Step 4 — Storyboard Continuity & Traversability Review
Reviewer: selenite-cutter (Editor)
Date: 2026-05-22
Frames reviewed: 78/78
Status: REVIEW COMPLETE
1. Traversability Assessment (Start/End Delta vs. Shot Duration)
Every shot’s start→end frame pair evaluated for whether Veo can plausibly generate the motion within the planned duration.
Scene 1 — Opening (Projector RUNNING)
| Shot | Duration | Delta Description | Traversable? |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.1 | 5s | Art Deco title card → empty gold/teal border frame. Text fades, geometric border remains. | YES — dissolve/fade motion, simple |
| 1.2 | 5s | ECU hands threading projector — minimal hand position shift, light intensifies slightly through gate | YES — low delta, mechanical detail holds |
| 1.3 | 4s | Medium silhouette at booth window → warmer lighting shift | YES — lighting change only, figure static |
| 1.4 | 8s (w/ mid) | Wide booth establishing → Projectionist moves from window to projector. Mid-frame shows intermediate position | YES — camera static, figure movement across booth. 8s is generous for this walk |
| 1.5 | 5s | CU profile with projector behind → gold light shifts across cheekbone | YES — subtle lighting traverse, near-static face |
| 1.6 | 4s | ECU gate — film passing through, light beam through celluloid → minimal change | YES — very low delta, mechanical texture hold |
Scene 1 verdict: ALL PASS ✓
Scene 2 — Confession (Projector RUNNING → THREADING)
| Shot | Duration | Delta Description | Traversable? |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2.1 | 7s (w/ mid) | Auditorium through window, full house, warm screen light. Start/mid/end show subtle audience movement, screen glow shift | YES — near-static wide, audience ambient motion |
| 2.2 | 5s | ECU hands removing reel — hand position changes (reel handling motion). Consistent projector mechanism | YES — mechanical action, moderate delta |
| 2.3 | 5s | Nearly-empty auditorium through window — 4-5 silhouettes in empty seats. Minimal delta | YES — near-static, teal mood hold |
| 2.4 | 6s | CU face, split-lit (gold/teal). Subtle expression shift — jaw tightens | YES — very low delta, lighting hold |
| 2.5 | 5s | Hands resting on projector housing. Static contemplative pose | YES — near-zero delta |
| 2.6 | 5s | Medium push toward cabinet — camera discovers it on shelf. Art Deco border visible in start frame | YES — slow push is a clean Veo motion |
| 2.7 | 7s | ECU through cabinet gap — canister visible inside, spotlight beam. Minimal delta | YES — low delta, hold shot |
Scene 2 verdict: ALL PASS ✓
⚠️ NOTE on 2.6: Start frame has prominent Art Deco geometric border overlay (like a frame-within-frame). This is a nice stylistic touch but it must NOT appear in shots that don’t have it — it’s a one-off compositional device for the cabinet reveal push. The end frame (closer to cabinet) drops the border. This is correct.
