3D and Event Movies

Event movies are shown in 3D, shot specifically to enhance and show off 'what 3D can do' - they are usually blockbusters that are either made for 3d or converted to 3d to try and wrong out any other money

Spectacle and immersion

1) Film income decreased by piracy, 3D introduced to "make experience better" and increase attendances, more formulaic Hollywood films

2) Indies get their films seen by a larger audience due to internet exposure and therefore gain an audience that they wouldn't have had otherwise (no income, but they usually do it for the art)

3) Film industry is gaining money through piracy as streaming services are learning to gain money through streaming services by promising higher quality and faster speeds

4) Audiences are getting more formulaic films, that are focused on CGI and being a spectacle rather than being a good film. The gimic of 3D has passed

----

Video nasties essay:

Argument 1 - People can get hold, government can't control

Arg 2 - Whitehouse and Conservatives thought it was their moral right to protect society

Arg 3 - conservatives did this to cover up the moral decline

Revision lesson (23/3/15)

Propp characters:
V subverts CHN Propp characters with V as he's a hero/anti-hero/villain to show that we shouldn't believe what we hear (Message) - As were told which character is hero

Sci-fi convention:
Toned down sci-fi in both films to keep the realism and make the message more realistic. No lasers, aliens etc. Just near future technology

Style:
Long take in CoM give the documentary look to it
Comic book style in V for vendetta is mixed with Chiaoscuro (Shadows, dark, low-key lighting) to mix realism with comic book violence, however, it subverts the stereotypical Hollywood superhero film by making you think (Easter Egg Experience)

Video Nasties Essay - Attempt 1

During the late 70s through to the late 80s, Home Video and VHS were on the rise. With this, new unregulated videos entered the market, readily available for their customers. These films were known as "Video Nasties" and featured graphic nudity, gore, imitable violence and even in some cases, rape. These were only a few of the themes featured, and each film aimed to provide a "shock factor" that was larger than one you'd find in your last 'Nasty'. The fact that these films were so readily available, selling in Garages and Sweet Shops, sent the UK into a Moral Panic. The fact that the content here was unregulated and untouched by the government, made it so that anyone (even children and teenagers) could get their hands on the most graphic of films around at this time. Noticing this, measures were put into place by the government to try to censor (ban) these films so that the could not be seen by the younger audiences that were so tempted as to see them. It is argued that this was "motivated by fears surrounding new technologies", which I believe is true to an extent, however, I also think that the only reason that these measures were adopted by the government was because it was something that you could blame the current Moral Decline on, a 'Scapegoat'.

The enforcement of censorship amongst these 'Nasties' was originally put in place to protect those of a more vulnerable mindset, of course; being the children and teenagers that could get their hands on these films. The largest age group that did so are the 12-16 year olds (primarily of which were boys). Mary Whitehouse, was a member of the NV&LA or the National Viewers and Listeners Association, this was a group of ordinary people who took it upon themselves to watch films available on the market and warn people of the content of them. However, after viewing just one of these 'Nasties', notorious amongst film history; "I Spit On Your Grave", Mary decided it upon herself that something was needed to be done about these films, their content and how available they are to the market. Mary started a pressure group of those who wanted to control how available these films are on the market. Being a traditional Christian and a mother, she took it upon herself to protect others from the horrors of these films, specifically the children. Rightly so, from a moral view, that these films should be banned from viewing by Children and Teens. It has been said that these films can be influential and therefore damaging to the children and teenagers who watch them due to their 'copycat' violence and graphic nudity. However, I do not believe that she had this idea in her mind in it's purest form. Mary Whitehouse had only seen the one nasty, "I Spit On Your Grave", which is arguably one of the most graphic and potentially damaging films to children, and refused to watch any more Video Nasties. This means she didn't have much to go on, only basing her views on what she'd seen in one of the many nasties that were around at this time. Even when she did have a point and we were lead into believing that it could damage children, most films at this time were a lot tamer than this. For example, "Evil Dead", with it's Claymation zombies who turn all "gooey" once they were killed, yet "I Spit On Your Grave" had real people with realistic looking blood, shot in a realism style. With these two points in mind, I believe that Mary Whitehouse did have a good moral view on the situation at hand, these films; as a new technology, were far too easily obtainable for Children and Teenagers of the 80s. But I believe her reasoning was inconclusive as it was not backed up with much evidence as she'd only seen one of the films and the argument would do much better in the hands of someone who was not as deluded by their theism and had actually seen more of the films that were under criticism.

