Preparation for the FM2 exam - some blogs and sites to follow

Charles Gant (UK box-office trends)
http://www.theguardian.com/film/series/at-the-british-box-office

Mark Kermode (general film blog)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/markkermode

Stephen Follows (analysis of film issues)
http://stephenfollows.com/

David Bordwell (film analyst)
http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/

The Guardian film blog
http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog

BBC Film
http://www.bbc.co.uk/film/

The Guardian Film
http://www.theguardian.com/film

Industry news
http://www.screendaily.com/

Also some good information about the UK film industry is on the Media blog here:
http://howardschoolmedia.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/institutions-and-audiences-some-useful.html

Christmas reading - preparation for the mock exam!

Social media:
http://mashable.com/2010/11/29/social-media-movie-marketing/
http://socialfresh.com/how-social-media-is-changing-the-business-of-blockbuster-movies-infographic/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/britt-michaelian/social-media-is-a-major-g_b_4284162.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/preetam-kaushik/the-changing-roles-of-film-producers_b_2483863.html
http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/will-ferrell-s-anchorman-2-changing-way-movies-are-marketed-154076
http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2014/jun/16/twitter-movie-website-hashtag-film-social-media
http://www.portent.com/blog/social-media/hunger-games-social-media-campaign.htm
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/features/online-movie-campaigns-time-to-see-the-bigger-picture-2042357.html

Effects:
http://io9.com/5411842/does-cgi-ruin-movies
http://www.chicagoreader.com/Bleader/archives/2014/08/20/an-interview-with-veteran-special-effects-supervisor-scott-squires-part-two
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2013/03/15/why-less-is-more-when-it-comes-to-movie-special-effects/#.VImJ4tKsUuc
http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2013-10-10/barry-norman-modern-films-rely-too-much-on-special-effects-sequels-and-remakes
http://www.dukechronicle.com/articles/1997/09/10/hollywood-relies-too-heavily-special-effects-and-gimmicks#.VImIMNKsUuc
http://whatculture.com/film/the-importance-of-visual-effects.php
http://vfxg.org/profiles/blogs/are-visual-effects-more-important-than-story

Links to the BFI for your Small-scale Research Project

http://www.screenonline.org.uk/
https://www.youtube.com/BFIfilms

Film Studies FM2 - How to revise...

General information about the UK film industry

• For a great overview of the UK film industry, read the BFI statistical review: http://www.bfi.org.uk/sites/bfi.org.uk/files/downloads/bfi-statistical-yearbook-2014.pdf
• Another great source is the 2012 Government review of the film industry: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/78460/DCMS_film_policy_review_report-2012_update.pdf
• UK Box-Office 2012 information  http://www.bfi.org.uk/news-opinion/bfi-news/british-films-lead-uk-box-office-2012
• The U.S. majors (from Wikipedia):

 A major film studio is a production and distribution company that releases a substantial number of films annually and consistently commands a significant share of box office revenue in a given market. In the North American, Western, and global markets, the major film studios, often simply known as the majors (Warner Brothers Pictures, Walt Disney Pictures, Universal Pictures, Columbia Pictures, 20th Century Fox, Paramount Pictures) are commonly regarded as the six diversified media conglomerates whose various film production and distribution subsidiaries command approximately 90 percent of U.S. and Canadian box office revenue. The term may also be applied more specifically to the primary motion picture business subsidiary of each respective conglomerate.

Today, Disney is the only member of the Big Six whose parent entity is still located near Los Angeles (actually, on Disney's studio lot). The five others report to conglomerates headquartered in New York City, Philadelphia, and Tokyo. Of the Big Six, Paramount is the only one still based in Hollywood, and Paramount and Fox are the only ones still located within the Los Angeles city limits.

Most of today's Big Six control subsidiaries with their own distribution networks that concentrate on arthouse pictures (e.g. Fox Searchlight) or genre films (e.g. Sony's Screen Gems); several of these specialty units were shut down or sold off between 2008 and 2010. The six major studios are contrasted with smaller production and/or distribution companies, which are known as independents or "indies". The leading independent producer/distributors—Lionsgate Films, The Weinstein Company, and former major studio MGM—are sometimes referred to as "mini-majors". From 1998 through 2005, DreamWorks SKG commanded a large enough market share to arguably qualify it as a seventh major, despite its relatively small output. In 2006, DreamWorks was acquired by Viacom, Paramount's corporate parent. In late 2008, DreamWorks once again became an independent production company; its films are distributed by Disney's Touchstone Pictures.

The Big Six major studios are today primarily backers and distributors of films whose actual production is largely handled by independent companies—either long-running entities or ones created for and dedicated to the making of a specific film. The specialty divisions often simply acquire distribution rights to pictures in which the studio has had no prior involvement. While the majors still do a modicum of true production, their activities are focused more in the areas of development, financing, marketing, and merchandising. Those business functions are still usually performed in or near Los Angeles, even though the runaway production phenomenon means that most films are now mostly or completely shot on location at places outside Los Angeles.

How do I time myself in the exam and which questions do I answer?
Read this http://howardschoolfilm.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/some-points-for-exam.html

What typical question areas are covered by the sources in Section A?

• Genre - use your class notes for this and here is a good overview of current UK trends in genre http://stephenfollows.com/genre-statistics-in-the-uk-film-industry/
• Stars/ talent - use your hand-outs and this post http://howardschoolfilm.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/fm2-stars.html
• The cinema experience - use your class notes.
• Audience - use your class notes and Chapter 15 of the Statistical Yearbook http://www.bfi.org.uk/statisticalyearbook2013/
• Technology (including exhibition) - see the Statistical Yearbook and here http://howardschoolfilm.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/fm2-technology-distribution-and.html  and the technology section in this post which has some extra ones http://howardschoolmedia.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/institutions-and-audiences-some-useful.html
• Distribution and marketing -see here http://howardschoolfilm.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/fm2-film-marketing.html  http://www.screenonline.org.uk/film/distribution/distribution7.html  http://howardschoolfilm.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/what-is-film-distibutor-fm2.html
• How does the UK film industry become more successful - http://howardschoolfilm.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/fm2-uk-film-policy-review-2011.html
• U.S. dominance of the film industry -

On Hollywood's dominance over the world's cinemas

There's no question that Hollywood is the top player in the global arena of film industries, and sales confirm it. While only topped by India's movie market (dubbed Bollywood) in sheer output and rivaled in worldwide popularity, America's blockbusters remain a preferred cinema experience for most of the world. What makes Hollywood so compelling as to be dominant over any single other foreign film market?

