Spooks and Casino Royal are both very patriotic, they are very similar in some of the more subtle ways they represent Britishness, but for the main display they are totally different. Casino Royal is more of an action thriller while Spooks is more of a drama. The main difference between the two is not so much the way they represent Britishness, but the way they go about entertaining and glorifying the British Intelligence Services.
Spooks is very political, it is made by the BBC, however it would have to be said that it is much more liberal and left wing. For example in the episode I watched, the Bendorf group consisting of eight members, own 75% of the worlds resources put together, they have more political influence than anybody in the world. Although this is just a drama, this could actually be a political message and representation of a real group in the USA called the Bilderburg group. The Bilderburg group have one hundred and twenty five members of some of the richest people in the world, together they own about 75% of the worlds resources. Within this group there are CEO's of massive corporations, incredibly powerful politicians such as Hillary Clinton, corporate banking CEO's, lots of business men in the general world of natural resources such as oil and gas and CEO's of private corporate military contract organisations such as Blackwater. There have been massively bold claims against this group for being the new world order, but also lots of proof that they have done lots of mining in places like Africa which fund and fuel wars and mass genocides there. Almost exactly like the terrorist group in Spooks said. In the episode though, it portrays the terrorists and the Bendorf group as being bad, the audience sympathise a lot with the terrorist group, but may not agree with the way in which they're doing it. So the only real good guys in episode are the MI5 agents, who are nearly all white British. The Bendorf group was American, Russian and Chinese and the terrorists were French.
In Casino Royal and also Spooks, all the main characters have a lot in common. They are nearly all "White British Men" who are upper middle class and will almost certainly have come out of Oxbridge. The security services used to actually only recruit students out of Oxford and Cambridge, now they are more open but it's still the stereotype of an MI5 agent. It's as there is an elite culture of middle class men and women who are defending Britain intelligently, morally and technologically in secret. Both Spooks and Casino Royal fit massively into those stereotypes, but the way they go and represent the jobs of the security services is totally different. Casino Royal glorifies violence, action and also the view of women being sexual objects. The incredibly beautiful and intelligent accountant who at first is meant to be repulsed by James eventually falls for James, it's as if going around being a spy is killing people, being reckless and chasing women. But non of this is meant to be taken literally, it is all adding to the thrill of James Bond. One of the main ways for instance is the promotion of James Bond being turned into a double o (007) or the way his incredibly expensive cars have machine guns and rockets on them. Spooks however, although it also glorifies being an intelligence agent, it does it in a very different way. To a degree Spooks is meant to be taken more literally, it has real political issues within it, it also has a bigger sense of realism. The actual truth of working for the security services, is that it will most of the time be quite boring and sometimes exciting, but to make good drama they have to glorify it. Most episodes do take they're time to get to there final goal, but it's always very intense which is what makes it good, Casino Royal turns everything into action or sexualises it.
Tuesday 1 December 2009
Monday 23 November 2009
Notes on Spooks - Series 8 Episode 3 ... Cultural Identity and what Spooks represents
Upper class
Modern and technological
Patriotic
Sophisticated
Cool
Glorified
Subtle
Secret
Political
Conspiracies (Bendorf Group, owning 75% of worlds resources)
BBC created, supposedly unbiased, however it’s views are more left wing.
Justified
The “Good Guys”
Authoritive
Power struggles
Modern and technological
Patriotic
Sophisticated
Cool
Glorified
Subtle
Secret
Political
Conspiracies (Bendorf Group, owning 75% of worlds resources)
BBC created, supposedly unbiased, however it’s views are more left wing.
Justified
The “Good Guys”
Authoritive
Power struggles
How has the internet changed our notion of ‘Collective Identity’ ?
The new media today is still a MASS audience, it is even a bigger audience than before as new technological advances keep accelerating and economies have been boosting rapidly in some parts of the world which were not up to date technologically. Such as China, India, Iran, Croatia, Cuba etc … Not only this, but Web.2.0 can be accessed nearly anywhere in the world, to get internet connectivity to your laptop now days, it is as simple as using a memory stick provided by a company such as 3. However, in terms of Britishness, the audience has also become bigger, it is actually a government objective to create ‘Digital Britain’, this is an economic, environmental and user friendly aim. This probably won’t be fully successful for some time though, as there are still too many of the older generations which are ‘Digital Immigrants’. Not all people have Computers in their home yet. The mass British audience is actually changing it’s notion of selective identity because we no longer a mass audience in terms of similarities, only in numbers. The audience is now more selective in choosing how they interpret the messages.
The internet has allowed and opened doors to an unbelievable amount of communication methods. Blogs, social networking, wiki, twitter, file sharing, online gaming, 3G, email, virtual words, video conferencing etc … Everyday people in Britain are meeting people from different cultures and identities over the internet, creating relationships with them and socialising with, often via instant messengers, online gaming or chat rooms. There are even full communities on the internet for instance, clans or guilds in online gaming, they have official websites, Teamspeak (microphone) servers, game servers and even meet up and it’s all done because of the internet. This utter freedom to connect with others in the world, is it creating all the technological advanced countries into one mass audience and are we loosing our collective identity as British people?
The internet is without a doubt changing our collective identity, the influence and connection with and to other cultures certainly is one big factor; the biggest influencer is the world super power, America. If you look just on the most basic level, Britain gets lots of their media such as their films, music, games and news before anyone else in the world, we also get there companies and corporations. Britain has even become more Americanised in the way we have now inherited ‘Litigation Culture’, every time you turn on the TV now, there are adverts asking you to sue people on a ‘No Win, No Fee Basis’. So combining the freedom of the British people to connect with other cultures, the corporations and businesses coming over from America and others countries, the idea of the American dream in so many young persons minds completely un-aware of how influenced they are by the media, and the part that the British media has to play in it such as papers like the daily mail that are full of propaganda, Britain’s Collective Identity has and is certainly changing.
