Integrated Media

Coke Zero awakened the Bond in everyday commuters at the Antwerp Central Station in the September of 2012, as part of a campaign for Coca Cola’s official sponsorship of the latest James Bond movie, Skyfall. Upon purchasing a can of Coke from the vending machine, commuters are first challenged to a race against the clock across the train station and upon taking up the challenge presented to them, commuters are thrown into a world of meticulously orchestrated chaos – delayed by the janitor, stopped by the woman dressed in red, a basket of free falling oranges, etc. Successful completion of the task would entitle commuters to exclusive Skyfall tickets. According to an online article approximately 70 people participated in the event.

During the event, nearly 70 people ran for tickets, Hantson says, but the agency of course chose the best moments and the individuals most reflecting the Coke Zero brand for the final edit. With more than 3 million views on YouTube and more than 29,000 ‘likes’, the planning seems to have paid off.

What I liked most about the (flash mob) campaign, apart from the orchestrated obstacles, is its ability to induce curiosity and interactivity. Apart from that, while I liked the idea of the campaign, I thought it was just a tad bit cliche. Besides that, the thing that bothered me most about the event and/or video was that the whole stunt looked staged. All three participants featured in the video seemed to have gotten past the obstacles laid in front of them a little too comfortably. Thus challenging the authenticity of the participants. However, Geoffrey Hanston, the executive director of Duval Guillaume Modem, says otherwise.

the clip is the result of detailed orchestration, involving ten cameras, expert timing, security details on stand-by to intervene should anything go wrong and meticulous preparation – and no actors, at least not among the wannabe 007s, were used.

All in all, I liked the idea of the campaign and how it calls forward participation by playing on people’s curiosity and whether or not the participants or commuters were legitimately average Joes is another question all together.


Collapsus, directed by Tommy Pallotta, follows the adventures of 10 young people located all around the world, as they go about tackling a world filled with deception, conspiracy, and, more importantly, the imminent depletion of energy resources.



The Collapsus Project originated as a documentary for Dutch broadcaster VPRO. The documentary was originally dubbed “Energy Risk” and it covered the imminent energy transition from fossil fuels to alternative energy sources. The intended target audience for the documentary was a younger audience. However, the audience for documentary is dying and the average age for a documentary viewer is 55 years old and above. Hence, the producers (a.k.a. Dutch broadcaster VPRO) decided to look for a solution elsewhere. They felt that by doing so they stood a better chance at achieving their goal: to get these issues out to younger people and the connected generation and at the same time attract a different audience than traditional documentary viewers.

Producers looked to create a multimedia experience for their younger viewers. And so, they brought their documentary to Submarine Channel, where it then underwent major remodeling and eventually evolved into a hybrid documentary game that marries animation with interactive fiction and documentary film across a three-panel system. The study of the raw material first led to the materialization of a meta-scenario and from that a script and possible interactive mechanics were explored. The entire Collapsus Project embodied the work of approximately 60 producers working on the interactivity, animation, documentary, script, development and design. Nevertheless, all the time, effort and hard work put into the project did not go to unappreciated. Since its launch in 2010, Collapsus has acquired numerous achievements awards.


  • Games for Change Festival 2010 Transmedia Award Nominee,
  • SXSW Winner Interactive Awards 2011,
  • Digital Emmy Nominee for Best Digital Fiction,
  • Spin Awards Best Interactive Video,
  • idfa DOCLAB Nominee,
  • Doc/Fest Sheffield Nominee,
  • 15th Annual Webby Awards Nominee,
  • FWA Site of the Day

Three-panel System


Screen Shot 2013-07-31 at 2.36.03 AM


The center panel functions as the main fictional storyline and timeline.

The right panel operates as the documentary segment of the documentary game. Here, viewers are introduced to an array of talking heads, interviews with experts in the field, additional blogs from the characters, as well as some environmental and cultural facts.

The left panel is the interactive portion of the documentary game, which includes an interactive map that reveals each character’s location, types of available resources, the amount of energy needed, and the amount of energy produced.

