Thursday 9 May 2013
Thursday 2 May 2013
Mock Answer
To what extent does Internet Piracy pose a threat to the Film Industry?
I feel that Internet piracy poses a great threat to the film industry, it not only limits the amount of money that can be made through films but it also limits the genre of films available for the viewer. Less genres are available due to a unwillingness to try out new things as many viewers now instead of taking a risk and paying for the film at the cinema will watch it illegally online meaning the film will make no money. This leads to many sequels of the same type of films, a recent example of this is Fast and Furious 7. There are however some positives as through piracy audiences have a much wider choice of film to download and view from home, giving them access to films that they would not have previously been able to see at the cinema. The film industry is trying to adapt to this piracy wave with methods such as 3D which makes piracy much harder so audiences have to visit the cinema to see them. Cinemas also do many offers for cheaper tickets in an attempt to bring people back to the cinemas for a reasonable price.
Through the advances of digital technology piracy has become much easier and much more common within audiences. Through new technology the audiences have the option of either downloading the films or simply streaming them online, a key site that was used commonly by a large proportion of online film viewers was MegaUpload. A sure which hosts files people upload and allow others to both view and download them meaning that audiences can easily view from home rather than going to the cinema and can also download the film and distribute them to others they know. Through the easy access of almost any brand new film through the Internet the film Industry has to combat with technological advances of it's own, or new ways to attract audiences back. The current wave is the resurgence of 3D. The usage of 3D in films not only allows the cinemas to charge more money but also makes the films much harder to pirate, meaning in some cases such as Avatar any who are interested in the film are forced Into the cinema to view the film in 3D. This surge of 3D almost forces it on any directors who want a guarantee of large numbers viewing their film, many directors are unhappy with this and 3D rarely goes down well with critics. This shows that Internet piracy does present a great threat to the film industry as it severely restricts the amount of money made.
Although Internet piracy greatly harms the profits of the film industry it has some positives in the way of it allows the audiences to view a much greater variety of films much as the video nasties did with the release of VHS. The films being viewed online however are not all of the adult or horror genre, they allow smaller indie films to be shared to a much wider audience allowing an improvement in the "film literacy" of the audience meaning that they are much well educated as to what is a good film. Through access to a wider variety of genres and movies more specialist audiences develop and give the audiences a greater relationship with directors and actors. I feel that although online piracy allows a wider variety of films to be viewed it is doing more harm than good as it takes away from the money made by the film industry limiting the technological advances they can make and improvements to future movies. It is also my opinion that I people viewed films in cinema or payed for the DVD releases rather than pirating them for free the industry would no longer have to make the same stale, bland films am they would be able to take risks again with new, edgy film ideas.
Piracy has a great economic effect on the film industry as I have already mentioned. It doesn't however just restrict the profits made, it also restricts the actors within films. Directors can no longer take risks with new actors and rely on big name, established stars as a definite selling point for their movies. An example of this is The Expendables 2. Despite being a very good action film it's only major selling point was that it used multiple famous past actors some of which were in their 60s. Without money the Industry cannot afford to discover new talent that will become the big name stars of future generations. This lack of profits also leads to films that appeal to the widest audience being created meaning 'Big Dumb Movies' are made with simple to follow storyline and no real content so they can appeal to all ages. This leads to generic films that are not memorable as many of their predecessors were. This shows that piracy poses a threat to the industry both in its future in terms of actors but also it's future in terms of films that they show, if piracy carries on taking profits as is does these dumbed down sequel movies will continue to be made allowing no originality.
In conclusion I feel that Internet piracy poses a very strong threat to the film industry. It takes away money from the industry but also limits the type of films they can making forcing new methods to attract people to the cinema such as 3D that take away from the quality of cinema.
I feel that Internet piracy poses a great threat to the film industry, it not only limits the amount of money that can be made through films but it also limits the genre of films available for the viewer. Less genres are available due to a unwillingness to try out new things as many viewers now instead of taking a risk and paying for the film at the cinema will watch it illegally online meaning the film will make no money. This leads to many sequels of the same type of films, a recent example of this is Fast and Furious 7. There are however some positives as through piracy audiences have a much wider choice of film to download and view from home, giving them access to films that they would not have previously been able to see at the cinema. The film industry is trying to adapt to this piracy wave with methods such as 3D which makes piracy much harder so audiences have to visit the cinema to see them. Cinemas also do many offers for cheaper tickets in an attempt to bring people back to the cinemas for a reasonable price.
Through the advances of digital technology piracy has become much easier and much more common within audiences. Through new technology the audiences have the option of either downloading the films or simply streaming them online, a key site that was used commonly by a large proportion of online film viewers was MegaUpload. A sure which hosts files people upload and allow others to both view and download them meaning that audiences can easily view from home rather than going to the cinema and can also download the film and distribute them to others they know. Through the easy access of almost any brand new film through the Internet the film Industry has to combat with technological advances of it's own, or new ways to attract audiences back. The current wave is the resurgence of 3D. The usage of 3D in films not only allows the cinemas to charge more money but also makes the films much harder to pirate, meaning in some cases such as Avatar any who are interested in the film are forced Into the cinema to view the film in 3D. This surge of 3D almost forces it on any directors who want a guarantee of large numbers viewing their film, many directors are unhappy with this and 3D rarely goes down well with critics. This shows that Internet piracy does present a great threat to the film industry as it severely restricts the amount of money made.