Postmodernism is always a heavy influence in the change of ‘Collective Identity’. Over the last twenty years, what has become acceptable in the media and what hasn’t has rapidly changed. We now have the watershed for instance on TV, after this, almost anything can be shown on TV. But the internet has no restrictions to what can be put on it and what can be viewed at any time of the day, it is also now the biggest form of media consumption ever. The internet is by far and to such a large degree the most flexible to its content and mass audience form of Media in the world. All the new generations of people who are ‘Digital Natives’ are exposed to everything on the internet. Internet Pornography for example is readily available on the internet at any time of the day, totally free, totally legally and advertised massively. Not to mention all the adverts that are on normal websites, full of models or half naked men and women totally sexualised. The generations of ‘Digital Natives’ are totally exposed to this all the time and are influenced all there lives by it, they are even influenced when walking down the street looking at random people who are sexualised, advertisers, cars, shops and even music. I am not saying all this is totally a bad thing, I am saying that it would never have been appropriate to wear such revealing clothes for instance on an everyday basis and the internet has a massive part to play in the influence of Britain’s ideology and value streams.
“Web 2.0 isn’t a thing, it’s a state of mind” ‘Sabbah 1985” This quote by Sabbah is very true, he is saying that Britain and actually much of the world is totally reliant on the internet, it has become our infrastructure of security, economy, communication and arguably society. If the internet was to go down for even one day, it would be economically catastrophic; it would be the rise of a whole new moral panic. Teenagers or ‘Digital Natives’ are almost totally reliant on the internet as well, for communication, fun, education etc … Most teenagers spend over two hours on the internet every day, often for non-educational purposes. Over 90% of households in Britain have a games console in there household, a majority of them now connected to the internet, not to mention those that do PC gaming as well. In the last twenty years or so, books have been almost totally replaced by TV, internet and gaming. Our Notion of British ‘Collective Identity’ is now totally different and arguably non existent accept on the most basic level such as language and sport. But our values, culture and ideologies are all a big mix of America and Europe.
The internet has allowed and opened doors to an unbelievable amount of communication methods. Blogs, social networking, wiki, twitter, file sharing, online gaming, 3G, email, virtual words, video conferencing etc … Everyday people in Britain are meeting people from different cultures and identities over the internet, creating relationships with them and socialising with, often via instant messengers, online gaming or chat rooms. There are even full communities on the internet for instance, clans or guilds in online gaming, they have official websites, Teamspeak (microphone) servers, game servers and even meet up and it’s all done because of the internet. This utter freedom to connect with others in the world, is it creating all the technological advanced countries into one mass audience and are we loosing our collective identity as British people?
The internet is without a doubt changing our collective identity, the influence and connection with and to other cultures certainly is one big factor; the biggest influencer is the world super power, America. If you look just on the most basic level, Britain gets lots of their media such as their films, music, games and news before anyone else in the world, we also get there companies and corporations. Britain has even become more Americanised in the way we have now inherited ‘Litigation Culture’, every time you turn on the TV now, there are adverts asking you to sue people on a ‘No Win, No Fee Basis’. So combining the freedom of the British people to connect with other cultures, the corporations and businesses coming over from America and others countries, the idea of the American dream in so many young persons minds completely un-aware of how influenced they are by the media, and the part that the British media has to play in it such as papers like the daily mail that are full of propaganda, Britain’s Collective Identity has and is certainly changing.
Postmodernism is always a heavy influence in the change of ‘Collective Identity’. Over the last twenty years, what has become acceptable in the media and what hasn’t has rapidly changed. We now have the watershed for instance on TV, after this, almost anything can be shown on TV. But the internet has no restrictions to what can be put on it and what can be viewed at any time of the day, it is also now the biggest form of media consumption ever. The internet is by far and to such a large degree the most flexible to its content and mass audience form of Media in the world. All the new generations of people who are ‘Digital Natives’ are exposed to everything on the internet. Internet Pornography for example is readily available on the internet at any time of the day, totally free, totally legally and advertised massively. Not to mention all the adverts that are on normal websites, full of models or half naked men and women totally sexualised. The generations of ‘Digital Natives’ are totally exposed to this all the time and are influenced all there lives by it, they are even influenced when walking down the street looking at random people who are sexualised, advertisers, cars, shops and even music. I am not saying all this is totally a bad thing, I am saying that it would never have been appropriate to wear such revealing clothes for instance on an everyday basis and the internet has a massive part to play in the influence of Britain’s ideology and value streams.
“Web 2.0 isn’t a thing, it’s a state of mind” ‘Sabbah 1985” This quote by Sabbah is very true, he is saying that Britain and actually much of the world is totally reliant on the internet, it has become our infrastructure of security, economy, communication and arguably society. If the internet was to go down for even one day, it would be economically catastrophic; it would be the rise of a whole new moral panic. Teenagers or ‘Digital Natives’ are almost totally reliant on the internet as well, for communication, fun, education etc … Most teenagers spend over two hours on the internet every day, often for non-educational purposes. Over 90% of households in Britain have a games console in there household, a majority of them now connected to the internet, not to mention those that do PC gaming as well. In the last twenty years or so, books have been almost totally replaced by TV, internet and gaming. Our Notion of British ‘Collective Identity’ is now totally different and arguably non existent accept on the most basic level such as language and sport. But our values, culture and ideologies are all a big mix of America and Europe.
Tuesday 3 November 2009
Moral Panics Essay
Compare and Contrast three Case Studies. How do Moral Panics help Form or Fragment Cultural Identity ?