The combination of all three components requires the viewer to read, listen, watch and interact simultaneously. As mentioned by Henry Jenkins, the Provost Professor of Communication, Journalism, and Cinematic Arts at the University of Southern California, a basic breakdown of existing communication reveals reading, listening, interaction, and watching to be the modern foundation of possible sensory content application.  Additionally, reading, listening, interaction, and watching, are all media sources useful in releasing information and encouraging viewers to seek further analysis. It is then safe to presume that the three-panel design played a role in Collapsus’ success.

Media Platforms

The primary media platform of the Collapsus experience is its webpage. Secondly, the YouTube channel “CitizEnergy” contains expert videos that are displayed on the right panel of the Collapsus website. Collapsus also includes another YouTube channel titled “Collapsusnews”, which includes a few scenes from Collapsus’ fictional narrative as well as a walkthrough video with Collapsus’ very own director, Tommy Pallotta. The YouTube channel was mainly created for the purpose of directing viewers to the Collapsus Facebook and Twitter page. However, the setup of both Facebook and Twitter pages seem to be redundant as neither are making any distinctive contribution or offer a new level of insight and experience (cf. Jenkins 2006-105).

Game Play

As mentioned above, Collapsus is a documentary game that follows the adventures of 10 people as they become entangled in a world flooded with deception and conspiracy, and their struggles with the energy crisis at hand. In the story, set in the year 2012 and up, international powers try to cope with a transition from fossil to alternative energy sources, while dealing with political conflict, anarchy, and increasingly frequent blackouts.

Collapsus places its viewers in climacteric points in time, where it then coerces its viewers to make life-or-death decisions about things such as the impending energy crisis, and the world’s energy production. In addition to that, live action footage combined with animation is designed to help viewers understand the current political situation as well as the each character’s course of destiny. Viewers are accompanied and guided by numerous vlog posts of Vera and her friends as they try to solve their personal problems and at the same time attempt to create a better, sustainable future.

This form of interactive documentary is both engaging and informative, and the blend of animation and documentary and/or the play with fiction and reality proves to be rather entertaining.


Click here to launch Collapsus

Click here for Collapsus’ Facebook page

Click here for Collapsus’ Twitter page



Collage is a demonstration of the many becoming one, hence the idea was to film various fragments and string them together with an underlying common theme. In our film, the topic we decided on was “love”. Building on that topic, we have asked our subjects to answer a total of two questions. The first question required an explanation of what love is to them, and the second question necessitated subjects to recount five things or people that they love. We initially meant to focus only on the definition aspect of love, but after receiving constructive feedback and discussing it through, we decided to incorporate both definition and the list, in hopes that it would bring about more diversity.

Owing to the open-ended nature of the questions asked, the answers to these questions varied, leaving us with no “right” or definite conclusion. Also, in the film, we have edited our footage such that the camera operator’s voice or presence will not be audible to the viewer, leaving only the answers provided by the subjects. The viewer is expected then to find meaning and piece the puzzle together on his or her own. With the absence of a linear plot, or headings and captions that would spell out or hint to the viewer precisely what the project is about, the meaning of the film is to be created by the viewer. Even though the viewers are the ones who partake in the quest for meaning, we, as creators, are ultimately the ones who guide them to it. Additionally, the absence of a narrative, headings and captions, together with the pauses in between different clips allow viewers to ponder about possibly; to insert themselves into the ongoing discussion – what love is to them or the things they love.

Next, “plots are for dead people.” (Shields, 2011, p.2) We completely agree with this statement on the basis that fragments are far more interesting. Fragments stimulate one’s consciousness by evoking a search; a search for meaning instead of having it spelt out neatly and in doing so, destroying all predictability, swelling curiosity and most importantly, allowing for an experience. “The novel is dead, long live the anti-novel, built from scraps.” (Shields, 2011, p.2)

Subsequently, “all definitions of montage have a common denominator” (Shields, 2011, p.3); they all imply that meaning is created by the juxtaposition of shots. Using our project as an example, all the fragments, or videos, of our film, when viewed as a whole communicate one constant underlying message and the answers may well vary from subject to subject, but these differences are the examples of the constant theme; that love is universal. Love is and can be experienced regardless of race or religion; it knows no language barriers or age gaps and subscribes to no exclusivity.