Scene 3 — The Fear / Montage (Projector THREADING → STOPPED)
| Shot | Duration | Delta Description | Traversable? |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3.1 | 5s | Medium — Projectionist threading final film at projector. Subtle hand motion, golden light on figure | YES — mechanical threading action |
| 3.2 | 3s | ECU hand reaching toward cabinet latch → pulling back. Small delta | YES — simple hand gesture, 3s is tight but fine for minimal motion |
| 3.3 | 3s | ECU different angle — hand on latch mechanism, pulling back. Same gesture, different era | YES — same low delta as 3.2 |
| 3.4 | 3s | ECU canister through gap, hand withdrawing. Cabinet open slightly showing canister | YES — minimal hand movement |
| 3.5 | 6s | CU face front-on — “contained fear.” Teal dominant, gold diagonal slash. Minimal delta | YES — near-static emotional hold |
| 3.6 | 5s | Through booth window — auditorium applauding, screen going dark. Start warm → end cold/dark | YES — lighting transition, 5s generous |
| 3.7 | 5s | Medium-wide — Projectionist in shadow, booth dark, projector stopped. Same framing as 7.1 | YES — near-static, darkness hold |
Scene 3 verdict: ALL PASS ✓
Scene 4 — The Decision (Projector STOPPED → LOADING FINAL REEL)
| Shot | Duration | Delta Description | Traversable? |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4.1 | 5s | Medium-wide — silhouette rising from chair toward cabinet. Dark teal, projector stopped | YES — figure movement, simple silhouette traverse |
| 4.2 | 4s | ECU hand on latch — decisive grip, latch POPS open. Start: hand approaching. End: darker, latch engaged, opening | YES — single action beat, dramatic lighting shift sells it |
| 4.3 | 5s | ECU canister in hands — lifted out of cabinet. Geometric angular hands cradling grey-silver canister. Near-zero delta between start/end | YES — held moment, near-static |
| 4.4 | 6s | ECU hands threading HIS film into projector gate. Trembling hands, rough stock | YES — mechanical action (slower/more deliberate than 1.2, per character profile) |
| 4.5 | 4s | Hand on switch — trembling, then flip. Previously reviewed | YES — single decisive action |
Scene 4 verdict: ALL PASS ✓
Scene 5 — The Climax Bridge (LOADING → RUNNING new film)
| Shot | Duration | Delta Description | Traversable? |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5.1 | 4s | Auditorium through window — full house in darkness, dark screen, waiting | YES — near-static hold |
| 5.2 | 4s | CU face — raw terror, near-darkness, teal only. Minimal delta | YES — near-static emotional hold |
| 5.3a | 3s | ECU switch — angular hand flipping ON. Background shifts from teal to warm gold as lamp ignites | YES — single action + lighting shift, 3s fine |
| 5.3b | 3s | ECU gears/gate — lamp fire visible, then film feeds through. Mechanical engagement | YES — mechanical motion, Veo-friendly |
| 5.4 | 5s | Medium — projector running, gold beam projecting. New rhythm | YES — machine in steady state |
| 5.5 | 4s | Auditorium through window — full house, leaning forward (gasp). Warm screen light returns | YES — audience posture shift, subtle |
| 5.6 | 6s | Screen-within-screen — pencil-sketch face appears on cinema screen, proscenium arch visible | YES — image appearing on screen surface |
| 5.7 | 6s | Screen — sketch continues (hand reaching to window). Art Deco elements dissolving to sketch | YES — style transition within shot, moderate delta |
Scene 5 verdict: ALL PASS ✓
⚠️ FLAG — Shot 5.4_start: Contains embedded text: “CINÉMA-PROJECTEUR / ANNÉE 1925 / ART DÉCO MÉCANIQUE.” This is a generation artifact — text must be suppressed in production prompts. The end frame is clean. Action: Tech Lead must add negative prompt for text/lettering on this shot.
⚠️ FLAG — Shot 5.7_start: Contains “CINEMA PALACE” text in upper right corner. Same generation artifact issue. Action: Negative prompt for text/lettering.
Scene 6 — His Film (Pencil-sketch track, no projector)
| Shot | Duration | Delta Description | Traversable? |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6.1 | 8s (w/ mid) | Full frame pencil-sketch — mother’s face. Trembling graphite on cream paper. Start/mid/end are nearly identical — the “movement” is the trembling quality of the lines, not subject motion | YES — near-static, style texture is the content |
| 6.2 | 6s | Hand reaching toward window — pencil-sketch. Light blue wash on window, warm graphite lines. Minimal delta | YES — very low delta, sketch hold |
| 6.3 | 8s (w/ mid) | Figure in doorway — pencil-sketch pullback into white space. Start: figure close. Mid: pulling back. End: figure smaller, more white space surrounding | YES — slow pullback/scale change, clean Veo motion |
Scene 6 verdict: ALL PASS ✓
Scene 7 — After (Return to Art Deco)
| Shot | Duration | Delta Description | Traversable? |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7.1 | 8s | Medium-wide — Projectionist seated in chair, silent projector, dark booth. Start slightly brighter → end slightly darker. Near-static final image | YES — held final beat, minimal delta |
Scene 7 verdict: PASS ✓
TRAVERSABILITY SUMMARY: 36/36 shots PASS ✓
No shot has a start→end delta that exceeds what Veo can reasonably generate within the planned duration. The storyboard is well-calibrated — shots with larger deltas (1.4, 4.2, 5.3a) have generous durations or mid-frames to guide interpolation.
