Monday 29 September 2014

Existing Double Page Film Review Analyses


This review page is for Pirates of the Caribbean: The World’s End (2007) from Total Film.

The layout of the page shows a nearly A4 sized image, in this case an action shot from the film itself, with the written review taking up roughly half an A4 page in the bottom left corner. This makes the words to image ratio almost equal and therefore makes the overall spread more attractive to the audience. Along with these two main features, we also have a contents banner for the section along the top of the pages, a large title, not for Pirates of the Caribbean specifically, but for the sequence of film review articles in the magazine, along with a guide to the star ratings, the title for this review (the film title), the film’s star rating and very brief informal synopsis, a rectangular box on top of the image (containing text and other images) which has similar films to the one the review is about, a page number and website address in the bottom corners and finally some quotes and a graph within the review text itself to make this body of text look more appealing. This layout I think works really well in making the whole spread look appealing, with not too much text and a good balance of images (and image size). I also think the rating system and the informality of the article makes reading it much more fun, as well as being seriously taken and factual.

The colour palette for the spread is white, black, red, and yellow which make the article clear and easily accessible, but it still looks interesting at the same time. The positioning of the colour use is balanced, not having too much of a bright colour in one place but none in another, and this makes the article, overall, appealing to look at. For example, yellow is used along the top of the spread (in the banner), in the bottom left corner and in the bottom right corner. This doesn’t make any part of the article too bright, or too unclear to read, especially as the yellow is used on a black background in an inversion to further the clarity and not make the yellow text hard to read. Furthermore, the image chosen complies with the colour palette so it fits the article and doesn’t look out-of-place.

The typography used in the article is all very clear and modern, with very little change in font type throughout. The masthead of the page (the film review section title) and the review title (“Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End”) both share the same typography, a large, bold, cinematic font that is used in black for clarity and to stand out against the rest of the article (using this on white creates an inversion which furthers this clarity and boldness). The font used for the subtitles is very similar to the masthead font, but smaller and less bold, so it’s still clear and has an impact, but smaller and makes the reader have to take some time to look at the article to take in what it says. This draws the reader in to read the rest of the review, which uses again, a similar but smaller font, in black, which is easy to read, and in places in bold so that certain parts of the article are emphasised and it adds depth to the article so it doesn’t all look exactly the same and boring.

The lexis used is mostly quite informal, opinionated and humourous, talking to the reader like a friend, which makes the whole article seem more friendly and inviting. The title of the review series is called “Screen: new movies in order of merit” which indicates that this magazine is very interested in films and therefore reviews lots of them, allowing a variety of film reviews for the reader to choose (listed in the banner at the top of this page), and also the rating system that goes with this allows the reader to find and watch the best received films at the time.  The informal synopsis for the review says “Captain Jack delivers spectacle. And talk. Lots of talk.” and this sets the tone for the article, indicating the general opinion of the film from the start.

In terms of representation, both of the main characters in the image, and all the background characters, are adult males, and so this doesn't represent the female audience, indicating that the target audience is predominantly males because of the action/adventure genre. 

Overall, this film review article is modern, concise and attractive to the reader, without overcrowding or too much text compared to images. This makes the spread more likely to draw in the reader to read the whole article.  





My second double page film review analysis is of a review for Avatar (2009). 

The style of this spread in comparison to the first one is very different, focusing on imagery in the form of action shots from the film with minimal text. However, the layout is very similar in that it has the main body of text in the same place (the bottom left corner), the main image on the right and a text box in the bottom right corner. Furthermore, the title of the spread "AVATAR" is in the same place as on the previous spread. In addition to this, there are several smaller images that take up the rest of the room on the spread and page numbers in the bottom corners. 

The main article has a black background, which differs from the previous one that had a completely white background. This means that instead of black text on a white background like before, this has white text on a black background and this connotes the genre of the film, which is sci-fi, by having a futuristic look to the main body of text. Along with the black and white, the rest of the colour palette is red and yellow, like before, but with blue added from the images. This indicates that this colour palette of black, white, red and yellow is a common convention of film reviews  and therefore I should reciprocate this in my own practical production. 