In terms of arrangement, we initially toyed with the idea of sorting our videos according to interest, but because many of the subjects had interconnected or overlapping points, that left us with not many distinctive differences in that regard. To illustrate my point, subject A responded by saying he loves his family, his friends, his girlfriend, dog and music, while subject B stated he loved his friends, family, girlfriend, work and music, and subject C, his family, friends, girlfriend, work and music. That being said, responses varied between subjects but the differences are negligible. However, by playing around further and distinguishing the difference in ages, we found that the contrast of age in subjects provided difference but maintained a unified theme. As such, we decided to go with this arrangement: by category

, and by age groups (children, young adults, adults and elders).

The rationale behind this arrangement was to provide some form of “structure” amongst the fragments; to create a categorized assortment. The arrangement according to category lends the film a sort of reoccurring position by demonstrating consistency. The arrangement according to age group reflects the differing ideas or opinions on love evidenced through age difference; for example, a younger person’s interpretation is comparably more candid and simple, perhaps even naïve, of love being a happy feeling; as to that of an elderly persons’ more deep, knowledgeable and “practical” view of love being a commitment or the ability to accept differences.

With regards to the composition of the individual clips, we have various reasons. As such, in the clips where our subjects answered the question of “What is love to you”, the videos were scaled down to the various body parts such as the eyes, mouth and hands for the purpose of aesthetic variety. As for the clips that answered the second question – “list five things you love”, we decided to have them remain solely as headshots. Having the subject somewhat concealed in the “what is love to you” clips creates some room for mystery and wonder that would be later fulfilled when the identities are eventually revealed once the viewer watches the “list five things you love” clips of the respective subjects. This covert play with mise-en-scene also renders the capability of interactivity between the viewer and the film. In the process of listening to the answers and attempting to create meaning, having this “matching game” encourages participation, which in return, makes it a more interactive experience for the viewer.

Also, in the first clip, what the viewer will see in our film is a collection of words and phrases used by our subjects to describe love. By emphasizing the kind of emotions present, emotions such as joy, shyness, uncertainty, or pride, our intent was to establish the general feel and vibe of this project. Another thing we did was to attempt to keep the lighting constant so as to limit possibly distractions. In terms of audio, we kept the audio recording as its primitive state. Meaning to say, we did not use a separate microphone to record the sound, so as to further emphasize the fact that we did not want a scripted, professional, or “studio-like” effect, and deliberately left it as candid and as natural as possible to help preserve the authenticity of the piece.

According to Shields, there are two kinds of filmmaking – that of Hitchcock’s and that of Cappola’s. Firstly, as a director, Hitchcock works with a clear picture and/or direction constantly in mind and views any variation from the complete internal idea as a defect, while Cappola, on the other hand, is quite the opposite. Cappola’s filmmaking style thrives on the process itself, where random elements that present themselves during the process are collected and implemented.

Our film is very much based on this principle as well. In going with the flow of things, and being receptive to possible changes or hiccups, allowed us to work with the unexpected and instead of viewing it as a “defect”, use it to our advantage. For instance, having approached random people to do the clips instead of having actors reading off a script, allowed for spontaneous and varied and most importantly, original responses that added some “colour” to our work.

Also, before we filmed them, we merely explained that we were students from RMIT filming a school project and if they were happy to help by answering some questions. In doing this, upon hearing the “What is love” question, people’s initial reactions (shock, a sigh, a confused look, a giggle) were candid and that allowed for the demonstration of the weight of the question as well as captured the candid and natural effect we were aiming to achieve.

This utilizing of Cappola’s style is not to say that we started out without any clear aim or goal. We simply accepted that there could be more than one way to achieve that goal, and that if a path led to a different destination altogether, it was not necessarily bad or wrong.

