Do you see any similarities between the early Channel 4 and an independent film production company?
Yes, I feel that both of the two stand for similar values in the way that they promote social realist drama. These comparable motives carry through to the media which can also be prepared. The materials produced and presented by both parties is extremely rough and ready as well as dealing with politically sensitive issues for example the film Walter…which highlights many absurd themes.
How do you think the move in 1993 to being a more commercially motivated broadcaster, with the ability to sell their own advertising space, affected Channel 4’s acquisition and commissioning decisions?
Prior to Channel 4’s independence, if a show had been unsuccessful in regards to viewers, they would not have suffered as they were not in charge of the advertisement. However, once they were in control of the advertisement it was clear to them that if they targeted a mainstream audience they would get more viewers resulting in advertising places being more profitable. Therefore, they started to present shows that were not target towards a petite audience but more towards the mainstream. Consequently, the shows were less controversial and slowly Channel 4 started to lose their unique programme style.
In what ways do you think Channel 4 have lead to innovations in British Television?
I believe that in the initial stages of Channel 4’s did begin to modernize television, this is evident from its opening night where the episodes of ‘Walter’ and other shows which causes many different reactions. However, as Channel for has become more mainstream in recent times this unique style has gradually faded.
How has Channel 4 strayed from the ethos of it’s original remit as a public service broadcaster to showcase innovation and diversity in television?
Firstly, Channel for has strayed immensely as it is no longer a non-profit organization, this means that is it no longer a PSB. Moreover, it is clear that it doesn’t no longer aim in the interest of the viewers as many mainstream shows are presented e.g Friends. These are mainstream shows as they are light-hearted fun that everyone can understand.
Does the factual programming on Channel 4 today have the same educational value as it did 25 years ago?
No, for the simply reason that Channel 4 have manipulated there factual programmes in order to make it interesting and shocking. Dispatches often focus on stories that shock where as documentaries like ‘Network 7’ had a specific topic that would only appeal to certain R’n’B fans. Therefore, Channel 4’s educational programmes have been more generalized in order to capture a wide audience, resulting in a loss of educational value.
Are there any arguments to say that Channel 4 still, in some ways stil maintains its original remit?
Yes, they still broadcast new British independent films as a rule on Film4’s fund. Moreover, they still present educational programmes for kids which are common for PSB’s. What’s more, channel 4 also present shows for example documentaries that will not always appeal to a mainstream audience.
Is Channel 4’s Ownership of Film 4 Productions an example of horizontal or vertical intergration?
Channel 4’s owner ship of Film 4 productions in a vertical integration. Channel 4 acts as indirect producers as they fund Film 4 Productions however they are mainly exhibiters of the films produces as they show the film on television.
Sunday 18 October 2009
Sunday 11 October 2009
Fantasy Film Making Part One
At the initial stages of the lesson we were given the following information about our production;
Production Company: Little British Films, a subsidiary of Hollywood
Budget: 1 million
Scenario: An adaptation of 'Porno', Irvine Welsh's sequel to Trainspotting.
From these given circumstances we developed the following storyline;
The group have little to no money and life is harder than usual, they increase their dependence on crime and are in and out of prison.
Pubs - By using a real pub is will allow us to get it for free as well as using real people are extras.
Streets - We will use different streets in Scotland,this will cost nothing as we will still to alley ways and small streets.
Police related material,Cars, costume, jail, police station)- All of this would cost roughly £10,000, but is essential to the film.
The next element to consider as actors for the production;
Ewan McGregor as the lead role - as he would cost far too much to pay, we decided to offer him 11% of the films profits. Although this is a risky move he is vital to the story.
David Tennant would play the head detective on the case, as well as being Scottish he is also very well known in England for Dr.Who and other productions. £100,000
The next two actors were in the previous film and played the characters of Spud and Tommy's Girlfriend.
Production Company: Little British Films, a subsidiary of Hollywood
Budget: 1 million
Scenario: An adaptation of 'Porno', Irvine Welsh's sequel to Trainspotting.
