Thursday, 2 April 2015
Sunday, 29 March 2015
3D Essay
What conclusions can you draw from the resurgence of 3D in
the 21st Century cinema?
Films such as The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 1, American
Sniper and Guardians of the Galaxy, are all examples of how a non-3D film can
be more successful than a 3D film. Due to the new release of CGI in films such
as Avatar in 2009, this film was set to bring the cinema attendance to a rise.
But before all of this that happened, there are factors before that led it to
what it is today. 3D is being release as a new thing but really it’s been
available from the early 50’s. From the 50’s it was released as the new thing
but then as technology grows and gets better, 3D soon run its time when the
television was release in the mid 50’s and for that cinema attendance dropped.
Other than that later on in the 80’s, the release of VHS again dropped
attendance because it was a cheaper way for families to view films. Finally in
the 09 Avatar was released to get people back in to cinemas to try and revive
the experience that you get when going to the cinema.
When all of that happened it had a traumatic change to the way
people viewed films. For the 50’s it was the television being released. When
the television was released it brought down cinema and films because TV’s were
the new thing and they started to become a trend other than going to the
cinema. But because of this, the release of more 3D films to try and bring back
audiences raised. But it didn’t work for the social factor of things because
having a television meant that it would be cheaper for a group to watch things
like films, but then on the economic side it was ruining the studios and cinema
industry because they weren’t gaining profit from screen time. So for this the
studios had to fight back to win audiences back from the new releases of
technology.
Film critics are ones who judge films for there story line
and how flowing the narrative actually is and if it makes sense, they are also
there to judge the 3D films and judge if they actually needed to be in 3D.
Critics are the ones who some people follow when going to watch a film in the
cinema for the experience of that film. Some critics like Mark Kermode, really
try and unravel why movie studios are making films 3D. Mark Kermode is one of
many critics who properly judge in depth analysis to why 3D is such a flop in
ways. Kermode states in his opinion, 3D will run its course and then die out
and go back to normal 2D because he thinks that the 3D gimmick is just a faze.
In ways you can say he’s right because in 1953 3D ran its course and then died
out until the 80’s when it was revived for a bit until the release of VHS,
which then led to the decline in attendance again. Because that happened back
then, it had led to the steady decline in cinema audience. Critics also state
that video piracy is one of the key factors to why 3D can’t take off as much as
it did when it was first released.
Thursday, 26 March 2015
Video Nasties Essay
"Censorship is motivated
by fears surrounding new technology's"
Discuss this statement referring to video nasties and the impacts of technological, social, political contexts of the early and mid 80's
To an extent there is reason to why this statement is true. Morally films then did have to be censored to protect the younger audiences of 12-16 year olds who are the main viewers of these films, although the films were banned and illegal to have, it didn't stop people of young ages to get a hold of them. All that made this happen was the release of the home video (VHS). Distributors of these films were people who own sweet shops to get the youth to buy a film even though they know it was illegal. The Government couldn't do much to stop this because know matter how much they tried to stop and censor most video nasties, there was always a way for people to get the video nasties and sell them all. This became such a big problem that Government forces raided these shops, but this was still all in good natural for the upper class end of the filming and political viewers to protect the littler working and middle class citizens. With the conservatives and also Mary Whitehouse, they had the intent that it was there job to protect all of society from the inimitable behaviours in some films. Conservatives also did this to try and cover up the economic aspect and cover up the moral decline.
Government with all there power and authority cannot censor out all the video nasties due to the new technologies that were just coming up at that time. VHS made all this possible by making films cheaper for families to get films and also have a bigger verity of choses because they can get any film they want. In 1984 there was the release of the Video Recordings Act 1984 (VRA) which was promoted to try and censorship video nasties by putting them though some test and evaluate if they are deemed illegal for the public to watch or if they were to violent, gory or inimitable if the youth got a hold of this. A film that was a big influence for this act to start up was Evil Dead. This was an act placed in by Government to try and protect the society but this was only put in place after they were pressured by pressure groups to try and censor off the video nasties. Even with this act still in placed, it didn't stop people from getting the films and watching and sharing. Everyone done it for the thrill and experience of watching a film that was banned in the country. And this was all due to the technological evolution.
