Exploring Movie Construction & Production: What’s so exciting about movies?
The writer covers broad aspects of the movie making process but paints each concept in very broad strokes. Although many different ideas are covered, it seems to be missing a great deal of information. For instance, there is no discussion regarding "film form" or "what makes a film," instead the information is often times presented as opinion first with "facts" to back up the idea. It seems that this is the start of a good entry level text but there has to be more visual content and examples to back up concepts/claims.
Although the content had a good general idea about the construction of films, it seems that the text was very biased toward the writers opinion. For instance, he states that an audiences enjoyment of a film is solely based on its "theme" as opposed to to a variety of other elements. I found this comment to not be factual and instead was of the author's opinion regarding the audience's film experience, ultimately leading the reader to view it as fact. There were other moments that his opinion created very reductive concepts regarding much deeper and conceptual elements (i.e. narrative, characters, direction, genre, etc.) I also found these concepts were not on par with other available texts that cover similar material.
The books use of available, copyright free, and public domain material was rather interesting and I appreciate its use, however one of the bonuses of taking a film studies class is watching a variety of movies from different eras, cultures, and content. Using mostly films from the first half of cinema's history worked (and stuck with the open source idea) but a better variety of required films would help the author better develop the content and explain concepts/ideas better. He did offer additional (optional) films to view but ultimately these were not required and had only a limited description with the author's biased opinion on its content. Perhaps not limiting the films could broaden the text's appeal and relevance.
The concepts were fairly clear to me as a reader, but some of that could be prior understanding of the content. For a first time reader, some ideas could be incorporated better. For example, he often used fake (unproduced) film narratives to explain particular terms and concepts but as a reader this made it much more confusing. Ultimately, this got in the way of the text informing the reader about the idea, and instead focused on an illusion of a non-existent film that did not clearly explain the concept. Oftentimes, these explanations were so wordy that the text became difficult (and at times dull) to read.
The author defined many of the terms consistently but the explanations became a bit muddy. He would often use a perceived equation to better explain some concepts but these were never fully realized and made the text more confusing as opposed to simplify the idea. Also, these equations appeared to be formulated by the author's personal opinion as opposed to more commonly understood views of each concept. Possibly explaining why this equation was being used could help its incorporation.
Overall, each section was divided appropriately but many times there were large, uninterrupted chunks of text. Since film is a visual medium, a few sample photos/stills/frames could help the reader better understand the ideas presented. This is a perfect example of how a picture could be worth a thousand words.
The strength of the text is how its structure follows a narrative film's production process (pre-production followed by production and ending with post production.) The author even hints at this near the end but the text could stand a few more edits to better incorporate and streamline the material.
The interface was clear and one page easily followed the other. The main issue revolves around the incorporation of images that appear to be buried at the end of the text and could be better used throughout the content as opposed to an afterthought left at the end of the text.
The book appeared use appropriate grammar.
The use of dated examples did not provide the most diverse or culturally relevant text. As stated in other comments, the use of additional, more modern and diverse examples could better influence and inform the readers regarding new concepts and ideas regarding filmmaking as an art form.
This text is a good starting point but does need some work. It is a little too subjective and leaving out a definition/explanation of film form keeps the text from moving forward. Finding additional material and not being so reductive could also help the text.
It should be noted that I found the title very odd and misleading, when I think "movie construction" it leads me to believe this is about set building and not film craftsmanship.