Creating a striking and successful music video

Here are a few blunt, even rude suggestions regarding your music video. You can do whatever the heck you like, but if you follow these simple rules and pointers, your video will look good, and will look like a music video

Vary your cinematography 

Not all shots are created equal. And simply pointing the camera at what you want to film and hoping it looks cool just isn't going to work

The most important thing to remember is to vary your cinematography. Mid shot mid shot mid shot is not only boring, it also looks nothing like a music video (unless of course you're doing something really specific and precise). In general, you'll want to use every shot type, camera angle and camera movement you can think of.

However, some shots just work better than others. This is why we're asking you to watch lots of music videos: to see what other creators do, what works, and what shots you can effectively steal for your own production. 

This very famous cartoon by Wally Wood is related to comic book panels, but it should give you some inspiration for what shots are particularly effective.

Michael's top shots that always work

• ECU of lips, eyes, fingers etc - mysterious and builds character!
• ECU of fingers on guitar fretboard - very indie
• CU of points/gurning/shouting at the camera - very edgy!
• ECU of an insect crawling on a leaf - bugs are cool
• MES of fluro/neon/glosticks in a black box room - techno techno!
• ECU of shoes walking across floor - maybe combine with a slider track
• GoPro POV of cycling around - I love cycling!
• Crazy, excessive makeup - go hard or go home
• Costume changes - If it works for Kylie
• Cross dressing - really simple, really effective, still catches attention in 2022
• Cherry Hinton Chalk Pits - it looks like Mars! 
• Abstract water shots - bit of ink blooming in water or flowers floating in a bath... always works
• Flickering TV screens - bonus marks for CRT

Don't just wear jeans and a T shirt

Things that look normal and cool in real life often look REALLY STUPID in a music video. Wearing jeans and a t-shirt (or a hoodie or trackie bottoms or whatever) is a sort of uniform to not get noticed. In a music video, you look like some random person who shouldn't be there. Do NOT wear normal clothes in your music video. Wear the clothes of a celebrity. Wear something crazy!

Think carefully about an interesting setting 

Your living room is boring. Your bedroom is boring. The local park? It's boring. Unless you start to pull furniture around and think about how to frame things artistically and strikingly, your video will descend in to pictures of stuff. 

Keep the camera still

Always keep the camera still. Never move the camera. Are you in doubt? Don't move it. What should I do with the camera? Keep ii still! Moving the camera around, especially just holding it in your hand will create a jerky, blurry, fuzzy, amateurish mess. If you want movement, you can achiebve it through EDITING later on. Cutting shots together is WAY more exciting that running around with the camera like you're some kind of drunk reporter or you're trying to reenact The Blair Witch Project. 

Don't 'go for a walk' 

Going to be honest here: sometimes the worst videos are the 'going for a walk' videos. Like, 'lets go for a walk round town, also I'm really sad'. The issue is, going for a walk is good for exercise and to get from A to be and for the purposes of relaxation. But going for a walk is also REALLY boring to watch. We don't watch music videos to watch mundane things. You can also add 'hanging out down the park' and 'having a big party' to this list. Sorry!

Cutting to the beat is overrated 

This is more editing advice than shooting advice, though it pays to be thinking about editing when you're shooting. But basically, cutting in a way that is too precise, and too much on the beat can actually make a video that is too jerky, boring, and lifeless. This is one to play by ear when you edit, but experiment with not cutting each time you hear a bass drum or something, especially if your song is in a simple time signature like 4/4 (UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ)

 Keep things clean, in focus and well lit

If you shoot at night it will probably look terrible. If you film in your bedroom with no additional lighting, it will definitely look terrible. Cameras need light. If you don't have light, it will look terrible. No exceptions. So how to film at night? You can use lights to flood light the area. But here's a better, easier, more effective way: shoot during the brightest day imaginable. Have your actors wear big jackets and scarfs (it might get a bit sweaty). Then, tweak the exposure and the colour balance in post production. It will look great! Artistic! Evocative! It will look like a music video!

tl;dr: You can't 'fix' wobble or grain or darkness in post production. So shoot in clear, sharp focus in the most light you can manage using a completely static (still) camera, and use post production to add any effects and colours to the mix!