Although Internet piracy greatly harms the profits of the film industry it has some positives in the way of it allows the audiences to view a much greater variety of films much as the video nasties did with the release of VHS. The films being viewed online however are not all of the adult or horror genre, they allow smaller indie films to be shared to a much wider audience allowing an improvement in the "film literacy" of the audience meaning that they are much well educated as to what is a good film. Through access to a wider variety of genres and movies more specialist audiences develop and give the audiences a greater relationship with directors and actors. I feel that although online piracy allows a wider variety of films to be viewed it is doing more harm than good as it takes away from the money made by the film industry limiting the technological advances they can make and improvements to future movies. It is also my opinion that I people viewed films in cinema or payed for the DVD releases rather than pirating them for free the industry would no longer have to make the same stale, bland films am they would be able to take risks again with new, edgy film ideas.
Piracy has a great economic effect on the film industry as I have already mentioned. It doesn't however just restrict the profits made, it also restricts the actors within films. Directors can no longer take risks with new actors and rely on big name, established stars as a definite selling point for their movies. An example of this is The Expendables 2. Despite being a very good action film it's only major selling point was that it used multiple famous past actors some of which were in their 60s. Without money the Industry cannot afford to discover new talent that will become the big name stars of future generations. This lack of profits also leads to films that appeal to the widest audience being created meaning 'Big Dumb Movies' are made with simple to follow storyline and no real content so they can appeal to all ages. This leads to generic films that are not memorable as many of their predecessors were. This shows that piracy poses a threat to the industry both in its future in terms of actors but also it's future in terms of films that they show, if piracy carries on taking profits as is does these dumbed down sequel movies will continue to be made allowing no originality.
In conclusion I feel that Internet piracy poses a very strong threat to the film industry. It takes away money from the industry but also limits the type of films they can making forcing new methods to attract people to the cinema such as 3D that take away from the quality of cinema.
Thursday 25 April 2013
Mock Exam Answer
“Film censorship is motivated by fears about audiences and technologies.” Discuss this statement in reference to the concerns expressed about uncensored and unregulated video content in Britain in the early 1980s. [30 marks]
I feel that film censorship is strongly motivated by fears about audiences and technologies however there are some other factors that motivate film censorship which do not fall into either of the above categories. Through improvements in technologies such as VHS players which were now present in many British homes the public could easily get easy access to unregulated and uncensored films known as video nasties, these led to fears that the quality of society in Britain could fall if they were allowed to remain being easily obtainable to the public. These video nasties were a sort of scapegoat for any troubles within the country possibly arguing that film censorship could be motivated by personal ideals but i will explore this later in the essay. These VHS tapes and video nasties also presented a great threat to the multiplexes as the viewers could now view previously unobtainable footage from the comfort of their homes, leading to fears of an even greater economic decline.
Through the technological improvements that took place throughout the 1970s the public now had the option of both Betamax and VHS on which to watch films at home. Despite its better quality betamax was soon defeated as VHS not only allowed for a longer recording but had also become a social trend throughout Britain as visiting the multiplexes had been in the past. It did however have a darker side which played a large role in its triumph over betamax which was that VHS tapes were easier to copy and therefore pirate. It was this piracy that led to unregulated tapes being produced in mass numbers and therefore widely distributed across the country. This piracy of tapes allowed prices to fall therefore making it a much more appealing option for the public than to visit their nearest multiplex creating a fall in cinema attendance.
The main fears of what audiences of watching came with the introduction of the video nasties.These tapes allowed the viewers to see content that had been deemed either to horrific or obscene for the screens of the cinemas. The films focused on the genres of horror and pornography. Through being uncensored they were able to explore much darker concepts than anything before them had been, such as the idea of rape or extremely gory deaths. Through these new themes came a certain sense of intrigue which appealed in the main to teenage audiences as it was new and captured their attention and curiosity. This led to great levels of fear in parents as they no longer had any control over what their children were watching and no guarantee that the film was appropriate as it was unregulated. This created a great sense of moral panic as many adults felt that what their children were watching was wrong and should be banned altogether.
Amidst this moral panic the government saw a window for them to take advantage and use this for their gain. This argues that film censorship was not motivated by fears about audiences and technologies but rather as a tool to defeat the scapegoat which took the blame for a broken Britain. Under Margaret Thatcher the conservative government claimed that it was the fault of these video nasties for the state of some of the problems in Britain, Her government held very traditional views and felt that these tapes were not appropriate for viewing by anybody and should be gotten rid of. Through the media the government pushed the idea and created a larger sense of fear that it was these films damaging youth and the morals of the country, therefore rallying greater support for their disposal or censorship and also taking more blame away from Margaret Thatcher for the violence and poorness of the country. This gives the idea that it was not fear of how the audiences react but rather through the use of power to create a fear that had previously not been there in force for a governments own gains.
Eventually in the year of 1985 the regulation of home video came to be through an organisation called the BBFC meaning the British Board of Film Censorship. After being given permission by the conservative government the BBFC was allowed to apply age ratings to home video allowing the videos with the worst content to be flagged warning any potential viewers of what they would be watching. This shows that film censorship was done for the benefit of the audiences as they now knew what they were viewing and the country could have proper control over what was being distributed.
