0:00-0:05
The ad starts with a slow dolly shot on two young African-American children who are probably around seven to ten years old. The little girl is holding a basketball and the little boy is leaning on a bicycle which gives the impression that these children are athletic and they enjoy playing sports. The children have bored and uninspired faces as if they are waiting around for something to do or waiting for someone. They are looking upwards at something out of frame. They could be looking at someone or something in the air.The little girl blows a bubble with her chewing gum which can imply that she likes candy. The kids have nice clothes, and by the looks of the nice house and big front yard, their family has a good amount of money. It is day time so that must mean that the children may be off of school or it is summer time.
The filmmaker used a dolly technique in order to get the audience to focus on these two children. This gets the audience to sympathize with these kids and it gets them to believe that the ad is about children
0:06-0:07
Now we finally get a shot of the whole family in the driveway. It is revealed that the children were looking at a male figure on a step ladder fixing a basketball net and this is presumably the children’s father. We now know why the children looked bored because their basketball net had been broken. The father looks to be getting told off by a woman who is most likely the children’s mother. The garage door is open with a van inside. This tells us that the family may only take one car and it also hints at the real meaning behind the ad. There are more bicycles in the garage that look to be bigger than the little boy’s bike, meaning that the whole family is athletic, not just the children.
The filmmaker leaves subtle hints in the background to clue the audience in on what the ad is really about. By placing the van in the back you may be able to assume that the ad may be about car safety.
0:08-0:14
The backboard of the basketball net falls off the pole. The father looks the other way as if to avoid suspicion. The children have shocked and happy expressions on their faces which means that they thought the accident was amusing. The mother is not pleased by this because her facial expression looks annoyed. The mother could be mad at her husband for not fixing the basketball hoop correctly, or she could be mad at her kids for breaking it.
The filmmaker used a bit of comedy to get a kick out of the audience. The comedy can be used to soften the blow of the true message behind the ad.
0:15-0:20
The next shot is a medium close up of the little girl with the basketball. She turns to look directly at the camera with a worried expression on her face. She is in the center frame which makes her the main subject focus. She seems to be relaying a message to the audience.
The filmmaker used this shot to give the little girl authority on the subject matter.
0:26-0:27
This shot is the same as the previous and is still focused on the little girl. She seems to be begging the audience for something.
The filmmaker probably used this shot in order to provide an effect like that of an aside. This shot is Shakespearean-esque where the main character has a heart to heart moment with the audience.
0:28-0:30
This shot is the same as 0:08-0:14. Instead, this time the father is still on the step stool staring at the damaged backboard on the ground. It is at this point where the father may have taken responsibility for his actions as instead of looking away to avoid suspicion like before, he looks directly at his mistake. The mother charges off seemingly fed up with what her husband had done.
The creators of this ad are effective at persuading the audience about the importance of child safety. While right away, the ad doesn’t feel like it advocates for car seat safety for children, but the ad drops subtle hints that will lead the audience to that conclusion. With the van in the garage it implies what the ad is truly about. When the father drops the basketball net in front of his children, it turns on a light bulb that the ad is actually about the idea of safety. If the children were to continue playing basketball with that net, they were bound to get hurt. All the while, the van in the garage in the background signals that the ad is about car safety. There is no music within this ad as to give the ad a more serious tone. This helped the persuasiveness of the ad because if music were playing, it would take away from the importance of child safety. In the case of this ad, the visuals are essential to the persuasiveness of this argument. Since there is no music in the ad, the argument has to rely solely on visuals.
Can I just get some general feedback please?
You bet.
I get the impression that the “father” is finishing the assembly of this brand new backboard that the kids are waiting impatiently to use.
I notice the car is centered in the garage, a detail you didn’t mention, which confirms your impression that they have one car only.
The crash is dramatic and funny, but consider the emotional weight of that thing falling. The wife is ABSOLUTELY RIGHT to be upset that her husband would risk crushing his kids under a backboard to prove his skills.
Your filmmaker notes are clever and insightful.
But your overall analysis does not grade the creators on the effectiveness of their presentation. This is a Persuasive Argument. You do not appear to be at all clear on what what to be communicated, so . . . did the authors succeed in using visuals to communicate?
After you draw those conclusions, I recommend you listen to the Soundtrack and answer the essential questions: Did the visuals contribute to the overall argument? How well did the soundtrack contribute to the persuasiveness? Which is more essential? How if at all would you change the balance?
Provisionally graded. Always eligible for Revisions and Regrade.
So by saying this is a persuasive argument are we persuading that the video is effective at getting its point across? Or do mean that the video itself is a persuasive argument and we are just grading the effectiveness of it?
I see the confusion. The Video is a Persuasive Argument. Your post should include contain an analysis of the effectiveness of the video.
Managed to add a bit more am I eligible for a regrade still?
No music, no, but the message depends heavily on the girl’s speech, doesn’t it?
Yes, but you asked about the soundtrack. Naturally, I would assume that you’re talking about music. My mistake.
Hmmm, should I call it the audio track?