The conservatives also jumped on the bandwagon after hearing of Mary's conquest, making the Video Regulation

3.5.1 - Video Nasties, Liberal vs Government

Contexts:
Social
Technological
Economic
Political

Liberal means the people, individuals can control what they can and want to watch. Government can restrict, control and regulate what you can/can't see, to protect the people

Video Nasties around at this time, low budget, gory horror films that could not be controlled as there was nothing in place to stop them from showing anything.

Media used this to whip up a moral panic (this is purely a media thing, no one was really panicked), "five year olds tune into nasties", to protect the children. This started a phase of nannying. The government wanted to regulate the films able to be shown, get paid for the research and were able to put on what they want.

The government then blamed the violence and disorder in the world at the time on the video nasties

Is it really the government's job to protect us? Surely we can be liberal and protect ourselves!

Video regulation act (VRA)
Passed to censor the film. Originally a list of 80 films, including Texas Chainsaw Massacre. However, the ideas in the film were gruesome and implied, but no violence was shown. This film was actually implicit and banned for no reason.
However, Evil Dead was the number 1 nasty, as it has zombies, gore, violence and horror. Despite it all, was done with plasticine. However, was really only banned for the tree rape scene and the pencil killing scene (this can be inimitable). They then used the controversy to make the film, which was then banned. The film production company uses it for marketing, making more people wanna see it.
The VRA wanted people not to be able to see these films at all, and even started to advertise how to stop fainting at these films and warning people that they were banned for a reason.

Case studies
⚫Texas Chainsaw Massacre
⚫Evil Dead
⚫Last House on the Left

What do they have in common? (Style, Themes, narrative, budget, genre, directors & where are they now?)

Evil Dead:
Ideas - rape, graphic violence that was inimitable, gore, horror, dismemberment (by chainsaw)
Low budget - Only one known actor,Makeup for zombies wasn't too great, camera was mainly handheld, cheaper but effective, use claymation for gore etc., filmed in woods
Narrative - People all get killed in one house, horror, some evil character or force
Themes - Demonic possession (Mary White House is Christian), reanimation, teens in the woods.
Genre - Horror
Director - Sam Raimi (Now mainstream)
Conclusion - Uses banned title to promote, meaning that teens tell it with word of mouth and want to see it! "Forbidden fruit"

Last house on the left
Ideas - Murder, family slaughter, graphic violence, dismemberment (by chainsaw), immitable violence
Budget - Low budget
Narrative -
Themes - Teenagers, filmed in woods
Genre - Horror
Director - Wes Craven (Now mainstream horror director)
Conclusion - Uses real people rather than claymation as theirs no possession, filmed like a documentary, making it a lot more real

Texas Chainsaw Massacre
Ideas - Murder, slaughter, graphic violence, dismemberment (by chainsaw), immitable violence, threat
Budget - Low budget
Narrative -
Themes - Teenagers, filmed in remote location
Genre - Horror
Director -
Conclusion - Uses real people rather than claymation as theirs no possession, filmed like a documentary, making it a lot more real

3.4.2 - Video Nasties

Nasties are the films that exhibitionist would not show in cinemas. These are films with gore, sex scenes, horror and other explicit themes. These are horror films. Usually low budget, special fx driven films. Usually had challenging ideas like rape, kidnapping etc.