The typography used on this spread is quite different than on the previous one because all of the text is rounded and this gives a much less formal and less professional looking style to the article which connotes that the audience for the article is younger readers. This style of font stays constant across the whole of the spread, meaning there are no obvious font changes that make the page look interesting too look at. 

In terms of the lexis, in the top left and right corners the subtitle for the spread is displayed, reading "Film of the Month" which, despite the typography, tells us that this spread is serious and that the review speaks highly of the film, enough for it to be superior against all of film released in that month. This review also has the release date of 17th December and "certificate TBA" which tells the reader which, if the rating had been announced, would be helpful in telling the reader what content could be expected from the film, and whether it's worth a family trip to the cinema. From the article to the fact bar, it is clear that this article takes a much more serious tone through text than the previous one, making it seem more reliable and factual rather than opinionated, which it is. 

On this spread, unlike before, there is a large image of both a male and a female Avatar, and therefore both genders are represented, indicating that the target audience, at least for this article, is both males and females, and not just males. 

Overall, although fundamentally similar, this review spread is very different from the first one, with a different tone set from the off, making it darker and more serious than the previous one, and the tone of the text furthers this seriousness, though the let down of the article is with the lack of variety when it comes to typography, which is something I will have to focus on in my own production. 

Sunday 21 September 2014

Short Film Research - The Tea Chronicles



This video, although a comedy video, gives some really valuable information about the techniques use in the creation of this short film and tells us how to make sure our  own short film creations come out the way we want them to. 

The main points raised in the video were: 
  • How the story concept was created and how it became a short film
  • How the shots were planned and who did them (with a shot of their screen so we can see an example of a professional shot list)
  • The size of the crew
  • How they did the production design
  • How to throw your drink at a camera 
  • How they used green screening 
  • The difficulty of editing and how not everything filmed actually works for he final cut
  • Colour grading the film to enhance it and make it look more cinematic
This brief overview of the way in which the short film developed is really helpful for video examples of the stages gone through to make it. This allows me to get see what a closed set like a house looks like in filming and understand what to expect, and the problems we may face, when creating our own. 

Existing Short Film Analyses

The Tea Chronicles 



The Tea Chronicles is a psychological thriller that follows the view of Charlie as he encounters his new housemate’s tea making skills. It was made by QualiTea Productions, founded by Charlie McDonnell (http://charliemcdonnell.com, https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmQXOAse-VnzuXHebX5I77g).

The film starts with a black screen where you can hear the diegetic sound of someone typing. Then, the visual quickly fades in, creating a sound bridge, showing the main character, Charlie,  sat at a desk, typing on a MacBook from a low angle, making him seem important. As the camera zoom into the character’s face, he moves, drinking from his cup. In terms of sound, you can hear the diegetic sound effects of the drinking and the cup being moved across the desk. The shot changes with a jump cut to an over the shoulder shot of Charlie, showing a new character in a mysterious way. In addition to this, non-diegetic, incidental music starts playing, heightening in pitch and volume as the camera flicks back and forth with one-two shots of each character - from medium shots to close up shots, rapidly building tension until a medium, over the shoulder shot shows the new character running away out of the room with the music stopping after the climax.

Charlie then engages in one-two dialogue sequence with a new character, Chris, who has also been sat in the room, but unobserved. This one-two is shown through mainly multiple over- the-shoulder shots, until there is a jump cut from an over-the-shoulder shot of Chris to a close up on Chris’s face. This shows tension and this tension is furthered through the performance of the actor, showing a look of despair in his facial expression and through the “argh!” noise he is making. Then, the conversational topic turns to unicycles, and it is clear from the use of a down tilt when focusing on the unicycle that the idea of having a room for a unicycle collection is a bad idea.

