Harry Potter - Assignment 4

Harry Potter is one of them films that as soon as you mention the name people know what you're talking about, these kind of films are called Blockbusters. There are many things that can affect the money a film makes, including a 'hot' star, topic, special effects; a well-timed release date (i.e: summer or Christmas); accompanying promotional merchandise – appealing to several demographic groups. Harry potter is amongst the highest grossing films of all time, and the franchise/film series Harry Potter is the highest grossing of all time generating a huge $7,706,147,978 in only 8 films, the highest grossing being the newest film generating $1,328,111,219 alone. This kind of money wouldn't be generated without some kind of advertising. 

These films are made by Warner Bros, this means they had a great budget for advertising this would boost the films revenue hugely. 

"Pauline Kael in The New Yorker: In general, it can be said that the public no longer discovers movies, the public no longer makes a picture a hit. If the advertising for a movie doesn't build up an overwhelming desire to be part of the event, people just don't go. They don't listen to their own instincts, they don't listen to the critics – they listen to the advertising."

This quote can be seen in different views, for example some people can assume that its not true and people will go to see a film because of the reviews that a films has had.

From my point of view if i was to go see a film, and it had really bad reviews i would think twice about going to see it, but it wouldn't necessarily make me not want to see it.

Films like Harry Potter, have such large budgets they can spend a lot of money on things like advertising, and distribution. A film will always still get some bad reviews.

Harry potter the was starting to advertise big after the success of the 3rd harry potter film, not necessarily by TV advertisements or spoken word. It was the fact that people understood that the films where doing well therefore all of them would be made. Harry Potter is the type of film/book which is advertised to people of all ages because it holds contents in which all people are able to relate to. Stars are seen as marketing tools as they do not only receive views from the fans of the film they are starring in but from fans of their own fan base. So if you had a famous actor such as Jim Carey staring in a random film made from a book, some people may not like the idea but they will follow and watch the film because they are watching it to see Jim Carey

Advertising for Harry Potter included everything from trailers, posters, and pictures to Lego, Video Games. When the films started to get larger, more known and people knew that the films were going to be big hits, all of a sudden Harry Potter just became everything, people started creating real life games based on Harry Potter.

Analyze the ways in which Tarantino controls the audiences' reactions in the 3 sequences we've looked at..

When watching films, as an audience we sometimes have a 'reading' of a film. This reflects what we watch and how we react after we have been watching it. The hypodermic needle reflects that we watch the film and want to go do what we saw, for example we see someone being killed and we get the urge to do that. Stuart halls theory reflects that people have there own preferred reading, for example they watch the film and have there own feelings about it.

(Fig 1)

We first see Vince walking up to Mia's house, there is a note on the window, when Vince picks up the note, you can hear Mia's voice reading out what is said on the note. The effect of her reading out this note makes her seem mysterious, and we are curious as to what is going to happen. There is then a flash transition as he walks into the home, which you can see a bit of in Fig 1. This flash transition gives the effect to us the audience that Vince has walked into some dream-like state or a daze. Because of the drugs in the film this could also be seen as him tripping or being 'high'. This kind of editing and work makes the audience have engaged with the preferred reading in this part of the film.

(Fig 2)

As we start to see him walking around the home, the mise en scene is white and the camera is following Vince and we are interested in what he's doing and what he's looking at so at this point we are aligned with him. At this point we do not see Mia's face at all, continuing to show that she is mysterious, she is sat watching vince moving the cameras and following him. This can show that she is dominant and 'in control'. There is then all of a sudden an extreme close up of her red lips (Fig 2), avoiding her face again, to keep the mysteriousness. Tarantino was trying to suggest that she's a sexual character especially from what we know earlier about her previous experience with a foot-rub. There is also sexual connotations with her mouth being so close to the microphone and the shape of the implement reflects what she may be thinking. There is a preferred reading in these scenes with a sexual nature because the audiences will watch the film and think that something is going to happen between these two people. The fact that we don't see Mia at all is Tarantino  playing with the audience and creating entertainment though the tension that is being created.

