Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood

Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood was released in November 2010. It was initially released for PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360, before being released for Microsoft Windows and Mac OS X in May 2011.

The game passed over a million sales within a week of being released, and in May 2011 its developers, Ubisoft, announced the game had sold over 8 million copies. In March 2011, having sold 6.5 million copies, the game had generated an estimated $390 million.

In 2011, he game took the Assassin's Creed franchise to over 28 million units sold, generating an estimated $1.8 billion.

The game had 7 different editions; Standard Edition, Special Edition, Auditore Edition, Collector's Edition, Limited Codex Edition, Digital Deluxe Edition and Da Vinci Edition.

Spartacus Essay- Improved Version

The scene begins with a long shot showing the fighter's living quarters. They are very basic, representing  a low standing and class. Also showing this is the clothes the characters are wearing. The fighters are wearing dirty, grubby robes, again signifying lower standing than the guards who is taking them to wherever they are going.
The camera then cuts to the wealthy, higher class people, sat in their luscious robes, playing with expensive jewellery. This juxtaposes the opposites, with simply their balcony being much better than the fighters' living quarters, as well as the clothes they are wearing and the props shown in the scene. The balcony is also more colourful. The fighters' living area is very mundane, brown and dark greens, whereas the rich balcony is colourful- vibrant colours such as pink and yellow, and a regal white are worn by the characters. This signifies a higher class and status.
The weapons that the black fighter has to use- a trident and a net- represent a fisherman, which gives the immediate impression of a lower class.
When the fighters first enter the arena, their robes are removed. This emphasises their vulnerability- they have nothing to protect them because they don't deserve to be protected. It again shows a lower class and status as they don't deserve armour or even clothes.
In the scene, the doors used are a big signifier of wealth and class. The fighters walk through a creaky, wooden door which hasn't been given any level of attention to detail. On the other hand, you have the guards, who when exiting the arena, use a proper, enforced, crafted door, which has had money spent on it. This shows higher class and status, as the fighters don't use this door, they are deemed unworthy.

There is a shot when the first pair of fighters are just being called out, which the editor uses to show the three levels of class in the scene. At the bottom are the fighters, in the middle, above the fighters are the guards, and above the guards are the wealthy people watching the fight. This is the only shot where we see all three levels of status together, and it does it well, showing them on levels of class.
During the clip, we spend a lot more time with the protagonists. This means we are more likely to side with them as we get to know them better and can see things from their point of view. This makes the audience dislike the wealthy, as they are of stark contrast to the gladiators we have spent more time with.
There is a number of shots where we see the protagonists at their worst- being forced into a small crooked hut type thing, or a body being dragged away, before the camera cuts straight to a shot of the wealthy people. This juxtaposes the opposites and makes us feel even more sympathetic for the fighters as the previous image is still firmly in our mind.
At the end of the clip, the wealthy man kills the black man. It is significant that the rich man delivers the killing blow as it signifies his power over the fighter, and his ruthlessness connotes a lack of care for those below him. At the end of the scene, the blood squirts in the rich man's face. This instantly makes us dislike him even more, as we find this image disgusting.

Towards the beginning of the clip, when the guard is leading them away, there is a camera shot from behind a cage wall. This connotes captivity and shows that the fighters are being controlled by higher powers. This imagery is later repeated with a shot through the black fighter's net, showing that despite them fighting in an open-ish environment, they are still in captivity and under control.
The introducing shot of the four rich people sat on the balcony is a wide shot, so we can see everything of them in one shot, and see their wealth and class in contrast to that of the four poor fighters shown before. The shot itself shows the four characters laid down, relaxed. This connotes almost a lack of care for what they are about to witness, which shows class and status because the rich don't care for the poor, don't care that they are about to fight to the death.
A lot of the fight itself is shown from the high angle of the balcony. Again this symbolises a superiority of rich over poor. This further emphasises that the wealthy are of a higher class and status than the fighters they are looking down upon.
As the rich are sat on a balcony, the camera is often looking up at them with a low angle shot. This connotes superiority and control over what is going on, suggesting that they are of a higher status than those they are controlling.