This all seemed to be creating moral panic within the Government, mainly the conservative side, which Mary Whitehouse and Margret Thatcher both used there power to try and protect society because they thought it was there moral right to do so. Both woman wanted video nasties to be banned from all television but deep down they knew know matter how much they tried, that due to new release of technology, wiping out the whole country of video nasties was a figment that they would never reach. But none the less they both were fighting and Thatcher was complaining that the video nasties was a threat to the society they lived in, but by the way that they have been doing this, more and more video nasties were being produced because all the stir and in a way, marketing, it is making people want to buy and watch them more because it was the thing that was wrong and it became a trend for people to go and watch it. The media was also further forced against this by Whitehouse who was backing her conservative party and she was reenforcing the family aspect of the video nasties. And although Mary Whitehouse and Margret Thatcher were against all of video nasties, they had never themselves watched a video nasty.
Now in this time there was the factor of the VHS just being released for the public, this enabled anyone and everyone to view what they wanted, when they wanted, even younger people. Even with the fight to censor all video nasties, with this released of VHS it basically became impossible to stop people from watching it. Plus if you tell someone you can't watch something, there more likely to go out of there way to watch it. The effect censorship would of made would be to stop the youth audiences from being exposed to graphic gore and psychological effects that it could lead, an example of this what be 'I Spit on Your Grave'. Now because of VHS, the media then started to get involved to try and maybe stop people from buying one so that they can protect the younger audiences that shouldn't be watching them in the first place. But with the way that they did it, it started to create a moral panic. This then got the public all worked up and started to believe that all video nasties were evil, but by this it was then giving the Government all evidence needed to ban all video nasties and this then gave the Government more power than they already have so they can control watch people watch. But still no matter how much they tried, the power of piracy through VHS prevented Government from having complete control over what everyone watched.
Overall you could agree to the statement, because of newer technology, the VHS, it has motivated the Government to try and censor films to protect the younger ages. And also not just from younger ages, because of the inimitable behaviour that you find in video nasties, you would have to try and keep them away from the mental challenged who could try to inimitate scenes from the films. But you could also have a disagreement to this by say you could just let people decide for themselves if they want to watch it or not, give people the free will to judge a film themselves. Why go along with what the Government and Mary Whitehouse think when they haven't even watched the video nasties themselves.
Discuss this statement referring to video nasties and the impacts of technological, social, political contexts of the early and mid 80's
To an extent there is reason to why this statement is true. Morally films then did have to be censored to protect the younger audiences of 12-16 year olds who are the main viewers of these films, although the films were banned and illegal to have, it didn't stop people of young ages to get a hold of them. All that made this happen was the release of the home video (VHS). Distributors of these films were people who own sweet shops to get the youth to buy a film even though they know it was illegal. The Government couldn't do much to stop this because know matter how much they tried to stop and censor most video nasties, there was always a way for people to get the video nasties and sell them all. This became such a big problem that Government forces raided these shops, but this was still all in good natural for the upper class end of the filming and political viewers to protect the littler working and middle class citizens. With the conservatives and also Mary Whitehouse, they had the intent that it was there job to protect all of society from the inimitable behaviours in some films. Conservatives also did this to try and cover up the economic aspect and cover up the moral decline.
Government with all there power and authority cannot censor out all the video nasties due to the new technologies that were just coming up at that time. VHS made all this possible by making films cheaper for families to get films and also have a bigger verity of choses because they can get any film they want. In 1984 there was the release of the Video Recordings Act 1984 (VRA) which was promoted to try and censorship video nasties by putting them though some test and evaluate if they are deemed illegal for the public to watch or if they were to violent, gory or inimitable if the youth got a hold of this. A film that was a big influence for this act to start up was Evil Dead. This was an act placed in by Government to try and protect the society but this was only put in place after they were pressured by pressure groups to try and censor off the video nasties. Even with this act still in placed, it didn't stop people from getting the films and watching and sharing. Everyone done it for the thrill and experience of watching a film that was banned in the country. And this was all due to the technological evolution.
