0:00-0:01: A young black man, probably between 20 and 30, is seen in the frame first. In the background, there is a small green plant. To the left is a small table with drawers that could be a tv stand or a dresser. To the right, there are two small bags, yellow and blue. I am identifying the furniture to get the whereabouts of where the man may be packing at. Based on the furniture style, it could either be a living room area or the man’s bedroom. The yellow one is much larger than the blue. The window lets in a ton of light within the frame, so the time of day would be around morning or early afternoon. Blue could be a sleeping bag. He is seen exhaling a cloud of smoke from his mouth. It could be because it’s cold in the house, but it doesn’t look like it. It has more of a texture of cigarette smoke or a vape. He is seen rolling up some mat. It could be a yoga mat or a sleeping mat for beneath the sleeping bag. Based on the number and type of bags, the scene implies that he might spend the night away from home somewhere, likely outdoors. Based on the amount of bags, it’s suggested that he might be spending the night somewhere.
0:01-0:03: Another man appears in the next frame, in a different room from the man in the previous scene. It seems to be the same house based on the furniture style, and the lighting in the room is similar to the room before. He is packing his clothes in a bag like the man before him. Based on the similarities, I guess they are going on a family trip, or they are college students who own a house together. They could also be friends. They share similar clothing styles and look to be packing a good amount of clothing and supplies. He is a similar age to the black man shown in the scene before. He is walking downstairs, so I am guessing he is coming from his room on the 2nd floor. This might be the exact location of where the guy from section 0:00- 0:01 is located. You can tell it’s daytime as it’s very light. The young white man had the yellow bag strapped to his shoulder while a brown one was around his other shoulder. He is also carrying one with his right hand. He has long green pants with a blue shirt and a patterned flannel. Based on their clothing style, they are middle or high-class citizens. Nothing is very formal, but they have nice flannels and pants on. It looks more athletic and is not something typically worn if you are going into an executive meeting. He also has a cloud of smoke fuming from his mouth and nostrils. Based on what they are packing, it looks to be some trip. The bags are pretty full and look soft, implying they have blankets and clothes packed. We have seen no tools loaded from the scenes like they work a blue-collar job, so we assume it’s some outdoor trip. However, we do not see supplies like skiing gear, golf clubs, or sports equipment. This helps us narrow down what kind of trip they are going on. We also have to note that this might be their last-minute packing stuff, and all the more extensive equipment, like tools or sports equipment, is already in the car, van, or truck.
0:04-0:06: A young black female appears to be in a mirror or some front door glass paneling. As the scene moves on, the white man comes within the frame and opens the house door for the young lady. The man came from the top of the stairs to answer the door, so we assume it’s his house, or they own it together. Their facial expressions implied they were thrilled to see each other like kids on Christmas morning. There are many possibilities for the characters we have seen so far. We could conclude that they are in a relationship. Or the two males might be in a relationship. A little too early to conclude the relationship status, but there are multiple different outcomes. Because the director showed us two males similar in age blowing a cloud of smoke, I figured that it was cannabis, vaping, or cigarettes that they were exhaling within the multiple scenes. We assumed they were going on a trip together as a group of three, but the girl had no bag on her back or in her arms. He may have packed for both of them, or it could still be in your belongings, just not in the camera’s frame.
0:07-0:08- The yellow bag makes an appearance again, belonging to the white or black man. It is seen in the back of a small SUV or crossover. The trunk is also filled with other bags, shoes, and a big green cooler. Maybe the white girl from the previous frame had already loaded her bags into the car. The man in the blue flannel and the black man in the dark yellow jacket is seen loading even more belongings into the trunk. It seems to be a wealthy neighborhood based on what they are wearing and what looks like an Audi or BMW in the background. The houses are also above average, with lovely landscaping surrounding them. From the director’s point of view, I think he is trying to show us that people of all ages smoke. We still aren’t sure what they are smoking, but it has to suggest that people of all ages, sexes, and wealth can make bad/good decisions when they smoke cannabis (even though we aren’t exactly sure yet).
0:08-0:10- Another white female appears, blowing smoke. She is a similar age as the other figures, but as time passes, it seems like they are friends. They could also be two couples. Either both males, both females or male and female together. The white female is also wearing a blue jean jacket and pants. Similar to other scenes, they are wearing a large amount of clothing, implying it must be cold outside, or they could be traveling somewhere cold together. It still needs to be clarified if they are all friends or if some are in a relationship.