In conclusion i agree with my original point that film censorship is strongly motivated by fears about audience and technologies. It is the fear of the kind of content audiences are exposed to and through improved technologies the ease they can obtain it which pushed censorship forward as a major issue and led to home video being censored so strongly. Although other factors like the governments traditional conservative views affected censorship i still feel that fears for the audience and the advancements of technologies were more significant. The same issues of piracy causing film censorship to be difficult are still around today but in the form of internet movie piracy rather than VHS piracy, the audience however are now 30 years on a lot more desensitized to what they see it is almost as if films need to be extremely horrific just to capture our attention and become popular. An example of this is the human centipede a film viewed by many teenagers despite almost all of them being disgusted and horrified. All viewing however knew what they were about to watch which leads me to the conclusion that films should have age ratings and content warnings but that films should never be censored as it is the viewers choice if they are sufficiently warned to undertake the viewing of the film.
Martin Stewart.
I feel that film censorship is strongly motivated by fears about audiences and technologies however there are some other factors that motivate film censorship which do not fall into either of the above categories. Through improvements in technologies such as VHS players which were now present in many British homes the public could easily get easy access to unregulated and uncensored films known as video nasties, these led to fears that the quality of society in Britain could fall if they were allowed to remain being easily obtainable to the public. These video nasties were a sort of scapegoat for any troubles within the country possibly arguing that film censorship could be motivated by personal ideals but i will explore this later in the essay. These VHS tapes and video nasties also presented a great threat to the multiplexes as the viewers could now view previously unobtainable footage from the comfort of their homes, leading to fears of an even greater economic decline.
Through the technological improvements that took place throughout the 1970s the public now had the option of both Betamax and VHS on which to watch films at home. Despite its better quality betamax was soon defeated as VHS not only allowed for a longer recording but had also become a social trend throughout Britain as visiting the multiplexes had been in the past. It did however have a darker side which played a large role in its triumph over betamax which was that VHS tapes were easier to copy and therefore pirate. It was this piracy that led to unregulated tapes being produced in mass numbers and therefore widely distributed across the country. This piracy of tapes allowed prices to fall therefore making it a much more appealing option for the public than to visit their nearest multiplex creating a fall in cinema attendance.
The main fears of what audiences of watching came with the introduction of the video nasties.These tapes allowed the viewers to see content that had been deemed either to horrific or obscene for the screens of the cinemas. The films focused on the genres of horror and pornography. Through being uncensored they were able to explore much darker concepts than anything before them had been, such as the idea of rape or extremely gory deaths. Through these new themes came a certain sense of intrigue which appealed in the main to teenage audiences as it was new and captured their attention and curiosity. This led to great levels of fear in parents as they no longer had any control over what their children were watching and no guarantee that the film was appropriate as it was unregulated. This created a great sense of moral panic as many adults felt that what their children were watching was wrong and should be banned altogether.
Amidst this moral panic the government saw a window for them to take advantage and use this for their gain. This argues that film censorship was not motivated by fears about audiences and technologies but rather as a tool to defeat the scapegoat which took the blame for a broken Britain. Under Margaret Thatcher the conservative government claimed that it was the fault of these video nasties for the state of some of the problems in Britain, Her government held very traditional views and felt that these tapes were not appropriate for viewing by anybody and should be gotten rid of. Through the media the government pushed the idea and created a larger sense of fear that it was these films damaging youth and the morals of the country, therefore rallying greater support for their disposal or censorship and also taking more blame away from Margaret Thatcher for the violence and poorness of the country. This gives the idea that it was not fear of how the audiences react but rather through the use of power to create a fear that had previously not been there in force for a governments own gains.
Eventually in the year of 1985 the regulation of home video came to be through an organisation called the BBFC meaning the British Board of Film Censorship. After being given permission by the conservative government the BBFC was allowed to apply age ratings to home video allowing the videos with the worst content to be flagged warning any potential viewers of what they would be watching. This shows that film censorship was done for the benefit of the audiences as they now knew what they were viewing and the country could have proper control over what was being distributed.
In conclusion i agree with my original point that film censorship is strongly motivated by fears about audience and technologies. It is the fear of the kind of content audiences are exposed to and through improved technologies the ease they can obtain it which pushed censorship forward as a major issue and led to home video being censored so strongly. Although other factors like the governments traditional conservative views affected censorship i still feel that fears for the audience and the advancements of technologies were more significant. The same issues of piracy causing film censorship to be difficult are still around today but in the form of internet movie piracy rather than VHS piracy, the audience however are now 30 years on a lot more desensitized to what they see it is almost as if films need to be extremely horrific just to capture our attention and become popular. An example of this is the human centipede a film viewed by many teenagers despite almost all of them being disgusted and horrified. All viewing however knew what they were about to watch which leads me to the conclusion that films should have age ratings and content warnings but that films should never be censored as it is the viewers choice if they are sufficiently warned to undertake the viewing of the film.
Martin Stewart.