From these given circumstances we developed the following storyline;
The group have little to no money and life is harder than usual, they increase their dependence on crime and are in and out of prison.
***
Tommy's girlfriend visits the video store only to discover her and Tommy's 'home video' to be available for rental. She confronts the shop owner who recognises her from the video and explains that it is his best selling video in the store. She visits the group to explain her distress, this is where one member of the group develops the idea of making more videos.
***
They make money from the multiple videos produced, and life for the group is going well, apart from the minor dilemma.
***
These videos are of course illegal, and they find out that the police are planning a raid on all video stores in the local area (they find out in advance as Spud some how got a job as a police officer). As a result, they have to go all around the video stores that own their videos in a rush to destroy all of the copies. They do so. However, what Spud fails to explain to them is that they are also planning a raid on all places that they suspect to contain drugs e.g their flat. They finally get a long prison sentence.
Title: Shooting Up
Once the story had been established there were still multiple other factors to consider, here are the decisions that we came up with;
Locations/Sets:
Abandoned Flat/House
This location would be quite easy to find and most importantly would be FREE to use. This is important due to our small 1 million pound budget.
Multiple video stores - This again would be free. Also we would use the cashiers in the shop at the time in the film in order to make the deal more appealing to shop owners as well as cutting down on payment for actors.
Pubs - By using a real pub is will allow us to get it for free as well as using real people are extras.
Streets - We will use different streets in Scotland,this will cost nothing as we will still to alley ways and small streets.
Police related material,Cars, costume, jail, police station)- All of this would cost roughly £10,000, but is essential to the film.
The next element to consider as actors for the production;
Ewan McGregor as the lead role - as he would cost far too much to pay, we decided to offer him 11% of the films profits. Although this is a risky move he is vital to the story.
Frankie Boyle and the money man, he is very direct and extremely funny. He costs us a total of £10,000
David Tennant would play the head detective on the case, as well as being Scottish he is also very well known in England for Dr.Who and other productions. £100,000
The next two actors were in the previous film and played the characters of Spud and Tommy's Girlfriend.
Music
I felt that music was key to the film in order to gain that 'zoned out' feeling and add to the surreal genre of the film. We had to pick four song to include in the film:
Original song made for the film - Prodigy = £100,000
Original Soundtrack - Gallows = £25,000
Kasabian - Empire = £1000
Original song made for the film - Chemical Brother = £100,000
There is an example of a song that i would want the songs to sound like;
Therefore, in total i have £661,000 left in order to complete the rest of the film. It remains to be seen what this money will finally be spent on.
Britishness
My production is much like 'Trainspotting' in representing Britain. It focuses much more on the lower more run-down areas of britain. Moreover, it also portrays britain as a very dangerous place to live. It gives viewers the impression that Britishness is having the instiact to just live each day as it comes abd obtain all thrills that are possible. Although this may be true to a certain extent, both Trainspotting and my production go over and beyond this idea to the extent that it is seen as a negavtive way to live.
Target Audience
Age: 18-25
Gender: Male
Interests: Thrill seeking, Crime, Drugs etc .
Current Film Consumption: Trainspotting, This is England, Football Factory, Blow.
Ethnicity: Prodominately white
Location: Britain but mostly Scotland.
Friday 9 October 2009
Preliminary exercise feedback - strengths and weaknesses
Good points
- Different variety of shots was good.
- Clear and creative story line.
- Match on action was used effectively.
- Editing was good, invisible editing was in practice.
- The music was appropriate for the story line.
- The lighting varied between shots.
- Music was maybe a little too fast for the scene.
- I would change the lighting, through editing techniques
- I would also include a more complex ending, rather than leave the scene on a cliffhanger.
- Use slower music at the end of the scene.
Tuesday 6 October 2009
Sunday 4 October 2009
Hollywood v Independent
The difference between Hollywood and Independent films is vast. I will be highlighting these differences and using examples from ‘Tropic Thunder’ & ‘Hot Fuzz. Before I begin contrasting I feel that it is appropriate to deliver a little background on both of the films.