As cinemas refuses to show these, people who wanted to watch these would have to rent through VHS pirates.

The fear behind the non showing of this is because the government would worry that people were going to reenact the scenes in the films.

Who should regulate what is socially acceptable?
⚫Pressure groups
⚫Director/Producer/Distributor
⚫Individual responsibility (Do I wanna expose myself to these themes?)
⚫BBFC - Appointed a charter they have to analyse against, get paid to certify. Need a certificate to be released in cinemas and DVD
⚫Government

Individual and government are in conflict over film regulation/banning

The banning of films can be bypassed by online viewing, some even use it for advertising! Most films are banned before they are even viewed, creating a moral panic

Stickies arranged into Production, Distribution (<- or a combination of the two ->) Exhibition

Multiplexes stickies

3.4.1 - Multiplex, cinema synthesis

Quality of cinema has decreased time
A lot of books are films now, adapting
No original ideas anymore due to increase in vfx
Since our birth, our perception of films have changed, as films have changed over time.
Film has changed from art form, to a product, lost all message
Watching films on internet gives us wider choice than cinema.

3.3.1&2 - Economic, Technology and The Rise of the Blockbuster

Economic
⚫Box office shows cinema attendance
⚫Production budgets over $100mil+ are more likely to be CGI based
⚫Marketing budget spending is increased, meaning there is more hype. JAWS did this through FEAR as well as the presold audience of the book. The poster is iconic and people wanted to go just to be part of the event.
⚫In 1970s and 1980s there was a recession, people had less income to spend on cinema
⚫Film studios started building multiplexes, to show their films, outlets to show their films. People going to these cinemas could only see the blockbusters. This effects the exhibition as people wanted to see the blockbusters, so they show them. These put fleapits out of business. The fleapits are now niche cinemas, show indie films. These multiplex cinemas are put in shopping centres to become part of leisure activity. These film studios only let their films be exhibited in their multiplexes, as they want the profit, affecting the distribution of their film. Trailers are shown to promote the studios other films for free, thus making them gain more money.
⚫Merchandising from the movie (e.g: Star Wars making $20bil on Merch since 1977)
Technology
⚫VHS was the first way that people could watch films at home, meaning that there was a decline in cinema
⚫Event movies drew people back into the cinema, showing that films are better as am experience, however, can work other way if other people are a distraction.
⚫People may find comfort in sitting at home watching films, rather than spending more money to see it in the cinema

Social:
⚫Peak of attendances was after wars, this was for distraction from war. They showed war films as propaganda, raising morale. This was also due to the Pathe news reels shown in cinemas
⚫2011 caused a raise in the attendances as 3D was introduced to cinema. People will go to cinema to see a film in 3D for the experience. This counteracts Piracy, as well as people paying more for tickets. The 80s did that for JAWS, to counteract VHS viewing. This is a parallel to cinema now

JAWS and Star Wars did well, so they made more of them. Creating the blockbuster formula. This effects the production of films, movie studios will commission films like JAWS and Star Wars.

These caused the rise of the blockbuster.

-----
The rise of the blockbuster

The films in the 70s were based on their times, hard edge. Vietnam was a big topic.
This was the era of independence also known as New Hollywood. However, Star wars follows stock character roles Pirate, Princess, Farmboy/Knight, despite being futuristic based. Star Wars being a big success shows that the audience in the 70s wanted something that wasn't hard filmmaking, wasn't distressing to watch, but was fun and fresh. Star Wars did this.

The audience has gone to this film several times, meaning it was beyond an audience, it was a fanbase. This means merchandising existed and sold well. Sold $20bil worth of merch since 1977. Showing that it is more than just a movie.

JAWS, being made between Godfather and Star Wars, was the transition from New Hollywood to blockbusters. It stayed in cinemas for 6 weeks, spending loads on advertising to generate hype.

VHS was the first time that you could watch movies at home, which declined the cinema. ET was the biggest selling VHS video of all time.