The next scene entails a dialogue-less sequence where Khyan makes Charlie a cup of tea. The mise-en-scene of this scene, and throughout the film, is quite standard; with the location being a house it is decorated to look like a home. A specific piece of mise-en-scene is the “Quali-Tea chart” on the cupboard door. Not only is this stuck on the door that Khyan goes on to find the sugar in, but it also specifies the exact requirements of Charlie’s tea. This foreshadows the finding of the sugar and the potential for the making of the tea to not live up to Charlie’s request. Through this sequence there are a range of shots used, including a medium shot where the camera seems handheld, building tension, a close up from inside the cupboard and an over-the-shoulder, high angle shot of the bag of sugar in Khyan’s hand, with the focus pulled from the background to the bag of sugar itself. This occurs with the use of non-diegetic score music which also builds the tension. The lighting in this scene is very dark, with what seems like a single light box shining light in such a way that in the final shot of the sugar bag, mostly just the bag of sugar is lit up. All of this is significant because it foreshadows the effects of the sugar to come. The film then cuts to a medium shot of Khyan and the sugar, the score music temporarily stops, and then he decides to use the sugar, despite its old appearance. This, along with the actor’s shrug of “it seems okay”, shows that this character is not entirely aware of the possibility of the sugar being not okay.

After this, there is a fade to black and then a fade in of the title screen. This title screen is relevant to the film it is for because the colours are yellowy-orange on black, connoting the tea that film is based around, and the smokiness connotes the steam coming from the tea. The screen then fades to black again, and then cuts to high angle close up of Charlie.

This next scene shows lots of skill in terms of sound editing, where the diegetic sound coming from Charlie’s headphones and the diegetic sound of the characters’ voices are altered depending on whether Charlie is wearing the headphones or not, placing the viewer inside Charlie’s head, although the visual is from a third person perspective. The sound begins with the diegetic classical music from Charlie’s headphones playing clearly, then as Khyan talks to Charlie, his voice is muffled, as if we are hearing what Charlie can hear of the conversation. When Charlie takes off his headphones, the conversation becomes clear and the sound from his headphones is muffled. Through this scene, the positioning of the characters has Charlie sat down at his desk and Khyan stood above him. This connotes a difference in status as Khyan gives Charlie the tea he made for him, which opposes the status difference just before created when Khyan has to interrupt Charlie to talk to him, showing Charlie as superior.

One of the most interesting scenes in the film comes when Charlie becomes teabag Charlie through a fade through a cup of tea to the table top and then Charlie is now in minute form, inside a teabag. This uses green screening so that teabag Charlie can run across the table, chased by a rain of sugar poured by life-sized Khyan. This is symbolic because it shows that Charlie is scared and insecure and shows that the sugar is the horror that has turned him this way. Then, a movement match is used to show teabag Charlie being lifted by the teabag string with a full shot of Charlie and then a close up shot of life-sized Charlie’s face as you see his hand pull teabag Charlie up in front of his face, and the focus is pulled from teabag Charlie to life-sized Charlie. This represents Charlie being the basis for this extreme behaviour, indicating that he drinks too much tea and any change in the taste of the tea will evoke an extreme reaction.


Overall, from this short film it is clear that dark lighting, tense incidental music and a large quantity of closer shots build suspense and evokes a more aware reaction from the audience and therefore I should use these points in my own film creation.

UNWIND


UNWIND is a dystopian, sci-fi short film that is an adaptation of a novel. It was made by Mainstay Productions (http://www.mainstaypro.com/).

The film begins with a fade in from black to synopsis screen where a general overview of the context is described with After the Heartland War was fought over abortion, a compromise was reached, allowing parents to sign an order for their children between the ages of 13 and 18 years old to be unwound—taken to "harvest camps" and having their body parts harvested for later use.” This inclusion avoids the need for unnecessary additions to the script to avoid confusion by giving a basic background and explanation as to what is happening in the short. The typography used for this text is white, on a black background, and futuristic, indicating the genre of sci-fi, and the lack of colour shows the seriousness of what’s going on in the film. Whilst this is on the screen for the first 16 seconds, the non-diegetic sound effect of a heart rate monitor beeping, and also non-diegetic incidental music plays, building in volume, until the screen fades back to black, when it stops.

