior from other dogs, versus how they may be raised by human owners/ breeders. You could maybe go down this route and see what turns up.
Clip 3 – Carol does answer some of your questions more thoroughly and in-depth, but she seems to be having some of the same issues Diana in that she doesn’t sound 100% honest. I hate to say it but I think you need to really “push” your subjects more… on some of the questions, your interviewee’s (Diana mostly) seems to give you a straight-forward, yes/ no kind of an answer.
- I like how Carol didn’t pick up on the kind of “lock-jaw” you were referring too!
My gf and I have recently been looking into getting a puppy, so we have been making trips to the Dog Pound on a regular basis… and I would say about ½ of the dogs there are either Pit Bulls or Pit Bulls Mixed. It’s a real shame, because they were all over 1 year, which means they are no longer puppies and therefore, there is not very much interest in them as family dogs.
Good job.
Ian
sorry guys!!
ReplyDeletei fixed the first link and it should be viewable now! please check it out as its one of the more interesting interviews
thanks for listening.
What up C-dog!? (Get it? C-DOG?!)
ReplyDeleteSo first of all the way you ask the questions is a little weird. Since you're just reading them off of a page and you kinda sound like you don't care, it makes the whole interview seem less inviting I think. Like in your first clip you ask "Do you think this is true?" and the girl just says, "No." I think if you were a bit more welcoming you would have gotten more of a response out of her rather than having to pull it from her in a follow up question. Just try to have more of a conversation rather than reading scripted questions.
I like Ian's comment too about clip 2. If you just start with a conversation to kind of warm her up, then lead into the dog stuff she might be more relaxed.
I'm still really excited about your film since I LOVE pit bulls!
First off Sandra's joke as C-DOG is funny.
ReplyDeleteI like all of the questions your asked. It's just the way of delivering them is a bit odd. Once you stopped reading from your paper, it got a lot more interesting! It was more like a convo instead of a Q & A session ya know? It flowed a lot better. I don't think it sounds like you don't care; you sound like a robot, but a caring robot. :)Just let the questions come to you, have your notes in front of you, but have it be more of a conversation.
I really like Stephanie. She seems like someone who knows her stuff. I would def use her for the doc. But you were already planning on that right? She's good. She's knowledgeble, kind, she has a good voice. I think she'll be a great asset for your doc!
For the Diana interview I had a hard time hearing the questions because I think you were far away. But I like her voice. She seems like a very nice person. I agree with Lauren that the questions should be more open ended. Let the "interviewee" ramble on. There's nothing someone loves more than being able to voice their opinion on something they're passionate about.
I like the Carol interview. She's a good person to interview because of her opinions. I would try to get more out of her though. Is there a reason why this interview was only 4:25 mins long? I wanted to hear more from carol! lol
Ok so I found this guy (Manny). His neighbor was leaving his house in a rush, so Manny went over to see if he could help. Turns out the neighbor is dog sitting for a friend. The dog is a pit bull. That pit bull attacked the neighbor's dog so that neighbor was rushing to the vet with his dog. He asked Manny to close the gate to the yard bc he didn't have time. So Manny went to the gate to close it and the pit bull attacked him. It bit his arm/hand and then Manny had to go to the hospital also. He spent at least 5 hours there. And he lost part of his finger.
I can give you his info if you want. Let me know.
All in all, these were very good pre-interviews!
I think that the style of the interviews needs to be a little different. It seems like the interviewees are not that interested in the subject. I would suggest changing the style to more of a conversation, like maybe the questions should not have such an exact answer. Give them questions where they can add more commentary.
ReplyDeleteI'm in agreement with Sandra in that I think this should feel more like a converstation and less like a formal interview. That's really my biggest issue with what you have so far. It felt too scripted that I had a hard time seeing how this would fit together on screen.
ReplyDeleteI like the variety of people that you have though, and it was interesting to see the different definitions of lockjaw between the three of them. I'm glad to hear that most of them are thinking positively about these dogs and I'm looking forward to the more negative interviews to contrast these ones.
I think the key to this piece will be making your subjects comfortable with telling their story. I've been shooting a documentary this semester with a fellow student and we've felt that our interviews always go a lot smoother if we just sit and have a conversation with the subjects first and then naturally come back to those topics when the camera is rolling. You might even consider adding in some "fluff" as in some questions you don't necessarily intend to include in the documentary but just to help your subjects feel more at ease.
ReplyDeleteOverall I think you have an important message and I really look forward to seeing a first cut.
So far so good. I feel that you need more of the stories here. I know this is just a pre-interview but I don't think it is necessary to have the interviewees state definitions of some things like you have in the beginning.
ReplyDeleteI would avoid having your voice in the background. Whenever I have seen a very good documentary, I never hear the questions being asked (but thats just me). Just make sure they can answer questions without your voice needing to be there. Kinda just let them talk and tell their story, and if they fail then just point them in the right direction. It makes it flow a lot better and then the editor has a lot more options of how to cut it!!!
Can't wait to see this!!!!
So overall this is some good stuff, and there are some interesting points covered and potential opportunities to dig deeper when you have future interviews.
ReplyDeleteThe big thing though, as everyone of course has already stated, is your approach with these. Make it conversational. Most people have been saying this because it sounds weird and uncomfortable. That's true for the most part, but if you were to interview like this come shoot time your real problem would be apparent when you try and cut together various clips and segments - if you don't have conversational, flowing dialogue to work with your cutting and meshing of audio is going to be rough and choppy and even if you mixed it all up, they'd still sound like Q&A sessions, and that's no fun :(
So have more fun with these! They're interesting to listen to, and they'll be that much better and prepare you that much more for the real deal. Having conversations will also lead you to questions you may have not of though to ask...I know Adam has mentioned it, but double check with him to see if he does in fact have the full skype recording of Mark Jonathon Harris from H.I.T. a while back. He touched on some really interesting stories/techniques about when he interviewed subjects for his doc.
