Newcastle University: Year 2
Hey! Here's my post all about my 2nd year as a Film Practices Student!
Just as a heads up for anyone that isn't me reading this: Newcastle University's Film Practices course is primarily a documentary course. You do study fiction film both in all years, but the practical element is entirely non-fiction. It's about the only degree-level course in the UK currently that primarily focuses on documentary filmmaking, and you do also study/analyse documentary films as well as making them. The skills you learn are not, as far as I can tell from having friends at other unis that study film, different at all from those who study fiction filmmaking. I think the only key difference is that you don't learn screenwriting - every other element of production remains the same. I would say my course, this year, was split into 60% theory, 40% practical.
Semester 1
So, in my first semester of year 2 I had:
MCH2086: Analysing Documentary Practices
MCH2000: Film Theory for Practice 1 - What is Cinema?
MCH2035: Media, Mythology and Storytelling - How to Analyse Archetypes and Ideologies in Media Texts
MCH2086: Analysing Documentary Practices
Similarly to my practical filmmaking modules last year, in MCH2086 we had different tasks each week that were more creatively-oriented rather than achieving a particular technique (like the 'Dialogue' ect from last year). These were:
A Teaser
Sound Exercise
Self-portrait
Archive
A 'Truth'
I'll also be including links to each of these films as hyperlinks on the freeze-frames so feel free to check them out if you're interested!
A Teaser
If you're not sure, a 'teaser' is like a trailer but it kinda gives a more full impression of the film (that spoils the ending in a way). We had to go home and watch one of three documentaries: 'Man on Wire,' 'Please Vote for Me' or 'Touching the Void.' I chose 'Touching the Void' because it was definitely the story I was most interested in out of the descriptions. I watched it with my roommate, and wowee was it intense. We had to edit the whole film, and even though this was the first of the tasks, and I found it really tough.
**SPOILERS FOR 'TOUCHING THE VOID'** I wanted to split the film up into thirds because it had to be 3-minutes long, with the first third being before the fall, the 2nd third being both of their experiences apart on the mountain and the final 3rd would be them returning to each other. It took me so long to edit the first third that I had to rush the rest of the video so I didn't love the editing of my teaser towards the end. I had a lot of moments that I wanted to put in that already had music over them which was tricky to edit around. I saw one of my classmates had edited a version that showed them going slightly mad amazingly well with music and all sorts, and I didn't play on the 'characters going slightly insane' element as much as I really could have.
All in all, the teaser was probably my least favourite task from this module because it felt challenging but not in a creative way that I enjoyed because I was editing someone else's footage/ideas. Sometimes a challenge in terms of time constraints is really fun and useful in the long-run but for this I didn't really feel like it benefitted me too much. But, I saw other student's whose were fantastically well edited and the best thing they produced on this module in my opinion, so it shows I should really work on my editing!
Sound Exercise
This was absolutely the easiest task out of the bunch. For this one we had to just record a space. I think people did kinda end up telling stories though which sections of their sound recordings they ended up using for their minute-long film (this one had to be 1 minute rather than 3), but it wasn't technically part of the description for the audio to tell a story.
About mid way through a Halloween party at my house I started recording because my friends had started playing a game of 'who is more likely to?' It was a great thing to record because there was a chatty atmosphere before the round began to set the scene for the listener, that then moved into individuals speaking one at a time to tell an easy to follow story of the main person finding out they are 'the most likely to have a fight with a stranger.'
I honestly can't remember exactly how long I filmed for. According to my reflection I recorded a lot, and I know for sure it was at least 5 minutes but I have no idea whether we're talking 10 or 40 minutes in reality! I just remember finding that section of the audio quite early on in the recording when it came to editing because I purposefully started recording while they were playing a game rather than when the party was more disjointed with general chatting. With the game, it's easier for the listener to get a sense of character and story, and each round is so short that it fit nicely into the 1-minute time-limit.
Self-Portrait
This one was the first one that I actually got weirdly emotional making. The task was to make self-portrait of ourselves through film.. I had some friends that did narrations of how they were feeling at that time, or films about their interests such as collectables or gaming, and I knew some people that made films about a day in their life.
My friend Chris Fan did a really great one that I wanted to give credit to as well as another example of a different kind of self-portrait if you're interested in checking it out: 'Chris' Self Portrait'.