The non-diegetic heart monitor beeping continues and becomes diegetic as the screen cuts to a bird’s eye view extreme close up of a girl’s eye. This makes the girl seem insignificant due to the way the camera looks down at her. The girl looks young, and is wearing eye make-up but that’s all that’s visible, indicating her age is probably teenaged, telling the view that this scene is part of the “Unwinding” process that’s highlighted in the synopsis screen text. From the start of the scene, the diegetic sounds of the girl breathing and the ambient sound that comes with an operating theatre (e.g. the hum of machines, the sound of gas and air going through a tube etc) begins. Even though the visual is very limited, this sound creates the location alone. Furthermore, from this angle you can see the reflection of a medical light in the girl’s eye. This furthers the creation of the hospital theatre scene. The girl looks to her left and sees two surgeons; they are both wearing blue scrubs and gloves. It is clear from this close up, POV shot, that there is hospital equipment set up on a table, further indicating that she is having an operation. Some of this equipment includes a bowl and swabs. The girl’s vision is blurry and shaking, indicating that she is scared and unaware of everything that’s going on. The two surgeons then engage in dialogue, discussing the male surgeon’s life. This continues as the girl looks around the room. The camera cuts back to the bird’s eye, extreme close shot of her eye, which happens between every different shot. The camera then cuts to a worm’s eye view of a vent on the ceiling which continues to show her as insignificant, but looking up at is also represents the significance of what she’s doing – saving lives. The indication of her being scared is also shown here through the vent flicking from out of focus to in focus and back, showing that’s she’s trying to understand her surroundings but not really taking in all that she sees. Then the camera cuts back to her eye again, then to a full shot of the girl looking down her body to her feet, whilst lying horizontally, from her perspective. Wearing a hospital gown and a heart monitor on her finger, she lifts up her left hand and looks at her fingers, shown by a shakey, handheld up tilt, as the male surgeon says the word “five”, this connection represents her just being a number to him. The camera then cuts back to the girl, this time showing both of her eyes; this shows that she is now more aware of her surroundings.

The female surgeon then comes over to the bed, shown by a cut to a low angle, medium close shot of the top quarter of the female surgeon who now can be seen to be wearing a head cap and a face mask with her scrubs. She moves a drip trolley with her to the bed and a diegetic sound effect is used to show the sound of the trolley moving across the room. The woman is holding a needle syringe and can see the anxiety in the girl’s eyes as she says “relax, it’s Kelsey, right?” when she gets to the bed. She starts opening the syringe which can be heard through diegetic sound effect, and this inspires Kelsey to talk for the first time, saying “what’s that?” The use of this question tells us that Kelsey isn’t fully aware of what’s going on because she doesn’t know what is about to be put into her.  You can then hear the diegetic sound of the needle being stabbed into her flesh, along with the continuous sound of the female surgeon talking to her, and the cut to Kelsey’s eyes (again, from a bird’s eye angle, in an extreme close shot), and seeing her wince in her performance shows the pain of it, evoking the reaction “it’s not supposed to hurt” which opposes her previous question because clearly she knows some things about the procedure, but not anything specific.  

You can then hear the diegetic sound of the woman putting the oxygen mask on Kelsey’s face as the camera up tilts to see the bag of fluid on the trolley, and then tilts back down to look at the woman before looking over to her left with a medium close shot of the male surgeon unwrapping something, with diegetic sound of the unwrapping. The camera (still portraying Kelsey’s pov) then focuses on the equipment that had been unwrapped which shows how scared she is as well as anxiety for what’s going to be done with the piece of equipment. Then, as she gets more scared, she starts to look around more quickly, more frantically, for example using up and down tilts with pans to look straight from one character to the other and back. This especially comes with the diegetic drill sound that she can’t see the source of, so she has to look around for it, before the diegetic sound of her flesh being torn into, and this happens repeatedly as the camera goes from the bird’s eye view, extreme close of Kelsey’s face to the close up, low angle shot of the woman, to the medium close, low angle shot of the man.

