1

VIDEO CRITERIA FOR MASS MEDIA MAJOR @ CSUSM

GENRE______(Fiction, Non-Fiction, PSA)

PROJECT NAME: ______STUDENT: ______LENGTH:____

Overall Project Criteria

Needs improvement
(1-2) / Acceptable
(3-4) / Excellent
(5-6) / Score / Comments
Concept Realization /
  • The work as a whole was garbled, unclear, and/or uninteresting
  • For documentary, the film doesn’t transmit the participants’ point of view
/ •The work as a whole is not consistently clear or compelling.
• For documentary, film transmits the participants’ perspective /
  • The work was well expressed, executed, and compelling
  • For documentary, film transmits participants’ perspective with empathy & intelligence

Integrity & Unity /
  • The work does not fulfill its premise
  • Cinematic elements worked against each other and detracted from the film
/
  • Work partially fulfills in presenting its premise.
  • Some cinematic elements worked together but not all
/
  • Project is true to its premise.
  • Cinematic elements worked in concert to fulfill the potential of the film

Audience Engagement / • Audience can’t identify with characters and story /
  • Audience is mildly engaged.
/
  • The project was riveting.

Clarity /
  • The story and action were confusing
/
  • The story and action were somewhat muddled
/
  • The story and action were clear

Authorship /
  • Film style is derivative, generic, & anonymous
/
  • A distinct storytelling voice is emerging in the work
/
  • Distinct, individual storytelling voice in evident

Pre-Production (Research and Development, Screenwriting, Casting)

Needs improvement
(1-2) / Acceptable
(3-4) / Excellent
(5-6) / Score / Comments
Premise & Theme /
  • The premise was flat or unoriginal
  • The story lacked a discernable theme
/
  • The premise was somewhat original
• The script conveyed a thematic message beyond the confines of its narrative, but the message was muddled or trite /
  • The premise was highly original
• The script conveyed a coherent and interesting theme
Characterization / • Characters were unoriginal or stereotypical. / • Characterization was generally well depicted, but with occasional lapses or contradictions / • Both primary and secondary characters were presented in new and vivid ways
Story Development / • The story unfolded in ways that failed to exploit its potential
• Film has a problematic ending and lacks closure / • The story was somewhat or occasionally successful in exploiting its premise
• Film achieves closure satisfactorily /
  • The story developed in ways that exploited its dramatic, comic, emotional potential.
  • Film delivers an unforgettable resolution

Casting / • Actor selection was cliché or inappropriate for the roles
•Choice of documentary subjects was uninspired / Actor selection was appropriate for all roles
•Choice of documentary subjects fit the project and provided appropriate story information / • The casting choices were consistently inspired
• Choice of documentary subjects worked on expositional and emotional levels.

Production (Direction, Camera, Sound Recording, Acting)

Needs improvement
(1-2) / Acceptable
(3-4) / Excellent
(5-6) / Score / Comments
Performance /
  • Acting was wooden, not credible
  • The placement and movement of actors was awkward and detracted from project.
  • • Documentary participants are scattered and nervous
/ • Some performances were credible, but not all
•The placement and movement of actors was adequate.
• Documentary participants satisfactorily impart the facts.
• Documentary participants are comfortable and able / • Performances were convincing, compelling, and emotionally involving
•The placement and movement of actors was imaginative, enhancing theoverall effect of the film.
• Documentary participants are focused and at ease, trusting the makers
Visual Composition / • The angles and camera moves that made up the scenes were poorly chosen.
• Many shots were poorly framed detracting from the film.
• The lighting was amateurish and detracted from the aesthetic quality of the film. / •The angles and camera moves were competently chosen though only aided the intention of the film in some scenes • The framing and use of lenses was competent but did little to further the impact of the story.
• The lighting was competent but didn’t create an effective mood except occasionally. / • The angles and camera moves were effective in capturing the important moments.
• Framing and lens use added significantly to the aesthetic quality of the picture
• The lighting created effective mood that added to the emotional impact.
Sound Recording / • The recorded dialogue and natural sound was not intelligible / • The recorded dialogue and natural sound was coherent, but sounded unnatural. / • The recorded dialogue and natural sound was natural and dynamic.

Post-Production (Editing, Sound Mixing)

Needs improvement
(1-2) / Acceptable
(3-4) / Excellent
(5-6) / Score / Comments
Visual Post-Production /
  • The pacing was poor, with slow action scenes and/or quick dramatic scenes.
  • The film had accidental jump cuts or other distractions in the edit.
• The images palette and densities appear to be unmatched & unfinished. /
  • The pace was appropriate to the story
  • The editing was generally invisible, except where intentionally apparent.
/ The film was superbly paced and highlighted certain moments. •The editing was completely invisible, or where designed worked to create a brilliant montage or essayistic journey. • The palette, and density of color works with the story and is consistent
Audio Post & Music /
  • There was no sound design to speak of.
  • The film lacked sound and room tone in places
  • The levels of the different elements were not balanced
  • The music was inappropriate for the film.
/
  • The sound design was appropriate for the film.
  • All sounds and room tone were present, but some did not sound right.
  • The levels of the different elements were balanced appropriately
  • The music was appropriate but not well cued
/
  • Sounds played an important, expressive role in the telling of the story
  • All sounds and room tone were present and they sounded good.
  • The mix was dynamic and expressive.
  • The music was expressive and well cued.

Total score: ____/84