At the time, and still now to a large extent, I don't like making films about myself or that feature me in them massively. I would just rather be talking about someone else than myself I suppose, and at the time it was incredibly daunting to know that all of my class were going to see a film made by me about me (oh yeah, sidenote: we watched every person's film and commented on them as a class. I can't tell you how scary this was at first and I had some people ask for theirs not to be shown to the class. But it was, in the end, a good thing because it make people more competitive and more self-reflexive). Looking back, I don't know why I was so nervous because the whole task was going to be inherently self-absorbed, wether deprecating or loving, and everyone knew that so it wouldn't have been as big of a deal as I made it out to be. Anyway, as such, I decided to make one through the words of my best friend from home and through the perspective of our friendship.
My friend and I used to make really rubbish films and vlogs when we were in high school and that's where most of these clips came from, so this was actually my first time dealing with archival footage too. I tried to keep a really close eye on and record of my old footage because I think it's just so sweet to look back on, and this film makes me genuinely a little bit teary every time I watch it because I just love my friend so much and I'm really glad they see me in that light. As for the task, it wasn't technically a SELF-portrait.. More like someone else doing a portrait of me. But it was, I guess, a construction of myself using someone else's words.
Archive
Even though I think that my Self-Portrait was the best film I made in this module, I do think I enjoyed the making of my archive one the most. For this, we had to use the Prelinger Archive, which is full of non-copyrighted footage from all throughout the 20th Century on a number of different topics. The only restrictions were, of course, how long it had to be (1 minute) and the fact that it couldn't be a music video.
I really liked that with this one there was so much variety of options, but it wasn't like you had an infinite number of videos to work with - meaning you weren't just aimlessly struggling to pick the best videos to use. I searched for a good few topics until I found one that actually had more than 2 videos on it on the Prelinger Archive: Alaska. I started putting it together with the aim of making it look "not so bad" as a place to visit (because of the video I used at the beginning). At first I was going to compare the night & daytime of Alaska since I found a video that made it look a lot less cutesy than the other footage I found, but decided this was too ambitious for a 1-minute film.
But, I didn't like the silent nature of it, so I wondered if the Prelinger Archive had any music on it. I can't remember exactly what I typed in to find it, but I ended up finding this really sweet music video by a band in the 60's that I just had to use! The lyrics were just so perfect!
'Truth'
This one was similarly quite a broad idea, we had to just express a 'truth' in some way. So we were like: "what do you mean by that?" and our lecturers gave us a list of different types of 'truth films' that they meant. So, for example: you could do an essayistic truth, or a poetic truth, or an observational truth, or an expository truth.. They described them more specifically on the note but what they were basically driving at was the different modes of documentary we studied in year 1.
If you watch the video, you can probably tell that I was going through a bit of a rough patch at the time - which is pretty embarrassing to have made a film about but hey! I do look back on this film quite fondly even though it was so self-absorbed because I really did appreciate the help and support of my loved ones but particularly my friends at that time. Again, I technically used archival footage like I did with my self-portrait, because some of the videos were from a week before, or some even from the year before.
There isn't much to say about this film apart from the fact that it was my first time writing/performing a narration in a film, and that it was the quickest thing to edit out of all these projects (except the sound exercise). I think the reason for this is probably because it was quite stream-of-consciousness and I had a very clear process/structure in mind for how it was going to be made, unlike the others. I suppose the thing I learned, looking back, is that you're more productive when the project's message means something to you rather than you just finding it aesthetically pleasing.
For the assessment, which was a 2000-word essay, we had to pick from one of these:
Documentary film makers interpret and represent historical events with different approaches, discuss the capacity of two differing approaches to engage and critique history in relation to two films from the module.
Evaluate and contrast the narrative strategies and structuring devices utilised in two documentary films viewed within the module.
With reference to two films viewed in the module, discuss the implications, including ethical implications, of a filmmaker engaging in Stella Bruzzi’s ‘performative mode’ of documentary film making.
With reference to two films from the module, analyse and contrast each in relation to either Jane Chapmans ‘triangle of message’, or Bill Nichols’ ‘triangle of communication’.
I ended up choosing no.2 and compared 'Grizzly Man; with 'Stories we Tell'. You of course don't want to read the essay but the basic gist was that both directors were making very in-depth character studies of a person but they were different in the way they approached evaluating and constructing the person. Another similarity between them both was the fact that they both use archival footage, narration and are reflexive films, but the ways these techniques are used are starkly contrasting in tone and present very different moral dilemmas. Neither of these are the best documentaries I've ever seen. But, they are probably both some of the most controversial ones we saw in class.