Non-diegetic score music then comes in with a drumming style sound, pounding, like Kelsey’s heart would be, and Kelsey’s breathing gets faster. The lighting of the room is set up exactly like an operating theatre, with a blue tinted light filling most of the screen when we see from Kelsey’s perspective. The incidental music builds in tempo and volume, and the camera blurs more than before and then cuts to black. The non-diegetic score stops, but the diegetic heart monitor sound speeds up as different, more calming non-diegetic score comes in giving a juxtaposition of sound. The final piece of dialogue we hear is “I’m here for you, still here” from the woman, layered on top of a constant non-diegetic beep, the diegetic heart monitor sound and the diegetic drilling sound, until all sound fades out.

The film title then fades in from black, in a futuristic font, like at the start and a new futuristic, non-diegetic score comes in, with the credits rolling in the same font as on the synopsis screen.


Overall, this short uses only few different camera shots, but develops the narrative and tension using mainly both the diegetic and not diegetic sound. Along with this though, the mise-en-scene made the scene look highly realistic and the cinematography (i.e. the focusing and non-focusing of the shots) gave a realistic patient perspective that allowed the viewer to feel the same emotions as Kelsey as they went through the procedure with her. 

MEMORIA



Memoria is a 2013 psychological short film made in Denmark and directed by 

The film starts by fading in from black to the camera tracking to the right at a constant distance from the wall, with diegetic sound coming from a man opening a box in a room that the camera tracks past the entrance to. The footage then fades to black and the film title 'Memoria' appears on the screen with no movement, accompanied by a non-diegetic gun shot. The title typography then cracks with red (connoting blood) fills the font as it dissolves to black. Then we have another fade in from black to a high angle long shot of a door, with the camera shaking as if handheld, until the subject opens the door and comes in, leaving the door open. The sound seems to contain diegetic sounds of wind from outside, the bottle being dropped on the floor, his footsteps as he walks about the house, and dialogue as he questions if anyone is home. This subject is a young man wearing scruffy clothes with a scruffy overall appearance. This suggests that he follows Stanley Hall's 1904 youth theory of the storm and stress model, where he said that teenagers are often depressed, involved in criminal activity, and are prone to drink and take drugs. The character comes into the house drunk, and holding an alcohol bottle, and then walks to the table to sit down, before he falls asleep at the table. The camera then, at a high angle, with a long shot, still shaky dollies into the subject before tracking around him so that the subject is in the foreground and the door is in the background. He then wakes up to the diegetic sound of the door slamming shut, gets up, and walks over to the door, whilst exclaiming "who's there?" through diegetic dialogue. The camera then cuts to an eye level angle close up, with the subject as the doorhandle, that sees the man walk over from the background to the foreground in a movement match whilst placing his hand on the handle to try and open the door. Whilst trying, the shot changes to a medium shot at a low angle, with the same handheld shakiness, and upon trying the door he has a flashback, where there is a flashback of a teddybear, created with jump cuts to make it jerky and a shock to the viewer. This is accompanied by tense non-diegetic score is his diegetic cry in pain. He then looks down at the injury on his hand with a POV bird's eye full shot of his hand, before transitioning to a medium shot of the man looking up with confusion, before the camera pans to the left to follow his movement into the corridor. 

In the corridor of this old, dilapidated house, the camera pans to follow the man try different door handles up the corridor, but finding each locked. Then, at the end of the corridor, the camera, now a bird's eye view of the man, sees him try the window, before having another flashback of his family (mum, dad, and baby brother) in the same place within the house, back when it was homely and vibrant in colour, juxtaposed to the present, before the subjects of the flashback crack, and back in the present the floor breaks and he falls through. As he tries to escape, the diegetic sounds of him walking, and banging continue, and the non-diegetic score builds in tempo, creating suspense. As he becomes more desperate to escape, the shots transition more often with shorter shot duration, and the flashbacks have a longer duration each time, giving more information about the back story to what's happening and what's haunting the man. Running through the corridors, he comes across memories with him in from the past juxtaposed with the present, for example when he, as a child, is being shouted at by his father, diegetic dialogue, and the main character as a man sees this, and there is a hitchcock zoom of it as he moves away from the memory. 