Part of it is the long-running history and 'legacy' of America's film production and studio system. While film was created by the Lumiere brothers in France, it was directors and editors like Edwin Porter and D.W. Griffith who created sensational stories and stylistic techniques that elevated the medium to an art. Griffith went on to form the studio United Artists, one among many studios that became dynastic in their funding of increasingly ambitious, epic, glamorous movies. Many other countries in the early part of the twentieth century had little interest or desire in movies, perhaps because there was little money to be put towards films' production or exhibition when many countries were more concerned with the effects of two wars. Perhaps because the fight never hit home on U.S. soil, America's early experimentation in the first half of the century cemented their place among the the world cinemas. The sense of legacy, of Hollywood's golden age of prestigious studios, and star actors and actresses, is still perpetuated through the annual award shows and a lucrative celebrity paparazzi industry all its own.

Another factor is how much Hollywood is willing to gamble on a single, huge blockbuster. Movies are an expensive endeavor, and America has long been one of the wealthiest countries in the world. The tradition of going to the movies, started as a cheap, escapist group activity, long established a national past-time for Americans. Hollywood has long had to come up with ways to keep people coming back, though, to create spectacles and increasingly bigger more exciting experiences. The big studios have only gotten bigger, and with conglomeration, have even less rivalry from independent sources, and can provide so much funding that the only limit to a Hollywood movie is the limit of the imagination. There's so much spent that film-fans can see new product out of Hollywood every single week.

The spectacle of big action movies isn't possible in many country's markets, certainly they can't be funded as often, but is still highly desired by people the world over. As the Daya Thussu reading showed, before, a third of a Hollywood film's earnings would be made from foreign markets, and now it's closer to half; this is why many blockbusters, summer movies, and comic book movies are made with these markets in mind. The plots are kept accessible to various cultures, relatable to common shared emotions, and mostly inoffensive. As if a long-standing franchise like Lord of the Rings, X-Men, or Transformers isn't enticing enough to sell a movie, the promise of original 'experiences' like Avatar is something that excites people the world over, that people want to flock to as a shared event.

And furthermore, part of the reason Hollywood dominates in distribution the world over is the very Hollywood-ness of it. While often predictable, unrealistic, and artificial, there's clearly something almost intoxicating about the highly-polished, glamorous, bright and loud flash of Hollywood that other cultures want to share in. Movies are almost always cited as a major influencer in the globalized western culture, the spread of so-called Americanization. While it's vital for a country to maintain it's national identity, in this case namely through the medium of cinema, global audiences evidently find it desirable to partake in the unique American experience portrayed in movies like Iron Man and Indiana Jones. Like it or not, Hollywood movies often sell American values, sometimes even American products.

There are other factors like the interest in the free-trade of film products, that some Hollywood studios may almost force certain movies into a foreign market. Many blockbusters today are so expensive there's no way they could recoop and make a profit domestically, and they're made fully with the expectation the global market will put it over the top. Like those countries that didn't get an early start of their own national film industry, many still don't have a production system 'up-to-par' to meet the people's entertainment demands, and Hollywood exports fill that gap. Whatever the reason, it has further since cemented Hollywood's dominance as the world's foremost film industry.  Stephen Ferrell