Thursday 14 March 2013
Economic:
- Jaws was the first film ever to gross over 100million dollars at the box office
- FIlm was released at different times in different places making it an event release allowing more money to be made
- Product tie-ins and merchandising became prominent
- People became attracted to blockbusters for these event films so that they could appreciate the big budget special effects films in a cinema with good lines of sight but also the quality of sound and projection that they had now come to expect and could no longer be achieved in small independent cinemas
Technology:
- Mechanical shark
- Star Wars kick starts go-motion animation, lead to character morphing, led to real time compositing which led to high tech camera systems and digital smoke + pyrotechnics
Social:
- Jaws appeals to peoples fear of the unknown
- Became attracted to the large blockbusters in the multiplex' as they were event films
- Event films became a social event
- Jaws was the first film ever to gross over 100million dollars at the box office
- FIlm was released at different times in different places making it an event release allowing more money to be made
- Product tie-ins and merchandising became prominent
- People became attracted to blockbusters for these event films so that they could appreciate the big budget special effects films in a cinema with good lines of sight but also the quality of sound and projection that they had now come to expect and could no longer be achieved in small independent cinemas
Technology:
- Mechanical shark
- Star Wars kick starts go-motion animation, lead to character morphing, led to real time compositing which led to high tech camera systems and digital smoke + pyrotechnics
Social:
- Jaws appeals to peoples fear of the unknown
- Became attracted to the large blockbusters in the multiplex' as they were event films
- Event films became a social event
Comprehension Homework Questions
8.) Describe the rise of Cineplex
and the resulting changes to film distribution
- The rise of the
Cineplex came when types of films such as slashers, slapticks comedies and
youth films started to take over from the past favourite films such as ‘the
disaster film,’ and ‘the vigilante film’/ The trends of films started to
closely follow the trends of shows on television making the films more heavy
action and superhero based. With this change in genre of films more effects and
‘bigger’ sounds were needed. The average independent cinema could no longer
handle this type of production which caused this raise in Cineplex’s as they
were able not only to play more films at once but they were also able to cope
with the greater needs that the type of film requires. This greater influx in
the genre of film also led to the need for multiplex’ so that they could show
multiple films at once satisfying a greater audience. This rose it over
independent theatres as they now had a too wide audience to satisfy.
9.) Discuss the phenomenon as a contributing factor in the rise of the blockbuster
- The cineplex were a major contributing factor in the rise of the blockbuster as the new multiscreen system and the new quality of these cinemas allowed people to go to the cinema and appreciate these blockbusters with all their new sound and special effects etc in the highest quality.
- This aided the blockbuster to rise because it allowed people to appreciate them in a special way that was more attractive and of better quality than any home videos or little independent cinemas
- The cineplex' allowed the more mainstream films to be shown and also allowed higher prices to be charged meaning that the blockbusters could afford to advertise more and therefor attract more people to the blockbusters
- The system of multiple screens meant that people had more opportunity to see the films and therefore the blockbusters became more popular and widely viewed
Thursday 7 March 2013
Blockbuster Preparation
Film: Men in Black 3
Production Budget: $215,000000
Director: Barry Sonenfield
Starring:
- Will Smith (I Am Legend, iRobot, Independence Day)
Box Office: $624,026,776
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 70%
Film: Avengers Assemble
Production Budget: $220,000000
Director: Joss Whedon
Starring:
- Robert Downey Jr (Iron Man, Sherlock Holmes, Due Date)
- Chris Hemsworth (Thor, The Cabin in The Woods, Snow White and The Huntsman)
- Scarlet Johannson (Lost in Translation, The Prestige, Iron Man 2)
- Jeremy Renner (The Bourne Legacy, 28 Weeks Later, Hansel and Gretel Witch Hunters)
- Samuel L Jackson (Django Unchained, Pulp Fiction, Snakes on a Plane)
Box Office: $1,511,757,910
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 92%
Film: The Bourne Legacy
Production Budget: $125,000000
Director: Tony Gilroy
Starring:
- Jeremy Renner (Avengers Assemble, 28 Weeks Later, Hansel and Gretel Witch Hunters)
Box Office: $276,144,750
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 56%
Film: The Amazing Spider-Man
Production Budget: $230,000000
Director: Marc Webb
Starring:
- Andrew Garfield (The Social Network, The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, Never Let Me Go)
- Emma Stone (Easy-A, Superbad, Zombieland)
Box Office: $752,216,557
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 73%
Film: The Dark Knight Rises
Production Budget: $250,000000
Director: Christopher Nolan
Starring:
- Christian Bale (Public Enemies, American Psycho, The Prestige)
- Tom Hardy (Inception, Warrior, Lawless)
- Michael Caine (Thunderbirds, Children of Men, Harry Brown)
- Anne Hathaway (Les Miserables, The Devil Wears Prada, Rachel Getting Married)
- Morgan Freeman (Wanted, The Shawshank Redemption, Se7en)
Box Office: $1,081,041,287
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 87%
Film: The Expendables 2
Production Budget: $100,000000
Director: Simon West
Starring:
- Sylvester Stallone (Rocky, Bullet to The Head, Rambo)
- Jason Statham (The Mechanic, Snatch, The Bank Job)
- Chuck Norris (The Delta Force, The Way of The Dragon, Lone Wolf McQuade)
- Bruce Willis (Looper, Die Hard, Pulp Fiction)
- Arnold Schwarzenegger (Terminator, Predator, Total Recall)
Box Office: $312,500,000
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 65%
Film: Total Recall
Production Budget: $125,000000
Director: Len Wiseman
Starring:
- Colin Ferrell (Fright Night, Phonebooth, Seven Psychopaths)
- Kate Beckinsale (Underworld, The Aviator, Pearl Harbor)
Box Office: $198,467,168
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 31%
Film: Looper
Production Budget: $30,000000
Director: Rian Johnson
Starring:
- Joseph Gordon-Levitt (The Dark Knight Rises, 500 Days of Summer, Mysterious Skin)
- Bruce Willis (The Expendables 2, Die Hard, Pulp Fiction)