It feels funny to say that because neither of them were about anything political or particularly socially-conscious in terms of subject-matter, if anything the point of them was that they were incredibly personal stories. It's just that I know a lot of people in my class or people that had seen these films elsewhere were very uncomfortable with the lens these filmmakers chose to present their subject matter. Though they both caused some discomfort, I definitely think that 'Grizzly Man' takes the cake for 'most uncomfortable way of presenting a person's life'. Since my essay on World Cinema, it was my favourite one.
I think doing all the work we did on how these films are made through making small ones ourselves that employed many of the same techniques the films we ended up studying did (for me, this is particularly true for archival film) was really helpful in our essays and made this a great module. I loved the consistent practical/theoretical balance and thought I think this module might be my favourite I've had so far at University.
MCH2000: Film Theory for Practice 1 - What is Cinema?
I remember this module was quite a lot at the time. We'd have a lecture on different forms of cinema, including french impressionism, german expressionism, avant-garde, British documentary movement and realism.. But before the lecture we'd have to do some readings for it, and after we'd do reading responses that were due for a few days later at the seminar. We were encouraged to write as many as we could, but that only the best few were going to be put towards our final grade. I can't remember exactly how many you needed to write, but I wrote 8 reading responses knowing that a few wouldn't be counted. These were:
Week 2) Munsterberg and Balasz
Week 3) Epstein, Delluc & Kracaur
Week 4) Kuleshov and Tsivian
Week 6) Formalist film theory & Vertov
Week 8) Britain
Week 9) Politics of Realism
Week 10) Realism
Even though we only had to write 200 words for these, many of my classmates (myself included) found it very hard to distill whole sections of texts down to so little words while also comparing each text with each other and arguing for/against the points made. I would have actually rather had these be longer responses since they were much easier to write that way, given the small amount of time to do them (a few days after the lecture) on top of the films we needed to make each week for MCH2086. Additionally, the texts were often from before the 1970s, since this was supposed to be the first half of the century while MCH2001 in semester 2 would cover the 2nd half. Some of these texts were very difficult to read since they were written in a very different way to how the more modern texts I'm used to in media studies are, and they were also often going into masses of depth on things that are now considered to be common knowledge. A great example is that we read/discussed in class so much about the close-up as a shot type, and how revolutionary it was to be able to see a moving, real character's face so close up. At the time, this was the thing that set film apart from painting & theatre - which is common sense now. I feel harsh saying this, as if we didn't have that level of analysis back then, film studies as an academic subject probably wouldn't exist today... It just feels tedious now to read it and explore it as a debate when the debate doesn't really exist anymore.
Another assessed piece of work for this module was a group-assessed powerpoint, which my group did on Lotte Eisner. She was a writer on German expressionism and proposed that death, in German cinema, is presented as something delicate and poetic. The iconic bright lights/dark shadow cinematography of German Expressionism is highlighted by her as being integral to the narrative. She noted that as film advanced, particularly with the introduction of sound, these elements were used less and less. We talked about her ideology, influences, and how what she observed is relevant today/has gone on to influence other films.
As well as this, we had to do a 2,000-word essay answering one of the following questions:
Critically discuss theories of cinematic realism and their development in relation to film language and cinematic techniques as well as the ideological functions of cinema using at least two of the following authors: Brecht, Lukacs, Benjamin, Kracauer, Bazin.
Compare and contrast one of the theories of realism (Brecht, Lukacs, Benjamin, Kracauer, or Bazin) with views on the relationship of film to reality in one of the following writers (Epstein, Balasz, Eisenstein, Eisner).
Based on Bill Nichols’s “Documentary Avant-garde” essay, critically discuss early theories of documentary film in relation to the development of film language and social functions of non-fiction with reference to at least three of the following: Vertov, Ivens, Grierson, Rotha, Ruttmann.
I did the 2nd one, and really blew it. I barely passed ultimately because I misunderstood what realism in film was. I really did feel like I didn't understand it at the time but it was such a busy semester that I didn't get much opportunity to ask my lecturer for help. Luckily, my group's presentation kinda saved me because we got a pretty high mark - my lecturer said she liked the attempt at audience participation we tried!