The main character then becomes trapped by the memories as the house cracks and the red seeps through towards him, and the non-diegetic score reaches its most tense. He the crouches, seen with a high angle medium shot, and it fades to black. When if fades in from black, we're in a flashback scene, starting with a medium shot at eye level of the main character, as a teenager, lying on his bed as his little brother walks into the room in the background. The only sound is diegetic, coming from the dialogue between the two characters, Benjamin's laughter, and the sounds he makes as he throws pillows and walks across the room. A long shot of the main character in the foreground and Benjamin in the back ground then cuts to the opposite, clearly abiding by the 180 degree rule, as the camera uses jump cuts to show the same low angle medium shot of the main character from different positions, before using a POV of Benjamin looking up at the main character as the red creeps up and the screen darkens and the main character grabs a pillows and suffocates Benjamin, who the viewer is in the position of, and the screen fades to black. After ten seconds of black screen, we fade in to the same low angle shot looking up at the main character, as the door opens and light shines onto his face. He stands up, with a movement match into the next shot as he stands up and the camera cuts to a side on medium shot with the subject in the foreground and the table with a box on from the first shot of the character at the start of the film. This shot then dissolves into a long shot of the subject at the table, looking at the box, sitting down and fading to black. The same sound effect of opening the box as at the beginning then plays, and after a few seconds, the credits roll. 

Overall, this is very interesting, thought-provoking short, with excellent use of cinematography, editing and mise-en-scene to accurately present every detail the makers wished to put across. The animation allowed for the precise colours to be used, and I especially liked the foreshadowing with the use of the colour red, before being used to colour the main character as he committed the murder. The representation of a situation that viewers can relate to with the main character resorting to extreme actions is memorable and will definitely inspire the writing of my own film. 

My Own Short Film - Initial Thoughts

For my own short film I will be working in a group with two other people. We have decided that making a horror/psychological thriller would be a good way to make the plot interesting, unique and give us the opportunity to try out some new techniques with the cinematography and sfx that we hadn't used before. 
Furthermore, this use of genre will allow us to try and spread awareness of the effect of mental illness, namely, schizophrenia, which is what we would like to base the short around. 

Technology and the Film Industry

As the industry progresses, it is getting easier and easier for people to produce media, including films, and therefore the playing field is becoming a lot more level in terms of the technology available for producers to create high quality material that could potentially make lots of money if it were to be seen by a mass audience. One of the key ways that media is currently shared is through the use of internet: In 2008, Plunkett said that “A new generation of UK media power players are ditching the traditional gatekeepers and going straight to their audience via the web” which tells us that using the internet to reach the target audience for your products is the most successful way of it reaching as many people in that intended audience as possible.

Away from the internet, other technologies are becoming a higher quality whilst also becoming less expensive to buy and easier to use, for example, the quality of a Canon 6D camera, one which we have and use in college, equals the quality of the cameras used in the production of films, and also has been used to record films on, yet it only costs £1400 to buy, and it’s so easy to use that students from GCSE level can use it effectively. This shows that the playing field is becoming more and more level due to the fact that smaller British film companies can make films that are the same quality as the films produced by large US companies, whilst spending a lot less money on large, expensive cameras – The Blair Witch Project again being a prime example of this. 

In addition to this, they way in which films are edited in post-production is also becoming easier and less expensive, whilst still allowing you to create films of a high quality. If you have an Apple Mac computer (which costs around £1000), you can buy a range of different software, used by industry professionals, for only around £800-1000. As mentioned before, an example of editing software that allows you to create special effects is AfterEffects, which costs only £800, and this can be used to make in-depth, realistic special effects for a small amount of money. This shows that innovative software would  be affordable by smaller British film companies in order to compete with the larger, more expensive software used by larger American companies, therefore independent films such as ours can potentially be made at as high a quality as Hollywood blockbusters, whilst simultaneous costing millions less. 

Legal Restraints

One of the key restraints when making a film is the age rating system put in place to protect younger viewers from non-age appropriate content.


Age ratings were created because of the hypodermic needle theory, stating that young people can be easy influenced by the things they watching in films and on television. The use of age ratings in the film industry meant that young people would be protected from any particularly frowned upon contents that could possibly influence their actions, physically and verbally. 

