In this extract, camera angles are used to show which character is superior or inferior to the other during an exchange. For example, when the young girl and the man are arguing, an over the shoulder shot is used, looking up at the man and down at the girl. This shows that despite what they are saying and the fact that he is already physically bigger than her, his age gives him authority as he is looking down on her.
In regards to sound, a majority of the extract contains country music to match its surrounding, however when the teenagers are shown in the clips, the music becomes more tense. One time this happens is when the girl is in her room about to run away. This is a huge contrast to the sounds used only seconds later when the men are working. This shows that the adults are stable and almost happy with their lives and surroundings whilst the teenagers are unstable and are creating drama or trouble between or for themselves.
For example, when the young girl and boy are having an exchange at 0.18, the music changes to something more intense.
The cutting of certain events when it comes to the teenagers, shows that the worst is expected of them and that they are unreliable. Two examples when this happens is between the time the girl gets in the car and crashes because the crash is not shown but the audience is prepared for it because of how she handles the car before she begins to drive. Her inexperience shows her immaturity and age because she is trying to imitate something that adults do but fails.
Another time when this happens is when the girl and the man of the house argue and she runs away. It doesn't show her running away, but we see her leaving stuff on the bed and looking into the mirror before leaving through the window indicating that she left through it. What the editing does is represent the unreliability and mystery behind what the younger characters do and how they react to certain situations. This is a contrast between the scene in the office between the girls head teacher and the man of the house. The conversation is clear and the issue is dealt with in a mature manner.
Where the extract is set is in a countryside. The adults fit in well with this background in their denim jackets and rugged dirty work clothes, however the younger characters are wearing a more generic form of clothing worn by most teenagers e.g. jeans and hoodies. The younger characters do not look like they 'belong' in regards to their surroundings, in what they wear and also with what they do as they are doing jobs such as sweeping and driving to places etc. They aren't working with the adults and doing what they are which shows the divide between the two generations.
Another time where mise-en-scene indicates someones age is in the girls bedroom where there is a lot of pink, a messy dressing table and photos stuck onto the mirror. In contrast to this, the mans study along with what is shown of the rest of the house is very grand and in dark colours with rich textures and what generally looks more serious and neat to suit the liking of an adult.
Between the man and the headmaster, the clothing worn also shows the difference between a middle aged and older man as one is in work clothes whilst the other is in more smart attire, clean clothes, tie on, and in pastel colours often associated with elderly people.
In conclusion, the main age differences represented are between teenagers and adults, however there are elements of age differences shown between middle aged adults and older ones. The mise-en-scene, I believe has attributed to representing age the most and the elements used such as the acting itself, e.g. when the young boy shouts "sixteen!" in an exaggerated manner and when the girl shouts 'I HATE YOU!". This is what is usually expected of people their age and other features such as what they are wearing and their posture for instance add to all of this.
Wednesday, 22 February 2012
Notes- Exam Practise 'Monarch of the Glen'
Camera
- girl looking up to man- over the shoulder shot. shows power and who's older.
- man looking down at girl, makes her look inferior.
- music is mostly country music and that which represents sadness.
- around adults it is country- they fit in in their surroundings, whilst the younger characters are shown using more tense music.
- didn't have to wait for girl to crash- didn't actually show her crashing but you know its going to happen. inexperienced driver. teenagers and how the worst is expected from them- or waiting to happen.
- when she runs away the same thing happens- nothing is shown but is expected of her.
- the girls bedroom is the stereotypical pink with teddy bears etc. shows the difference between her room and the rest of the house which is wooden and huge like the office of the man.
- the clothes they wear- adults in dirty, worn out looking clothes which suit the farm like environment whilst the teenagers look like city kids to an extent and aren't in the same attire- this shows age because adults adapt to environment whilst the younger characters are all the same even when their in these different environments.
- girls hand writing on cars on the bed- love hearts and swirly writing usually done by younger people.
- the father and the old man- difference in clothing, one in work clothes and one in a smart outfit.
Wednesday, 8 February 2012
'MONSTERS'- Marketing, Awards & Reviews.
Gross
Total Lifetime Grosses
Domestic: | $237,301 | 5.6% |
+ Foreign: | $4,005,677 | 94.4% |
= Worldwide: | $4,242,978 |
Marketing
In the weeks leading up to the UK release date of 3 December 2010 a marketing campaign using social network Foursquare was announced.
As well as this, Vue Entertainment and Cineworld Cinemas set up 'infected locations' which gave users access to exclusive Monsters content and the chance to win random on-the-spot prizes. Many fans turned up for this and the unique marketing strategy was appealing.
