A shot list is integral to a shoot, it tells you where and when you’ll be shooting as well as what will be in the scene. As such, it is imperative that the list is perfect. If something has no purpose in the shot, it shouldn’t be there, you can think of this as the reverse of Chekov’s gun principle which states that if an object is payed attention to in a shot, it should have some story significance by the end of the plot. “If you say in the first chapter that there is a rifle hanging on the wall, in the second or third chapter it absolutely must go off. If it’s not going to be fired, it shouldn’t be hanging there” (THE WRITING KYLIE, 2015).

During the production of the shot list I regularly consulted the script provided to me which I would then break down scene by scene. I’d think “what is happening in this scene and how do I represent that visually?” One of the scenes in the script describes a montage of a character watching TV and getting more drunk as it goes on, I took that scene and made a list of all the things imperative to that scene. He’s getting more drunk so there should always be a drink in the shot, preferably with it getting more empty with each shot. his surroundings should become more messy to show his lack of spatial awareness and so on, I broke down every scene with that mindset to create a shot list that the rest of the team could refer to over the course of the production.

THE WRITING KYLIE, 2015. AN EXPLANATION OF THE TERM CHEKHOV’S RIFLE: WHAT NOT TO DO. [Viewed 1st May 2020]. Available from: https://thewritingkylie.com/blog/an-explanation-of-the-term-chekovs-riflewhat-not-to-do

Link- https://vimeo.com/97069911

Password- Nordic2014

Within the first few seconds of its run time, Listen (2014) clearly conveys its narrative to the viewer. The delayed sentences and clarity of speech displayed by the actress in the first scene establishes her role as an interpreter while simultaneously implying that she is trying to calm the person she is speaking to. The point of view shifts multiple times between all the people present in the room to establish their reactions to her words. The film makes exceptional use of this as it captures the police officer’s confusion as they do not understand her words while also capturing the looks of the interpreter who is seemingly trying to neglect the woman’s suffering for religious purposes. This behaviour of the interpreter is further accentuated when in response to an officer’s question regarding the woman’s gestures, the interpreter claims “it’s a religious gesture, women do it if they feel guilty”.

In an interview, it was stated that “we took this story from an amalgamation of many real life cases that took place” (RASKIN, 2018). by taking inspiration from real life events, the story comes across as more grounded the viewer, it makes the characters and the situation more empathetic as a result which in turn makes the story more engaging.

Hjort (2018) speaks to the use of epistemic empathy in the piece with regards to the woman’s covered appearance, stating that it allows for “both empathetic and sympathetic attitudes towards the victim”. By fully concealing the abused womans face, it allows for the discrepancies between the police and the interpreter for religious reasons but it also promotes the emotion and direction of the actors. The audience is solely reliant on dialogue and the actors movements when forming an idea of the true narrative and the extent of this woman’s suffering. The lack of a visual aid means that the audience has their own interpretation of the damage the woman has sustained, further promoting the emotional connection between the audience and the piece.

Bibliography:

Hjort, M., 2018, Unlikely empathy: The process and effect of identification in Listen. Short Film Studies, Volume 8(1), 73-77

Raskin, R., 2018, An interview with Rungano Nyoni and Hamy Ramezan on Listen. Short Film Studies, Volume 8(1), 65-68