Moral Panic is defined as an 'Abstract concept used to make sense of Irrational Public Hysteria'. The three key words I want to focus on are irrational, public and hysteric. Moral Panics effect the whole public, which is a mass audience. When a mass audience wants to hear more about certain topics, the media will put massive amounts of effort, money and time into making sure they do hear about it, to sell more news and to charge higher rates to advertisers. They form and fragment cultural identity for the simple reason, 'Moral Panics change what is socially acceptable and what is socially feared'. For example, Paedophilia in the twenty first century is now incredibly feared and publicised. It never used to be such a big deal until one or a few very serious cases got publicised by the media turning it into a Moral Panic. It was/is irrational with news corporations giving names and pictures of sex offenders, it is feared by a mass public audience, of which the majority are hysteric about.
Within the Processual Model, stage five, six and seven describe what happens at the end of the Moral Panic. Stage five (coping and resolution) talks about leading to 'Legal Reform', this is a key part of how a Moral Panic helps form Cultural Identity. The last three stages could almost be called the 'conclusion' stage, as the panic is evaluated, action is taken to try and reduce the panic and make sure it doesn't happen again and then the legacy of it comes in. Ultimately though, it is often the government or law that governs what is acceptable. For instance, the UK has a large under age binge drinking culture, the average age to start drinking is now only twelve years old. The legal age to start drinking in the UK is eighteen, however in the USA, it is now in all states aged twenty-one and people often do not start drinking there until they are at least that age or close to it. This is partly historical but arguably down to the law, which sets what is socially acceptable and not. Not only this, but the punishments in the USA are much harsher than in the UK, acting as a much bigger deterrent . This is in many ways similar to the raves and ecstasy Moral Panic that started around 1988. At the time, there was a huge culture for very fast and upbeat music and also going out to clubs at the weekends etc ... Ecstasy and drugs for lots was a usual thing, but at the time there had been no scientific research into the effects of Ecstasy. It is very difficult to make things illegal unless there is any evidence to prove it is actually dangerous. The media at first condemned rave culture turning many youths in the eye of the British public into 'Folk Devils', not only this but they used headlines such as 'Fascade for dealing in drugs' which caused large panics. The papers really got there win when a girl called Bett's died on her eighteenth birthday because of water intoxication when she had taken ecstasy. This led to 'Legal Reform' and ecstasy becoming illegal. The legacy of this moral panic lead to massive social reform, ecstasy and raves are now seen as very socially un-accepted and a big minority of society actually do either anymore.
The Moral Panics involving Child Abuse and Paedophilia both lead to massive social reform and are both cases of Moral Panics that are still 'worried' areas of society. Unlike the HIV/AIDS Moral Panic where people have calmed down and accepted people with HIV/AIDS quite happily into society, also not being incredibly ignorant and blaming homosexuals and drug addicts for every problem, seeing homosexual as 'folk devils', the Paedophilia and Child abuse still get a moderate amount of attention. Although legal reform has been put in place, although there are incredible measures to stop the abuse of children and also intense pressure on child care services because of the 'baby P' tragedy, they still get a lot of media coverage. These are both cases of moral panics where the legacy lives on, I think this is also because parents are naturally incredibly protective over they're children and can get very easily sucked in to bad things that 'could' happen to there children. Parents will naturally ignore that the chances of this happening to they're children are actually very low as long as they're generally sensible about bringing up children, rather than being hugely over protective and condemning people left right and centre.
However, these Moral Panics are horribly blown up by the media, partly because of 'Media Entrepreneurs' (stage three in the Processual Model) which of course will start irrational panics among the public. This leads to intense pressure on politicians and governments which they really must take hard lines against these 'folk devils' as if they do not, they will be seen as useless in the eyes of the public and loose valuable votes.
Moral Panic is defined as an 'Abstract concept used to make sense of Irrational Public Hysteria'. The three key words I want to focus on are irrational, public and hysteric. Moral Panics effect the whole public, which is a mass audience. When a mass audience wants to hear more about certain topics, the media will put massive amounts of effort, money and time into making sure they do hear about it, to sell more news and to charge higher rates to advertisers. They form and fragment cultural identity for the simple reason, 'Moral Panics change what is socially acceptable and what is socially feared'. For example, Paedophilia in the twenty first century is now incredibly feared and publicised. It never used to be such a big deal until one or a few very serious cases got publicised by the media turning it into a Moral Panic. It was/is irrational with news corporations giving names and pictures of sex offenders, it is feared by a mass public audience, of which the majority are hysteric about.
Within the Processual Model, stage five, six and seven describe what happens at the end of the Moral Panic. Stage five (coping and resolution) talks about leading to 'Legal Reform', this is a key part of how a Moral Panic helps form Cultural Identity. The last three stages could almost be called the 'conclusion' stage, as the panic is evaluated, action is taken to try and reduce the panic and make sure it doesn't happen again and then the legacy of it comes in. Ultimately though, it is often the government or law that governs what is acceptable. For instance, the UK has a large under age binge drinking culture, the average age to start drinking is now only twelve years old. The legal age to start drinking in the UK is eighteen, however in the USA, it is now in all states aged twenty-one and people often do not start drinking there until they are at least that age or close to it. This is partly historical but arguably down to the law, which sets what is socially acceptable and not. Not only this, but the punishments in the USA are much harsher than in the UK, acting as a much bigger deterrent . This is in many ways similar to the raves and ecstasy Moral Panic that started around 1988. At the time, there was a huge culture for very fast and upbeat music and also going out to clubs at the weekends etc ... Ecstasy and drugs for lots was a usual thing, but at the time there had been no scientific research into the effects of Ecstasy. It is very difficult to make things illegal unless there is any evidence to prove it is actually dangerous. The media at first condemned rave culture turning many youths in the eye of the British public into 'Folk Devils', not only this but they used headlines such as 'Fascade for dealing in drugs' which caused large panics. The papers really got there win when a girl called Bett's died on her eighteenth birthday because of water intoxication when she had taken ecstasy. This led to 'Legal Reform' and ecstasy becoming illegal. The legacy of this moral panic lead to massive social reform, ecstasy and raves are now seen as very socially un-accepted and a big minority of society actually do either anymore.