Tropic Thunder (Hollywood)
Main Producer: DreamWorks
Film Budget: $100-150 million
Plot: A parody of war films. After certain events, the war film becomes slightly more realistic than expected.
Hot Fuzz (Independent)
Main Producer: Big Talk Productions
Film Budget: $8 million
Plot: A successful London cop (Simon Pegg) is transferred to a police department in a small country town. There turns out to be a lot more crime than meets the eye.
Actors
The first contrast between the films start even before the film has begun being produced. The casting of the two films causes this difference; due to ‘Tropic Thunders’ Hollywood institution they can increase the films profile by molding the film into a star vehicle by employing well known as well as expensive actors. Actors in this instance include; Ben Stiller, Jack Black, Tom Cruise etc. All of these wouldn’t have been cheap to employ. However, Big Talk Productions did not have millions to invest into the film, resulting in a less known cast such as; Simon Pegg, Nick Frost etc. Therefore, before the films have even begun shooting it is clear that the DreamWorks production will appeal to a wider audience due to the audience’s previous positive conception of the actors.
Characters
Hollywood films aim towards the main stream audience, where as Independent productions aim towards a smaller audience. Consequently, Independent films are more likely to produce characters that are more controversial or more specific to a culture where as Hollywood stick to conventional and acceptable characters. For example, as the actors are playing actors in the film, the actors are presented as unintelligent which creates a comical aspect to the film as well as allowing people to relate to it. Furthermore, the film is a parody of war films; therefore it is demoting violence as well as presenting it. This technique widens the audience as both people who despise or enjoy watching violence will enjoy the production, increasing the audience. However, Hot Fuzz is a film where it is clear that the characters will only be understood by certain people. For example, Simon Pegg and Nick Frost play the heroes in the film yet neither of then are overly attractive or sensuous. Therefore, (due to the production company’s low budget in comparison to DreamWorks) not all the characters look how they should and stereotypes are not always used in Independent films. What’s more, as the film is set in a small town, strong country accents are presented in the film. Unlike, Tropic Thunder the accents in the production therefore will be difficult to understand by some people.
Dialogue
Hollywood productions are able to use better writers, whereas Independent productions are most realistic. In ‘Tropic Thunder’ the dialogue is used to extent the narrative, for example towards the initial stages of the film the ‘director’ states “Let go and make the best war movie, ever!” just before stepping on a landmine. This will foreshadow the plot of the film to the audience and suggest that things will go wrong and leaves you waiting for more. Yet, in contrast to Hollywood productions, Independent films seem to use simpler dialogue and seem to make the storyline more real. “Want anything from the shop?”.
Music
Purchasing songs in order to use them in films differs from how well known the artist is. Hollywood productions often either produce the music specifically for the film or copyright music that will appeal to their audience as it is well known. However, independent films often just copyright less-known yet appropriate songs. This is clear with my examples as in ‘Hot Fuzz’ the most well known track is ‘Blockbuster – The Sweets’ which was released in 1989. However, it is clear that the music in ‘Tropic Thunder’ adds to the storyline due to its upbeat nature and recognized profile, for example, ‘U Can't Touch This" – M.C. Hammer.
Camerawork
Camera angles are vital to telling the story of a film, and this is where the difference between Hollywood and independent becomes most apparent. DreamWorks huge budget allows them to heighten the ‘action movie’ affect that ‘Hot Fuzz’ fails to do. With the opening 30 seconds of the movie being films entirely in helicopter shots. It is this quality that ‘Hot Fuzz’ lacks, which is once again down to the institution on the movies. The lack of money for ‘Hot Fuzz’ results in a large amount of long takes in comparison to the multiple cuts of ‘Tropic Thunder’ due to the cost of the film.