When we enter the arena with the fighters, the music becomes frantic. We hear the harsh tones of trumpets which build suspense. This represents the horror of the lower class fighters.
Throughout the clip, the fighters do not talk. Whereas whenever we are with the rich, a lot of the time they are talking. Often they are laughing. This emphasises class as when we are with the fighters, the music creates a very tense and anxious atmosphere, whereas that all disappears when we are with the wealthy people. They are chatting, laughing, giggling. The juxtaposition of these emotions emphasises the gap in class between these two sets of people.

Preliminary Film Review

The Locker Room was the title of our film. It showed a student running through different parts of a school in an attempt to find survivors of a mass murder. He finds what he thinks to be a survivor (in the locker room) who turns out to be the killer.

The brief was to film a short film showing a character enter a room, cross the room and sit down, before exchanging a couple of lines of dialogue with another character. The film should include example(s) of match-on-action, shot/reverse shot and the 180 degree rule. Our film met all required criteria.

We planned effectively, spending a lesson and a half, as well as some time individually at home, working on the storyboard, script, music choices, as well as deciding our roles in the filming. Unfortunately we misplaced the script, although it was brief and all lines are said in the video so it isn't required. Below are images of our storyboard, which we used both during filming and editing, but didn't stick 100% to, exploring different possibilities, camera angles or transitions we found worked better when we had actually filmed them rather than we planned before.


This section shows the start of our film, which begins with the protagonist running around two or three sections of the school, before cutting to a shot of the antagonist. The antagonist is introduced with a medium, high angled shot, designed to make the character look weak, before cutting to a close up of his face, showing him laughing menacingly. This familiarises the viewer with the antagonist early, and makes us realise who the protagonist is running from, and we know who he is when we meet him. The storyboard depicts more shots of the antagonist before the characters meet, something we didn't include in our final edit. We felt that the same/similar shots could get boring, and weren't sure where they would fit in. Perhaps with screams in the background, followed by shots of the antagonist smiling and looking, to all intents and purposes, rather creepy, the film could have been improved.

This image shows the protagonist running around schools, and checking a door. This is to show the viewers he is searching for someone/something- not running away from something. This is important as we know the antagonist is stationary, and isn't moving anywhere, so if the viewers thought he was running from someone, it could get confusing. The character is shown running down stairs. This is simply to give a different setting, so it isn't all running in a straight line. It also gives more of a sense of realism I think. The final edit followed him round the corner of the stairs, contrary to the storyboard. This, I must say, was an input of my own. I, as cameraman, felt there were too many stationary camera shots, and the camera moving could create a more frantic atmosphere, which I think it did.

There were more running scenes, but we didn't storyboard them, as we didn't realise, without actually filming, that the running scenes came and went so fast, so we needed to add more in to fill time, but also to add a greater sense of realism. He wouldn't find someone after running in 2 or 3 corridors and checking one door. This storyboard shows the protagonist enter a room, demonstrating match on action by opening the door. Another example of match on action in our film is running around a corner. This was a late decision, as we felt the shot running around the corner went on too long, and it needed a new camera shot to keep the frantic feeling. The shot is a somewhat point of view shot, making us feel with, and side with, the protagonist. The antagonist is sat down, so that the protagonist seems bigger than him, fitting the metaphor if "the bigger person", also shown by the fact he takes up most of the screen- despite us only seeing his shoulder and the side of his head, while being able to see the whole of the antagonist without taking up as much screen.

This scene demonstrates both shot-reverse shot and the 180 degree rule. The protagonist thinks he has found a fellow survivor, and without getting a reply to his question, picks up a chair and sits opposite him. This is where the 180 degree rule comes in. This part is the only major failure of our film. The protagonist picks up the chair, and due to mixed ideas of how it is portrayed, the camera shot doesn't work. Also the sound is not correct. He says his line and the sound of the chair means we cannot hear it, and it is important. As a result we had to pinch a section of sound from another clip, and place it over the other video. We had to actually use two separate sound clips, so the sound doesn't fit at all, and realism is lost as we don' hear the chair touch the floor. We should have filmed the scene again but didn't have time.