Another trait of collages and montages is that it has no conclusive ending. “Nothing is going to happen in this book.” (Shields, 2011, p.7) That is precisely the point in our film. Being able to match a pair of hands to its head does not bring the viewer to any form of conclusion. Like how Holden Caulfield does not eventually bring his reader to some grand happy ending in the final pages of “The Catcher in the Rye”, the reader is left with only the experience of journeying with him through the ostracization and angst that typically package teenage years. There is no ending in our film, and no clear beginning for that matter. The end of each clip only leads to the beginning of the next clip; it is about the experience. For example, we don’t pay $20 for a movie ticket solely to find out if Superman saves the day or not, or if Leonidas leads Sparta to her victory (we often already know the ending); we take in the experience of everything else that encompasses the entire experience of movie-going; from munching on popcorn, to Dolby digital surround sound, to the enjoyment of being graphically stimulated, all demonstrate the experience of the journey, not about the ending. That is what this film and other Korsakow films allow for; the emphasis on the experience instead of the ending. “Art exists that one may recover the sensation of life; it exists to make one feel things, to make the stone stoney.”(Shields, 2011, p.7)

With directed story telling, the underlying linearity is apparent, meaning to say that, “resolution and conclusion are inherent in a plot-driven narrative.” (Shields, 2011, p.1) However, with a collage of fragments, the association between the images is what tells the story, in other words, what is not being said says everything. Instead of showing a clip of someone actively tipping over a glass of water, leaving a puddle on the table to exhibit spillage, a collage could use only one image of a glass of water on a table, and the next image of the puddle on the table with the glass on its side. The same incident is told in different ways; one where it’s blatantly explained, and the other, the gap between the two images explains the scenario by creating association between the two images.

Korsakow films enables one to exercise this method of saying more with less. With the absence of linearity, the empty spaces in between the images transform into a playground for imagination where associations are made and meanings are formed. “The task is not primarily to have a story, but to penetrate the story, to discard the elements of it that are merely shell, or husk, that give apparent form to the story, but actually obscure the essence. In other words, the problem is to transcend the givens of a narrative.” (Shields, 2011, p.5)

As in our film, having no subtitles or captions to narrate what is going on, we allow the viewer to access directly into the “essence” of it all. As with Korsakow films in general, its cycled nature forces the filmmaker to focus on the essence of the story, and how to tell that story without actively telling it. It at first seems like the easier option, because of its’ borderless nature. However, after trying it out, one realizes that even though it is not limited to traditional borders, it does not make it borderless. It does in fact have its’ own form of borders, like not blatantly spelling everything out, or piecing differing fragments to create a whole picture. This was at first a challenge, but with the constant focus on the theme, we were able to keep that in check and have tweaked what was needed accordingly.


Shields, David. “L: Collage”. Reality Hunger: A Manifesto. Vintage, 2011. ebook.

Click here for the k-film

Happy watching!

Tuesday 28 May 2013

– Footage re-edited
– Interface redesigned
– Topic/question secured (notes to be examined by Adrian)
– Prototype up and running
– Discuss written essay and divide the work

To-do list:
– Rethink the interface layout
– Shoot and edit more clips
– Redo thumbnails
– Create a “trailer” or title page
– Finish up the essay

Tuesday 21 May 2013

– Finished editing footage (came up to about 50 videos)
– Background finished
– Interface finished (but until the deadline, it will remain a work in progress)
– Created a prototype to be viewed in class (used only 10 out of the 50 videos we had for the in-class preview)
– Viewed each other’s projects in class and gave and received feedback
– Scheduled to film more videos

– Line up the grids to make it look more structured
– Background should be stretched out
– Bring down opacity of background image
– Background might be too busy
– Rethink circle thumbnails; language of the screen is rectangular
– Thumbnails could be made to look black and white
– Thumbnails might look good with flashy backgrounds
– No variation between shots
– Get rid of heading

To-do list:
– Secure a topic/question for the written essay
– Re-edit footage to give it more variation
– Redesign interface
– Film more clips
– Edit newly filmed clips


Tuesday 14 May 2013

– Went through all the footage together
– Decided to use footage of people answering to both questions
– Started editing the footage
– Discussed interface layout while designing the interface
– Explored the possibility of having round-shaped preview screens
– Came up with the idea of applying the vignette effect to thumbnails in hopes that it would appear round against the black background
– Discussed possible backgrounds (background to be complete by next week)
– Talked about the written essay

Tuesday 7 May 2013

– Officially changed our topic to “love”
– Discussed whether to change our question from “what is love to you?” to “what are the things you love?”
– Analyzed video footage (we only had filmed one shot, so we have nothing to compare it to)
– Developed the idea of using talking heads throughout the k-film
– Explored possible shot variations for the talking heads
– Scheduled dates to meet up and film