Things to absolutely never do in your music video because it's illegal or unethical

Hopefully ALL of these go without saying, but here are some examples of things that you legally or ethnically cannot do in your music video

• Chose a song that is blatantly hateful, fascist, racist, etc
• Have a white artist lip-syncing to the 'n-word'
• Hateful or offensive imagery with no justification - eg using a Nazi flag, even ironically
• Filming unstimulated physical harm and distress, even if consensual 
• Unstimulated drug use and the depiction of actual illegal drugs
• Significant sexualised representations - remember, you count as a vulnerable adult
• No depictions of vandalism
• No upsetting and disruptive behaviour, eg setting off smoke bombs in public, and deliberately shoving cameras in peoples faces
• Blocking public paths 
• Extreme depictions of violence that are highly likely to traumatise the audience

Revision: Les Revenants and atypical representations

To what extent do the representations in Les Revenants reflect the time in which it was made?

The representations in Les Revenants are deliberately confusing and unconventional, high reflects the modern society in which it was made. 

Historically, the representation of women that we have studied in media studies has often been highly oppressive and stereotypical. Texts such as Woman use stereotypical conventions to portray women as housewives. However, a number of things have changed since the 1960s, and women in particular are now portrayed in more powerful and diverse roles. In this essay, I shall argue that Les Revenants uses unconventional representations to challenge conventions, and confirm that we live in a confusing and atypical time. Les Revenants is French horror TV show which targets a niche and highly specialised audience. It was released by major French cable channel Canal +.

Plan 

Explicit representations of sex

Long shot, HA of victor isolated in garden

Conventional of horror

Julie clothing: baggy, loose, oversized

Shirt - stereotypically masculine

Julie is not scared

Standoffish 

Lena  - stereotypical teenage girl: rebellious

Camille: hysterical, stereotypical young woman

Le petit mort - the little death 

Sex and death

Death of childhood

Working class Julie flat

Seurat family house glassy and posh

Low key lighting Julie apartment 

Intertextual horror reference

One way in which Les Revs portrays gender atypically is through the representation of Julie. Julie is dressed in a strikingly androgynous style. For example, her baggy, oversized jumper has connotations of masculinity, and covers her body in a manner which challenges traditional, hegemonic gender norms. Additionally, through her oversized and deliberately non-sexualised costume codes, it can be argued that the character of Julie deliberately subverts the male gaze. Julie functions as a clear binary opposition to the many of the other women in this TV show, and in doing so, the character of Julie reinforces the ideological perspective that the world is complicated, and not everyone identifies with the same stereotypical ways of dressing and acting. In this sense, Julie can be seen to subvert stereotypical perceptions of how men and women act. Julie provides a more diverse representation of women, and she may be particularly appealing to certain women watching the show who may identify with her unconventional outlook. 

Another atypical representation can be seen through the representation of Lena. Lena is represented as being explicitly sexually driven and sexually active. Lena is clearly motivated by sex, as we see in the scene in the Lake Pub where she assertively pick up Simon. Letter in the narrative arc of the first episode, we see her as a fifteen inviting an older boy in to her house. The MES that constructs this sex scene is constructed through a series of voyeuristic close ups, that position the target audiences in an uncomfortable mode of address. The representation of sex is hardly pornographic: instead it is both intimate and relatable to the secondary teenage audience. The close up shots of pink, heavy breathing faces is somewhat unflattering, which constructs a frank and relatable experience of sex that is highly unconventional yet also reflects the time and place in which it was made. From a stereotypical perspective, French media is often more sexually explicit and open about sexual issues, which may mean that the themes of this episode could be shocking to British audiences. However, this show was still broadcast on Channel 4, which reflects changing societal values

Yet another atypical representation is realised through the highly unconventional and atypical setting of rural France

One way in which Les Revs reflects the time in which it was made is by showing a clear contrast between working class and middle class identities

Revision: representation, realism and Les Revenants

Stuart Hall argues that representations in media products will always make claims about realism. To what extent do you agree with this statement? Make reference to Les Revenants in your answer.  

Representation refers to the re-presentation of a place, a group of people or an event by the producer for the purpose of reflecting their ideology. In this essay, I shall argue that the producer of Les Revenants is presenting atypical and subversive representations in order to challenge the niche and specialised target audience of the show. I shall also argue that while the representation of gender in particular in Les Revenants is subversive, it also makes big and important statements about how men and women are treated in real life. Les Revenants is a niche horror TV show set in rural France and produced by Canal +.