MCH2035: Media, Mythology and Storytelling - How to Analyse Archetypes and Ideologies in Media Texts
This was the only optional module I got this year. I had a choice between this, 'MCH2065: Race, Culture and Identity' and 'MCH2075: Representations - Identity, Culture and Society'. I decided it was the one that would be closest related to film as a subject, because the others were much more sociological/ethnographic. Though, this was the only not explicitly filmmaking module that I did this semester. We had to do a 2,000-word essay case study on an archetype that we studied. These were mostly focused on Campell's 'The Hero's Journey' and the archetypes surrounding this, but also had other elements such as the 'intellectual dark web.' Mythological analysis is done though:
Psychological & archetypal research
Semiotic & textual methods.
These were anchored by a discourse-mythological analysis. I did my essay on the shadow archetype using Gollum from The Lord of the Rings series, and I did my group presentation on The Hero's Journey. Each group had to do a presentation on a different archetype, but there was no limit on how many people could do a case study on the same archetype for the essay.
The aspect of this module I enjoyed the most was the psychological element of the analysis, and I thought the structure was really interesting. The one thing that was particularly unique in this module in terms of my experience of uni, was the fact that each seminar was assessed my engagement. If you asked questions and engaged in interesting debates as a classmate listening to another group's presentation, you scored highly, whereas the mark for how well you did in the presentation was different. I was nervous for this at first, because I hated the idea of always having to be on it and on top form every class. But, I actually think this turned out fantastically because you had to work hard both in class and in the presentation and it showed who was more engaged in a way. I would recommend this module!
Semester 2
For semester 2, we had these compulsory modules:
MCH2001: Film Theory for Practice 2 - Why Cinema?
MCH2002: Filmmaking - Ideas to Screen
MCH2082: Making a Short Documentary
MCH2001: Film Theory for Practice 2 - Why Cinema?
This was part 2 of the Film Theory modules, and it mostly covered the post-60s film/documentary movements. These were the topics we covered:
Semiotics & Structuralism
Postcolonial perspectives
Ideology and Marxism
Third Cinema
Authorship
Feminist Film Theory
Film Philosophy & Film Phenomenology
Postmodernism
Postmodernism & Cognitivism
Ethnography
The assessments were: a group oral presentation, 4 300-word reading responses and a 2,000-word essay. We'd have to have done reading before the lecture so that we could discuss the contents of the lecture in the seminar. Also, the reading that we'd do would be the stuff we'd be analysing in our reading responses. So the day was structured by having a lecture on the subject, then a seminar right after to discuss. As I'm sure you can imagine from what I said about the previous Film Theory module, I was really happy to hear they increased the word-limit of the reading responses, and it made these much easier to write and much more engaging comparisons. I wrote 9/10 reading responses for this module too cause I really wanted to take every opportunity I could do do better than I did in the previous semester.
For the group presentation we could either pick from a selection of questions that were specific to each of the different theories, or we could make up our own question. My group chose to do one on feminism and made up our own question. Because of the quarantine, we ended up recording a zoom video call where we screen-recorded the presentation and spoke over each of our sections.
I also did feminist theory for my essay. We had to "advocate for or refute" the theoretical framework and "point out what makes a good film according to the theory and use the main texts and film examples to support author's position." I decided to compare avant-garde feminist documentary with female-lead fiction film according to Laura Mulvey's definition of feminist film: something that should a) attempt to construct an identification that isn't the mainstream, and b) discard what she defined as the "male gaze." The films I chose were 'Riddles of the Sphinx' and 'Portrait of a Lady on Fire.'
I actually wanted to talk about a much more mainstream film that I would consider as feminist, like 'Alien' or 'Kill Bill' in this essay because I wanted to get into why it is that people do/don't see those films as feminist and the semantics of feminist film. However, my lecturer dissuaded me from doing that because she thought that both of these films stuck more closely to Mulvey's definition of a feminist film, allowing for a more detailed analysis.
I would highly recommend both of these films honestly, they're both incredibly entertaining and beautifully made, and I've never seen anything quite like 'Riddles of the Sphinx’ with it's use of 360 spins that kinda make any identification impossible, and the beautiful music too. And, of course, 'Portrait' has amazing music too. All in all, this module was much better than the semester 1 version mostly because it felt much more relevant to today.