The Moral Panics involving Child Abuse and Paedophilia both lead to massive social reform and are both cases of Moral Panics that are still 'worried' areas of society. Unlike the HIV/AIDS Moral Panic where people have calmed down and accepted people with HIV/AIDS quite happily into society, also not being incredibly ignorant and blaming homosexuals and drug addicts for every problem, seeing homosexual as 'folk devils', the Paedophilia and Child abuse still get a moderate amount of attention. Although legal reform has been put in place, although there are incredible measures to stop the abuse of children and also intense pressure on child care services because of the 'baby P' tragedy, they still get a lot of media coverage. These are both cases of moral panics where the legacy lives on, I think this is also because parents are naturally incredibly protective over they're children and can get very easily sucked in to bad things that 'could' happen to there children. Parents will naturally ignore that the chances of this happening to they're children are actually very low as long as they're generally sensible about bringing up children, rather than being hugely over protective and condemning people left right and centre.
However, these Moral Panics are horribly blown up by the media, partly because of 'Media Entrepreneurs' (stage three in the Processual Model) which of course will start irrational panics among the public. This leads to intense pressure on politicians and governments which they really must take hard lines against these 'folk devils' as if they do not, they will be seen as useless in the eyes of the public and loose valuable votes.
Thursday 22 October 2009
Tuesday 20 October 2009
Thursday 15 October 2009
Moral Panic's
Moral Panic - (Abstract concept used to make sense of 'Irrational Public Hysteria' - e.g. Paedophilia)
- Public and academic debate on moral panic works on the assumption that the media plays a significant role in determining the charactersistics of a moral panic.
-Signifies complex processes that shape public perceptions of a perceived threat to the moral case of society.
Processual Model:
A hends to process of moral panic, it has 7 defined stages...
-Emergence
-Media Inventry : Explanation of threat is manipulated by the media
-Media Entrepeneus: Groups of organisations speak out offering solutions
-Experts: Socially acredited experts who diagnose solutions
-Coping and resolution: retain to media and moral entrepeneus leads to legal reform.
-Fading away - Condition disappears, submerges, detiorates or becomes more visible
-Legacy - a moral panic have a long term effect and created big changes in social policy, the law, or society's views on it's self.
Attribution Model:
Claims those working in the media, politcal institutions of the legal system impact on the moral panics through 'claims making'
-5 Elements or Critera distinguish attributes of moral panics.
-Concern - a heightened level of convern, measurable through oponion polls etc ...
-Hostility - Increased hostility to a group or category - seen as 'enemy', to the rest of 'responsible' society.
-Consensus - a substantial segmant of society, agrees that the threat is real or caused by 'wrong dooers'.
-Disproportionality - The reaction by the public is out of proportion of the actual harm.
-Volatile - the idea that moral panics are volatile by nature, erupt quickly, but also often subside quickly. Each episode cannot be sustained for long.
- Public and academic debate on moral panic works on the assumption that the media plays a significant role in determining the charactersistics of a moral panic.
-Signifies complex processes that shape public perceptions of a perceived threat to the moral case of society.
Processual Model:
A hends to process of moral panic, it has 7 defined stages...
-Emergence
-Media Inventry : Explanation of threat is manipulated by the media
-Media Entrepeneus: Groups of organisations speak out offering solutions
-Experts: Socially acredited experts who diagnose solutions
-Coping and resolution: retain to media and moral entrepeneus leads to legal reform.
-Fading away - Condition disappears, submerges, detiorates or becomes more visible
-Legacy - a moral panic have a long term effect and created big changes in social policy, the law, or society's views on it's self.
Attribution Model:
Claims those working in the media, politcal institutions of the legal system impact on the moral panics through 'claims making'
-5 Elements or Critera distinguish attributes of moral panics.
-Concern - a heightened level of convern, measurable through oponion polls etc ...
-Hostility - Increased hostility to a group or category - seen as 'enemy', to the rest of 'responsible' society.
-Consensus - a substantial segmant of society, agrees that the threat is real or caused by 'wrong dooers'.
-Disproportionality - The reaction by the public is out of proportion of the actual harm.
-Volatile - the idea that moral panics are volatile by nature, erupt quickly, but also often subside quickly. Each episode cannot be sustained for long.
Sunday 20 September 2009
Sense and Sensibility and Four Weddings and a Funeral – Britishness
Both Sense and Sensibility and Four Weddings and a Funeral both have lots of elements of Britishness that makes them very British films, but they are British in two totally different ways. The largest difference of Britishness is the timeline these films are set in. Four Weddings and a Funeral was set in the very late nineties, while Sense and Sensibility was set over a hundred years ago still in the time when women had absolutely no power compared to the men. However they still have similarities in some respects, such as the actors they use (Hugh Grant is in both films), the morals that the films are showing and the way that both are sending out political messages which were relevant to the times that they were filmed in. For instance, Sense and Sensibility was actually a book before a film written by Jane Austin. She used the book to show about the in-equality women have in society in Britain and she could of been also been saying something about the greed that people have for money and status by using the character fanny. In a similar way, Four Weddings and a Funeral have been thought to send out a political message about British society and what marriage means to people today. One of the characters in it talks of how people get married when they have nothing else to say to each other in a relationship, which although is moralistically wrong and a very post modernist thing to say as well as totally stereotyping, it has certain elements of truth within it. It is saying that people don’t need to get married to have a healthy relationship and getting married won’t make you happy. The interesting contrast is that in Sense and Sensibility, the thing that makes them all so happy is when they do all get married, but this could also be interpreted as the only way for the women to escape from what they have is to get married.