This all seemed to be creating moral panic within the Government, mainly the conservative side, which Mary Whitehouse and Margret Thatcher both used there power to try and protect society because they thought it was there moral right to do so. Both woman wanted video nasties to be banned from all television but deep down they knew know matter how much they tried, that due to new release of technology, wiping out the whole country of video nasties was a figment that they would never reach. But none the less they both were fighting and Thatcher was complaining that the video nasties was a threat to the society they lived in, but by the way that they have been doing this, more and more video nasties were being produced because all the stir and in a way, marketing, it is making people want to buy and watch them more because it was the thing that was wrong and it became a trend for people to go and watch it. The media was also further forced against this by Whitehouse who was backing her conservative party and she was reenforcing the family aspect of the video nasties. And although Mary Whitehouse and Margret Thatcher were against all of video nasties, they had never themselves watched a video nasty.
Now in this time there was the factor of the VHS just being released for the public, this enabled anyone and everyone to view what they wanted, when they wanted, even younger people. Even with the fight to censor all video nasties, with this released of VHS it basically became impossible to stop people from watching it. Plus if you tell someone you can't watch something, there more likely to go out of there way to watch it. The effect censorship would of made would be to stop the youth audiences from being exposed to graphic gore and psychological effects that it could lead, an example of this what be 'I Spit on Your Grave'. Now because of VHS, the media then started to get involved to try and maybe stop people from buying one so that they can protect the younger audiences that shouldn't be watching them in the first place. But with the way that they did it, it started to create a moral panic. This then got the public all worked up and started to believe that all video nasties were evil, but by this it was then giving the Government all evidence needed to ban all video nasties and this then gave the Government more power than they already have so they can control watch people watch. But still no matter how much they tried, the power of piracy through VHS prevented Government from having complete control over what everyone watched.
Overall you could agree to the statement, because of newer technology, the VHS, it has motivated the Government to try and censor films to protect the younger ages. And also not just from younger ages, because of the inimitable behaviour that you find in video nasties, you would have to try and keep them away from the mental challenged who could try to inimitate scenes from the films. But you could also have a disagreement to this by say you could just let people decide for themselves if they want to watch it or not, give people the free will to judge a film themselves. Why go along with what the Government and Mary Whitehouse think when they haven't even watched the video nasties themselves.
Monday, 23 February 2015
Prequels, Sequels and Reboots
Star Wars, Termintor, Star Trek
-Director (J.J Abrams)
-Genre (Sci-Fi)
-Iconic soundtrack
-Director (J.J Abrams)
-Genre (Sci-Fi)
-Iconic soundtrack
-Sequels
-All reboots
-Targets male audience
Franchise:
"a general title or concept used for creating or marketing a series of products, typically films or television shows."
Prequel:
"a story or film containing events which precede those of an existing work."
Sequel:
"a published, broadcast, or recorded work that continues the story or develops the theme of an earlier one."
Reboot:
"restart or revive (a process or sequence, especially a series of films or television programmes); give fresh impetus to." Reimagining the original - new fans as well as old fans
Franchise:
"a general title or concept used for creating or marketing a series of products, typically films or television shows."
Prequel:
"a story or film containing events which precede those of an existing work."
Sequel:
"a published, broadcast, or recorded work that continues the story or develops the theme of an earlier one."
Reboot:
"restart or revive (a process or sequence, especially a series of films or television programmes); give fresh impetus to." Reimagining the original - new fans as well as old fans
Hollywood films:
Recycling old films into new films. There running out of ideas. They have limited ideas that would be able to work.
Films have to make them like this because they can't take risk because of the Internet and us.
Reason for why independent films are taking off so much.