MCH2002: Filmmaking - Ideas to Screen
So this module was all about experimental documentary. Before COVID-19, we had to make an experimental film as a group. The only written assessment was going to be a reflection of our work. When the lockdown was announced, the module was changed to be a solo film that we had to make from where we were quarantining, with a written reflection.
The module was structured in quite a relaxed way until about week 3 when we actually hard to start filming. Before that, we would watch a variety of experimental documentary films and discuss them. Two that particularly stuck out to me were 'LIFT' and 'Water, Baby, Window, Moving.' We did also watch some stuff I really didn't like, such as: 'Twenty Cigarettes.' Experimental documentaries seem to be really hit-or-miss because some, like 'Twenty Cigarettes,' utilise slow cinema and it's ability to force the audience to hyper-analyse the subject matter. I know some people in my class really enjoyed that film for this reason and that's awesome, it's just that for me I think the worst crime a film can commit is being boring, and I simply found the subject matter boring and the attitude of the film self-indulgent.
Before I talk about the actual film I ended up making on my own, I wanted to talk about the group-made film that we started. I kinda came up with the idea to do it on body modifications, and in the class we were telling each other our ideas.. Through this I ended up finding people who wanted to be involved, and one person was a notoriously good producer since they had worked with Newcastle Uni Theatre Society as their producer. I was fantastically lucky to get them on-board. Then I got two others who I knew from class who had their own strengths, one in camera and one in editing.
We had a meeting discussing morality and how we wanted to structure the film. My initial idea was to have the film be about the negative perceptions/attitudes people have to body modifications and wanted to reflect this through more sharp/nasty sound effects and photography in the film's construction... But my camera operator pointed out to me that if we were going to go with that type of construction, and explore why it is people have this bad perception of an ultimately harmless aesthetic choice, they said we might struggle to get participants for the film. People who have tattoos or piercings might not want to be in a film that depicts that choice in a bad light even if it is ultimately presented as a good/freeing thing to do. Additionally, this made us think about the possibility of artists/piercers/hairdressers not wanting to work with us too because our film could potentially harm their business if people interpreted the film wrong. After all, there is an inherent danger with experimental film that people could interpret it incorrectly because of the unconventional presentation of the subject matter. So, we decided to approach it from a more positive light just simply to engage better with subjects, because ultimately we couldn't pay anyone and had to rely on rapport.
After we had this meeting, our producer and camera operator reached out to different tattoo parlours/artists, and the editor and I went out to find people who were getting piercings/hair dyed/cut. We found a place and went to shoot: Hype Tattoo Newcastle. They let us film a person being tattooed and were really welcoming in letting us film from all kinds of angles and having quite big kit in there (mono/tripods). Our camera operator actually got chatting to one of the other artists there and did a couple of shots of their sleeve of tattoos for them, and later made an edit based on my camerawork & our camera operator's photography.
These are some stills from the day. We shot all this in one day about a week before the lockdown was announced, but because we never finished the project in it's entirety, our camera operator decided to edit it into a short promo video which you can find here.
The lockdown was announced a little before the easter break, and we had to wait a decent while before we even knew what we'd have to be making a film about, how we were going to do it, and if we even would be doing it. We were told: "you will instead submit an individually produced 5 min ideas-led documentary film. You will also be able to submit and get credit for any work in progress completed on your crew-based films. The percentage weighting remains the same - 70%."
At the same time, we were also making films for MCH2082, which I'll get more into a little later, but I feel like every Film Practices student I spoke to at this time did really struggle with having to make 2 different films in lockdown. We had pretty much nothing interesting to film, and a lot of us were either in back with family members who were uncomfortable with being filmed/were stuck at home too either unable to work or working from home.. Or, they were on their own and had to make a film about themselves. Which, as I touched on in my 'Truth' and 'Self-Portrait' analysis in MCH2086, is really really tough.
So, you had a situation where half of my friends were in Film & Media and they had to just make one film for MCH2082, and the other half were Film Practices where we had to do a film for both MCH2082 and MC2002. My lecturers, once the concern of "how are we going to make 2 different films in the same environment with the same very small pool os subjects" was raised, did try to guide us on ways of doing it. For example, they said maybe take 1 idea and express it through two different modes. Anyway, for MCH2002 I ended up making one that I personally didn't even really like that much because it was about me and how I was feeling about quarantine.