The traditional thoughts of what is Britishness within a film is usually rough, gritty, violent, cockney etc ... The majority of most famous British films have been those types of films such as Trainspotting, This is England, Snatch etc ... However with Sense and Sensibility and Four Weddings and a Funeral, they are British but at the other end of the spectrum. Much more of the middle / upper class area, where the most common British films are usually to do with social drama’s in the working class or underground cockney thug type films. The way these films maintain so much Britishness is a lot because of British actors, directors, authors, filmed in Britain and actually both films use a lot of the British countryside to set their scenes in, this for both films is using Mise En Scene but for different reasons. Sense and Sensibility is using the countryside filming because that’s the way people think of Britain over a hundred years ago, Britain was very much a more rural place. With Four Weddings and a Funeral it is because the British countryside is still very much associated with the upper classes which is where a lot of these weddings took place as they were being paid for by the more affluent member of society. It’s very interesting how in Four Weddings and a Funeral the way they send their message across to some degree is by using comedy. All the characters are very childish, but also using actors like Rowan Atkinson (Mr Bean) for a priest which is a very serious position in the church and very highly thought of, and turning the whole thing of marriage into a joke, shows that people do not always take it seriously these days and the point of it has to some degree gone away.
The ways the films are filmed are very different. Sense and Sensibility is quite a dark film because actually so many of the scenes are sort of negative scenes, they are very sympathetic scenes. Fanny, a character who is thoroughly disliked is not only wearing black lots of the time, but she is often also in dark scenes, or the lighting won’t be on her as much as it is on the other characters. But when Edward is playing with swords in the garden and also chatting to one of the young ladies in the library, the scenes are much lighter and happier. This is very different to Four Weddings and a Funeral as most of the scenes are bright, fast and upbeat. This is partly because it’s much more of a comedy film so it has to be, but it uses sounds much more than Sense and Sensibility to show the emotions of the characters. For instance when Hugh Grant is talking to the girl of his dreams when they bump into each other by accident, it’s the sound that makes the audience so in touch with the feelings of Hugh Grant.
The traditional thoughts of what is Britishness within a film is usually rough, gritty, violent, cockney etc ... The majority of most famous British films have been those types of films such as Trainspotting, This is England, Snatch etc ... However with Sense and Sensibility and Four Weddings and a Funeral, they are British but at the other end of the spectrum. Much more of the middle / upper class area, where the most common British films are usually to do with social drama’s in the working class or underground cockney thug type films. The way these films maintain so much Britishness is a lot because of British actors, directors, authors, filmed in Britain and actually both films use a lot of the British countryside to set their scenes in, this for both films is using Mise En Scene but for different reasons. Sense and Sensibility is using the countryside filming because that’s the way people think of Britain over a hundred years ago, Britain was very much a more rural place. With Four Weddings and a Funeral it is because the British countryside is still very much associated with the upper classes which is where a lot of these weddings took place as they were being paid for by the more affluent member of society. It’s very interesting how in Four Weddings and a Funeral the way they send their message across to some degree is by using comedy. All the characters are very childish, but also using actors like Rowan Atkinson (Mr Bean) for a priest which is a very serious position in the church and very highly thought of, and turning the whole thing of marriage into a joke, shows that people do not always take it seriously these days and the point of it has to some degree gone away.
The ways the films are filmed are very different. Sense and Sensibility is quite a dark film because actually so many of the scenes are sort of negative scenes, they are very sympathetic scenes. Fanny, a character who is thoroughly disliked is not only wearing black lots of the time, but she is often also in dark scenes, or the lighting won’t be on her as much as it is on the other characters. But when Edward is playing with swords in the garden and also chatting to one of the young ladies in the library, the scenes are much lighter and happier. This is very different to Four Weddings and a Funeral as most of the scenes are bright, fast and upbeat. This is partly because it’s much more of a comedy film so it has to be, but it uses sounds much more than Sense and Sensibility to show the emotions of the characters. For instance when Hugh Grant is talking to the girl of his dreams when they bump into each other by accident, it’s the sound that makes the audience so in touch with the feelings of Hugh Grant.
Slumdog Millionaire and Somerstown
Slumdog Millionaire and Somerstown
Slumdog Millionaire
Directed by Danny Boyle Written by Simon Beaufoy
Starring
Dev Patel
Freida Pinto
Madhur Mittal
Anil Kapoor
Ayush Mahesh Khedekar
Tanay Chheda
Rubina Ali
Tanvi Ganesh Lonkar
Azharuddin Mohammed Ismail
Ashutosh Lobo Gajiwala
Country United Kingdom
Language – English - Hindi
Budget $15.1 million Gross revenue $360,032,690
Somerstown
Directed by Shane Meadows
Written by Paul Fraser
Starring Thomas Turgoose
Country United Kingdom
Language English
Low Budget
The two films have both been classed as British, but for different reasons. Somerstown is much more ‘obviously” and ‘out there/in your face’ British than Slumdog Millionaire. This is mainly because of the setting of the film and the actors nearly all being British, it being set in London on a low budget. I quote the telegraphg review “At barely 70 minutes, it's the length of a B-movie or the low-budget, low-quality "quota quickies" churned out during the 1930s”. It shows all the elements of a classic British film such as the grittyness. It is also done a very “classic” British thing, where it is a low budgeted film that has done so well partly because of it’s low Budget, much like ‘This is England’. Slumdog Millionaire has created some controversy over if it is actually British or not. It wasnt filmed in Britian and it isn’t about British society. However it still has lots of elements of Britishness in it, although it wasnt filmed in Britian, it was filmed in another ‘gritty’ atmosphere, it still remains in British morals, it was funded by British institutions like channel 4, it has British actors and Directors and it is even based around a indian version of a British show (who wants to be a millionaire). I think that Somerstown would be classed as a lot more British than Slumdog Millionaire, but they both can be highly classed as British films. Just Slumdog Millionaire being a less classic conventional British film like Somerstown is.