Editing
It is the variety of editing that is the difference between Hollywood and independent. As well as Hollywood productions being cleaner cut in regards to framing. For example, the idea of invisible editing is much clearer with ‘Tropic Thunder’ as the cuts are barely noticeable making the production easier to understand. Furthermore, it is clear that any footage with like then perfect audio has been dubbed in order to give a clear sound to the dialogue. However, this is not the case with ‘Hot Fuzz’ where the audio is acceptable but not as perfect as in the DreamWorks production. This is once again down to the institution, DreamWorks want to portray a ‘dream like’ atmosphere so that the film is easier and simple to watch as well as understand. Whereas, Big Talk Productions look to go for the more realistic feel, where slight glitches are seen as acceptable.
Mise-en-scene
There are many differences in regards to props, locations and graphic between Hollywood and independent and I feel that ‘Hot Fuzz’ and ‘Tropic Thunder’ highlight all of these. Firstly is the location of the filming. The end-less pit of money resulted in ‘Tropic Thunder’ being filmed in three different countries as well as some scene being shot in a studio, where the setting was created. This meant that the location was perfect for the director want to produce, again making it a lot easier to understand as the location looks exactly how it supposed to. However, ‘Hot Fuzz’ as filmed in ‘found locations’ which were all in England and easily accessed. Therefore, once again giving the film a more real and imperfect feel. The next contrast between Hollywood and Independent is the props used. ‘Tropic Thunder’s props and costumes are really clear in order to represent the characters perfectly in order to make it easier to for the audience to get what character is being portrayed, for example the complex American army attire. However, in ‘Hot Fuzz’ the only specific costume used in the film is the police costume, which would not have been expensive to get. The last comment in regards to mise-en-scene is in terms of graphics. In ‘Tropic Thunder’ there are multiple explosions, all of which were possibly physically created one way or another. However, in one of the two explosions in ‘Hot Fuzz’ it is clear to see that technology was used to create it. This gives the movie again a less effective edge to it in regards to the Hollywood production.
In conclusion, both Hollywood and Independent production companies have the ability to produce great films. Yet there style of production is completely different and this is mainly down to the institutions of the films. Although they are small factors, they mould together to give each style its little characteristics.
Tropic Thunder (Hollywood)
Main Producer: DreamWorks
Film Budget: $100-150 million
Plot: A parody of war films. After certain events, the war film becomes slightly more realistic than expected.
Hot Fuzz (Independent)
Main Producer: Big Talk Productions
Film Budget: $8 million
Plot: A successful London cop (Simon Pegg) is transferred to a police department in a small country town. There turns out to be a lot more crime than meets the eye.
Actors
The first contrast between the films start even before the film has begun being produced. The casting of the two films causes this difference; due to ‘Tropic Thunders’ Hollywood institution they can increase the films profile by molding the film into a star vehicle by employing well known as well as expensive actors. Actors in this instance include; Ben Stiller, Jack Black, Tom Cruise etc. All of these wouldn’t have been cheap to employ. However, Big Talk Productions did not have millions to invest into the film, resulting in a less known cast such as; Simon Pegg, Nick Frost etc. Therefore, before the films have even begun shooting it is clear that the DreamWorks production will appeal to a wider audience due to the audience’s previous positive conception of the actors.
Characters
Hollywood films aim towards the main stream audience, where as Independent productions aim towards a smaller audience. Consequently, Independent films are more likely to produce characters that are more controversial or more specific to a culture where as Hollywood stick to conventional and acceptable characters. For example, as the actors are playing actors in the film, the actors are presented as unintelligent which creates a comical aspect to the film as well as allowing people to relate to it. Furthermore, the film is a parody of war films; therefore it is demoting violence as well as presenting it. This technique widens the audience as both people who despise or enjoy watching violence will enjoy the production, increasing the audience. However, Hot Fuzz is a film where it is clear that the characters will only be understood by certain people. For example, Simon Pegg and Nick Frost play the heroes in the film yet neither of then are overly attractive or sensuous. Therefore, (due to the production company’s low budget in comparison to DreamWorks) not all the characters look how they should and stereotypes are not always used in Independent films. What’s more, as the film is set in a small town, strong country accents are presented in the film. Unlike, Tropic Thunder the accents in the production therefore will be difficult to understand by some people.