Hyperreality refers to a representation that is more realistic and more relatable than the thing that it is representing in real life. Typically film and media products are constructed through hyperreal representations. However, these representations typically do not portray real life, but instead represent a 'perfect' reality. Julie is a character in Les Revenants who challenges a number of stereotypical representations and expectations of how women should behave. For example, in the scene when she is followed home by creepy child Victor (a typical horror film convention!), Julie is clearly coded as not being hegemonically attractive. The MES of Julies oversized baggy clothing is subversive in the sense that it clearly does not sexualise her. Under her jumper she is wearing an oversized shirt, which has stereotypical connotations of masculinity. She is wearing no visible makeup, and her hair is messy and unkempt. By being coded in this way, Julie is interestingly subverting the concept of the male gaze, and challenging the idea that women serve a voyeuristic purpose for the assumed heterosexual male audience. Julie's lack of sexualisation is reinforced through the binary opposition constructed through her neighbour, who is represented in a stereotypically sexualised manner. By challenging sexist representations of women, Julie provides the niche target audience an alternative to straightforward sexualised representations of women, and creates a more compelling and relatable representation to an educated and feminist audience. By appealing to a specific and niche audience, this helps Les Revs minimise risk and maximise profit. 

Personality: cold, deep voice, enjoys horror films (Texas Chainsaw, The Exorcist)

USP: something different, appeal to a different audience

The character Lena also subverts typical representations of gender, though she does so in a completely different way. Lena is clearly cast because she is hegemonically attractive, though her dress and personality are in many ways subversive. 

Flirtatious and sexually motivated. Subversive and atypical representation. Clearly subverts sexist hegemonic values

Lena is aggressive and assertive, eg 'de rien connard!' (thanks for nothing, dickhead!). Subverts stereotypical representations of women and expectations of women 

Lena reflects quite significant changing values since the 1960s. Her brash and over the top manner would have been unthinkable, and she better reflects reality than many sexist, straightforward representations of women 

Scruffy and punky, yet also stereotypically feminine as well. Her representation is both atypical and stereotypical, which makes her representation complicated and challenging 

Revision: Humans and cultural capital

 Stuart Hall argues that media products can be interpreted differently by different audiences, depending on their cultural capital. To what extent do you agree with this statement?

Another point, not made here, is that the original Swedish version of Humans is rather less mainstream has significantly more sex, violence and explicit politics than the British version, which perhaps challenges the idea that the British version is targeting a niche audience! Seriously, watch the Swedish version. It's 1000x better!

Cultural capital refers to the social assets of a person, for example their education, their tastes, their way of dressing. Stuart Hall argues that audiences can completely interpret products differently depending on their cultural upbringing. In this essay, I shall argue that the audience's interpretation of Humans is completely dependant on their level of education. I shall argue that Humans targets a niche audience with a high level of cultural capital. In order to analyse this idea, I shall be making reference to Humans, a British. American co production science TV show which targets a niche and middle class audience. 

One way in which Humans targets a niche audience with a high level of cultural capital is through its highly atypical and even controversial advertising campaign. The advertising campaign to Humans is highly postmodern. It is constructed in a way which is deliberately misleading and difficult to understand, to both challenge the target audience, and to increase the likelihood of word of mouth advertising. The advertising campaign for Humans is deliberately atypical. Rather than advertising the show itself and what time it is on, the persona Synthetics trailer instead advertises the fictional robot or 'synth' from the TV show itself. The advert not only does not mention the TV show, but also includes a convincing and professional on screen graphic/logo, a link to a professional spoof website, and the overall tone of a high end electronic product. Beyond merely being confusing, the advert also contains a number of themes introduced in the TV series. For example, there is a sinister shot in low key lighting of a synth leading a young boy upstairs which may be connotative of using technology to distract children. The theme of technology and how we use it is a key theme in Humans. This complicated and adult theme clearly appeals more to an audience with a high cultural capital, as it reflects dangerous and problematic real world issues. 

Another way in which Humans appeals to the assumed cultural capital of the target audience is through the representation of the Hawkins Family. While in the original Swedish version, the main family are stereotypically middle class and Swedish, the Hawkins family are stereotypically middle class and British. For example, the Hawkins are a stereotypical nuclear family with '2.4' children. This representation of a stereotypical middle class family allows the audience to fully relate to them. Their middle class status is emphasised through the MES of their large and spacious house, and their well furnished kitchen. Their privilege is further emphasised through the fact they are all together in the morning. However, the family are actually by something that is arguably trivial: a sit down breakfast. This luxury would therefore be desirable to the target middle class audience. Yet most of all, the most desirable aspect of this scene is Anita herself. In both versions of the show, Anita/Mimi is played by an East Asian actor. The significance of this casting is based on a stereotype of East Asian women in particular being cast in roles where they provide services to white main characters. Clearly here, Humans is making a comparison between technology and lower class and ethnic minority workers. This challenging and controversial idea is linked to the concept of commodity fetishism. This difficult to understand concept will doubtless be more successful with audiences with a higher level of cultural capital. 