• Franchises - See Tom Hanks article.
• Piracy - http://howardschoolfilm.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/fm2-film-piracy-useful-sites.html  http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/may/06/piracy-film-music-study-pay-illegal-download-damage  http://www.wired.com/2014/01/most-pirated-films-2013/
• Independent film - See Wikipedia for a definition http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_film  but here is a good discussion of the topic by Tambay Obenson called "How Do You Define Independent Film?:                                                   It happens just about every year - a film that many don't consider an independent film wins an independent film award or two; while a film that many consider quintessentially indie, is seemingly looked over.
  It happened last 2 nights ago, at the Indie Spirit Awards ceremony, which saw Silver Linings Playbook dominate, while Beasts Of The Southern Wild was left wanting. I'm sure you can figure out which of the 2 films most consider the true "indie" film.
  And it didn't take very long after the Indie Spirit Awards ended for discussion on what exactly being an indie film means, to trend on social networks. But this is a conversation that the film community has been having for years now, with still no real consensus on the matter, and I don't think there ever will be one - which means, next year, expect more of the same kind conversation.
  I just don't believe the answer to that question is a simple one. The lines between what we traditionally referer to as Hollywood studio cinema, and indie cinema, are so blurred today, that the term doesn't seem to really have much significance anymore, and maybe a brand new term is needed to replace it.
  If you asked any group of people to define independent film, many would probably say something like, "any film made outside the Hollywood studio system," with considerations made for budget, source of funds, cast, story, distribution, and more. But you could find any number of films that move fluidly between "studio" and "indie" when it comes to 1 or more of those production/distribution aspects.
  An example that I think most of you should know - George Lucas financed Red Tails with his own money - a huge investment; but, as we all recall, he said that no Hollywood studio would touch it; therefore, he had to reach into his own bank account to finance the film, at a cost of $58 million!
  So is Red Tails an indie film? And if it is, would it have been nominated for an Indie Spirit Award if it were a stronger, critically-lauded film?
  And if not, the question is, why not?
  Given the ongoing conversation, especially after Saturday night's Indie Spirit Awards ceremony, I thought I'd pose the question of what indie cinema is to you folks, because I really don't have a simple answer myself, and I'd like to read your thoughts.
  But first, I searched the web for answers to that question, and found several given by artists who work in the film industry, and whose names you'll recognize, and I thought I'd share their responses here as well.
  So take a look at what they had to say on the matter, and tell us how YOU definie indie cinema.
  Screenwriter/director John August:
  Classically, an independent film was one that was made outside of the conventional studio system, be that Hollywood, Bollywood or Pinewood. But with the rise of the “independent” labels of the major studios, such as Fox Searchlight and Paramount Vantage, that distinction is pretty much moot. Also, consider that the last three Star Wars epics were made independently (by Mr. George Lucas). Any movie with fast-food tie-ins really shouldn’t qualify, in my opinion. I’d argue that the term “independent film” should be reserved for talking about the movie itself, rather than how it was financed. There’s a reason the word “independence” so often shows up in proximity to “revolution” — a shared spirit of frustration, anarchy and apple-cart-upsetting. From their conception, independent films aren’t just made outside of the studio system. They are made in opposition to the studio system, with its relentless need to round off the corners and soften the blows. And in standing against the status quo, independent films help to change it. Of course, my proposed redefinition of independent film can’t accommodate many of today’s darling indies, which mollycoddle their audiences with a careful recipe of quirk, warmth and family dysfunction. Just the very term “indie” seems to embody that spirit of fuzzy cuteness. I would call on filmmakers to start feeding their movies after midnight, and let their vicious little monsters roar.
  Director/producer Ted Demme:
  If it’s personal to a director, then it’s an independent.
  Screenwriter/director Alan Rudolph:
  Independent is a misnomer. By definition, it’s an oxymoron. If you’retruly independent, then no one can really categorize you and yourfilm can’t be pigeonholed. If you’re against the system, you’re partof the system by definition. I don’t think independent means againstthe system, but you’re always dependent on the money.
  Actress Tilda Swinton:
  Independent in my mind means free. Independent films have changed so much over the past years. For example, when I started making films with Derek Jarman in the 1980s, that was really independent film-making, going around with a Super 8 camera to make The Last of England. That was before the studios started making what I would describe co-dependent films, films that were on a leash but given the impression that they were studio-light."Independent means you are free to say what you want. It does not necessarily say you will be able to do it very easily and anyone is going to give you any money to do it. It might mean it is very uncomfortable, it might mean you work with chaos on a daily basis, though it does mean that you don't have someone breathing down your neck ... So that is what indie means to me.
  Writer/director Michael Winterbottom:
  I think from the point of view of making films, I just want to make the films I want to make. In a sense that is the best definition of independent, people making the films they want to make rather than working within the studio system and making a film for the studio.
  And now over to you... how do you define independent film?
• Reviews - Online film reviews are discussed here  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_criticism#Online_film_reviews
• Box-office success - http://www.screendaily.com/news/uk-ireland/camerons-comments-draw-dismay-ahead-of-film-policy-review-mike-leigh-has-no-comment/5036369.article
• Blockbusters/ high concept films - 

The ‘high concept’ film is a response to some of the difficulties in knowing your audience. Some of its features are:
• a straightforward, easily pitched and easily comprehended story
• character and narrative are reduced and simplified
• there is a very strong match between image and music
• parts of the film can be easily transferred into other merchandising opportunities
• film is sold on ‘look’ - spectacular special effects, high production values
• the audience is to be caught up in the ‘surface’ of the film.


How do I answer the questions on the focus films? (British Horror and U.S. Comparison)
Read this  http://howardschoolfilm.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/fm2-exam-questions-common-question.html

Don't forget to use the digital files I've given you for the horror films plus the hand-outs and your class notes. Also look under the 'Horror Genre' tab on the blog.  For the U.S. Comparison use the typed notes I gave you, your class notes and the 'U.S. Comparison' tab on the blog.

The effects of new media on how film is produced and consumed - FM2

The effects of new media on how film is produced and consumed.

From the horizontal integration of multinational corporations, which guarantees extensive media crossovers, to the digitization of Hollywood, which has affected the business, production, and marketing of cinema, big-screen films are indebted to a similar intimate congress among media. (Klinger 2006 p236)

In recent years we have seen many changes in technology.  Processing power has increased, software is getting more and more integrated and complex and the hardware that is needed to run programs is getting smaller and more cost-effective.  For the film industry this means new editing software, more powerful digital imaging programs and new formats like digital projection, DVDs and Blueray. Digital cinema provides a clearer picture, a better cinematographic experience and faster and easier distribution and is now becoming an industry standard. (Taylor 2006) DVDs and Blueray have replaced the now-obsolete VCR as the new home entertainment standard and home cinemas with bigger screens and better sound have changed the home viewing experience. The media integration and convergence that new technologies are creating encourages increased franchising and intertextuality, a lucrative development that production companies are only too glad to encourage.  Now blockbuster films have all sorts of associate ancillary products, from video games to special edition DVDs to theme park rides and action figures.
A lucrative franchise is known in the commercially driven film industry (particularly in Hollywood) as one of the best ways to make money.  Hollywood blockbuster films may cost millions of dollars to make but studios are willing to put money into them if they expect them to provide a high financial return.  Successful blockbuster films are what fund Hollywood studios.  The studios can afford to take some financial risk in other areas, funding many smaller films that are not guaranteed to recoup money if they have a couple of blockbusters in hand. This is because the revenue from blockbusters is not simply dependant on income from seats sold in theatres. Lucrative sponsorship and product placement deals as well as the sale of merchandise, like games and special edition DVDs, supplement this income. These films are known as ‘tentpole pictures’ (Bordwell 2006 p12) because they are the productions that ‘hold up’ the rest of the studio in the same way as a central pole in a tent keeps the rest of the tent upright.