Dialogue
Hollywood productions are able to use better writers, whereas Independent productions are most realistic. In ‘Tropic Thunder’ the dialogue is used to extent the narrative, for example towards the initial stages of the film the ‘director’ states “Let go and make the best war movie, ever!” just before stepping on a landmine. This will foreshadow the plot of the film to the audience and suggest that things will go wrong and leaves you waiting for more. Yet, in contrast to Hollywood productions, Independent films seem to use simpler dialogue and seem to make the storyline more real. “Want anything from the shop?”.
Music
Purchasing songs in order to use them in films differs from how well known the artist is. Hollywood productions often either produce the music specifically for the film or copyright music that will appeal to their audience as it is well known. However, independent films often just copyright less-known yet appropriate songs. This is clear with my examples as in ‘Hot Fuzz’ the most well known track is ‘Blockbuster – The Sweets’ which was released in 1989. However, it is clear that the music in ‘Tropic Thunder’ adds to the storyline due to its upbeat nature and recognized profile, for example, ‘U Can't Touch This" – M.C. Hammer.
Camerawork
Camera angles are vital to telling the story of a film, and this is where the difference between Hollywood and independent becomes most apparent. DreamWorks huge budget allows them to heighten the ‘action movie’ affect that ‘Hot Fuzz’ fails to do. With the opening 30 seconds of the movie being films entirely in helicopter shots. It is this quality that ‘Hot Fuzz’ lacks, which is once again down to the institution on the movies. The lack of money for ‘Hot Fuzz’ results in a large amount of long takes in comparison to the multiple cuts of ‘Tropic Thunder’ due to the cost of the film.
Editing
It is the variety of editing that is the difference between Hollywood and independent. As well as Hollywood productions being cleaner cut in regards to framing. For example, the idea of invisible editing is much clearer with ‘Tropic Thunder’ as the cuts are barely noticeable making the production easier to understand. Furthermore, it is clear that any footage with like then perfect audio has been dubbed in order to give a clear sound to the dialogue. However, this is not the case with ‘Hot Fuzz’ where the audio is acceptable but not as perfect as in the DreamWorks production. This is once again down to the institution, DreamWorks want to portray a ‘dream like’ atmosphere so that the film is easier and simple to watch as well as understand. Whereas, Big Talk Productions look to go for the more realistic feel, where slight glitches are seen as acceptable.
Mise-en-scene
There are many differences in regards to props, locations and graphic between Hollywood and independent and I feel that ‘Hot Fuzz’ and ‘Tropic Thunder’ highlight all of these. Firstly is the location of the filming. The end-less pit of money resulted in ‘Tropic Thunder’ being filmed in three different countries as well as some scene being shot in a studio, where the setting was created. This meant that the location was perfect for the director want to produce, again making it a lot easier to understand as the location looks exactly how it supposed to. However, ‘Hot Fuzz’ as filmed in ‘found locations’ which were all in England and easily accessed. Therefore, once again giving the film a more real and imperfect feel. The next contrast between Hollywood and Independent is the props used. ‘Tropic Thunder’s props and costumes are really clear in order to represent the characters perfectly in order to make it easier to for the audience to get what character is being portrayed, for example the complex American army attire. However, in ‘Hot Fuzz’ the only specific costume used in the film is the police costume, which would not have been expensive to get. The last comment in regards to mise-en-scene is in terms of graphics. In ‘Tropic Thunder’ there are multiple explosions, all of which were possibly physically created one way or another. However, in one of the two explosions in ‘Hot Fuzz’ it is clear to see that technology was used to create it. This gives the movie again a less effective edge to it in regards to the Hollywood production.
In conclusion, both Hollywood and Independent production companies have the ability to produce great films. Yet there style of production is completely different and this is mainly down to the institutions of the films. Although they are small factors, they mould together to give each style its little characteristics.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)