Box Office: $166,521,588
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 93%
Production Budget: $215,000000
Director: Barry Sonenfield
Starring:
- Will Smith (I Am Legend, iRobot, Independence Day)
Box Office: $624,026,776
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 70%
Film: Avengers Assemble
Production Budget: $220,000000
Director: Joss Whedon
Starring:
- Robert Downey Jr (Iron Man, Sherlock Holmes, Due Date)
- Chris Hemsworth (Thor, The Cabin in The Woods, Snow White and The Huntsman)
- Scarlet Johannson (Lost in Translation, The Prestige, Iron Man 2)
- Jeremy Renner (The Bourne Legacy, 28 Weeks Later, Hansel and Gretel Witch Hunters)
- Samuel L Jackson (Django Unchained, Pulp Fiction, Snakes on a Plane)
Box Office: $1,511,757,910
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 92%
Film: The Bourne Legacy
Production Budget: $125,000000
Director: Tony Gilroy
Starring:
- Jeremy Renner (Avengers Assemble, 28 Weeks Later, Hansel and Gretel Witch Hunters)
Box Office: $276,144,750
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 56%
Film: The Amazing Spider-Man
Production Budget: $230,000000
Director: Marc Webb
Starring:
- Andrew Garfield (The Social Network, The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, Never Let Me Go)
- Emma Stone (Easy-A, Superbad, Zombieland)
Box Office: $752,216,557
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 73%
Film: The Dark Knight Rises
Production Budget: $250,000000
Director: Christopher Nolan
Starring:
- Christian Bale (Public Enemies, American Psycho, The Prestige)
- Tom Hardy (Inception, Warrior, Lawless)
- Michael Caine (Thunderbirds, Children of Men, Harry Brown)
- Anne Hathaway (Les Miserables, The Devil Wears Prada, Rachel Getting Married)
- Morgan Freeman (Wanted, The Shawshank Redemption, Se7en)
Box Office: $1,081,041,287
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 87%
Film: The Expendables 2
Production Budget: $100,000000
Director: Simon West
Starring:
- Sylvester Stallone (Rocky, Bullet to The Head, Rambo)
- Jason Statham (The Mechanic, Snatch, The Bank Job)
- Chuck Norris (The Delta Force, The Way of The Dragon, Lone Wolf McQuade)
- Bruce Willis (Looper, Die Hard, Pulp Fiction)
- Arnold Schwarzenegger (Terminator, Predator, Total Recall)
Box Office: $312,500,000
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 65%
Film: Total Recall
Production Budget: $125,000000
Director: Len Wiseman
Starring:
- Colin Ferrell (Fright Night, Phonebooth, Seven Psychopaths)
- Kate Beckinsale (Underworld, The Aviator, Pearl Harbor)
Box Office: $198,467,168
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 31%
Film: Looper
Production Budget: $30,000000
Director: Rian Johnson
Starring:
- Joseph Gordon-Levitt (The Dark Knight Rises, 500 Days of Summer, Mysterious Skin)
- Bruce Willis (The Expendables 2, Die Hard, Pulp Fiction)
Box Office: $166,521,588
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 93%
Wednesday 13 February 2013
Friday 1 February 2013
Evaluation of Screen Reading of my 'Scribble Script'
- The dialogue in my sequel scene does not move the story on as fluently as it could, it is more of a conversation. Only a few of the lines of dialogue are effective to moving the story forward
- My dialogue conveys the relationship between the two characters well because it shows Kevin's submissive nature towards the guard and how the guard no longer has any fear for Kevin
- My dialogue does not communicate the Macro from my textual analysis very well as the both of the two characters in my scene are now adults, however through the stage directions we see that Kevin is resorting back to his old childlike ways supporting the conclusion i made in my textual analysis essay that some people are born evil and will always revert back to it whatever situation they are placed in
- I need to improve the amount of dialogue in my script. i will do this by adding more in to link it to my macro study better and to convey more of the story rather than some of the seemingly pointless time filling conversation my scene has at the moment
- I felt that the dialogue i did use however suited my characters well in the ways in which they would speak, the guard as an everyday male and Kevin as a submissive teenager
Thursday 31 January 2013
To what extent do V for Vendetta & Children of Men conform to film stereotypes and what messages are behind these representations?
To what extent
do V for Vendetta & Children of Men conform to film stereotypes and what
messages are behind these representations?
The two films that I am studying both do conform to
film stereotypes to an extent however they both have aspects that go against
these traditional stereotypes which I will be exploring throughout the essay.
However the film V for Vendetta appears to conform to these stereotypes to a
greater extent than that which Children of Men does.
Both films follow the typical ‘horror’ characteristic
of having a ‘final girl’ despite both being hybrid genre sci-fi thriller films.
In V for Vendetta the final girl is the character of Evie, although she does
fit many of the guidelines of a final girl she does differ in some ways. Evie
reaches the end of the film and achieves her goal due to being smart, and
through masculating herself. This is a common characteristic of how final girls
reach the end of films and how we know that they are the stereotype of a final
girl. Evie however achieves her objective through well planned out efforts and
a strategy which does not conform to the stereotype which is that final girls
normally defeat the final obstacle they face by accident or by some streak of
luck. This shows that much like the genre of the film Evie is a hybrid of the
final girl stereotype, she has lost her girlish characteristics and achieves
her goals through planning but does survive to the end as the last significant
female making her fit into the stereotype nonetheless. The film Children of Men
however does not have this stereotype of a final girl, despite Kee surviving to
the end of the film she does not do it through any of her own actions, the only
reason she reaches her destination and survives the problems she faces
throughout the film is through the actions of a male (Theo) and sacrifices
others have made for her. She survives through to the end but does not meet any
of the physical or mental stereotypes of a final girl so I do not feel that she
should be placed into this category showing that the film Children of Men does
not follow the common stereotype of genre of a final girl, and does so to
convey the message that although women are necessary to keep the world going
they need men to help them reach this goal and outcome.