The end of our film was designed to be dramatic and scary, which it definitely achieved. The music stopped at the pinnacle of its build up when the dialogue began, and again, my job (not that I'm boasting or anything) but it was just perfectly edited. As the scene ends, and we see the antagonist lunge to attack the protagonist, the screen goes black and the music kicks in loud and fast, creating sense of panic and fear. This works to perfection and is a great ending to the film. The ending is our best section in my opinion.

Overall, I think the film was a success. To say we had never used editing software or filming equipment before, to learn it all and produce a 1 minute 30 film in less than a week is a great achievement, and to the level I think we achieved is something. I thought our film was to a very high standard.

In terms of me individually, I felt I did a good job. In some ways, I slacked off my first job- to write the script. I sat down to write it but didn't know quite what to put and gave up quite quickly, without putting much thought and effort in to it. In many ways, however, I think this was a good thing. It made me realise that I didn't want to be that person, the person who the group carries and gets away with doing no work. I knew that I could offer something to the group, so when deciding roles, I immediately put myself forward for both cameraman and editing. The role of cameraman was shared, but I like to think I did a better job, selecting different angles and not being afraid of moving the camera or going off the storyboard a bit-which worked well, giving us good options and choices in the editing.

I think the editing was something we did fantastically as a team. Not afraid to criticise each others' decisions or choices, and all getting involved with our own ideas. As a result I feel the majority of the editing was done to a very high standard. I think the team dynamic worked well. We got the work done, but also had a laugh at the same time, enjoying it very much. It felt good to have freedom to do things without supervision, whilst we also knew we didn't want to be split up for the next task, so we did the work properly, to a very high standard, and did things numerous times to make sure it was perfect. I think it was the perfect work environment.

Heroes Assignment- Feedback

Recently, Mr Croft set us the task of, in pairs, watching an episode of a TV drama, and assess it on the various things we have studied in class so far. Click here to view the result.

The feedback from my classmates was:

1. More images required to break up the "huge wall of text", and more appealing than graphs, which make no sense.
2. Great terminology and detail, and did well to cover most topics.
3. Good images/diagrams but gets too text heavy at end.
4. More detail about character roles. Good work on signification and theories.
5. Good detail and explanation but could have more colour and excitement.
6. More visual and audio aids to add another dimension to it.
7. Very good explanation, good use of terminology and developed more than needed with the very in-depth graph.
8. Interesting mix of graphs, images and text.
9. Good detail and perceptive explanation of a lot of terminology

The general consensus was that we used terminology well and to good effect, and it was done in good detail. However, we could have used more images and perhaps made the post more interactive and entertaining. I think these comments are fair, but I think, with an assessment like this, it is difficult to get entertainment in there- when reading others I found it difficult to stay interested all the way through- although perhaps that was because I had read 4 or 5 similar assessments. The pair I thought did the best job was Adam and Liberty, whose assessment of Doctor Who: Asylum of the Daleks used amusing images to keep the reader interested and engaged throughout.

For me personally, next time we are given a task like this, I know I need to pull my weight more. My partner did a lot of the work, while I sort of sat there and offered the occasional insight. However, I think it is difficult. I dislike the idea of "working with someone you haven't worked with before". I think it holds you back, and when I am working with someone like Megan, who sat there and got on with the work, it is quite easy to slack. Say, if I was working with someone I am comfortable around, they, or I, would be quite happy to say "oi! You're not doing any work!" or to disagree with something they say or do. Whereas with someone you don't know, it is a bit awkward and there is not as much freedom and comfort. I accept that it is what happens in real life and you have to deal with it, but at this stage, when we are trying to get quality of work and the highest grades, it would be better to work with someone you know and are comfortable around.

Past Exam Question- Hotel Immigration Raid

We watched a clip from a TV show that had been shown as a part of an exam at some point in the last few years. We were asked to make notes on the mise-en-scene in the clip, and what effect it had. Then we were told to answer these four questions:

1. Why represent the police in this way?

The police are represented as they are so we immediately think that they are the antagonists- which immediately subverts the role of the police from the one we know- the protectors- the protagonists. This adds a sense of realism as the police wouldn't just let all the illegal immigrants roam free- it is their duty to get rid of them. This avoids the easy narrative resolution, and as a result, makes the programme more entertaining and interesting- which is the underlying purpose of TV and film. The police being represented in this way establishes a clear difference between the police and the immigrants. The police are portrayed as especially bad to make the immigrants seem nicer, and to make you side with the immigrants.