(Fig 3)

(Fig 4)

At this point parallel editing was used because Mia is talking over the tannoy system to Vince guiding him around the house. It seems to the audience that he's lost his confidence like he is complying with her orders, the fact that we have this hard gangster that has all of a sudden lost his confidence to a woman is meant the amuse the audience this comedy is put into the film by Tarantino deliberately. The alignment during these scenes switches between the two characters, an example of this is when vince is walking to get a drink from the station and then the camera cuts to the security camera and Mia looking down on him we are then aligned with her. Just as the security camera is moving there is another shot of her hand (Fig 3) of her moving the camera showing that she is in control, and also keeping her mysterious because we haven't seen her face.


We are aligned with Vince when he is pouring a drink. There is then this obscure high angle shot of Vince staring at a picture of Mia, this shot shows that Vince is looking up at Mia and Mia is looking down on him, again showing she is in control. (Fig 4)

(Fig 5)

The next cut is Mia walking around the house, with bare feet but we still haven't seen her face, and we can now only see her feet. The shot type used when we are following Mia is a tracking shot, closely used by Stanley Kubrick in The Shining. The way that she crosses her feet at the end of the scene reflects that she is playful and she's going to do something. The feet symbolize what happened to the guy before for giving Mia a foot rub. This shows that Taratino is controlling us. (Fig 5)
As an audince we are constantly thinking that we don't want Vince to try anything with Mia because we already know about the man who was thrown off a building for giving Mia a footrub, we are aligned with Vince because we are scared for him, but this contrasts what he does for a living, he is a tough gangster and the audience are made to be in his favour yet he is a murderer.

(Fig 6)

In the second sequence we seem to be aligned with both the characters because the camera is completely in the centre of the Vince and Mia. Shot reverse shot is used here to help the conversation flow, and to show there facial expressions towards each other for example Mia is being very sexual and seductive by sucking on a cherry, and just staring at Vince such a way that suggests lust. Mia goes to the toilet to 'powder her nose' but we know she has just taken drugs, and she's 'high'. We are aligned with Mia when she is in the bathroom but it makes the audience think twice about if we like her or not because she could get Vince killed for being how she is towards him. This control of the audience was deliberately done by Tarantino because he knew that the audience would get a preferred reading from this part of the film to have feelings towards vince, this is an example of Stuart Halls theory. When she walks away into the toilet we as an audience start to understand more about her. During the meal, they start to dance and this is meant to make the audience laugh, because the actor who plays vince (John Travolta) Who is well known for the film Grease (1978), and he dances a lot in this film so Tarantino is trying to have a laugh with the audience this is because of the star theory, people know the actor so this would also tempt them to see this film. When they get home, Mia and Vince are so comfortable with each other and they dance through the door (Fig 6) as the audience we get worried that Mia and Vince will try something on each other and we don't want Vince to get hurt because we are aligned with him. Because we are aligned with Vince at this point, this is what the director wanted to get across, Stuart Halls theory is that people gain there own preferred reading of a film rather than taking the reading the director wants the audience to take. In this case we are taking the reading the director wanted us to take; this would be called stuart halls dominant reading.


The third sequence is the overdose scene, this scene starts with Mia putting on the music this makes the audience think maybe she is going to get some atmosphere going, and then there is a long-shot that follows her while she is dancing, and the camera goes past a column within the house, and this kind of breaks up the audiences concentration on Mia, another reading would be that this reflects what happens later on in the film with Mia 'coming back to life'. Parallel editing is used when Vince is talking to himself in the toilet and Mia is then taking drugs that she found in his pocket. Vince is talking to himself, and trying to convince himself not to try anything with Mia, but as the audience can see how Mia is dancing, we can see that she is not interested, and this makes us as an audience worry because we know she doesn't want anything and he thinks she does. 