Hey Courtney,
ReplyDeleteThe first interview was good, I think Stephanie will be interesting to document. I liked the fact that she dismissed 'lock jaw', you could juxtapose this with what Carroll said about it.
Also the bit about how pitbulls can be family pets? I would like to hear more about this, because nobody really talks about them in this way. To me, this was interesting and could play for some nice contrast. I also thought the reference about the huskies would be good to use, they look more attractive, but they are equally or more threatening. Overall she was a good interviewee.
As for Diana, she needed to be loosened up, I couldn't tell if she was for or against pitbulls? Then Carrol, who will be great to contrast with, especially her view on 'lock-jaw'.
I'm really interested to hear her experiences with pitbulls that have given her this view of them. Also, the fact that she owns nice cuddly dogs will play a good part in explaining her stance on pitbulls.
Good job
thanks all for your comments, see you tomorrow!
ReplyDeleteClip 1
ReplyDeleteSo far, in the beginning, it just seems a little biased and insincere. Something about it seemed a little staged and less sincere....kinda took me out of the emotional aspect. It kept me from connecting with your subject
The person you're interviewing just seemed a little silly and I just didn't buy it. Now, I'm sure it was all sincere and such, but there's gotta be some way to keep it more serious and really pull at your viewers emotionally.
One note, I think instead of going by the book, bullet by bullet, you should ease into your questions from the answers you've been given. Give it more of a flow. You started to get into the flow a few times, but would then drop back into just going by the list. I understand that was the assignment, but it would be good practice to add improv into all of this and get some more interesting information from your interviewees.
Clip 2
I really liked this woman, her voice in general sounds really sincere and she seemed more like she was in a conversation. Again, you started off like you were reading off of it. I think you need to get into the habit of keeping it more conversational, like your interviewee. She sounds very sincere and I really believe what she's saying.
Clip 3
Like the second interviewee. I really liked this woman and really bought what she was saying.
Overall
You've got some good stuff here. I think it will be really interesting to see it visually cut together. Again, I think you just need to keep it more conversational and divert from the path to dig into certain things the people are saying. I'm interested to see where you go with this. I would of liked to have heard more from the last interviewee. She seemed to be rounding out documentary. Felt like there was more we didn't hear from her.
Courtney, can you get a vet to interview? I understand that the girl that works at the shelter probably knows her shit, but no one's going to question a vet - especially when you ask questions like 'is a pitbull's bite worse than other dogs'?' and the girl you're interviewing makes a lot of 'um' noises during her answer.
ReplyDeleteTry to ask your questions in a way where the interviewee will basically repeat the question, so instead of you asking 'how many dogs have you had?' and they just respond 'two' you need to get them to say 'I've owned two dogs in my lifetime' - makes it easier to cut/flow together with other interviewees/for the audience to understand. (This especially goes for your grandma, which I understand is hard to do with someone in their 70s)
I'm also going to caution against asking medicalish questions to regular ol' people, unless you're going to give the correct answer and point out the misconceptions (ie: grammy grams)
i had much more detailed notes but for sum reason when i clicked to post it said me session ran out or sumthing and it all got deleted. so here is the short version
ReplyDeleteinterview 1-
sketchy beginning, you sounded like you were reading she sounded uncertain of her answers. you should start all interviews with name, age, and profession, otherwise i don't really understand why their opinions on the subject mater, for instance what makes this girl qualified to answer these questions...oh and you two say 'like' too much..
interview 2-
I like that you are getting different age groups, maybe you could ask any of your interviewers if they have every been bit by their own dogs like playing or sumthing, this interview brings up a lot of issues like the media, maybe you could come to a conclusion on WHY the media "picks" on pitts. you should customize questions on the person you interview. since this person is older you can ask if pitts or any other dog had the same reputation 30 years ago.
interview 3-
specify what you mean by lock-jaw when you mention it, cause I thought lock jaw was cause when you get cut by something rusty and it effects your blood-stream
the first interview was definitely the most informative and relevant.
Personally I also think the first interview could have been a little more serious. Your subject almost seemed as if she was just agreeing with you because she was your friend. I'm sure thats not the case, but it came off that way to me. I liked the second interview better although at times Diana (I think that was her name) doesn't seem very interested in the subject matter. Im sure cutting with help with all of this so no worries. It's weird that she has no idea what "lock jaw" is, but I guess that might help your argument. Is your third interviewer correct with her definition of lock jaw? or wait shes talking about the disease. My bad
ReplyDeleteNothing much other than agreeing with previous comments.
ReplyDeleteSecond two were a bit stiff... I was actually a little uncomfortable listening to them as if I was a third person in the room kind of listening in to this scripted conversation.
Dunno if you need to push more, or just do a little more pre-interviewing/trust-building like what Crystal's been talking about in doc class to get things a little smoother and more comfortable.
"What is lock-jaw?"
"That's where their... I think lock-jaw is where they can't um... open their mouth or close their mouth, it's sort of locked in a certain position."
"Do you think pit-bulls have lock-jaw?"
"Actually I've never really heard of that. To tell you the truth..."
"Really? You've never really heard of a pit-bull biting someone and then, LOCKING THEIR JAW?"
"Um, not really."
"Hmm, okay..."
When you transcribe it, it's even a little funnier. Is lock-jaw really that well-known a subject? I've heard the term but never knew what it meant. Like Dom said, it could be funny if you were to contrast that with what interview 3 said about it. ;-)
Good job Courtney!
-David