Our film No Escape includes content of gory scenes and psychological trauma. 

The age rating system is:

This system shows that there are different groups of people allowed to watch different films through the teen years: young teens (12-14), mid teens (15-17) and late teens into adults (18+). 

A rating of 12 or 12 A means: 

 So, a film is rated 12A when an adult needs to accompany a 12- to the cinema to view the film and a 12 if it is advised that no under 12's watch the film at home. 

For a film to be rated 12 or 12A, it should comply with the following things: 



This means that it is possible for No Escape to be deemed 12A, however it says "horror sequences are not too frequent" and, being a short film of only five minutes, a lot of our film will be deemed as horror sequences. 

for a film to be deemed a 15, it should comply with the following:



This information shows that our film may not be influential (in the bad sense) enough to be deemed a 15, however, later on in the article it says this:
At the end of our film, there is a scene where Franklin (the main character) sees that he has killed himself. This could comply with the above information in that this could influential and therefore our film could be deemed a 15. 


After thoroughly studying the requirements of both of these age rating I've come to the conclusion that our film could fit into either of these categories and the only way to put it into one of these categories for sure is to re-evaluate the film's rating once it has been fully made to see where it stands against these categories then. 

Institutional Information

As our film is a short film that we're creating ourselves within our local area, we felt it unnecessary to need the aid of a production company in the making of the film. However, in order for our film to be seen by as many people as possible, we decided that it would be necessary to have a distribution company. This is mind, I've set out to find one that will fulfil our needs as an independant film company based in the UK.

After looking at some of the big distributors such as Universal, Lionsgate, 20th Century Fox and Warner Bros. it became clear that independant films are not of interest to these companies due to the small amount of income they would bring to them. Therefore, when looking at distributors for our film we would be looking at smaller distribution companies that aim to mainly just promote inside the UK. As a result, I will be looking at smaller distribtution companies that like to distribute independant films, and I will look at:  Icon films, The Independant Film Company and Metradome Group.


On their website, Icon Films says: "Formed in 1999, Icon Film Distribution is one of the UK’s leading independent film distributors generating in excess of £150m at the box office" which tells us, from the first look, that this company would be a really good company to enquire to due to the calibre of the work they do. From looking at the titles of the films this comapny has distributed it is clear that the genre of our films fits in with the other films they have distributed, namely Paranormal Activity, the Butterfly Effect films and The Grudge 3. With Paranormal Activity as a case study, it is clear that they are an effective distributor (even though they teamed up with a bigger distributor) as the production of the film cost around £9000, but making a huge £119,042,762. 

The Independant Film Company, however, says that they specialise "in the development, financing, production and distribution of independent feature films" which puts our film, being just a short and not a feature, at the botttom of their list of potential films. However, if they were to agree to distribute our film, one of their main ways of distribution is by sending  their films to film festivals. Some examples are What We Did On Our Holiday (starring David Tenant, Billy Connally and Rosamund Pike), The Falling (starring Maisie Williams and Maxine Peake) and Starred Up (starring Jack O'Connell, Rupert Friend and Ben Mendelsohn). Starred Up had a budget of £2 million, however, it has so far made £31.1K in the US and from this it seems unlikely that the film will make much of a profit, if any. 

Metradome Group says "Metrodome is a fully integrated rights management and distribution business which provides its industry expertise to maximise revenues for producers of film and TV content across all distribution platforms in the UK" and this puts it as a good contender to distribute our film. From examples it is clear that Metradome specialise in distributing DVDs, and one example of theirs is The Gatekeepers (2012), which had a production budget of $1.5million, and in box office has made $2,408,503, which shows it has clearly made a large profit.

Overall, from this research I think it's clear that the institution that would be best for the distribution of our film is Icon Films, with big distributional partners and the ability to distribute films that go on to achieve "the most profitable film of all time" (Paranormal Activity).  