Although studios sink huge resources into blockbusters and tentpole pictures, they can absorb many weak films because income streams in from many other sources, from ancillary rights and television sales to DVD revenues and assets arising from large libraries of older films. (Thompson 2007 p258)

A blockbuster is even more valuable if the formula is repeatable – the release of one or more sequels means more tie-ins and merchandise to sell to a pre-existing audience. (Wasko and Shanadi 2006) With home cinemas and other viewing technologies now available in the home, people do not attend the cinema as much as they once did, many preferring to watch films in the comfort of their own home instead. Production companies are aware that this loss at the box office can be recouped in other ways. Cross-media integration also means that advertising and marketing for games, films and other merchandise all serve to promote the franchise in general and heighten awareness of the products associated with it. (Skaggs cited in Thompson 2007) Take New Line Cinema’s proud claim that they are responsible for one of the most successful franchises in history – The Lord of the Rings Trilogy (2001, 2002, 2003). New Line Cinema noted on their website that The Lord of the Rings and its associated merchandise has earned $2.5billion. (Wasko and Shanadi, 2006)  With this sort of money on the line it is no wonder that studios are keen to develop franchise films.

The Jurassic Park ride at Universal Studios Hollywood

Jurassic Park (1993) is a perfect example of a tentpole film. It justified its $63 million production budget (The Numbers 2010) through its ancillary products as much as its box office receipts.  The first two films grossed over $1.5 billion worldwide, but that was a small amount compared with the estimated $5 billion that Universal Studios had accrued as of 2004 from all related revenue streams. (Bryman 2004) These included a successful theme park ride at Universal Studios and merchandise sales of over 1,000 official products – including toys, video games, t-shirts, toothbrushes and candy – that were branded with the Jurassic Park logo featured in the film. Such was the success of the Jurassic Park brand that some cynics may argue that this landmark film may have been created simply as an advertisement for its ancillary products.  Either way it is easy to see how most big budget films produced today are imagined as the fulcrum in a wheel of associated products.
Game licensing deals can prove particularly lucrative. For instance when EA Games acquired the film-based game rights for The Lord of the Rings, the fee that New Line negotiated was rumoured to be in excess of $10 million – a fee that was not unique to this franchise – similar amounts had been accrued for licenses to create games for the James Bond and Harry Potter films. Games companies are also keen to cash in on older, established franchises, competing with each other to acquire the licenses to adapt older films, such as Predator (1987) and Dirty Harry (1971), which are no longer being actively promoted. (Thompson, 2007) The immense success of the video games industry also means that Hollywood Studios are not only selling the rights for successful films but also buying the rights to successful game franchises and turning these into big-screen films. The success of the Tomb Raider (1996 – 2003) franchise

Tombraider

and the assimilation of the central Lara Croft character into modern culture is reminiscent of a Hollywood blockbuster film and its stars. Lara Croft, a virtual character, had websites and magazines devoted to her, and was used in advertising for many products like Nike and Lucozade. (Grieb 2002) This character finally came to the big screen in the form of Angelina Jolie in 2001. Still, with videogame software and hardware sales reached $8.9 billion versus $7.3 billion for film box-office receipts in 2000 (Wall Street Journal 2000 cited in Poole 2000) it is clear why film executives are looking in the direction of video games with interest.

Run Lola Run

But video games are contributing more than just revenue and franchise opportunities to filmmakers.  The popularity of video games and the aesthetics and technological advances associated with them are also changing the way that films look and feel.  Run Lola Run (1998), directed by Tom Tykwer has been much written about for its video game aesthetic.  (Grieb 2002, Harbord 2002, Wedel 2009) The film’s heroine has many similarities to Lara Croft, and has been compared to the Tomb Raider character. (Ebert 1999) The film’s three-part round structure is reminiscent of the three ‘lives’ typically attributed to an avatar in a video game. The look has also many similarities to games with its distinctive animated sequences and the camera 360 around Lola as she makes her decision at the start, which resembles a menu in a computer game. The feel and pace of the film are also distinctly game-like and this faster pace evident in many recent films can be partly attributed to digitisation and database editing, which have simplified the editing process. By 1996 digital editing accounted for about 80 of the films produced in Hollywood and this non-linear editing is thought to account for the new aesthetic of faster cutting and shorter shot lengths that gained popularity at this time. (Bordwell, 2006)
Even more influential in the way films look is the development of digital imaging technologies, which share many resources and people with video game development.  It is becoming more and more common, for films to rely heavily on computer-generated imaging (CGI). The course of convergence is advanced by the swift market growth in the area of video games and the ‘horizontal integration’ of media industries. The financial investments and interest shown in the area of video game development, by many of the parent companies of film studios is also increasing the ease with which partnerships are formed between film producers and video game developers. Similar techniques and technologies are also being used in the development of video games and this means that these industries are now in a position to share digital assets. There is also a possibility of sharing human resources since technicians and digital artists are often equally qualified to work in either industry. (Elkington 2009) Animation has been one of the most affected traditions, with the CGI which once supplemented some hand-drawn techniques now taking over completely (Weihart 2006) in many films, like Toy Story (1995) and Shrek (2001), but many of the live-action films being made in Hollywood today also have integrated digital imaging.
It has long been the focus of Hollywood to create realistic characters through CGI (Manovich 2001).  Films like 2001’s Final Fantasy: The Spirit Within, 2004’s Polar Express and 2007’s Beowulf may have stepped into the ‘Uncanny Valley’ [i] (Mori 1970) with their depictions of realistic human characters. The character of Gollum in The Lord of the Rings trilogy, on the other hand, is composed entirely of CGI but seems to avoid the Uncanny Valley. Perhaps this is in part because the character is not quite as humanoid. Andy Serkis’ performance of Gollum through motion capture has also attributed to this, and has been widely acclaimed as a breakout role in CGI characters. Weta Digital created Gollum’s skin texture using a new technique that won a technical award from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences in 2004.  This was not the only award-winning development in CGI made by the team behind The Lord of the Rings. The Massive program was developed by Stephen Regelous specifically for the project. Massive can duplicate hundreds of animal or humanoid figures, each with their own basic artificial intelligence which allows them to move independently, creating a realistic crowd dimension. (Thompson 2007)

Andy Serkis' performance helped bring the character of Gollum to life.