-----

1985, at the end of the rise of the multiplex, Milton Keynes got a multiplex cinema, the first in the UK. This was after it was trialed in America successfully.

-----

Steps of filmmaking:
1) Production (Pitch and Financing)
2) Distribution (getting the film out there)
3) Marketing (advertising)
4) Exhibition (showing the film)

Production:
⚫Test screening - Affects production
⚫Film lab
⚫VFX Studio
⚫Legal
⚫Producer/Writer
⚫Artists & Designers

Distribution:
⚫Marketing
⚫YouTube trailers
⚫Web distribution
⚫Cable/Satellite viewing
⚫DVD Retailer
⚫Merchandising
⚫Distributor
⚫Film sub service

Exhibition:
⚫Test screening - is a screening of the film, not final
⚫Web distribution - a showing of the film online
⚫DVD Retailer
⚫Film sub service
⚫Multiplex cinema

Multiplexes in the 1970s and 1980s

⚫Multiplexes rose in the 1970s because they could put smaller cinemas out of business
⚫The success of the early multiplexes influenced the others to convert/expand in the 80s
⚫Before multiplexes' introduction, cinema was in a big decline
⚫Main feature could be played in larger theatre to sell more seats, before moving to smaller screens before the new feature gets put in the larger screen
⚫1985 introduced the megaplex, 20 screens or more. The UK had one in Milton Keynes
⚫1984 brought people to the cinema with multiplexes, fighting the VHS

3.2.1&2 - Context of Blockbusters

Context = Reasons

Context involves:
-Economic
-Social/Audience
-Technology

--------------------------------------------

You're not required to think for Blockbusters, made for the masses to be entertained, due to the way we were raised on Blockbusters. The McDonalds of the film industry.

Film and food?
How is it we've come do a diet of watching blockbusters (unhealthy)
Blockbusters made as products, there to make money, but they work. Audiences pay for this, as shown by box office. Cinemas show blockbusters as they make money. These are event movies,meaning they are made for and draw in the audiences.
Used to have singular "Summer Event Movies" now we have several, showing that Blockbusters made as products work.

Audience/society behaviours change. In the 70s, cinema was the only way to see films, now, most watch things online. Films have to be designed a special way to only show in cinemas to profit fully. Not as good watching it on a laptop, compared to cinema, better visual, audio experience.

High streets are littered with unhealthy, cheap, fast food restaurant chains. Cinemas, specifically multiplexes, are filled with unhealthy, simple, generic blockbusters and are easily seen as multiplexes litter our streets. Easily profitable.
E.g. Horrors, cheap to make, very popular = profit $

Problems with blockbuster formula
Mass sfx can make it look like a video game, but not interactive, like watching someone else play a game, alienating the viewers.
"Set action pieces" - fight scenes, crashes, nothing to do with narrative. Sacrifices narrative

Blockbusters are cheapening film as an artform, now becoming "happy meals"

Are industry noticing the audiences growing distaste for "Big dumb movies"?

Blockbusters have EVOLVED all because of the context (audience, economy, technology)

--------------------------------------------

If you spend money, it will be an event. People build hype over event movies, as they get to be included in conversation. People may not like the film, but they'repair for the film ticket, so the blockbuster has done it's job.
But if we are spending to see these films, surely we should expect something better?

JAWS was the first blockbuster, therefore not being "big dumb movies", so to stop the down spiral of big dumb films, we must look back to JAWS.

Blockbusters rarely have messages, but they try. E.g. Michael Bay gives patriotism and promotes military as a good thing.

--------------------------------------------

Used to use Christmas as the event movie release time, however, it is mow used to gain consideration for the awards. The summer is a time when industry spews out big dumb movie. However, it is not always this case, some great films are released during the "summer event movie" period.