(Fig 7)

Mia then has an overdose of drugs, and ends up on the floor with blood on her face. As an audience we are screaming at the film because Vince is still in the bathroom, then a blackout occurs and the effect of this is to show time has passed because when the camera comes back we can see Mia almost dead on the floor (Fig 7), foaming at the mouth. A close-up has been used and doesn't come off her face at all even while Vince is talking. The effect of this camera shot is to make the audience panic because they know she is not well but Vince comes out of the bathroom talking normally, and having a conversation with Mia, then we can hear that he notices the body and and he notices that she's not well. The camera stays in the same place even when he grabs her face and picks her up. This is Tarantino controlling the audiences feelings by the way he has shot these scenes and the shot angle he has used.

(Fig 8)

Vince is then driving to Lance's house, and he is trying to call Lance, and he is sitting in the chair, and we are begging him to get up and answer the phone but he doesn't. The audience is in panic mode because we don't want Mia to die. Eventually Vince gets to the house, and crashes the car into the house, however this shot is interesting because the camera follows Lance out the house, and they are just juggling with Mia's body. The camera is hand-held and is one continuous shot throughout the scene. The camera is made to look like the audience is in the scene and that we are there with them in the room. We want to help Mia, and we keep screaming get the shot and we want to get in the room and help them find whatever it is they are looking for and help save her. This kind of shot brings the audience extremely close with the characters and at this point we are not really aligned with anyone but ourselves; however there could also be a prefered reading that we want Vince to succeed in bringing Mia back to life. Just as Vince goes to give her the shot the action goes extremely slow and he goes to stab her in the stomach, there is three close ups of Lance's face, Vince's face and the needle (Fig 8). She is then given the jab, and she jumps up and comes straight back to life.  The pace of editing slows down during the jab, and close-ups. Then when Mia is back to life the pace of the editing and camera shots becomes fast again, using these shot types controls the audiences reactions, for example with the slow shots we are holding our breath as an audience and whens Mia is back to life its like we can breathe out and breathe easy again. Tarantino would have used these shot types for this reason, to control the audiences. 

Hypodermic Needle Theory and Stuart Hall's reception Theory

The hypodermic needle theory is an outdated belief system about how audiences receive texts, the theory if from the 1920s. Basically the theory means that people watch a texts and then engage with the specific texts and then want to do what they have just seen. For example, someone watching a murder scene in a film, or in a music video and then someone going out to do what they have just seen. We are passive receivers, we just watch the text and let it absorb over us. We have no part in interpreting the information, we simply receive it and believe it.


Stuart Halls theory is that he disagreed with the hypodermic needle, and basically he says that everyone brings there own message and opinions into the media text. People react to the media  dependent on there own life experiences - If we agree with the writers message, this is called the preferred reading, however we might have a negotiated reading where out own cultural and life experiences affect our interpretation. Or... we might go further and create an oppositional reading where we question or challenge the message given to us.
Jay-Z has encoded the song with the message that he has a lot of problems  but women are not one of them, for example he doesn't bother with women because they are just 'problems' he has other problems to deal with - This is the message i got from this music video, by interoperating the lyrics and the video.
Media producers encode a media text with their ideological values, creating the preferred reading and audiences.


Audience members/decoders
Hall suggests that we receive the ideological message differently according to our own life experiences. We might agree with the preferred reading, or we may come up with a negotiated reading where our own cultural and life experiences bring a different interpretation. Or.. we might go even further and create an oppositional reading where we question or challenge the message given to us.


Harry Brown
I think the dominant reading from the producer is that he wanted to make people aware about drugs and violence and knife/gun crime that is current in our lives today. We hear about these kinds of crimes on the news, and the producer has taken these news stories and turned them into a film, and he lets us see the 'behind the scenes' of what happens with these crimes, and then there is this rouge pensioner which is just there to add to the film however the story about knife crime and violence is the key message in this film.
The way that I read (Negotiated reading) this film is that there is crime in parts of London that look like they do in the film, and we all know as a nation that this kind of things happen, but it is interesting to see what kind of investigation goes on into these crimes, and how the police and detectives react to these problems, on the other hand I think that I don't agree that the things that happen in the film, happen in real life to that extent, the film is somewhat exaggerated. However if I was younger and didn't entirely understand the film, and all the aspects of the film, I wouldn't understand the messages that the producer is trying to get across I would only watch the film for entertainment. 
I was attracted to this film because of the actors but the main attraction for me watching this film was because of the way people recommended this film, and this made me watch Harry Brown.