This program is very useful in films, games, and virtual worlds, where large crowds need to be generated. It plays an important part in the ease with which films now incorporate the spectacle of large, realistic crowds, and what the 1934 president of the Society of Motion Picture Engineers, Alfred N. Goldsmith, called “the production of an acceptable semblance of reality.” (Manovich 2001 p258)
According to Bordwell and Staiger (Manovich 2001) the development of CGI has not always been linear but there has always been one driving force behind it – the quest for realism – for masking the artifice of the effects. The position of theorists such as Kracauer, Bazin and Cavell is that realism is one of the key defining aspects of cinema. The theory of film realism takes that “photographic images, unlike paintings or line drawings, are indexical signs: they are causally or existentially connected to the referents.” (Prince 2002 p116) Computer-generated imaging displaces the notion that everything we see on the screen is a record or ‘index’ of a real person or object that has been photographed. To realists, the emergence of technology that makes films like Steven Spielberg’s Jurassic Park (1993) possible is troublesome.   Jurassic Park was the first time that CGI was used to create a realistic representation of a creature. (Bordwell 2006) Animators at ILM created photographic quality images of living, breathing dinosaurs that the viewer perceived as realistic, despite knowing that the dinosaurs were not real. To realists this presents a problem with the fundamental way they read films, however there is another long-held school of thought subscribed to by many other theorists such as Arnheim, Vertov and Eisenstein (Prince 2002). This ‘formalist’ outlook has long acknowledged that cinema is well versed in portraying a false reality.[ii]
In today’s technology driven world there is a sense that everything is connected.  Convergence and intertextuality are inevitable because the boundaries between all types of media are breaking down over time. (Elkington 2009) A successfully branded film can spawn hundreds, even thousands of related products.

No medium, it seems, can now function independently and establish its own separate and purified space of cultural media. (Bolter and Grusin 2000 p55)

Intertextuality is not a new notion.  The writings of Barthes (1977), Kristeva (1980) and Fiske (1989) in the area of semiotics have always indicated that intertextuality is a vital part of reading any text, constructing meaning and sense beyond what is shown in the individual work. Intertextuality allows for polysemic readings of seemingly straightforward texts. In his book, Paratexts. Thresholds of interpretation, literary theorist Gerard Genette defines ‘paratexts’ as “those liminal devices and conventions, both within and outside the book, that form part of the complex mediation between book, author, publisher and reader.” (Genette 1997 pi) Though Genette was concerned with books the concept is equally valid for films and the various games, books and DVD features that surround them. The emergence of bonus material such as cast and crew interviews, commentaries and deleted scenes enabled by the DVD players entrance to the market in 1997 (Bordwell 2006) can be seen as another layer of paratext that contributes to or facilitates discussion of the main text of a film.
Though some predict that film and video games may be in the process of totally merging (Perron 2008, Straubhaar, LaRose and Davenport 2008) I don’t believe this is the case.  While it is true that the technologies that drive both film and games have much in common and that both forms benefit from close working relationships with the other,[iii] I believe that the types of narrative required for a satisfying game versus a satisfying film are too different for a complete and successful convergence to occur.  Games are interactive and usually non-linear by nature.  They thrive on multiple possibilities and a user co-authorship. By contrast films are specifically structured narratives – usually in a linear form – and the viewer has no authorship control. (Manovich 2001)  The viewer interaction with a film text is generally limited to their analysis of a set piece of narrative.  These are two very different user experiences and I don’t believe that they can both be easily incorporated into the same single product. This is illustrated by the failure of ‘interactive movies’ to take off during the 1990s. (Perron 2008) It is also interesting to take into account that it wasn’t until the third game under the Lord of the Rings film franchise produced by Electronic Arts that this game line found some measure of critical success. The Lord of the Rings: The Third Age, released in 2004, had a much more open format than its predecessors and opened the user experience up to original characters and the larger world of Middle-earth.  The Third Age was well received in the gaming community and any criticisms levelled at it were generally in relation to the points in the game when the narrative of the films impeded the user interactivity. (Massimilla 2004, Semsey 2004, Elkington 2009)
I believe that film and games can benefit greatly from a close working relationship. EA executives in 2003 acknowledged that much of the talent involved is interchangeable, when they moved their base of operations nearer to Hollywood. EA’s Vice-President at the time also noted however, the fundamental difference that exists between films and games, when he said that films “create environments you look at.  [Games] create environments you live in.” (Miller 2004 p216) I think it would be equally true to say: film creates narrative; game creates the possibility of narrative. Despite these fundamental differences, and perhaps to some extent because of them, there are very real benefits for convergence in the film and games industries.  If well thought out, games provide a rich paratext, adding depth and variety to the schema of a film.
The perfect video game and film combination has yet to be created and there are a number of reasons for this. One of the most obvious reasons is a logistical one: time.  It takes an average of 24 months to develop and design a full-length video game.  By comparison the production length for a film is an average of 6-18 months. This creates an obvious conflict because, in the interest of taking advantage of the marketing for the film, the studios aim to release the games shortly before the films.[iv] Thus the games are rushed through production, given less time than would usually be allotted to development and are often tied very tightly to the narrative of the film because of time restrictions and lack of scripting budget. (Thompson 2007) Where convergence is useful and productive is in sharing assets, such as designs and 3-D models, and in getting game designers involved earlier in the pre-production phase of a film so that they can have longer to develop their game. Sharing personnel is often a viable option too, for instance when making the Lord of the Rings games EA hired many of the mapmakers, motion-capture experts, stunt doubles and actors that worked on the film to create an air of authenticity about the product. (Thompson 2007) Convergence can help to reduce the work, and thus the costs, of producing films and video games.  Intertextuality increases brand awareness and can be used to create layers of meaning in a text. While the production and political economy ramifications of this are clear, it is less obvious what this means for the future of film as an art form.