Slumdog Millionaire
Directed by Danny Boyle Written by Simon Beaufoy
Starring
Dev Patel
Freida Pinto
Madhur Mittal
Anil Kapoor
Ayush Mahesh Khedekar
Tanay Chheda
Rubina Ali
Tanvi Ganesh Lonkar
Azharuddin Mohammed Ismail
Ashutosh Lobo Gajiwala
Country United Kingdom
Language – English - Hindi
Budget $15.1 million Gross revenue $360,032,690
Somerstown
Directed by Shane Meadows
Written by Paul Fraser
Starring Thomas Turgoose
Country United Kingdom
Language English
Low Budget
The two films have both been classed as British, but for different reasons. Somerstown is much more ‘obviously” and ‘out there/in your face’ British than Slumdog Millionaire. This is mainly because of the setting of the film and the actors nearly all being British, it being set in London on a low budget. I quote the telegraphg review “At barely 70 minutes, it's the length of a B-movie or the low-budget, low-quality "quota quickies" churned out during the 1930s”. It shows all the elements of a classic British film such as the grittyness. It is also done a very “classic” British thing, where it is a low budgeted film that has done so well partly because of it’s low Budget, much like ‘This is England’. Slumdog Millionaire has created some controversy over if it is actually British or not. It wasnt filmed in Britian and it isn’t about British society. However it still has lots of elements of Britishness in it, although it wasnt filmed in Britian, it was filmed in another ‘gritty’ atmosphere, it still remains in British morals, it was funded by British institutions like channel 4, it has British actors and Directors and it is even based around a indian version of a British show (who wants to be a millionaire). I think that Somerstown would be classed as a lot more British than Slumdog Millionaire, but they both can be highly classed as British films. Just Slumdog Millionaire being a less classic conventional British film like Somerstown is.
Tuesday 15 September 2009
3 Article's and my brief Interpretations
Contemporary Britian
This article discusses several era’s and decades of British film and social realism. It points out a lot about social realism in British cinema such as Billy Elliot and The Full Monty and talks about the impact these types of films have on our society. It points out the influences these films have on people and the way that they take in the information. For example in This is England, the film points out about hooliganism and racist Britian, but this could have a very negative impact on some people’s minds making them take it to literally.
Media Pleasure
This article talks about the way that people interpret media information differently. The three different types of reading that people can do by doing the preferred reading, opposite reading or in-between. It talks about how people like to escape from reality using media content such as film, video gaming and reading. This is called Escapism. Escapism can become very addictive, however video gaming is proven to be the far most addictive form of escapism. They use it as a sense of relaxation much like smokers may use a cigarette to relax.
Richard Curtis Article
The article talks about how films can be very political and represent political ideologies. It says a lot of films have subtle things in them that can denote certain ideologies that are often to do with things that are happening in the present. Such as Love actually in 2003. The prime minister in Love Actually is a sweeter and shallower prime minister than Tony Blair actually was. He calls the US president a bully and suggests that love is the answer to the horror of 9/11. It talks about how these film techniques have been using in the present but also lots in the time of Margaret Thatcher for instance, E.g. Billy Elliot.
This article discusses several era’s and decades of British film and social realism. It points out a lot about social realism in British cinema such as Billy Elliot and The Full Monty and talks about the impact these types of films have on our society. It points out the influences these films have on people and the way that they take in the information. For example in This is England, the film points out about hooliganism and racist Britian, but this could have a very negative impact on some people’s minds making them take it to literally.
Media Pleasure
This article talks about the way that people interpret media information differently. The three different types of reading that people can do by doing the preferred reading, opposite reading or in-between. It talks about how people like to escape from reality using media content such as film, video gaming and reading. This is called Escapism. Escapism can become very addictive, however video gaming is proven to be the far most addictive form of escapism. They use it as a sense of relaxation much like smokers may use a cigarette to relax.
Richard Curtis Article
The article talks about how films can be very political and represent political ideologies. It says a lot of films have subtle things in them that can denote certain ideologies that are often to do with things that are happening in the present. Such as Love actually in 2003. The prime minister in Love Actually is a sweeter and shallower prime minister than Tony Blair actually was. He calls the US president a bully and suggests that love is the answer to the horror of 9/11. It talks about how these film techniques have been using in the present but also lots in the time of Margaret Thatcher for instance, E.g. Billy Elliot.
Tuesday 8 September 2009
Year 13 Film Project Proposal - Four's a Crowd
Documentary / comedy film about kids – Four’s a Crowd
Four teenagers (18 yrs old) studying at 6 form. Live together a non care free life. However, two of them meet girls. This leads to two of the four boys beginning to change their lives. As the plot progresses we have interview’s with the characters. All the characters are sarcastic and laid back individuals.
Three main points in the story.
The four guys lives are shown to the audience, the documentary team go into there gritty house and see what they do in there every day lives. It starts off with them just on a Saturday day and shows what they do on it. Smoke, giggle, mong, eat, smoke, do the dishes and sleep.
Audience see the four meetings these two girls. Two of the guys are interested, two are not, we see them getting along really well, but the guys are clearly in-experienced and kind of loosers, but the girls like this about them.
The two who are un-interested are still doing the same thing. The other two, one of the girls has cheated on him and he begins to set back into his old life. While the other moves out and sorts out his life still with this girl.
Pitch
The IGC Foundation Research Corporation are looking into the lives of four boarder lined average A2 students in Oxford, who attempt to live on there own with only money from their part time work and government support. One of them claims disability benefits for an allegedly paralyzed right arm. However the IGC camera crew will follow there lives over the period of one month, if there is one chance to make a mends on there lives, this is it, will they make it or will they break it?