Fandom

What is a fan?
Fans are people who appreciated a specific person, for example a producer or an actor, or even a series of films. Someone who follows a person, or a franchise over a period of time.
Fans are useful because you can make money off them because they buy merchandise. They buy the tickets, they follow the films. They advertise the films though word of mouth, fans can be dangerous if they don't like the film, and they then tell people not to see it because its not good. Review sites, or social networking can be dangerous for example someone starting up a Facebook group. Make people listen to it, recommended it, share it on social network sites, all ways of making fans. People use teaser trailers and teaser sneak previews of films to create a fan, or to show there is a new series or a second film.




The walking dead - The Site was AMC
- Board games
- Clothes
- Action figures
- Photos from each episode
- Cast information
- Interviews
- Blogs
- Trivia
- Behind the scenes
- Downloads
- Newsletters


Harry Potter
People rein-act the battles from the film in real life
There is an online website, where you can real the story-line that never actually got written, like a behind the scenes for novelists. 
Theme parks, harry potter worlds.
Use youtube to watch snippets of the film, and other bits with the film, and people post videos and sing about there life.


The Dark Knight
Using the internet now to talk, and message each other, ask questions.
Shops to buy merchandise.
Video games and conventions in america people dress up and walk around talking to each other. The dark knight had a ride.

Questionaire Results

1) What originally attracted you to watch this film?

I found that most people wanted to watch the film because of the actors, such as Plan B and Michael Cane. Also because it was a classic British film. Also someone was told by another person to watch the film, because they found it entertaining and they just passed it on via word of mouth.

2) Is there anyway that you think you can relate to this film? E.G. Characters, feelings or meanings

I don’t think that many people could relate to the characters in the film, and this is because the film was just so violent. The fact that this was so violent,

3) In what way did this film give you 'entertainment'

All the action in the film, and the violence gave the people the entertainment and because it was a thrilling violent film. I think that certain types of people find different films entertaining. The mass violence just I think some people get a kick out of it. Also people thought that it had a great story-line.

4) If you could describe this film in three words, what would they be?

Bloody, Gore, Interesting, Shocking, Thrilling, Real, Exciting, Passionate, Entertaining – These were all the words that people used (some came up more than once). The most used word was thrilling, and I think that people found this film thrilling because of all the action in the film.

5) Is there anything that you took away from watching this film, for example a view of someone or something that you didn't have before?

I found that people do take things away with them after the film, in this case they took away the fact that they didn’t realize to what extent this kind of thing happens outside of the film. Like the areas of London that are actually like they are in the film, people didn’t know how bad it actually was. Also they had a different view

6) What was the sole reason that you wanted to watch this film? E.G. For an escape, or because you can relate to the film?

I found that most people decided to watch this film because they had been told by someone else to watch it, they had recommended it, however there was someone who wanted to see the film because of the message that it gives across. I found that they wanted to watch the film because they live in the same kind of situation and wanted to see how it related to them.

Uses and Gratifications Theory

Uses and Gratifications Theory is an approach to understanding why people actively seek out specific media outlets and content for gratification purposes. The theory discusses how users proactively search for media that will not only meet a given need but enhance knowledge, social interactions and diversion.

It assumes that members of the audience are not passive but take an active role in interpreting and integrating media into their own lives. The theory also holds that audiences are responsible for choosing media to meet their needs. The approach suggests that people use the media to fulfill specific gratifications. This theory would then imply that the media compete against other information sources for viewers' gratification. [1]

This approach focuses on why people use particular media rather than on content. In contrast to the concern of the 'media effects' tradition with 'what media do to people', U & G can be seen as part of a broader trend amongst media researchers which is more concerned with 'what people do with media', allowing for a variety of responses and interpretations. [2]

Chosen film: Harry Brown

1) What originally attracted you to watch this film?