That which withers in the age of mechanical reproduction is the aura of the work of art. (Benjamin 1935 p4)

The Lord of the Rings Special Edition DVDS

Walter Benjamin’s seminal essay, The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, uses the term ‘aura’ to describe the intangible quality that an original work possesses that is lost or diminished during the act of reproduction.  To Benjamin photography, film and other mechanical copies had no aura and thus where not true works of art, however Jonathan Gray (2006) argues that the introduction of paratexts such as DVD extras can be used to instil this sense of aura into a digital film.  The Lord of the Rings special extended edition DVDs contain many hours of commentary and documentaries about the films and the filmmaking process. They endeavour to bring the viewer on a journey through the making of the films, often in a very personal way, conjuring up layers of pride and nostalgia, which imbue the film texts with significant meaning. Drawing on the parallels between the making and reception of the films and the narrative events of the films themselves, the DVDs serve to codify the text in multiple layers of a ‘mythic resonance’ similar to the awe and reverence inspiring aura. I agree that there are many ways in which new media can be used to enrich films, helping to create a vivid semiotic tapestry that can expand and enhance the viewer experience. As we look to the future of film and the impact that further technological advances and new media will have on the industry, it is my hope that this is the area that will see the greatest development.
References
Barthes, R. 1977. Image/music/text, translation Heath, S. Glasgow: Fontana-Collins
Benjamin, W. 1935. The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction [Online]. Available from: <http://www.csus.edu/indiv/o/obriene/art206/Readings/The_Work_of_Art_in_the_Age_of_Mechanical_Reproduction%5B1%5D.pdf> [Accessed 6 January 2010]
Bolter, J.D. and Grusin, R. Remediation: Understanding New Media, 2000 Massachusetts: MIT Press
Bordwell, D. 2006. The way Hollywood tells it: story and style in modern movies. California: University of California Press
Bryman, A. 2004. The Disneyization of society. London: Sage
Ebert, R. 1999. Run Lola Run. Chicago Sun Times [Online] Movie Reviews. 2 July 1999. Available from: <http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19990702/REVIEWS/907020304/1023 > [Accessed 7 January 2010]
Elkington, T. 2009. Too Many Cooks: Media Convengence and Self-Defeating Adaptations IN: Perron,B. and Wolf, M.J.P. (eds) The Video Game Theory Reader 2. New York: Routledge
Fiske, J. 1989. Moments of Television: Neither the Text nor the Audience IN: Seiter, E., Borchers, H., Kreurzner, G. and Warth, E. (eds) Remote Control: Television, Audiences, and Cultural Power. London: Routledge
Genette, G. 1997. Paratexts. Thresholds of interpretation New York: Cambridge University Press
Gray, J. 2006. Bonus Material: The DVD Layering of The Lord of the Rings IN: Mathijs, E. (ed) The Lord of the Rings: popular culture in global context. Britian: Wallflower Press
Grieb, M. 2002. Run Lara Run IN: King, G. and Krzywinska, T. (eds) Screenplay: cinema/videogames/interfaces. Britian: Wallflower Press
Harbord, J. 2002. Film Cultures. London: Sage Publications
Jurassic Park. 1993. [DVD]. Directed by Steven Spielberg. USA: Universal Studios
Klinger, B. 2006. Beyond the multiplex: cinema, new technologies, and the home. California: University of California Press.
Kristeva, J. 1980. Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art. Oxford: Basil Blackwell



Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, Extended Edition. 2001. [DVD]. Directed by Peter Jackson. USA: New Line Cinema
Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, Extended Edition. 2003. [DVD]. Directed by Peter Jackson. USA: New Line Cinema
Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, Extended Edition. 2002. [DVD]. Directed by Peter Jackson. USA: New Line Cinema
Manovich, L. 2001. The language of new media. Massachusetts: MIT Press
Massimilla, B. 2004. The Lord of the Rings, The Third Age Review. Gamespot.com. [Online]. Reviews. 4 November 2004.  Available from: <http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/rpg/tlotrthethirdage/review.html > [Accessed 7 January 2010].
Miller, C.H. 2004. Digital storytelling: a creator’s guide to interactive entertainment. Oxford: Elsevier
Mori, M.1970. Bukimi no tani: the uncanny valley. Energy, 7:33–35.
Perron, B. 2008. Genre Profile: Interactive Movie IN: Wolf, M.J.P. (ed.) The video game explosion: a history from PONG to Playstation and beyond USA: Greenwood Press
Poole, S. 2000. Trigger Happy: Videogames and the Entertainment Revolution. New York: Arcade Publishing
Prince, S. 2002. True Lies: Perceptual realism, digital images and film theory IN: Turner, G. (ed) The film cultures reader. New York: Routledge
Run Lola Run. 1998. [DVD]. Directed by Tom Tykwer. UK: Sony Pictures
Semsey, R. 2004. Lord of the Rings: The Third Age Review (Xbox).   Team Xbox. [Online]. Reviews. 3 November 2004. Available from: <http://reviews.teamxbox.com/xbox/831/Lord-of-the-Rings-The-Third-Age/p1/> [Accessed 7 January 2010]
Straubhaar, J., LaRose, R. and Davenport, L. 2008. Media Now: Understanding Media, Culture, and Technology. Wadsworth: Cengage Learning
Taylor, R. 2006. Cinema meets digital technology. BBC News [Online]. BBC Click. 18 August 2002. Available from <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/click_online/5262456.stm> [Accessed 6 January 2010]
The Numbers. [Online]. Available from: http://www.the-numbers.com [Accessed 6 January 2010]
Thompson, K. 2007. The Frodo Franchise: The Lord of the Rings and Modern Hollywood. California: University of California Press.
Wasko, J and Shanadi, G. 2006. More than just Ring: Merchandise for them all IN: Mathijs, E. (ed) The Lord of the Rings: popular culture in global context. Britian: Wallflower Press
Wedel, M. 2009. Backbeat and Overlap: Time, Place, and Character Subjectivity in Run Lola Run IN: Buuckland, W. (ed) Puzzle films: complex storytelling in contemporary cinema. Britian: Blackwell Publishing
Weihart, L. 2006.  Entertainment. Australia: Career FAQ PTY LTD
Bibliography
Bal, M. 1997.  Narrotology: introduction to the theory of narrative. Canada: University of Toronto Ppess
Barthes, R. 1977. Image/music/text, translation Heath, S. Glasgow: Fontana-Collins
Benjamin, W. 1935. The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction [Online]. Available from: <http://www.csus.edu/indiv/o/obriene/art206/Readings/The_Work_of_Art_in_the_Age_of_Mechanical_Reproduction%5B1%5D.pdf> [Accessed 6 January 2010]
Bolter, J.D. and Grusin, R. Remediation: Understanding New Media, 2000 Massachusetts: MIT Press
Bordwell, D. 2006. The way Hollywood tells it: story and style in modern movies. California: University of California Press
Bryman, A. 2004. The Disneyization of society. London: Sage
Ebert, R. 1999. Run Lola Run. Chicago Sun Times [Online] Movie Reviews. 2 July 1999. Available from: <http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19990702/REVIEWS/907020304/1023 > [Accessed 7 January 2010]
Elkington, T. 2009. Too Many Cooks: Media Convengence and Self-Defeating Adaptations IN: Perron,B. and Wolf, M.J.P. (eds) The Video Game Theory Reader 2. New York: Routledge
Fiske, J. 1989. Moments of Television: Neither the Text nor the Audience IN: Seiter, E., Borchers, H., Kreurzner, G. and Warth, E. (eds) Remote Control: Television, Audiences, and Cultural Power. London: Routledge
Genette, G. 1997. Paratexts. Thresholds of interpretation New York: Cambridge University Press
Gray, J. 2006. Bonus Material: The DVD Layering of The Lord of the Rings IN: Mathijs, E. (ed) The Lord of the Rings: popular culture in global context. Britian: Wallflower Press
Harbord, J. 2002. Film Cultures. London: Sage Publications
Jurassic Park. 1993. [DVD]. Directed by Steven Spielberg. USA: Universal Studios
King, G. and Krzywinska, T. 2002. Screenplay: cinema/videogames/interfaces Britian: Wallflower Press
Klinger, B. 2006. Beyond the multiplex: cinema, new technologies, and the home. California: University of California Press.