The next stereotype i will focus on is that of a
hypermasculine protagonist. The film V for Vendetta immediately meets this
stereotype through the character of V. The character possesses super human
speed and strength which immediately shows him as a hypermasculine alpha male.
And scene which displays this to the greatest extent is in the conclusion of
the film where V fights multiple soldiers in the underground and kills them all
whilst being repeatedly shot at. This demonstration of his power shows his hypermasculine
characteristics and representation perfectly meeting the traditional stereotype
of a hypermasculine protagonist. You can also read into this in a psychosexual
way as V uses large knives to repeatedly penetrate his enemies to show his
dominance over them, this again supports the idea of him being hypermasculine
as i shows his superiority as an alpha male. V for vendetta also turns the
stereotypical female character of Evie into a hypermasculinised heroine who
completes Vs Vendetta. When she becomes masculinised Evie loses her fear and
also her hair, masculinising her personality and physical appearance. The way
that both protagonists fit the hypermasculine stereotype conveys the message
that only males can complete the important actions in the world, and gives the
idea that women almost need to change and become like males to make an impact
on the world. This message can be interpretated differently but that is how i
personally read into the film. Children of Men however has no predominant hypermasculinised
characters to fit into the stereotype, the only characters that i felt
portrayed these characteristics were the revolutionary group ‘The Fishes’
during the scene in which they chase Theo and Kee as they try to escape. The
fishes however are robbed of this hypermasculinity when they display feminine
traits during the scene in which Kee is wandering through the battle ground
with her baby and all fighting hold a ceasefire. This stop in fighting and
consideration is a feminine trait of weakness which would not be portrayed by a
hypermasculinised character. This leads me to the conclusion that V for
Vendetta conforms to the stereotypes of a Hypermasculine protagonist whilst
Children of Men does not conform to any extent.
The next main stereotype is that of a positive
British National Identity. As a Hollywood film it is to be expected that even
though it is dystopian V for Vendetta will still present Britain in a more
tourist appealing attractive way than the film Children of Men will. V for
Vendetta shows all the iconic locations of Britain such as the houses of
parliament and the old Bailey, despite being a dystopian film we see very
little evidence of this in the physicality’s of the buildings and locations in
which the film is set. The majority of characters in the film are very well
spoken in a typical British accent showing that the film follows these
stereotypes of the British national identity. However the film has a totalitarian
government with strong Nazi symbolism which goes against any stereotypes and
traditional representations of the British. This is put in the film to show the
dystopian theme of the film and means that the film cannot fully conform to the
typical Representation of the British national identity so only meets the
stereotype to a certain extent. The film Children of Men again goes against
stereotypes and does not follow any stereotypes of British National Identity
other than the accents which all of the English characters throughout the film
possess. These are none of Britain’s typical tourist attractions shown and the
country is presented in a negative light so would cause no desire for potential
tourists watching the film to visit. I feel that the film goes against these
stereotypes because it is a British made film rather than a Hollywood made film
so it has no influences or pressures from outside sources to include a positive
presentation of any aspects or buildings of the British.
In conclusion V for Vendetta conforms to the
stereotypes of Characters and British National Identity to a much higher extent
than children of men does. I feel that it does this because it is a Hollywood
film so follows more typical conventions to attract a wider audience unlike the
film children of men which was a British film and therefore aimed to give a
truer representation of Britain and what the future holds rather than to simply
create as much money as possible for those involved.
Thursday 24 January 2013
We Need to Talk About Kevin Sequel, Scene Idea.
We Need to Talk About Kevin Sequel Idea,
Jail Corridor Scene
- Kevin's in jail walking down corridor with a female guard
- Acts seemingly friendly to the female guard, laughing/joking with her
- Trips up the guard so that she falls onto her face
- Kevin smiles while the woman cannot see showing that tripping her up was his true intention
- Women stands up with nose bleed and Kevin acts sympathetic, showing that he is a liar and acts to deceive those around him
- When they reach Kevins cell he is locked in, the guard says bye and rushes off to clean up her nose
- Kevin smiles to himself and laughs when she is out of earshot, he is obviously gleeful with what he accomplished
- This scene shows that the character of Kevin has not changed since going into jail after committing the murders
- Kevin is again shown as demonised as he was in the original film, tying in with my study of the representation of youth
- Shows that some characters will never change, wherever they are placed and whatever happens to them
- Shows the true cruelty of Kevin as a character has not changed since the original, shows he has no cause or reason for his evil actions as he carries them out on a guard who is trying to be nice to him and be his friend in prison
- Only character in the scene that was present in the original film that carries over to this scene in the sequel is Kevin himself
- Only set 1 year on from original film
- Kevin's face has predominant bruising and scarring, viewer will work out it was caused by beatings administered by other inmates
- Set in a prison corridor
- Jail Cell
- Grey walls all indoors
- Nothing in corridor other than lights on ceiling
- Cold lifeless feel
- Harsh overly bright lighting, creates tense atmosphere
Jail Corridor Scene
- Kevin's in jail walking down corridor with a female guard
- Acts seemingly friendly to the female guard, laughing/joking with her
- Trips up the guard so that she falls onto her face
- Kevin smiles while the woman cannot see showing that tripping her up was his true intention
- Women stands up with nose bleed and Kevin acts sympathetic, showing that he is a liar and acts to deceive those around him
- When they reach Kevins cell he is locked in, the guard says bye and rushes off to clean up her nose
- Kevin smiles to himself and laughs when she is out of earshot, he is obviously gleeful with what he accomplished
- This scene shows that the character of Kevin has not changed since going into jail after committing the murders
- Kevin is again shown as demonised as he was in the original film, tying in with my study of the representation of youth
- Shows that some characters will never change, wherever they are placed and whatever happens to them
- Shows the true cruelty of Kevin as a character has not changed since the original, shows he has no cause or reason for his evil actions as he carries them out on a guard who is trying to be nice to him and be his friend in prison
- Only character in the scene that was present in the original film that carries over to this scene in the sequel is Kevin himself
- Only set 1 year on from original film
- Kevin's face has predominant bruising and scarring, viewer will work out it was caused by beatings administered by other inmates
- Set in a prison corridor
- Jail Cell
- Grey walls all indoors
- Nothing in corridor other than lights on ceiling
- Cold lifeless feel
- Harsh overly bright lighting, creates tense atmosphere
Elevator Pitch
This is my Elevator Pitch for my scene idea, see the post titled "We Need to Talk About Kevin Sequel" to see a detailed explanation of the scene and how it ties in with my MACRO study from my textual analysis essay.