Values and Ideologies
Coming of age. Learning the value of money. Maturing. Not wasting opportunities that arise. Relationships. Fraud. 6th form environment. Friendship. Zero to Hero.
Four teenagers (18 yrs old) studying at 6 form. Live together a non care free life. However, two of them meet girls. This leads to two of the four boys beginning to change their lives. As the plot progresses we have interview’s with the characters. All the characters are sarcastic and laid back individuals.
Three main points in the story.
The four guys lives are shown to the audience, the documentary team go into there gritty house and see what they do in there every day lives. It starts off with them just on a Saturday day and shows what they do on it. Smoke, giggle, mong, eat, smoke, do the dishes and sleep.
Audience see the four meetings these two girls. Two of the guys are interested, two are not, we see them getting along really well, but the guys are clearly in-experienced and kind of loosers, but the girls like this about them.
The two who are un-interested are still doing the same thing. The other two, one of the girls has cheated on him and he begins to set back into his old life. While the other moves out and sorts out his life still with this girl.
Pitch
The IGC Foundation Research Corporation are looking into the lives of four boarder lined average A2 students in Oxford, who attempt to live on there own with only money from their part time work and government support. One of them claims disability benefits for an allegedly paralyzed right arm. However the IGC camera crew will follow there lives over the period of one month, if there is one chance to make a mends on there lives, this is it, will they make it or will they break it?
Values and Ideologies
Coming of age. Learning the value of money. Maturing. Not wasting opportunities that arise. Relationships. Fraud. 6th form environment. Friendship. Zero to Hero.
Director of Rock'N'Rolla
Guy Stuart Ritchie
10 September 1968 (age 40)
Hatfield, Hertfordshire, England Occupation Filmmaker, Screenwriter Years active 1995–present
Other films
RockNRolla
Suspect
Revolver
Swept Away
Star
Snatch
Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels
The Hard Case
10 September 1968 (age 40)
Hatfield, Hertfordshire, England Occupation Filmmaker, Screenwriter Years active 1995–present
Other films
RockNRolla
Suspect
Revolver
Swept Away
Star
Snatch
Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels
The Hard Case
Monday 13 July 2009
Micheal Caine
Maurice Joseph Micklewhite in South London 1933. He left Wilson's Grammar school to be an office boy for Peak Films. Michael hoped to be discovered with his next job which was with 'The J Arthur Rank organization' which was a huge company at the time. Michael joined National Service and served in Korea and Germany. After 2 years service he worked at Westminster repertory in sussex and then Lowestoft Repertory where he met his wife.Michael and Patricia moved to London to pursue their acting dreams, however it proved difficult and patricia fell pregnant. They moved back to Patricias family home, and michael's dad passed away.Michael left fro Paris to sort his self out and worked in a snack bar, he then returned home after a short while.He gained a part in 'A Hill In Korea' but it was not a success and he was forced to find a new agent.He played a part in 'The Chimes' Charles Dickens in the East End theatre and a few other plays on TV.Michaels determination grew stronger after he was told to give acting up by the Chief Casting Director of Associated British Films.He starred in more than 100 films and has been awarded the Academy Award in every decade since the 1960's. The Italian Job and Get Carter have been huge success's for Caine and his recent work included part in Batman, Alfie and Children Of Men.
Caine has been Oscar-nominated six times, winning his first Academy Award for the 1986 film Hannah and Her Sisters, and his second in 1999 for The Cider House Rules, in both cases as a supporting actor. Caine is one of only two actors to be nominated for an Academy Award for acting (either lead or supporting) in every decade since the 1960s. The other is Jack Nicholson.
He was appointed Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE) in the 1992 Queen's Birthday Honours, and in the 2000 New Year Honours he was knighted as Sir Maurice Micklewhite, CBE. (Such awards must be conferred upon recipients' legal names, and Caine had not yet abandoned his birth name.)In 2008, he was awarded the prize for Outstanding Contribution to Showbusiness at the Variety Club Awards
Caine has been Oscar-nominated six times, winning his first Academy Award for the 1986 film Hannah and Her Sisters, and his second in 1999 for The Cider House Rules, in both cases as a supporting actor. Caine is one of only two actors to be nominated for an Academy Award for acting (either lead or supporting) in every decade since the 1960s. The other is Jack Nicholson.
He was appointed Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE) in the 1992 Queen's Birthday Honours, and in the 2000 New Year Honours he was knighted as Sir Maurice Micklewhite, CBE. (Such awards must be conferred upon recipients' legal names, and Caine had not yet abandoned his birth name.)In 2008, he was awarded the prize for Outstanding Contribution to Showbusiness at the Variety Club Awards
What defines to me as A British Film.
I define British film as, a film that contains lots of elements, settings, moralistic and ideloistic of British society. It doesn't matter for me if the film has a British director and British actors, as long as it still has British elements like the grittyness or cockney accents. However, the best British films are nearly always done by British directors and British actors which in some way makes the film "more" British, but I think only out of pride and realism.
Working Title
Working Title
What’s its role in British Film?
Gave significant to british film makers to help them create the best possible films.
5 films have been produced by working title?
Ali G in the house
Billy Elliot
Love actually
Notting Hill
Wimbledon
British Film Websites
British film websites help the director and production team sell the british theme in the film. The website designers do this by the use of images, font, colours and language used.
Three websites our group found which we thought were effective in representing britishness;
Three websites our group found which we thought were effective in representing britishness;
- The Bank Job (2008) -http://www.bankjobmovie.co.uk/
- This Is England - http://www.thisisenglandmovie.co.uk/
- Kidulthood- http://www.kidulthood.co.uk/
Teaser Trailer
A "Teaser Trailer" is a usually short film trailer which "Teases" the audience by showing them small clips of the film. It is intended to draw people in and make them want to watch the full movie. It usually gives an idea about the story line and sometimes ends in a 'cliff hanger' type of way so that the audience are drawn in even more.