Kristeva, J. 1980. Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art. Oxford: Basil Blackwell
Lewis, J. 2002. The end of the world as we know it: American film in the nineties. Britain: Pluto Press
Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, Extended Edition. 2001. [DVD]. Directed by Peter Jackson. USA: New Line Cinema
Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, Extended Edition. 2003. [DVD]. Directed by Peter Jackson. USA: New Line Cinema
Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, Extended Edition. 2002. [DVD]. Directed by Peter Jackson. USA: New Line Cinema
Manovich, L. 2006. What is Digital Cinema? [Online]. Available from: <http://itp.nyu.edu/isco/pdfs/manovich_digital-cinema.pdf> [Accessed 7 January 2010]
Manovich, L. 2001. The language of new media. Massachusetts: MIT Press
Massimilla, B. 2004. The Lord of the Rings, The Third Age Review. Gamespot.com. [Online]. Reviews. 4 November 2004. Available from: <http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/rpg/tlotrthethirdage/review.html > [Accessed 7 January 2010].
Miller, C.H. 2004. Digital storytelling: a creator’s guide to interactive entertainment. Oxford: Elsevier
Mori, M.1970. Bukimi no tani: the uncanny valley. Energy, 7:33–35.
Perron, B. 2008. Genre Profile: Interactive Movie IN: Wolf, M.J.P. (ed.) The video game explosion: a history from PONG to Playstation and beyond USA: Greenwood Press
Poole, S. 2000. Trigger Happy: Videogames and the Entertainment Revolution. New York: Arcade Publishing
Prince, S. 2002. True Lies: Perceptual realism, digital images and film theory IN: Turner, G. (ed) The film cultures reader. New York: Routledge
Rodriguez, E. 2007.  Computer Graphic Artist.  Global Media
Run Lola Run. 1998. [DVD]. Directed by Tom Tykwer. UK: Sony Pictures
Ryan, M.L. 2006. Avatars of Story.  Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
Semsey, R. 2004. Lord of the Rings: The Third Age Review (Xbox).   Team Xbox. [Online]. Reviews. 3 November 2004. Available from: <http://reviews.teamxbox.com/xbox/831/Lord-of-the-Rings-The-Third-Age/p1/> [Accessed 7 January 2010]
Straubhaar, J., LaRose, R. and Davenport, L. 2008. Media Now: Understanding Media, Culture, and Technology. Wadsworth: Cengage Learning
Taylor, R. 2006. Cinema meets digital technology. BBC News [Online]. BBC Click. 18 August 2002. Available from <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/click_online/5262456.stm> [Accessed 6 January 2010]
The Numbers. [Online]. Available from: http://www.the-numbers.com [Accessed 6 January 2010]
Thompson, K. 2007. The Frodo Franchise: The Lord of the Rings and Modern Hollywood. California: University of California Press.
Wasko, J and Shanadi, G. 2006. More than just Ring: Merchandise for them all IN: Mathijs, E. (ed) The Lord of the Rings: popular culture in global context. Britian: Wallflower Press
Wedel, M. 2009. Backbeat and Overlap: Time, Place, and Character Subjectivity in Run Lola Run IN: Buuckland, W. (ed) Puzzle films: complex storytelling in contemporary cinema. Britian: Blackwell Publishing
Weihart, L. 2006.  Entertainment. Australia: Career FAQ PTY LTD