2. Why represent the immigrant workers in this way?

The immigrants are represented in the way they are simply to make you sympathise with them. The producers want you to side with them, and they do this by showing them being "unfairly treated". And this is another reason; to portray the message that immigrant workers are treated unfairly. The producers clearly want to get across a message, and that is why they show the immigrants as they do. The producers also want to get us involved, want to make us feel a part of it, so a lot of the time, there will be close-up shots of the immigrants, and it will make us feel like we are with them, like we are in the cramped room with them, panting and panicking. The producers do this as they want us to identify with them, to experience emotions of panic, fear, injustice and loss.

3. What stereotypes are being adhered to or subverted?

The clip does adhere to some stereotypes we have of immigrants. For example that they have poor jobs, that they are treated unfairly. But mainly it attempts to subvert the usual stereotypes. It shows that immigrants are humans, and are all individual with the scene at the end in the canteen; all of them eat their meals in different ways. It also subverts the stereotype that immigrants are unskilled, with Adam saving the diabetic woman with quick thinking and surprising knowledge.
The stereotypes we have of the police are largely subverted in this clip as well. As I said, they are normally the protectors of society, the protagonists, whereas in this clip they are shown as faceless, unthinking, inconsiderate robots. They act very nonchalant, yet they are presented to be destroying people's lives. This subverts the stereotype of them saving lives and doing what we all think police do. They show little care or emotion, as they are just "doing their job" and "it's all part of the game". Ibrahim is treated roughly without provocation, making the police out to be even more mean and nasty. The fact that they don't say anything or identify him means they have just presumed he is illegal, suggesting possible racism. This is furthered by the lack of black policemen.
The clip attempts to de-construct the stereotypes through different representations, not just giving us the one example.

4. What is the purpose behind the mediation?

The purpose is to inform, show us what it is like. I didn't know there were so many illegal immigrants working in the county. I didn't know immigrants who did these "dirty jobs" were skilled; could do other things, and as Adam suggests, that they don't do their jobs by choice. The clip is also to challenge any preconceptions we may have, and to potentially change them. It gets us thinking about how we see immigrants, and whether we see them as faceless non-humans, or whether we see them just the same as us, caring, loving and interesting, as they are portrayed in the clip.

What Is Being Clever? (Lesson 1)

Our first lesson began with the question "what does being clever mean?" We discussed this in groups, and after much deliberation, we came to the conclusion that there isn't just one definition. Being clever is having intelligence, knowing how to do things. Being clever is being able to think for yourself, and make your own choices. Being clever is being able to understand and take in new things. Being clever is being able to work on your own or in groups. Being clever is getting good grades. And others which I cannot remember.

We then progressed to what methods of learning there are, and what we want. We were introduced to two "characters"- pupils taught previously by Mr Croft. Pupil A was taught how to answer questions in the exam. How to get the best grades come the end of the year. Pupil B was taught what this knowledge meant, what it related to in the real world. He was taught how he could use his knowledge and apply it when he found himself out of education. Both pupils lost their job in the recession. Pupil A found it hard to retrain and struggled to find a new job. However Pupil B found a job easily, due to the fact he had been trained to think for himself and he was able to retrain for a new job relatively easily.

Coming to the end of this discussion, we decided we wanted a bit of both styles. We want to be able to apply what we learn and learn what it really means, but we want to do well in the exam, so any help the teacher can give us- tricks of the trade, how to make the exam easier- we want.

I enjoyed my first Media lesson. The atmosphere was relaxed, but filled with interested people. It felt different, but good, and I hope it continues. I also enjoyed the style the lesson was given in. Mr Croft talked a lot, but with us sat in groups and entering discussions every 10-15 minutes, it was enjoyable, and also helped to digest what was said in that 10 minute spell. Had he spoke for half an hour or even the full hour, I, and I'm sure many of my classmates, would have forgotten what he said, so the fact we were able to discuss it before moving on helped to absorb the knowledge and understand it better.

As an opening lesson goes, you can't get much better than that!