2. Cut Continuity — Adjacent Shot Pairs
Critical Transitions (cross-scene and high-risk pairs)
| Cut | Type | Assessment | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.1_end → 1.2_start | Hard cut | Gold/teal Deco border → ECU hands on projector. Clean scale jump from title to action. | ✓ GOOD |
| 1.2_end → 1.3_start | Hard cut | ECU hands/gate → medium silhouette at window. Scale change works, teal palette bridges | ✓ GOOD |
| 1.4_end → 1.5_start | Hard cut | Wide booth → CU profile. The Projectionist’s position at projector in 1.4 end matches the profile angle in 1.5 start. Spatial logic holds | ✓ GOOD |
| 1.5_end → 1.6_start | Hard cut | CU profile (projector visible behind) → ECU gate. Motivated cut — we see the machine behind him, then cut INTO the machine. | ✓ GOOD |
| 1.6_end → 2.1_start | Crossfade | ECU gate/beam → auditorium through window. Gold beam visible in both. The beam is the visual bridge across the dissolve. | ✓ GOOD |
| 2.1_end → 2.2_start | Hard cut | Auditorium (warm, full house, screen edge shifting to geometric abstract) → ECU hands on projector (removing reel). Scale jump but palette bridges (copper/teal/gold) | ✓ GOOD |
| 2.2_end → 2.3_start | Crossfade | ECU hands on projector → nearly-empty auditorium. Teal palette bridges. Memory contrast: full house → empty house | ✓ GOOD |
| 2.3_end → 2.4_start | Hard cut | Empty auditorium through window → CU face (split-lit). POV → subject. Clean eyeline match — he was looking through window, now we see his face | ✓ GOOD |
| 2.5_end → 2.6_start | Hard cut | Hands on projector housing → medium push toward cabinet. The hands-at-rest → camera-finds-object cut works: hands are done with the machine, camera discovers what else is in the room | ✓ GOOD |
| 2.6_end → 2.7_start | Hard cut | Medium cabinet (push closer) → ECU through gap (canister visible). Scale progression — approaching then looking inside. | ✓ GOOD — but cabinet color/texture must match exactly. 2.6 shows grey-dented exterior; 2.7 shows interior through gap with grey canister. Metal tones are consistent. |
| 2.7_end → 3.1_start | Scene boundary | ECU canister through gap → medium Projectionist threading at projector. Scene change, different subject. 1.5s gap is built in. | ✓ GOOD |
| 3.1_end → 3.2_start | Hard cut | Threading at projector → ECU hand reaching for cabinet latch. Subject change (projector → cabinet), but narrative motivation is clear | ✓ GOOD |
| 3.2_end → 3.3_start | Montage cut | Hand pulling back from latch (1973 era) → hand on latch different angle (1985 era). Same object, same gesture, different angle. | ⚠️ MEDIUM RISK — latch mechanism must be visually identical across both. Frames show consistent latch hardware. Acceptable if generation maintains this. |
| 3.3_end → 3.4_start | Montage cut | Hand on latch → canister through gap, hand withdrawing (2003 era). Different framing. | ✓ GOOD — cabinet gap view matches 2.7. |
| 3.4_end → 3.5_start | Hard cut | Canister through gap → CU face front-on (contained fear). Object → emotional reaction. Clean. | ✓ GOOD |
| 3.5_end → 3.6_start | Hard cut | CU face → auditorium through window (applauding). Tight → wide. The face was looking toward window; cut to what he sees | ✓ GOOD |
| 3.6_end → 3.7_start | Hard cut | Auditorium going dark → medium-wide dark booth, projector stopped. The darkness bridges — screen goes dark, booth is dark. | ✓ GOOD |
| 3.7_end → 4.1_start | Scene boundary | Dark booth (seated) → dark booth (rising from chair). Same framing family (medium-wide booth). Near-identical composition — this is the SAME SHOT SETUP with the Projectionist changing from seated to standing. | ✓ EXCELLENT — 3.7 and 4.1 share framing. Visual continuity is seamless. Same camera angle, same projector position, same teal walls. |