Coursework:
1. Write a script for the disruption or revolution of Inception or Shutter Island. Must explore the MACRO of the film.
Video Nasties Content
Technical -
- Cinema attendance declined massively due to the rise of VHS
- Video Nasties created diversity of films
Social -
- Moral Campaign against video nasties; Mary Whitehouse (NVLA), Margaret Thatcher, the media and the BBFC.
- The above mentioned scapegoated the video nasties for immoral behaviour which led to a moral panic
- Regulated videos to have age restrictions by BBFC
- Government Censorship & Police Raids on VHS dealers
- Video Nasties were niche films and really popular with teenagers due to controversy
- Video Nasties were exploited to explain responsibility for moral decline in society
- Video Nasties were made for distribution only via home-video
- Censorship or individual judgement?
Political -
- Conservative government sought to protect
- Moral Panic created by Media the term: 'video nasties'
- Riots and civil unrest, unemployment and recession
- Watching video nasties helps put it in context of narrative, the campaigners did not actually watch them
- Video Recordings Act 1984, banned list
Economic -
- Videos being distributed by cornershops, market traders and garages
- The covers on the boxes often more grusome than the content
- Video Nasties like Evil Dead, I Spit On Your Grave and Driller Killer were realistic because they were low budget
http://leighmediaasfilm.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/session-1-video-nasties.html
Monday, 1 December 2014
Representation Comparison for VfV and CoM
-Using typical roles of a father and mother figure through Theo and Kee
-Kee being the mother as she is pregnant and trying to survive
-Theo is the fatherly figure by being the strong, powerful and the decision maker of the the two
-More relatable to reality with London having typical stereotypes of England
-Red buses, phone boxes are examples of what London is typically seen as
Hypermasculinity - exaggeration of masculinity
The Male Gaze - giving the male audience something to look at by objectifying women
Phallic and Yonic Imagery - symbolism
Mother figure
Fast and Furious 4 -
Phallic: the train having the power and trying to hit them, re-enforcing
We Need to Talk About Kevin -
Motherly figure: the mothers care for the child but then challenges the stereotype when she's throws him
Captain America -
Hypermasculinity: challenges it by having a weak solider being the bravest
Video Essay:
Must have MICRO and MACRO
Discussion of the MACRO
Purpose and meaning
The National Representation
1-Download and convert clips
2-Writing up the text for Final Cut
Points:
-Immigrants standing with the British people through the toughest time
(VfV - Britain Prevails
CoM - Cafe Bombing)
-Government control the country, but what at what cause? The positives and negatives
(VfV - Girl Getting Shot
CoM - Miracle Cease Fire)
-Difference when Government is attacked by the public
(VfV - Parliament Blowing Up
CoM - Uprising)
Mother figure:
-Absences of mother and father figures in CoM due to no children, no hope.
-Mothers represent hope and peace in CoM.
Phallic and Yonic:
-Phallic=power
-V's knifes are his symbol
-Tunnels are the symbolism of escape in CoM
-VfV uses more phallic and yonic scenes
Hypermasculinity:
-VfV uses it with V due to his strength and character
-Symboled as a hero/villain
-Enhancing the power of the character
-Hypermasculine characters are there to protect the people because they can't protect themselves
-CoM doesn't have this type of character
-Giving life is stronger than masculinity
-Showing woman have power over men from there trait to balance out fights
The films are both literal aspects of gender, but where one is actual and one is symbolic. VfV is following the representation but it subverts it.
Wednesday, 19 November 2014
Thesis - V for Vendetta and Children of Men
V for Vendetta (VfV) and Children of Men (CoM) are two different films with many similarities. Both the films have a disaster that we as the audience don't know how it started. In VfV they try and get across he message of warning to the views but in CoM it's a sense of hope. With VfV being a Classic Hollywood Narrative, it follows some of the general conventions of a typical Hollywood film, but then can't at the end gets the viewer thinking about what just happened. This never happens in a typical Hollywood film but that is what VfV is trying to get across. CoM being an independent film, the way it is shot is very different from how VfV was shot this independent film would be trying to make the film more realistic by trying to get it's style of shot across.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)