The History of Film

In the 1930’s, Britain had just been subject to the site of the First World War, and therefore from here on, the reconstruction of British cinema began. Two key film studios in this, British Picture Corporation and Gaumont British Picture Corp were founded. In 1935, Alfred Hitchcock, the saviour of British cinema, released 39 Steps and also in the 1930’s, The British Film Institute (BFI) and the National Film Archives were founded.


In the 1940’s, World War II took place, causing the industry of British cinema to again be rebuilt, and in 1947, The British Film Academy was founded.

In the 1950’s, a cultural convergence occurred with British and American themes and stars starting to mix. Also, World War II evoked a comeback of war films, bringing some of the best films of the decade. Furthermore, British cinema saw the beginning of the Carry On films, which became hits in Britain. In 1953, The Guild of Television Producers and Directors was formed, before merging with The British Film Academy in 1958 to become The Society of Film and Television Arts.


In the 1960’s, the first James Bond film was made; a British action hit, and became the beginning of a massively successful franchise, getting more successful with each film. In 1967, Alfred Hitchcock received an Oscar for Lifetime Achievement, a monumental success and the face of the British film industry. However, from 1960, where British cinema had reached profits of £501milion, the success of British cinema very quickly fell across the decade until it reached only £193million by 1970.


This was furthered into the 1970’s, where Hollywood continued to dominate as usual and through this American studios started to refuse the financing of British films. One of the most influential film companies to British cinema, The Associated British Picture Corp, was taken over by EI and began financing large US films. However, one of the ways Britain started to make more money was through the increased demand of Thriller films, and in 1976, the headquarters of The Society of Film and Television Arts was opened by the Queen and became officially known as The British Academy of Film and Television Arts, or BAFTA for short. 

In the 1980’s, the British film industry was again on the rise, and in his acceptance speech for his Oscar at the Annual Academy Awards, Colin Wellard said “The Brits are coming” as a statement about the nation’s growing success in the film industry.








In the 1990’s, Britain provided stars and production crew to a lot of films due to the growing success and talent of the British film industry, however finances largely came from the US. In turn, British cinema did exceptionally well at the Oscars in this decade, receiving 9 nominations for Best Picture in 7 years. Also, in 1999, BAFTA decided to give separate awards ceremonies to film and television in order to increase popularity. This decade is well-known in the British film industry for being the decade when Britain started to level the playing field between them and the US, this was down to many reasons:

  • Hollywood writer’s decided that they were not being paid enough and went on strike. This caused there to be a deficit in scripts to make films with, ending up in a huge decrease in films being produced.
  • The United Kingdom joined the European Union which resulted in grants being given to the British arts in order to make films.
  • The Internet became available for promotion and advertising, allowing more people to find out about films and watch them, allowing the industry to make more money.
In the 2000’s, The Film Council was established to fund fewer better films, and similarly to the EU grants, the National Lottery began which also produced a lot of funding for Britain to use for filmmaking, amongst other things. Finally, in the 00’s, one of the most successful franchises in the world began when film adaptions of the novel series started being made. The first Harry Potter film was released in 2001, and the success of the franchise only escalated until now, three years after the release of the final film in the series, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2. This franchise alone displayed the calibre of British talent in filmmaking and in acting, and overall sent out a message to the Hollywood film industry about how the British film industry was making a comeback and was out to compete with the US. Unfortunately, as previously discussed, the Harry Potter franchise did rely heavily on Hollywood funding, and therefore it can’t be said that Harry Potter sent out a wholly British message about how wonderful the British film industry is. This shows that the US film industry still proudly dominates the global market in film, and the British industry is yet to make a particularly deep impact in rivalling the success of the Americans.

Friday 12 September 2014

A2 Advanced Portfolio

For my Advanced Portfolio, I have chosen brief number 10; to create a short film. The auxiliary tasks I have chosen are to design: a film poster and a film magazine review page featuring the film. I made these decisions because I have a passion for creating films and this task would be a good choice in order to advance my filmmaking knowledge as well as allow me to really engage with the production of it. I chose these two auxiliary tasks because they are the most relevant methods film publicity and promotion on the list and therefore they would be more appropriate to me to create in order to further my skills learnt from my AS and GCSE media coursework.