| 4.1_end → 4.2_start | Hard cut | Silhouette moving toward cabinet → ECU hand on latch. Clean scale jump — wide figure → ECU action | ✓ GOOD |
| 4.2_end → 4.3_start | Hard cut | ECU latch opening (dark, hand barely visible) → ECU canister in hands (silhouette with teal geometric background). HIGH-RISK PAIR: canister must match. | ⚠️ MEDIUM-HIGH RISK — 4.2 end is very dark (hand in shadow on latch). 4.3 start shows canister lifted out against geometric teal background — more stylized composition, brighter. The darkness-to-brightness jump is dramatic. This cut may need a 1-2 frame transition or the darkness of 4.2_end should ease slightly. Canister itself reads as grey-silver metal in both — consistent with REF-CAN-01. |
| 4.3_end → 4.4_start | Hard cut | Canister in hands → threading at projector. Previously reviewed. | ⚠️ HIGH RISK per anchoring review. Canister must visually match. Grey-silver metal is consistent. Projector gate must match 1.2. |
| 4.4_end → 4.5_start | Hard cut | Threading near-dark → hand on switch. Previously reviewed. | ✓ GOOD — teal darkness palette consistent |
| 4.5_end → 5.1_start | Scene boundary | Switch flip → auditorium in darkness. Natural cut — he flips switch, we see the audience waiting | ✓ GOOD |
| 5.1_end → 5.2_start | Hard cut | Dark auditorium → CU face (raw terror). POV → subject. | ✓ GOOD |
| 5.2_end → 5.3a_start | Hard cut | CU face → ECU switch. Face → action. | ✓ GOOD |
| 5.3a_end → 5.3b_start | Hard cut | Switch flipped (warm gold flood) → gears/lamp ECU (fire visible). The warm gold bridges — switch ON triggers lamp, cut to lamp. | ✓ EXCELLENT — the lighting shift in 5.3a_end (gold flood) matches the warm mechanical glow of 5.3b_start |
| 5.3b_end → 5.4_start | Hard cut | Gears/gate ECU → medium projector running. Scale change, same machine. | ✓ GOOD (ignoring text artifact in 5.4_start) |
| 5.4_end → 5.5_start | Hard cut | Projector running → auditorium (audience leaning forward). Machine → audience reaction. | ✓ GOOD |
| 5.5_end → 5.6_start | Hard cut | Auditorium through window → pencil-sketch face on cinema screen. THE STYLE RUPTURE. Previously reviewed. | ✓ EXCELLENT — proscenium arch visible in both, bridging Art Deco → sketch reveal |
| 5.6_end → 5.7_start | Cut | Pencil-sketch face on screen (with Deco arch) → sketch hand on screen (with Deco arch, “CINEMA PALACE” text artifact). Proscenium arch consistent. | ✓ GOOD (text artifact flagged) |
| 5.7_end → 6.1_start | Dissolve | Screen-with-sketch (Deco elements dissolving to graphite) → full pencil-sketch face (no arch, no Deco). THE IMMERSION TRANSITION. | ✓ EXCELLENT — 5.7_end already shows Deco elements fading into sketch linework. 6.1_start is pure pencil-sketch on cream paper. The dissolve completes the transformation. Proscenium correctly ABSENT in 6.1. |
| 6.1_end → 6.2_start | Cut | Pencil-sketch face → pencil-sketch hand/window. Subject change within sketch style. | ✓ GOOD — line quality, paper texture, and graphite warmth are consistent across subjects |
| 6.2_end → 6.3_start | Cut | Hand/window → figure in doorway. Subject change within sketch style. | ✓ GOOD — consistent pencil-sketch style. 6.3 introduces a warmer sepia/brown tone on the figure, but this reads as clothing/warmth, not style drift |