2) Is there anyway that you think you can relate to this film? E.G. Characters, feelings or meanings 

3) In what way did this film give you 'entertainment'

4) If you could describe this film in three words, what would they be?

5) Is there anything that you took away from watching this film, for example a view of someone or something that you didn't have before?

6) What was the sole reason that you wanted to watch this film? E.G. For an escape, or because you can relate to the film?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_and_gratifications_theory [1]

http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/short/usegrat.html [2]

'Old films for new'

'Old films for new'


Old films, that are made into remakes can sometimes become a great success or sometimes can be a failure. I will cover some of the different production contexts and the effects on the films successes – do they ‘make it’ or ‘break it’?

One of the films we studied was The Ring (2002) and Ringu (1998),The Ring is an American remake of the Japanese film Ringu. There are many differences and similarities between there two films. There is some synergy between the films in terms of narrative, however there was an extremely large (~$48,000,000) budget for the American film. The Ringu film was made on a considerably lower budget (~$1,200,000) than the American one. The Ring was made 4 years after Ringu, and in these four years there was a slight advance in technology. The profit made from each different was completely different like the budget, I think that the profit reflects the budget. Ringu didn’t actually make much profit, however the American version did. For example the American remake had a profit of around $128 million, however Ringu only had a profit of around $1.7 million. The reason for not much money being made would be because of the distribution of the film. America was able to distribute the film across many countries: such as Argentina, Germany Finland, Greece, Netherlands, and more, where as Ringu only went abroad 3 years after it was released in Japan. But for America to make this success they needed Ringu to be made, because they wouldn’t of had any idea about the storyline of the film, but also without the original having success in Japan, the remake would not have made it in the counties that it did.

Vertical integration is where a specific company over-looks all the aspects of a film, and Ringu is an example of this. There was two main companies and both of these companies would have overlooked everything that happened, from the filming, sets and equipment and the original ring, would have been horizontal integration, which means there are lots of companies involved in making the film, for example some companies are listed for editing, special effects, and another for the equipment hire. The total amount of companies used in the original ring was thirty-nine however the America has a wider choice of companies they can use to assist them when creating a film that Japan had at the time.

The advantage of the American version of this film is the fact that they had an extremely larger budget. For example they had a lot more money to spend on effects, and SFX. Although the SFX in the newer film were extremely similar to the Japanese version, these effects would have been made by different companies and then come back to DreamWorks when the final version of the film was to be edited.

Each film is different in its own way, the original is slightly harder to follow because of the subtitles, the remake is extremely similar to the original in-fact in some parts of the film they have copied the same shots and camera angles, also the dialect is the same. The American version of the film, had different social situations and contexts, the psychological effect on the characters were shown more in the American version, because the story went into more depth, for example the whole story with the horses and how the ring came about was completely different to the Japanese version. American films have much more depth of explanation within the film, which reflects differences in social contexts, un-like the Japanese version which was more just based on the characters and how the characters are feeling, un-like the American films, they have a lot of explanation in there films, for example in The Ring (2002) she finds out a lot about the girl, and the film is more orientated around the girl, where as in Ringu, the film is just focused on saving her own life, and her sons life.

The remake of Psycho was made in 1998 and the original film was made in 1960, this version was made almost 40 years after and the film is exactly the same in every where, the shot types, and the settings. This film was made to make a remark to Alfred Hitchcock who directed the original, because he is seen to be an auteur. Some people think that the film should have been changed in some way instead of it being exactly the same to how Alfred Hitchcock made it. However personally I think that re-creating the original makes him seem better because obviously he must have been so good for them to not even have to change it in the slightest.

Alfred Hitchcock’s version of Psycho made a considerable more amount of money ($51 Million) than the remake ($38 Million), although Hitchcock’s version has had many years to make that money, the remake is no-where near. If they changed something within the remake this may have affected the amount of money that the new remake made.

Alfred Hitchcock was already popular when the Psycho remake was released, therefore he had already made his name, and he was already so well known in the American film industry, his film made so much money, and as for Ringu it made the most amount of money a film has ever made in Japan, if it wasn’t for this release then the American version wouldn’t have made the amount of money it did.