0:11-0:12- All four of the persons have entered the car. One male is in the passenger’s front seat, while the other three are in the back seats. There is no one in the driver’s seat which is odd to me. Maybe they are discussing who should. Or they could be impaired due to smoking earlier on. The young black man (who is in the front) is seen conversing with the black woman in the back. The other guy in the backseat looks worried that no one is in the front seat. The other girl is seen to be having a good time in the back by herself, while the other three people have a conversion. She is laughing and has a massive smile on her face. Based on how they are seated in the car, it doesn’t validate any conclusions I have made about relationships. Two girls are next to each other, one man is back with them, and one man is alone in the front seat. Unless the white man and black girl are together, or the two females are together, I conclude even more that they are just friends going on an overnight trip.
0:13- O:17- Suddenly, all their facial expression change drastically within a split second. They all have facial expressions like they did something guilty and blame themselves for causing this scenario. It looks like they are having a genuine conversation and discussing who should drive them to their decision. They could also be discussing alternatives. It is somewhat relevant to note that their argument could be about whos driving and what to do since they are all visually impaired if they were smoking cannabis, as seen in the beginning scenes when they were all exhaling smoke. Without sound, we do not know if they were even arguing or if their facial expressions just reassembled them being upset with their actions.
0:18-0:20- The man in the passenger front seat turns back around, and his facial expressions make it seem like he is thinking hard of a solution they are facing. The white man looks like he is telling the man in the front something, but it is hard to know since the seat is in the way of reading lips. The white woman is still laughing, and the black woman is still visually concerned. They could still be discussing options on whos driving. Or they could be talking about other options they could take. Upon viewing this video multiple times, it appears that people in the backseat have answered the man in the front seat question.
0:21- 0:23- Within the following scene, something is said, and now all the friends are laughing, and all their facial expressions have changed to an exciting look like they have figured out a solution. They may have found out whos driving. Or they could have discovered another idea to work around their issue.
0:23-0:24- They are all still laughing, and they are all now unbuckling their seatbelts. It is portrayed as they no longer going on a road trip since they do not have a driver and are reaching for the door handles in the car. We need to watch the video with sound to know if they were talking about lacking a driver and exiting the car because of it.
0:25-0:26- All riders have exited the car and are seen opening the vehicle’s trunk. They grab their bags from the back and put them on the driveway floor. They are still laughing and look like they are having a good time. The director wants us to know that they have made up their mind on who is driving and instead shows them getting out since they are now presumed to be high or under the influence, which is against the law.
0:27-0:29- They have relocated all their camping gear to the front lawn. The two men are high-fiving each other as if they made a good decision. On-screen, the words “If you feel different, you drive differently.” We can now assume that the conversation they were having in the car was about who would be driving since they were all under the influence. It showed the scene of all the people being shocked and guilty because they all realized they were under the influence and were not legally allowed to operate a motor vehicle.
Post-Viewing Analysis- Overall, the ad was beneficial, even without sound. The beginning scenes were a bit confusing, but as time passed, I started putting two and two together. In the final stage, the message “If you feel different, you drive differently” showed that all the persons within the ad were under the influence of cannabis. As mentioned earlier, it is essential to note that the director was trying to tell us that bad decisions can happen no matter your race, sex, age, and wealth.
After watching the video with audio, I found it much easier to understand the meaning of the ad. Within the first 8 seconds, we knew they were going on a camping trip as it was in their dialogue. It was also mentioned that during their “argument,” they were discussing who would be driving. There was music playing in the background, and as soon as their door closed, the music stopped, and the tone drastically changed, which helped show the audience there was an issue. I found it much more effective with the audio, but the director did an excellent job portraying his message with video only.
0:00-0:01:
—Nice work, BB. A few questions:
—What’s the point of identifying the furniture? Granted, there are no “errors”; everything is deliberate. But why? Is it to help identify which room he’s in? Could you say he’s “exhaling” a cloud of smoke?
—Day or night?
—Would you call it a yoga mat? Or is it too thin for that? Does it have a vapor-barrier side? If so, it’s for placing on the damp, cold ground. Perhaps underneath a sleeping bag?
0:01-0:03:
—When two characters not sharing the same space do similar things in successive scenes, our brains start working right away. Are they related? Are they packing for the same purpose? What does the evidence suggest?
—From their clothing and general aspect can you start to conclude their economic status? Social groups? The season?
—It’s early, but can you start to guess what they might be packing for? Some trips require tools. Others, clothing only. Others, gear: skis, sports equipment, garment bags, golf clubs . . . .
0:04-0:06:
—Look again. She’s approaching the house from outside. The glass she appears through is the front door. Her hand is poised over the doorbell when the young man appears at the door. He’s just come from upstairs, as you know. It’s his house. (Maybe they both live there. Maybe they’re romantic.) She isn’t hauling anything. Maybe he packed for both. This may turn out to be completely irrelevant, but the hints are there to get us guessing.