| 6.3_end → 7.1_start | HARD CUT | Pencil-sketch figure pulling back into white space → Art Deco booth, Projectionist seated, projector silent. THE RETURN. | ✓ EXCELLENT — CODIFIED: Hard cut. No dissolve, no crossfade, no transition effect. White space to dark booth. Pencil to copper. Dream to room. The reel runs out and you’re back in your seat. (Creative Director and Editor aligned — see rationale below.*) |
CUT CONTINUITY SUMMARY
- 34/34 cut pairs assessed
- 0 failures
- 3 medium-high risk pairs flagged (3.2→3.3 montage, 4.2→4.3 brightness jump, 4.3→4.4 canister match)
- 4 excellent transitions noted (3.7→4.1 shared framing, 5.3a→5.3b lamp bridge, 5.5→5.6 style rupture, 5.7→6.1 immersion dissolve)
3. Art Deco Style Consistency
Color Palette
All Art Deco shots maintain the teal-copper-gold triad. No drift into blues, purples, or warm orange/red. The teal walls are consistent across booth interiors (1.3, 1.4, 3.7, 4.1, 7.1). The copper projector maintains its patinated metallic sheen across all appearances.
Geometric Construction
The Projectionist’s face maintains angular geometric construction across all close-ups (1.5, 2.4, 3.5, 5.2). The faceted cheekbones and geometric jaw are consistent. As noted in the character sheet approval, the style is “stylized illustration” rather than extreme Lempicka geometric — acceptable for generation reproducibility.
Lighting Rules
- Gold projector light from right: consistent in running-projector shots (1.2, 1.5, 2.5, 3.1)
- Teal ambient dominant in stopped/dark shots (3.7, 4.1, 4.2, 5.1, 5.2)
- Split-lighting (gold/teal duality) on confession face shots (2.4): correct per character profile emotional state map
Projector Visual Consistency
The projector appears in 12+ shots across multiple framings. Core visual identity holds:
- Copper/brass body with visible gears, reels, and lamp housing
- Consistent pipe/chimney structure visible in wide shots (1.4, 3.7, 4.1, 7.1)
- Gate/threading mechanism consistent in ECU shots (1.2, 2.2, 5.3b)
Hands
Angular, copper-toned, lined. Consistent across projector interaction shots (1.2, 2.2, 2.5, 3.1) and cabinet interaction shots (3.2, 3.3, 4.2). The emotional register difference (confident on machine vs. hesitant on cabinet) is conveyed through gesture and lighting rather than hand appearance changes — correct approach.
ART DECO CONSISTENCY VERDICT: PASS ✓
4. Pencil-Sketch Track Separation
Style Anchors Check
| Anchor | 6.1 (Face) | 6.2 (Hand/Window) | 6.3 (Figure/Doorway) | Consistent? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trembling | Visible line tremor in portrait strokes | Loose, gestural hand lines | Lines are sketch-like, slightly trembling | ✓ |
| Intimate | Extreme close portrait, direct gaze | Hand reaching for window — personal gesture | Figure half-hidden in doorway — private moment | ✓ |
| Sparse | Face on cream paper, no background detail | Hand and window, minimal environment | Figure and doorway, expanding white space | ✓ |
| Warm graphite | Grey-brown pencil on cream/yellow-aged paper | Grey pencil with light blue window wash | Warmer brown/sepia tones on figure | ⚠️ MINOR NOTE |
| Unfinished | Edges fade into paper | Hand edges dissolve | Figure pulls back into white — deliberate incompleteness | ✓ |
⚠️ MINOR NOTE on warm graphite: Shot 6.2 introduces a light blue wash on the window, which is the only cool color in the sketch sequence. This is narratively correct (it’s a window — the light coming through is the outside world he never engaged with), but the generation prompt should specify that the blue is a WASH, not a solid color, to maintain the pencil-sketch feel. Shot 6.3 is warmer (sepia/brown on the figure’s clothing), which is fine — it reads as a tonal variation within the graphite family, not a style departure.