Awards
Monsters was nominated for six British Independent Film Awards, including Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Actor, and eventually won the Best Director, Best Technical Achievement, and Best Achievement in Production awards.At the 2011 BAFTAs, Monsters was nominated for Outstanding Debut by a British Director, but ultimately lost to Four Lions. It won Best Independent Movie at the 2011 Scream Awards, and was nominated for Best Science Fiction Movie but it lost to Super 8.
Reviews
Here are a range of reviews from a range of people, from different countries, and status within the film industry.
'MONSTERS' - The Budget.
The film was made using a budget of $15,000 which was basically the cost of the equipment. This didn't include the crew/casts wages and flights or hotel rooms which totalled to just under $500,000. There was a lot of media speculation (mostly online) and disbelief once the film became more popular as hollywood movies which 'MONSTERS' was deemed as on par with, usually cost hundreds of thousands, if not millions of pounds.
Gareth Edwards, the director, mentioned during the production process of the film that having to much time or money to perfect scenes and put every minute detail in place, made films look unrealistic at times and this is something he didn't want to do.
Even with the special effects and CGI, they wanted all of the signs to look as realistic as possible whilst not making the actual monster too weird so that the audience could slightly recognise elements of it and see its resemblance to squid/octopus/crab.
\\\
'MONSTERS' Film Notes (Independent/Low budget)
'Monsters' is a low budget, independent movie that consisted of a crew/cast of 7 people in total. They wanted to explore how they could make a hollywood movie using modern technology that they could have in their bedrooms and carry around with them on location. It took a lot of hard work and dedication from all of them to fulfil the 'vision' that they had. Allan Niblo and James Richardson of Vertigo Films worked as producers on the production.
- 3D visual effects were done on a very low budget, so the producers were curious to see if the director and crew could pull the idea for the film on with such amateur equipment. They had a limited amount of equipment and a lot of what they filmed was on a small camera that isn't usually used by professionals.
- The film was basically made up as they explored 6 countries. The crew and actors worked with what they had and improvised throughout the whole process. They would find settings that they thought would fit into the film and start filming. By doing this, they ended up with around a hundred hours of footage that the two man editing team had to sift through to edit it into a one and a half hour sequence.
- They cast/crew had a brief idea but no set script or scenes planned for the film. Even the vision of the 'monster' was being drawn up as they filmed, and there were dozens of ideas as to what it should look like and how realistic or close to nature it should look so that the audience can almost familiarise themselves with it.
- The actors had to pretend that there was something there and react to it as realistically as possible which in the making, they said was extremely difficult, however the director never described the creature in too much depth.
- Computer generated imagery (CGI) is not as easy as it looks according to the crew. Director had a vision and the producers trusted this even though there wasn't much pre-production done in relation to scripting etc.
- When signs were needed in the films e.g. 'infected zone' were all done on computer rather than making signs and taking them on location. This saved them money and as the director had the experience to do this effectively, he put his skills to use.
- They couldn't be in the same place for too long so they effectively had to get the scene done in one shot or near enough that without detailed instructions on what to do.
- 3D visual effects were done on a very low budget, so the producers were curious to see if the director and crew could pull the idea for the film on with such amateur equipment. They had a limited amount of equipment and a lot of what they filmed was on a small camera that isn't usually used by professionals.
- The film was basically made up as they explored 6 countries. The crew and actors worked with what they had and improvised throughout the whole process. They would find settings that they thought would fit into the film and start filming. By doing this, they ended up with around a hundred hours of footage that the two man editing team had to sift through to edit it into a one and a half hour sequence.
- They cast/crew had a brief idea but no set script or scenes planned for the film. Even the vision of the 'monster' was being drawn up as they filmed, and there were dozens of ideas as to what it should look like and how realistic or close to nature it should look so that the audience can almost familiarise themselves with it.
- The actors had to pretend that there was something there and react to it as realistically as possible which in the making, they said was extremely difficult, however the director never described the creature in too much depth.
- Computer generated imagery (CGI) is not as easy as it looks according to the crew. Director had a vision and the producers trusted this even though there wasn't much pre-production done in relation to scripting etc.
- When signs were needed in the films e.g. 'infected zone' were all done on computer rather than making signs and taking them on location. This saved them money and as the director had the experience to do this effectively, he put his skills to use.
- They couldn't be in the same place for too long so they effectively had to get the scene done in one shot or near enough that without detailed instructions on what to do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)