0:07-0:08-
—If this is the first indication you’ve noticed of the nature of the neighborhood and its residents, this is a good place to say so. My question for you would be: why? Could this cast of characters have been set in a less affluent neighborhood? Are the directors deliberately casting (YES!) and setting (YES!) these particular characters (YES!) in this particular neighborhood (YES!). Why? Is it meant to give them a pass for using mind-altering drugs? Or do we not know yet what they’re smoking? Is it too early to pass judgment? Maybe you could say what your FIRST impression was (if any), and what you have (SINCE CONCLUDED).
0:08-0:10-
—Good. An indication of weather.
—Now: the young black man is unaccompanied. The mixed couple arrive together? The white woman arrives unaccompanied. Is there anything like a social commentary here about the mixed-race couple? Are the other two truly unattached? Or is none of that obvious? Are we supposed to think of them as unattached friends?
0:11-0:12-
—You mean there’s no one in the “driver’s seat”!
—Smile on her back?
0:13- O:17-
—You let yourself off a little easily when you say their facial expressions all changed simultaneously and similarly.
—”like they did something wrong” means what? Guiltily? Sheepishly? Are they angry at each other? Themselves? Are they bemused?
—There is no title “Not Camping Day.” That title is just for the youtube displaity. It never appears on screen when the ad is broadcast.
—It’s interesting and true that we can’t know what they’re experiencing UNTIL we know what they’ve been smoking.
0:18-0:20-
—Good. I appreciate the distinctions.
0:21- 0:23-
—This video will give you a good opportunity to do a “post-analysis” of the effectiveness of the ad WITH SOUND. You can analyze whether the visuals alone ”
—You surely don’t mean “they have made up their mind on who is driving.”
0:27-0:29-
—That’s good. You have located the moment of “understanding” at the appearance of the screen message. From this your readers understand that until that “feel different” message, you were still debating what they were smoking and what their “no driver” dilemma might mean.
You can revise as often as you like or not at all. Grades will be posted after Trick or Treat.
Thank you for taking the time to leave very through feedback. I will be making revisions soon on the advice you gave me!
—Consider adding a “Post Viewing Analysis” in which you share whether you believe the ad was effective overall WITHOUT SOUND.
—Then you can watch WITH SOUND and tell us whether the audio was Unnecessary, Helpful, Contradictory, At Odds, Intrusive, etc., and why.
—Did the creators have a clear message to communicate? Did they do so effectively?
I will give it a try, thanks for the suggestion.
I took the time to take your advice into account and made revisions. I would like a regrade please.
0:00-0:01:
Much better, except for the annoying series of Rhetorical Questions. Rephrase them as simple observations or readers will think you don’t know anything.
Right?
0:01-0:03: Another man appears.
No tools have been loaded, so we assume it’s some outdoor trip.
However, we do not see supplies like skiing gear, golf clubs, or sports equipment.
0:04-0:06:
I objected earlier to a series of rhetorical questions, and I’m still not a fan of the sentence type, but I completely endorse your discussion here of the many possibilities about the social relationships of the characters based on the limited amount of information we’re given. You outline nicely the state of our understanding and our shifting awareness. (But could you do it without question marks?)
0:07-0:08-
You’ve managed it here: to suggest a range of possibilities as declaratives, not interrogatives.
0:08-0:10-
Increasingly impressive.
You have trouble with NUMBER and AMOUNT.
They’re all wearing a good NUMBER of layers.
They’re also wearing a large AMOUNT of clothing.
We can COUNT layers.
We can’t COUNT clothing.
0:11-0:12-
Does this validate or confound any conclusions you might have drawn about their relationships, romantic or otherwise?
0:13- O:17-
I mostly agree, but they don’t appear to be angry. If by arguing you mean trading premises, then yeah, but to me it appears to be a friendly discussion.
0:18-0:20-
On repeat viewing, does it look as if the back seat friends answer the front seat passenger’s question in turn?
0:21- 0:23-
Cool.
0:23-0:24-
That is clearly the director’s intention, but without the sound, is it truly clear that they’ve been talking about lacking a driver? Or do we know that because we’ve experienced the “with sound” version?
0:25-0:26-
That’s a reasonable conclusion (especially since we know it’s true).
0:27-0:29-
For me, this might have been the first time I really got it.
Post-Viewing Analysis-
Agreed.
To answer your question, yes, this is vastly improved and deserves a regrade. You may be tempted to stop there, but there are still small openings for improvement you can seize if you’re up to doing a final edit. Put it back into Feedback Please if you elect to do so. And thank you for engaging in the process: it justifies my existence. 🙂
Thanks for the feedback. Exactly what I was looking for. I will have revisions done soon.
I have taken the time and made revisions based on your comments. I have also taken out all my interrogative questions and converted them into declarative ones. I would like another regrade, please. Thank you!
Thorough and impressive.
Regraded.
Thank you!