Wednesday 16 January 2013
Mock Exam Homework
How do the films you have studied relate to the concept of genre and narrative?
The two films that i have studied are Children of Men and V for
Vendetta. Both of these have complex narratives and do not follow
simple conventions of genre. The film V however appears to have a much
more complex narrative than that of Children of Men.
Firstly i will start with the genre of these two films, both of the
two films which i study come under the classification of 'Hybrid
Genres'. This means that they are not simply one genre, for example
they are not simply horror or comedy. They are a mix of two or more
genres. This is made necessary in the films by them being set in the
future, meaning in most cases whatever original genre they had fallen
under a sci-fi aspect would have been included making them a hybrid
genre. Both of the two films are a mix of the thriller and sci-fi
genres. i will start off by looking at Children of Men. the film
follows the typical genre stereotypes of a thriller as a great amount
of suspense and mystery are created throughout the plot, the sci-fi
aspect of this film however comes as it is set in 2027. It is only a
subtle hint at sic-fi but giant electronic billboards are on street
corners along with computerized images on the sides of buses. This
more technical presence in the Mise-en-Scene makes it somewhat more
believable that humans are no longer able to re-create as even without
the presence of any 'robots' an impression is given to the modern day
viewer that technology is overtaking everything.
The same mix of Thriller and Sci-Fi is used in the other film of study
V for Vendetta. However V for Vendetta has a bigger Sci-Fi influence
than that which is shown in Children of Men. V for Vendetta uses the
same giant electronic billboards, but it also has the main protagonist
of V who possesses a sort of super power due to his heightened
abilities. During the film these abilities were acquired through V
being tested on in the Lark Hill concentration camp, showing the film
to be sci-fi as it follows the common genre convention that genetic
alterations came about by accident as a result of some form of
scientific experiment. In V however the Sci-Fi elements in the
Mise-en-Scene are still very small, this is to keep the idea in the
audiences mind that this is not a far off future, and they should be
worried about it. V has a stronger presence of the sci--fi genre than
Children of Men as it originated as a comic and comics frequently
contain strong sci-fi ideas.
These two films both use hybrid genres to maintain the interest of the
audience. As both films are Dystopian and set in the near future the
sci-fi elements must be kept to a minimum to maintain their
believability as a key feature of these two films is that it shows the
audience what their lives could be like very soon if the human race
carries on as it is. Some technological advances must be shown to
distinguish that it is the future but robots etc would be too far as
it takes away all the threat of the Dystopian near future ideas
presented in the two films. Single genre films have also already
covered almost every possible storyline in the past so a hybrid genre
must be created and used so that new ideas can be used and presented
in the best possible way in the films.
The two films again share a similarity in that they both have complex
narratives, this is to be expected to as they both fall partly under
the thriller genre. i feel however that Children of Men although
having a complex plot line follows many of the conventions of The
Classic Hollywood Narrative. By this i mean that the film has a clear
beginning, middle and end in the plot line (following a 3 act
structure) but also that it has the protagonist face a problem and
overcome it to allow the film to end with a happy positive resolution.
This happens almost completely in Children of Men as as soon as Theo
is introduced to Kee you know that he will safely deliver her to the
destination she needs to reach, there is no question about whether she
will make it. The only point in my opinion that challenges this
classic Hollywood narrative is Theo's' death at the end of the film,
this does not allow for a completely happy ending as you would expect
but at this point he has completed his duty and allowed the film to
reach a positive resolution so it does still follow the conventions
very closely. The film clearly follows the 3 act structure without any
deviation from it.
V for Vendetta however whilst also reaching a positive resolution and
having the main character die to achieve his goal in the same way,
does not follow the classic Hollywood narrative. it does not follow
this narrative style as V is not presented with a problem, instead he
creates his own agenda and imposes it onto others. the mystery that
surrounds V makes it very hard for the film to film into the classic
Hollywood narrative as we do not fully know what kind of character he
is until he has completed all of his private agendas and eventually
dies so that Evie who he 'set free' can complete his work. V for
Vendetta uses many flashbacks throughout the film to show what has
happened in the past or to create mystery around certain characters.