Proscenium Arch Progression
| Shot | Arch Visible? | Correct? |
|---|---|---|
| 5.6 | YES — full Art Deco arch framing the screen | ✓ |
| 5.7 start | YES — Deco arch with audience | ✓ |
| 5.7 end | DISSOLVING — arch elements becoming sketch strokes | ✓ |
| 6.1 | NO — pure pencil-sketch, no arch | ✓ |
| 6.2 | NO — pure pencil-sketch | ✓ |
| 6.3 | NO — pure pencil-sketch | ✓ |
The progressive disappearance of the proscenium arch (present → dissolving → absent) correctly enacts the immersion transition described in the scene list.
Mother’s Face Continuity (REF-SKETCH-02)
Shot 5.6_end shows the mother’s pencil-sketch face appearing on the cinema screen (within the Deco arch). Shot 6.1_start/mid/end shows the same face in full-frame pencil-sketch (no arch). The face is recognizably the same person across both shots — warm eyes, gentle expression, similar age, consistent graphite treatment. REF-SKETCH-02 continuity: CONFIRMED ✓
PENCIL-SKETCH TRACK VERDICT: PASS ✓
5. Flagged Issues — Action Items for Tech Lead
| # | Severity | Shot | Issue | Required Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MEDIUM | 5.4_start | Embedded text: “CINÉMA-PROJECTEUR / ANNÉE 1925 / ART DÉCO MÉCANIQUE” | Add negative prompt: “no text, no lettering, no labels, no watermarks” — RESOLVED: Tech Lead confirmed. Will strengthen ANTI_TEXT negative prompt + add “no French text, no poster captions” for projector/screen shots. |
| 2 | MEDIUM | 5.7_start | Embedded text: “CINEMA PALACE” in upper right | Same negative prompt treatment — RESOLVED: Same fix as #1. |
| 3 | LOW | 4.2→4.3 | Brightness jump — 4.2_end very dark, 4.3_start noticeably brighter with geometric background | RESOLVED: Handle in post with 2-frame micro-dissolve (Editor owns). Regen available as fallback if dissolve doesn’t hold in assembled timeline. |
| 4 | LOW | 6.2 | Blue window wash is the only cool color in sketch sequence | Prompt should specify “light blue watercolor wash” to keep it soft, not solid |
| 5 | INFO | 2.6_start | Art Deco geometric border overlay — unique to this shot | Not an error. Ensure this stylistic device doesn’t leak into other shots |
| 6 | INFO | 3.2–3.3 | Cabinet latch montage — latch hardware must match across rapid cuts | Already covered by REF-CAB-02 in reference manifest. No additional action needed if ref is used |
6. Highest-Risk Continuity Zones (Updated from Anchoring Review)
Zone 1: Cabinet Montage (3.2 → 3.3 → 3.4) — 3 cuts × 3s
Assessment: Latch mechanism is visually consistent across frames. Hand gesture (reach, hesitate, withdraw) reads clearly. Grey cabinet metal is consistent. Risk downgraded from HIGH to MEDIUM — storyboard frames demonstrate achievable consistency.
Zone 2: Canister Continuous Action (4.2 → 4.3 → 4.4)
Assessment: The latch-open → canister-lifted → canister-threaded chain is the longest continuous action sequence. Canister reads as grey-silver metal throughout. Projector gate in 4.4 is consistent with 1.2. The 4.2→4.3 brightness jump is the main concern — see Flag #3 above. Risk remains MEDIUM-HIGH.