Below are a few examples of which me and my group thought were effective "teaser trailers"
28 Days Later (2002)
This trailer is effective because its completly diffrent to conventional trailers. The clinical diffrence between this trailer and conventional trailers are that they dont follow the known tradition of having an narrator. Instead this trailer uses powerful rethorical phrases which has many polysemic meanings which the audience what answers to0.
This Is England (2006)
This trailer is completly diffrent to the methood to the one used by 28 days. This is because the main methood to assist the audience is the use of music. The director uses non digetic music and i belive that it makes the teaser trariler more effective because through the music the audience can see the diffrent stages of the film being represented. In addition to this the clips of england at the time being represented appeals to the audience as it shows its going to be an historical film. the section where the character says "put your hands off him now!" this quickly shows the audience that the film is grity and violent.
Run Fat Boy Run (2007)
Run Fat Boy Run movie trailer
Run Fat Boy uses a narrator which helps the audience have some context and information about the plot. This works well in the teaser trailer because it helps raises reasonable questions towards the plot of the storyline. . The film clips are picked effectivly as all the clips are humourous which is what the director spefically does to sell the genre of the film across to the audience.
Below are a few examples of which me and my group thought were effective "teaser trailers"
28 Days Later (2002)
This trailer is effective because its completly diffrent to conventional trailers. The clinical diffrence between this trailer and conventional trailers are that they dont follow the known tradition of having an narrator. Instead this trailer uses powerful rethorical phrases which has many polysemic meanings which the audience what answers to0.
This Is England (2006)
This trailer is completly diffrent to the methood to the one used by 28 days. This is because the main methood to assist the audience is the use of music. The director uses non digetic music and i belive that it makes the teaser trariler more effective because through the music the audience can see the diffrent stages of the film being represented. In addition to this the clips of england at the time being represented appeals to the audience as it shows its going to be an historical film. the section where the character says "put your hands off him now!" this quickly shows the audience that the film is grity and violent.
Run Fat Boy Run (2007)
Run Fat Boy Run movie trailer
Run Fat Boy uses a narrator which helps the audience have some context and information about the plot. This works well in the teaser trailer because it helps raises reasonable questions towards the plot of the storyline. . The film clips are picked effectivly as all the clips are humourous which is what the director spefically does to sell the genre of the film across to the audience.
Tuesday 10 March 2009
Monday 2 February 2009
Thursday 15 January 2009
Project Log
15/01/09
For the last three lessons since I have been back from my Christmas Break, I have mostly been brushing up on small details within our film. I have been finding other sources of music as we believe that we may have a copyright issue, changing small details in the editing to ensure it is most professional and as we only have two minutes, it also makes sure we use that time wisely. This Lesson Me and Glen Waine another member of my group have been confirming the music that we are going to use instead of the music we already have on top of our film.
02/02/09
The last three lessons have varied a lot. Three lessons ago I began to remake my storyboard by taking full screen screenshots of our film on youtube. It is nearly finished and will finish it in my own time. Last lesson I helped a lot of groups with editing thier films as I have progressed very quickly with the knowledge of the mac editing software called I-Movie. Today I have sorting out my blogg such as up loading my film and deleting posts which are now irrelivent as we are re-doing our storyboard. For the next hour of this lesson as it is a two hour lesson, we will watch and evaluate all the other groups films and see what could be done to improve ours.
15/06/09
Today was my first lesson into A2s. Ms Baird outlined the course and we learnt about British films.
30/06/09
Today we watched 1/3 of the 1969 Italian job and evaluated it. Thinking about the era that it was created and representation of the characters.
09/09/09
Today was my first lesson back from the summer holidays and my first lesson in year 13. Today we have been simply updating our blogs and doing whatever we need to do to them. I sorted out things to do with teaser trailers and British film.
17/09/09
Today we talked about, learned and discussed what 'Collective Identity' is and specifically it's relation with 'Britishness'. We watched a 10 minute scene from Both 'Sense and Sensability' and also 'Four weddings and a funeral'
For the last three lessons since I have been back from my Christmas Break, I have mostly been brushing up on small details within our film. I have been finding other sources of music as we believe that we may have a copyright issue, changing small details in the editing to ensure it is most professional and as we only have two minutes, it also makes sure we use that time wisely. This Lesson Me and Glen Waine another member of my group have been confirming the music that we are going to use instead of the music we already have on top of our film.
02/02/09
The last three lessons have varied a lot. Three lessons ago I began to remake my storyboard by taking full screen screenshots of our film on youtube. It is nearly finished and will finish it in my own time. Last lesson I helped a lot of groups with editing thier films as I have progressed very quickly with the knowledge of the mac editing software called I-Movie. Today I have sorting out my blogg such as up loading my film and deleting posts which are now irrelivent as we are re-doing our storyboard. For the next hour of this lesson as it is a two hour lesson, we will watch and evaluate all the other groups films and see what could be done to improve ours.
15/06/09
Today was my first lesson into A2s. Ms Baird outlined the course and we learnt about British films.
30/06/09
Today we watched 1/3 of the 1969 Italian job and evaluated it. Thinking about the era that it was created and representation of the characters.
09/09/09
Today was my first lesson back from the summer holidays and my first lesson in year 13. Today we have been simply updating our blogs and doing whatever we need to do to them. I sorted out things to do with teaser trailers and British film.
17/09/09
Today we talked about, learned and discussed what 'Collective Identity' is and specifically it's relation with 'Britishness'. We watched a 10 minute scene from Both 'Sense and Sensability' and also 'Four weddings and a funeral'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)