This is unlike Children of Men where it is all shown in present time
so there is no confusion or mystery as to what is going on in the
plot. Overall the film V for Vendetta does follow the 3 act structure
that defines the Classic Hollywood Narrative but through its use of
flashbacks and its complex character driven plot it deviates enough so
that i do not class the narrative as 'Classic Hollywood'.
In conclusion both of the two films use hybrid genres to allow them to
be near future Dystopian films and also so that they remain
interesting and fresh to the audiences who view them. V for Vendetta
has a much more complex narrative not following any guidelines whereas
Children of Men follows the Classic Hollywood Narrative very closely
making it a simpler film to understand, predict and watch.
The two films that i have studied are Children of Men and V for
Vendetta. Both of these have complex narratives and do not follow
simple conventions of genre. The film V however appears to have a much
more complex narrative than that of Children of Men.
Firstly i will start with the genre of these two films, both of the
two films which i study come under the classification of 'Hybrid
Genres'. This means that they are not simply one genre, for example
they are not simply horror or comedy. They are a mix of two or more
genres. This is made necessary in the films by them being set in the
future, meaning in most cases whatever original genre they had fallen
under a sci-fi aspect would have been included making them a hybrid
genre. Both of the two films are a mix of the thriller and sci-fi
genres. i will start off by looking at Children of Men. the film
follows the typical genre stereotypes of a thriller as a great amount
of suspense and mystery are created throughout the plot, the sci-fi
aspect of this film however comes as it is set in 2027. It is only a
subtle hint at sic-fi but giant electronic billboards are on street
corners along with computerized images on the sides of buses. This
more technical presence in the Mise-en-Scene makes it somewhat more
believable that humans are no longer able to re-create as even without
the presence of any 'robots' an impression is given to the modern day
viewer that technology is overtaking everything.
The same mix of Thriller and Sci-Fi is used in the other film of study
V for Vendetta. However V for Vendetta has a bigger Sci-Fi influence
than that which is shown in Children of Men. V for Vendetta uses the
same giant electronic billboards, but it also has the main protagonist
of V who possesses a sort of super power due to his heightened
abilities. During the film these abilities were acquired through V
being tested on in the Lark Hill concentration camp, showing the film
to be sci-fi as it follows the common genre convention that genetic
alterations came about by accident as a result of some form of
scientific experiment. In V however the Sci-Fi elements in the
Mise-en-Scene are still very small, this is to keep the idea in the
audiences mind that this is not a far off future, and they should be
worried about it. V has a stronger presence of the sci--fi genre than
Children of Men as it originated as a comic and comics frequently
contain strong sci-fi ideas.
These two films both use hybrid genres to maintain the interest of the
audience. As both films are Dystopian and set in the near future the
sci-fi elements must be kept to a minimum to maintain their
believability as a key feature of these two films is that it shows the
audience what their lives could be like very soon if the human race
carries on as it is. Some technological advances must be shown to
distinguish that it is the future but robots etc would be too far as
it takes away all the threat of the Dystopian near future ideas
presented in the two films. Single genre films have also already
covered almost every possible storyline in the past so a hybrid genre
must be created and used so that new ideas can be used and presented
in the best possible way in the films.
The two films again share a similarity in that they both have complex
narratives, this is to be expected to as they both fall partly under
the thriller genre. i feel however that Children of Men although
having a complex plot line follows many of the conventions of The
Classic Hollywood Narrative. By this i mean that the film has a clear
beginning, middle and end in the plot line (following a 3 act
structure) but also that it has the protagonist face a problem and
overcome it to allow the film to end with a happy positive resolution.
This happens almost completely in Children of Men as as soon as Theo
is introduced to Kee you know that he will safely deliver her to the
destination she needs to reach, there is no question about whether she
will make it. The only point in my opinion that challenges this
classic Hollywood narrative is Theo's' death at the end of the film,
this does not allow for a completely happy ending as you would expect
but at this point he has completed his duty and allowed the film to
reach a positive resolution so it does still follow the conventions
very closely. The film clearly follows the 3 act structure without any
deviation from it.
V for Vendetta however whilst also reaching a positive resolution and
having the main character die to achieve his goal in the same way,
does not follow the classic Hollywood narrative. it does not follow
this narrative style as V is not presented with a problem, instead he
creates his own agenda and imposes it onto others. the mystery that
surrounds V makes it very hard for the film to film into the classic
Hollywood narrative as we do not fully know what kind of character he
is until he has completed all of his private agendas and eventually
dies so that Evie who he 'set free' can complete his work. V for
Vendetta uses many flashbacks throughout the film to show what has
happened in the past or to create mystery around certain characters.
This is unlike Children of Men where it is all shown in present time
so there is no confusion or mystery as to what is going on in the
plot. Overall the film V for Vendetta does follow the 3 act structure
that defines the Classic Hollywood Narrative but through its use of
flashbacks and its complex character driven plot it deviates enough so
that i do not class the narrative as 'Classic Hollywood'.
In conclusion both of the two films use hybrid genres to allow them to
be near future Dystopian films and also so that they remain
interesting and fresh to the audiences who view them. V for Vendetta
has a much more complex narrative not following any guidelines whereas
Children of Men follows the Classic Hollywood Narrative very closely
making it a simpler film to understand, predict and watch.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)