Post genre - when there's more than one genre to a film
The Amazing Spiderman - Action, Sci-fi (Lizard man), Romance, Crime Thriller
Breaking Dawn Part 2 - Romance, Horror, Drama

Films used to just fit in to genre(s) and were made for entertainment. Whereas now, films try to span across several genres, reaching across to the wider audience, gaining higher profit.

●Check to see if Stars have OSCAR nomination to see if they were a-listers

☆Star Wars started the big franchising of films, in this case, film was an advert for the toys, highly successful.

--------------------------------------------

Audience behaviour
During the 40s, people could only use the cinema for their only form of entertainment. However, the recession during the 1950s meant that people had less money to spend on buying constant film tickets, bought TVs instead, cheaper in the long run. This steadily increased, meaning the admissions declined steadily.

Technological changes
TVs being introduced in the 50s meant that cinema admissions declined. Same with the introduction of the VHS during the 80s and DVDs in the 2000s. However 3D, surround sound and various other experience enhancing tech kept people coming back as blockbusters became more promising.

Economic climate
Recession during 50s meant that people would not spend on tickets as they were too busy spending on essentials. This caused a steady decline in admissions until the spending on new technology increased.

Before JAWS, the New Hollywood existed, these films looked independent and underground. There is an overlap between New Hollywood Cinema and Decade of and Blockbusters until 1982.

New Hollywood were character driven, challenging films made by the New film directors, trained by film schools. People preffered the Blockbuster decade kind of films compared to the New Hollywood.

Star wars paved the way that films would go, separating itself from JAWS due to it's visual effects, proving it's blockbuster-ness. JAWS is considered an early prototype of the

JAWS & High concept films

JAWS is a high concept film. These are very similar films with recurring plot, character types etc. This means that:
-Recurring good vs Evil theme
-Death and Honour are themes
-One line pitch
-Easy iconography
-Easy marketability/appeal
-Culture neutral

By utilising promotional tools such as merchandising, advertising and hype building through magazines, headlines etc., film companies can gain an audience and fill seats in cinemas.

For example: Film posters uses one liners as their tagline, "why so serious?", in a way to make it memorable and give little away from the movie, intriguing audience to see the film. They often depict the conflict between two characters, whether it be actually showing the actors as their characters or through symbol such as the Batman logo, which is easily recognizable even when red (the colour of blood showing potential death) and we know he is the good guy, placed on the opposite end of the poster to the jokers eyes, which are a black colour, meaning there is conflict through the conflict and opposition. Easy to sell as superhero films have been sculpted to be the norm in blockbusters as people want to see these films for their fantasy appeal and stunning visuals.

3.1.1&2 - Film flop and Blockbusters

Flop - A film that fails to meet twice the production and marketing budget (Flop formula - Large budgets, A list star, cannot be a comedy, large amount spent on Special FX)

Franchise movies - A film with large spending to be a fan followed film, made to be big

Multiplex - Chains of cinemas with multiple screens, main releases will overlap

Film budget - Averages to $150-$200 million in blockbusters spent on production ONLY : The spending on the making of the film, if you spend money, you'll make money

Blockbuster - A film with a large box office taking, after large spending and budget

Event film - big film, appeals to people as a group for the experience, mass appeal
----

Resources:
Box office mojo
IMDB
Mark Kemode

----

Do audiences really want visually effects driven films? Or do they go see it because it's all that's shown to them in cinemas?

Social value - audience. Go to see blockbusters, go there for the special effects as they are mass advertised through merchandising (McDonald's toys etc), and the only films played by cinemas are blockbusters.

Visual effects make people want to go to cinema over watching it at home as well as it stops piracy, as visual effects aren't as good when viewed illegally

The more a movie spends on marketing, the more people are gonna go and see it as it's presented as "in cinemas" and thus, is readily available.