Zone 3: Pencil-Sketch Sequence (5.7 → 6.1 → 6.2 → 6.3)
Assessment: Style consistency is excellent. Paper texture (cream/aged), line quality (trembling graphite), and compositional approach (sparse, unfinished edges) are consistent across all four shots despite different subjects. Mother’s face matches across 5.6 and 6.1. The blue window wash in 6.2 is the only minor style variation. Risk downgraded from MEDIUM to LOW.
Zone 4 (New): Style Return (6.3_end → 7.1_start)
Assessment: The transition from white pencil-sketch space back to dark Art Deco booth is the most dramatic style shift in the film (besides the initial rupture at 5.5→5.6). The white-to-dark contrast actually HELPS — it’s unmistakably a different visual track. A dissolve here would soften the return. Risk: LOW. The bigger editorial question is whether to use a hard cut (more jarring, more honest — “his film is over”) or a dissolve (gentler, more reflective). Recommend: hard cut. The film’s emotional truth is in the abruptness — the projection ends, and he’s just a man in a room again.
7. Verdict
STORYBOARD APPROVED FOR PRODUCTION ✓
All 78 frames reviewed. All 36 shots pass traversability assessment. All cut pairs are editorially sound. Art Deco style consistency holds across the primary visual track. Pencil-sketch style separation is clean with correct proscenium arch progression.
2 action items for Tech Lead (text artifact suppression in shots 5.4 and 5.7).
1 editorial recommendation for the 4.2→4.3 brightness transition.
1 editorial decision logged: hard cut for 6.3→7.1 style return.
The storyboard is ready for Step 5 — Principal Photography.
8. Cross-Reference with Narrative Review (2026-05-22)
Scribe’s narrative accuracy review filed at /workspace/shared-dirs/selenite-team/storyboard-narrative-review.md. Cross-referenced findings:
Additional Flags (from scribe, Editor concurs)
| # | Shot(s) | Issue | Editor Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | 2.6, 3.4 | Ornate Art Deco border contradicts “discovered, not presented” and breaks montage consistency with 3.2/3.3 | CONCUR — regen without border |
| 8 | 3.2, 3.3, 4.2 | Latch mechanism renders as 3 different devices (cylindrical/lever/slide bolt). Must match REF-CAB-02 | CONCUR — I was too generous in initial pass. Regen to match ref |
Creative Ruling Codified
Shot 5.7 — Auditorium POV: The “never from inside the auditorium” rule is suspended for Shot 5.7 only. At the reveal, the camera shifts from booth POV to audience POV — the hidden work is being SEEN. This is an intentional rule-break authorized by both Creative Director and Editor. The composition should remain as storyboarded (seat-level, looking up at the screen).
Combined Action List for Tech Lead
- REGEN — 2.6, 3.4 (remove border)
- REGEN — 3.2, 3.3, 4.2 (latch mechanism to match REF-CAB-02)
- CONFIRMED — 5.4, 5.7 text suppression (enhanced ANTI_TEXT)
- POST — 4.2→4.3 micro-dissolve (Editor handles in timeline)
- MINOR — 5.3a OFF/ON text (Tech Lead discretion)
- CODIFIED — 5.7 audience POV (intentional rule-break, approved)
*Rationale: 6.3→7.1 Hard Cut (Creative Director + Editor, codified)
- The pencil-sketch world’s power comes from SEPARATION. A dissolve blurs the boundary between the two visual languages — the two worlds would briefly coexist, undermining the thematic argument. We already gave them coexistence in 5.6-5.7 (screen-within-screen). The return doesn’t get one.
- Shot 6.3 is already a recession — figure pulling back into white space. A dissolve after that stacks two kinds of fading. Redundant.
- The hard cut mimics the reel running out in a cinema. Screen goes white, you’re back in your seat. That’s what the Projectionist experiences. That’s what our audience should feel.
- Visual Personality Map for 7.1: “the most dramatic moment is over, and what remains is a man sitting in a room.” A hard cut delivers this with maximum force. The suddenness IS the point.
BINDING: No dissolve, no crossfade, no transition effect on this cut.
Updated — selenite-cutter, 2026-05-22