---

[i] The Uncanny Valley is a hypothesis that helps to explain why audiences can have a negative reaction to non-human characters that look very close to human.
[ii] “Noel Carroll has pointed out this bifurcation between the camps of realism and formalism and linked it to an essentializing tendency within theory, a predilection of theorists to focus on either the cinema’s capability to photographically copy physical reality or to stylistically transcend reality.” (Prince 2002 p120)
[iii] “On the one hand, visual and interactive media show increasing aesthetic and procedural similarities.  Video games have generally become more narrative-based and increasingly draw upon film-like special effects and celebrity-power to stand out in the marketplace.  Likewise, the technologies used for computer-generated imagery (CGI) in film are more and more often the same technologies used to develop video games, to the point that artists and technicians are able to move between the two industries with increasing fluidity.” (Elkington 2009 p213)
[iv] “A film-based game aims to come out at about the same time as the move, primarily to take advantage of the fact that film studios usually have much bigger budgets for advertising than do game firms.  Skaggs calls this double-duty use of publicity “the whole franchise effect”: :All the marketing and advertising and everything hits for the films, and people walk into the store, Best Buy or something, and they go, ‘Oh, look, there’s the thing I just saw advertised a thousand times on TV or in the movies. Wow, I want it!’” (Thompson 2007 p237)

FM1 coursework - Analysis of a film extract

What does the specification say you have to do?
An analysis of a film extract - 1500 words (30 marks).  Candidates are required to explore how one or more of mise-en-scène, performance, cinematography, editing, and sound construct meaning and provoke response in a film extract.

• Candidates are encouraged to support their work with illustrative visual material.
•  Recommended length of extract: approximately 3-5 minutes (depending on the complexity of the extract).

How do I start off? (preliminary analysis)

One way to begin is by using the analysis sheet contained in your film language pack (see below).  This has lots of useful questions that you can ask of your sequence.

You will probably now have a clearer idea of a good micro feature (e.g. editing, sound etc.) to analyse in the sequence.  You can do two micro features if you wish, but I would not advise analysing three.

If you are doing cinematography, you can use this guide to help you:

If you are considering sound, you can get some ideas from this document:

If editing is your focus then this guide will help:

Mise-en-scene is covered here:

Special effects (which could be included in either editing or mise-en-scene) is described in this guide:

I would not advise analysing performance unless you do Performance Studies and then only if you have an advanced understanding of the terms contained in the document below:

You can also find additional information on the key terms within film language here: http://howardschoolfilm.blogspot.co.uk/2011/12/film-terms-glossary.html  and here  http://howardschoolmedia.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/media-word-bank.html

More help in analysing your sequence is contained in this document which gives further examples: 

Top tips for success:

• Give some basic information about the film at the start of your analysis - title, year of release, director, DVD edition, start and finish timings for your sequence.
• State your focus micro feature(s), e.g. camerawork.  Then make sure that do actually write about the micro feature(s) that you intended to.
• Introduce your sequence with a contextual paragraph.  This could include: location, time (e.g. day/night), characters (in the sequence), key action (including conflict) and what has happened in the film leading up to this sequence.
• It's important to write about your personal response to the sequence.  You should be using the words "I", "the viewer" or the "the spectator", not "the audience".
• A formula for success is to consider three things together: 1. What is the technical (micro) feature used? (e.g. a pan)  2. What meaning is created? (e.g. the illusion of someone's head moving)  3. What is your personal response (e.g. "This shot makes me feel like I am the person turning my head and I am positioned within the scene.").  So, technical feature + meaning + response.
• Use terminology widely and accurately.
• Don't use the word "scene" when you actually mean "shot" or "frame".
• Screenshots from the sequence should be used to illustrate your analysis.  Please note that these are there to assist with assessment; you should not write about your screenshots, you are writing about a moving sequence, not still images.
• Be specific when writing about producers - don't write about "they".  "They" will be the director, editor, cinematographer, actor, set designer, sound editor, composer etc.  Use the correct names.
• The word "it" is also too vague for an analytical essay.  Be specific and state clearly what you are writing about.
• Please note that cameras do not 'cut' or 'fade'.  These are editing techniques and take place post-production.
• Use paragraphs to give your analysis structure.
• Check your spelling, punctuation and grammar before submitting your work.
• Put a word-count at the end of your essay.

TITLE OF FILM (YEAR OF RELEASE)

DIRECTOR

DVD EDITION

START TIME FOR EXTRACT – END TIME FOR EXTRACT

MICRO FEATURE(S) YOU ARE ANALYSING

INTRODUCTION:

Where and when does the action take place?

What happened in the film before your sequence?

Who are the main characters?

What are their motivations?  What are their relationships?  What conflict is there between them?

Why are they acting in the way they are?

How have we got to this point in the plot?

ANALYSIS:

Technical film term + meaning + personal response = Film Language

e.g  “The camera tilts upwards from the orc’s feet to its snarling face.  By doing this, the cinematographer shows the sheer size of the creature compared to the small and vulnerable dwarf.  I felt fearful that the dwarf’s death was imminent.”

Bad example

“The shot goes up so that the orc looks big and scary.  It does this because the audience needs to feel tension and want to watch more.”

Weekly plan for year 12 Film Studies - Term 2

Week 1

• Shawshank Redemption viewing
• Characterisation and archetypes in Shawshank Redemption (w/s 14a)
• Structure and narrative in Shawshank Redemption (w/s 14a)
• Messages and values in Shawshank Redemption (w/s 14a)
• Genre in SR (w/s 14a)
• Independent study:  This site http://www.shawshankredemption.org/  has some really interesting reflections by the director of the film, Frank Darabont, under 'Analysis'.  If you ignore the awful green text, his comments give a terrific insight into the feature film-making process.

Week 2

• Birdman of Alcatraz viewing
• Compare characterisation and stereotypes, structure and narrative, messages and values, and genre in the two films.
• Independent study: read the viewing notes (14c) for the film and the wikipedia entry for Robert Stroud  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Stroud
• How accurate is the representation of Stroud in the film, in the context of your background reading? How authentic should cinema be in portraying real events?
• The Magdalene Sisters viewing

Week 3

• The Magdalene Sisters - the language of film (w/s 14b)
• The impossibility of escape (w/s 15) - read and discuss in pairs/ as class.
• The use of voiceover (w/s 17) - bullets 1&2, discuss
• Costume and genre in prison films - annotate and share
• Scenes from prison films for discussion (w/s 18)
• Independent study - contextual reading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdalene_asylum
• Donnie Darko viewing