2.3.2 Notes - Layout

Thesis, Macro
Indie or Hollywood?
Representation - Gender, Race, Phallic, Psychoanalysis
Director's interview - Messages/Purpose & Previous films
Critical response - Specific to messages/meaning
Casting - Roles associated
MICRO - Detail of scenes (sim & diff)
Symbolism -through MES, what significance do they have

Prepare for representation of CoM

CoM Vs V brief comparison

Children of Men compared to V for Vendetta

Gender roles in V for Vendetta will be stereotypical as it is Hollywood. However, it subverts this in some way, despite having very hollywood characters. Children of men has your everyman character (alcoholism,  human flaws). Britain is represented to be dystopian which helps enforce the messages of a warning. England is not presented as the stereotypical in CoM.

V is HyperMasculine, whereas Theo is realistic.

1) Fast and furious - Hypermasculinity - Reinforces (bravery, pain tolerance), Phallic imagery which also reinforces masculinity (gear stick)

2) We need to talk about Kevin - Maternal figure (caring until annoyed, where she turns uncaring) - challenging stereotype

3) Captain American week - Challenges masculinity (you don't have to be muscly to be masculine)

No Male gaze throughout
As well as representation of nationality

Micro and Macro discussion and why, then compare to next clip

PARENTS
V has more symbolic parents than actual parents, CoM has absence of children showing lack of maternal/paternal characters
Mothers = peace and hope, without them, the men turn to war

PHALLIC YONIC
Knives (penetrate) - masculine
Phallic = Power
Men = power
Roses = yonic "giving a vagina" OR birth into afterlife, freedom
Train = birth of freedom
--
CoM has wound (freedom) and tunnel (freedom) both yonic. Phallic objects are destructive, men = destructive. Women are important challenging stereotype

Representation of Nationalism

HYPERMASCULINITY
NATIONALITY
GENDER ROLES
PHALLIC/YONIC
MATERNAL/PATERNAL ROLES

Refer to MICRO (MES,Cam,Editing) as you can't take clips in

Fatherland, Fuhrer, Fascism = V's government

1) England are "heroes" but we a re close to being fascist like Nazi Germany due to hate for immigrants
2) Terrorist/Fear = Power, released a disease to get voted. CoM have fishes, extremist bomb and shoot. We associate all terrorists to be immigrants, but really we are. Religion plays a big part in terrorism, V has hate for muslims and gays as they don't agree with Christianity. Switching sides. Britain in future = own enemy

Representation exam notes

1hr - representation
Question is at top of most recent post
5 things to compare
MES is from scenes, E. Micro is evidence, also E.
HOW REPRESENTATION CREATES MESSAGES
PEA structure, write in margin

HyperMasc:
V is leader, is. theo avoids conflict, is not.
V subverts hypermasculinity by displaying female traits. Has a lot of influence
Theo does not and has little influence

Phallic
CoM Phallic is destructive, hypermasculinity is a detriment. Women are hope for manking, sacrifice
V Women are not shown with phallic objects, have little power, men are dominant.

Male Gaze
Voyeuristic to Evey in opening
CoM noone is being objectified, gender neutral in opening
V conforms to Male Gaze, pope scene, evey is objectified, vulnerable, only saved by v, a man.
Kee is not sexual when naked, not shot in sexual manner. CoM does not conform.

Nationality
V and CoM are both future Londons. Opening shows polluted London.
V has London as clean city
both have corrupt governments, different policies and views
CoM Hopelessness in future (conc camp), againdt immigrants, compare to hitler.
V has government made disease, voted in to cure, genocide dor power. We became what we fought. The opening (TV) talks about immigrants

Mother father roles
V motherly, follows stereotypes (cooking, apron, long hair etc)
Kee is stereotypical,  literal mother (gives birth) Theo is father
Sutler, father to creedy (controlling, bigger)
Jasper is father to theo, self s acrifice (pov, shock)
Evey, feminine, vulnerable (long hair, dress) Evey reborn as masculine (short hair, loose clothes)
Kee is feminie, there to birth, barn = nativity stable