Before I came up with an idea, I was scrolling through the Prelinger Archive (since we were allowed to use archive considering the lack of options), and found a video called 'Developing Self-Reliance' that I adored because it was so matter-of-fact and old-fashioned and I just thought: this is the perfect narration because I need to learn these things! The film mostly consisted of a) missing my friends and b) not feeling very self-reliant.
I was inspired by the kind of stuff I've seen on LOCAL 58, which I highly recommend checking out if you're into unnerving editing of old footage. Another great one that is similar to LOCAL 58 is KrainaGrzybowTV but if LOCAL 58 is like, a 6/10 on the creepy scale, KrainaGrzybow is like a 9/10 for me.
The only other thing to report about this film was that it did actually get picked out of 2 films from this module to get shown at 'A World Turn'd Upside Down'. This was a festival hosted by Star & Shadow cinema that screened that year's Film Practices & Film and Media student's dissertation films via a video stream. Two films from MCH2002 and two films from MCH2082 were chosen. if you'd like to check out what happened on the day and how it was scheduled, heres's the link to the programme.
I don't have a link for all the films, but those I do have are listed below
Just One (Video) Call Away **TRIGGER WARNING: REFERENCES TO SUICIDE**
I really really enjoyed all of these films and I had such a great time watching them, i highly recommend checking them out!
MCH2082: Making a Short Documentary
I didn't expect this post to be so long, wow. This module, like MCH2002, was going to be a group-based project before we had the lockdown. For this module you didn't get to pick your groups, and you were given a time-slot to base your film's subject around.
In our group, we were given 3pm-5pm, and we toyed around with a few different ideas like kids leaving school, workers at the Grainger Market, but eventually ended up settling on a music show that would be happening around that time. Initially we were going to film the show, but as we started watching practices, we decided to make it about the lead-up to a show at Sage, rather than the show itself. We'd be following different people who were involved in the music department at Newcastle University, some students, technicians and lecturers. We only managed to do one shoot, like
I was the producer/camera operator for this one, and me & the director had lined up some interviews based off who we met at our recording session. We documented each part of the process and after taking some of these shots we were ready to Pitch our ideas to our lecturers. The day came to Pitch, and the lockdown was announced. That was the end of that! We ended up getting some marks for our pre-covid work since we'd done a fair amount, but ultimately we couldn't continue the film.
For our film we had to make in lockdown, we could either:
Make an ethnographic film about someone else's current situation
Make a self-expressive film about our experience of the lockdown
Write a written portfolio of how you would go about doing the 2nd option, but not actually making a film
What with deciding to make a film about my experience of lockdown in MCH2002, I made one about someone else. Luckily, my mum didn't mind me making one about her, and I asked my lecturer if I could structure it as an interview with b-roll type of thing like we did in MCH1011, except just about 1 person and 5-minutes long instead of that module's brief of 3 subjects at 3-minutes long. Additionally, I used archive from Youtube and The Prelinger Archive to add to the verisimilitude of my mum's story, and any photos she had from the time. Also, the time period she's talking about is perfect to use a Beatles song cover in the background!
I feel like I enjoyed MCH2002 more than this module simply because the films we watched were more engaging and the films we would have made if lockdown hadn't happened would be more interesting than the ones I made in this module because the requirements for this were so restricted. We couldn't choose our group, were restricted for subject-matter, and I don't think the classes were as well-structured or films that we studied as inspiring. Although I found some stuff experimental films very boring in MCH2002, I feel like the good ones I enjoyed were far superior to anything shown in this module.
I think mainly it was the inability to choose groups that actually undermined the module. As much as I understand that they wanted us to experience how, in the industry, we might not always get to work with people we get along with or get to choose, I think it was counter productive to our creative abilities and work-ethic more so than it was helpful for our team-management skills. I felt like I got a much better team experience and creative output in MCH2002's pre-lockdown project than this one's. Undeniably, this was a helpful module, since it build on skills we learned in MCH1011 and MCH1035, but I genuinely think all of the weaknesses of the module would have been solved by having us be able to pick our groups, and still would have challenged us to a sufficient level.
Finally, we're at the end of the post! Thank you so much for reading and I hope that maybe you can take something from my experience of University so far. Hopefully my next post will either be on FILM-SOC or Film Lab, since it'll be another year before I write a summery of my 3rd year.
Speak soon! Kat