However, there are many aspects of Humans that be enjoyed and interpreted even by audiences that lack cultural capital. For example, the narrative of the show is actually rather straightforward, and focuses on one man (Leo) trying to track down his robot friends. In the scene where Leo is introduced, he is represented through a scruffy working class costume, and uses an aggressive mode of address in order to interrogate the antagonist. Additionally, Leo is motivated through his desire to track down 'the princess'. which is a highly cliched story arc. In this sense, Humans is not only a controversial science show, but a straightforward and exciting soap opera, that will stereotypically appeal to working class audiences. Additionally, many of the cast are clearly hegemonically sexually attractive, which emphasise the potential sexual gratification pf the TV show, using sex to sell the TV show. Finally, by including science fiction conventions, Humans is actually using the conventions of a mainstream and extremely popular genre that not only targets niche audiences, but also targets mainstream audiences with a lower cultural capital. 

However, ultimately, Humans predominantly is targeting a middle class audience...

Revision: Humans and audience interaction

What opportunities for interaction do TV shows provide for their audiences? Make reference to Humans in your answer

The original, Swedish version Akta Manniskor also presents a stereotypical breakfast scene, albeit a stereotypical Swedish breakfast scene. And, while the family's hair is noticeably very, very blonde, the actor who plays Anita/Mimi is also East Asian. Clearly, there is something very significant about ethnicity happening here!

Knee Jerk: Humans provides substantial opportunities for audience interaction 

Audience refer to those who use, interact and take pleasure from a media product. When watching a TV show, the audience essentially enter a contract with the producer, by decoding meaning that the producer encodes. In this essay, I shall explore just some of the many ways in which the producers of Humans provides opportunities for the audience to interact with the TV show. In order to explore this idea, I shall be making reference to Humans, a 2015 science fiction TV show co produced by channel 4 and AMC, and its advertising campaign.

One way in which Humans encourages audience interaction is through it's highly innovative and unconventional advertising campaign. The TV advertising campaign for Humans is highly subversive. Instead of being a conventional TV advert, the Persona Synthetics trailer parodies adverts for tech products. The advert diegetically situates the audience by advertising a product from the narrative of the TV show. This is not only atypical, but highly immersive. In the advert, it uses a cliched and conventional direct mode of address that provides a range of hermeneutic codes to the audience. One question that is being asked of the audience is whether or not the advert is even real. The advert features the MES of an apparent robot completing house activities, and the MES of a middle class British household creates a realistic mode of address, which asks the audience to question if it's real. Additionally, the darker themes of the TV show are introduced through the direct and prolonged mode of address between the robot and the audience, which creates an unsettling atmosphere. These elements combined encourage audience interaction. For example, audiences can check out the website included at the end of the trailer, as well as using or checking out the hashtag, which makes use of digital convergence. Finally, this advert offers audiences many opportunities to discuss the advert, and to try and work out what it means, which is a highly participatory and interactive experience.

One way in which Humans provides opportunities for audience interaction is through themes of postmodernism and hyperreality. Postmodernism refers to an outlook on society that is completely sceptical, and argues that absolutely nothing is real. Postmodernists believe that our world is too complicated to understand. Humans clearly shares this bleak outlook, particularly in the concept of hyperreality. This advert creates a deliberately false and confusing perception of reality, in order to manipulate, confuse and even upset the audience. This complicated and disturbing advert actually functions in a very conventional way, encouraging the audience to research and then of course to start watching the TV show. In this sense we can see it is highly interactive. 

Another way in which humans provides opportunities for audience interaction is through the hegemonically perfect, hyperreal representation of the British family. In the original Swedish version, the Hawkins family are very stereotypically Swedish. However, in the British version, the Hawkins family are stereotypically British family. The Hawkins family are a nuclear family, and sit together to eat their meal. They are middle class, and this is emphasised through the MES of their big kitchen, the amount of furniture they own, and their expensive breakfast layout. However, the audience are assumed to be white, middle class and belonging to a nuclear family. This is a deliberately controversial technique, which is made clear by the inclusion of Anita. Anita is represented as essentially a slave, and is othered from the Hawkins family by being East Asian. In the Swedish original , Anita is also Asian, which reinforces the ideology of the TV show. Anita is represented as exotic and submissive, which is a highly stereotypical representation of East Asian women. These diverse and challenging representations allow a diverse audience to interact with Humans. For example, white audiences may see this scene as relatable and even an escapist fantasy. However East Asian audiences may also feel targeted thorough the TV show drawing attention to themes of victimisation and racial hierarchy. These themes provide the niche target audience with many themes to to discuss online, on internet forums such as Reddit.