Hello, this is my blog for my AS Media coursework, detailing the research + planning, production and evaluation process of creating a two-minute film opening
Match Cut, this video says: "jumps from one shot to a similiar shot by either matching the action or the composition", change in space mostly but also in time, it is not cutting on action because we are changing to a different moving subject/action, where as with cutting on action we're still following the same subject. Like in The Two Towers, when Gandalf falls after trying to heal the king
Verbal Match Cut, the diegetic sound spoken by one character is, is not the same as an audio bridge, because we there we can't see the first part spoken, here one sentence is completed by the other (like in Candalabra)
TRANSITIONS:
Fade In & Fade Out
Dissolve (The panning shot from one to another of Billy's room)
Smash Cut, sudden abrupt change, often waking up from a dream (if I had done the dream where Billy dreams of kissing Rachel)
Iris, an alternate way of cutting to or zooming in on a close-up
Wipes, simple square, or can be different types of shapes (like with the pool table)
Invisible Cut, where it's made to look like that it's still one single take, but it really is done through camera angles, like in whip pans, or mise-en-scene, like lighting
L-Cut, audio carries over but is different
J-Cut, same as audio bridge? Also difference that sometimes diegetic sound turns into non-diegetic sound. Also "the audio of the next scene starts before you get to it", you hear what's going on before you see what's going on. Also great to introduce a new element of a scene(Tom Hanks stepping on piano and hearing it before we see it)
Both L- and J-Cut are designed to create a seamless flow, continuity editing, to make it look real, to achieve verisimilitude.
TWO TYPES OF TITLES: Inter-Titles + Titles on live action.
Title giving exposition and anchorage to the date and/or location. Titles will mainly always be edited in, being called non-diegetic titles, however there are examples of titles that are part of the mise-en-scène, called diegetic titles.
Despite Bringing Up Baby's reputation as a flop, it was successful in some parts of the U.S. The film premiered on February 16, 1938 at the Golden Gate Theatre in San Francisco (where it was a hit), and was also successful in Los Angeles, Portland, Denver, Cincinnati and Washington, D.C.. However, it was a financial disappointment in the Midwest, as well as most other cities in the country, including NYC; to RKO's chagrin, the film's premiere in New York on March 3, 1938 at Radio City Music Hall made only $70,000 and it was pulled after one week[46] in favor of Jezebel with Bette Davis.[47]During its first run, Bringing Up Baby made $715,000 in the U.S. and $394,000 in foreign markets for a total of $1,109,000;[34] its reissue in 1940 and 1941 made an additional $95,000 in the US and $55,000 in foreign markets.[46] Following its second run, the film made a profit of $163,000.[34] Due to its perceived failure, Hawks was released early from his two-film contract with RKO[34]and Gunga Din was eventually directed by George Stevens.[48] Hawks later said the film "had a great fault and I learned an awful lot from that. There were no normal people in it. Everyone you met was a screwball and since that time I learned my lesson and don't intend ever again to make everybody crazy".[49] The director went on to work with RKO on three films over the next decade.[50]Long before Bringing Up Baby's release, Hepburn had been branded "box-office poison" by Harry Brandt (president of the Independent Theatre Owners of America) and thus was allowed to buy out her RKO contract for $22,000.[51][52] However, many critics marveled at her new skill at low comedy; Life magazine called her "the surprise of the picture".[53] Hepburn's former boyfriend Howard Hughes bought RKO in 1941, and sold it in 1959; when he sold the company, Hughes retained the copyright to six films (including Bringing Up Baby).[50]
The film received good advance reviews; Otis Ferguson of The New Republic thought the film very funny, praising Hawks' direction.[38]Variety praised the film, singling out Hawks' pacing and direction, calling Hepburn's performance "one of her most invigorating screen characterizations" and saying Grant "performs his role to the hilt";[39] their only criticism was the length of the jail scene.[40]Film Daily called it "literally a riot from beginning to end, with the laugh total heavy and the action fast."[41]Harrison's Reports called the film "An excellent farce" with "many situations that provoke hearty laughter,"[42] and John Mosher of The New Yorker wrote that both stars "manage to be funny" and that Hepburn had never "seemed so good-natured."[43] However, Frank S. Nugentof the New York Times disliked the film, considering it derivative and cliché-ridden, a rehash of dozens of other screwball comedies of the period. He labeled Hepburn's performance "breathless, senseless, and terribly, terribly fatiguing",[44] and added, "If you've never been to the movies, Bringing Up Baby will be new to you – a zany-ridden product of the goofy-farce school. But who hasn't been to the movies?"[45]
SYNPNOSIS: Classic screwball comedy following palaeontologist David Huxely who is engaged to the dour and workaholic Alice. He faces a marriage trapped in hard work with little romance, who is determined that their marriage contain "no domestic entanglements of any kind." He is about to meet a new woman in his life, Alice Swallow, a free-spirited and, possibly pre-cursor of the Manic Pixie Dream Girl, who will turn his life upside down in the pursuit of a leopard that he has been sent from Brazil. The opening sequence introduces us to the engaged couple in their place of work.
IDENTS:
One ident for one company responsible for both production and distribution, as was more common in those days, lasting for 15 seconds and then fading in and out to the titles. It has a signature sound, that of s radio signal, appropriate for its name.
TITLES:
Separate inter-title sequence before the live action starts, which was the norm and convention back then, but can still be seen such as in films like This Is England and The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, and is still seen after a live action opening sequence in the Bond franchise.
THE OPENING SHOT:
An extreme longshot, an establishing shot which we are going to close in on
NARRATIVE, EXPOSITION:
Instead of a title telling us date and setting, like we sometimes see, mise-en-scène is used to anchor the location.
We get introduced to one of the main two protagonists of the narrative. TODOROV: This is an equilibrium, the disruption will happen later with the introduction of We are at the same location that the film will end on, when the dinosaur smashes to pieces, so the dinosaur at the moment represents the old equilibrium that must be destroyed for a new one to exist.
MISE-EN-SCÈNE: For verisimilitude their are multiple scientific objects around the room to connote that this is a place of scientific study. Huxley is dressed in a typical white garb which a majority of people know, making it one of Barthes's cultural codes.
EDITING:
At the beginning we cross-fade into shots.
GENRE SIGNIFIERS:
Two parts of the love triangle are present here, and conflicts about different opinions on family life.
REPRESENTATION:
GENDER: The female dominant in the relationship here. However the woman is shown as the typical torment for the man.
ETHNICITY:Just Caucasians present, this is pre-Civil Rights Movement.
SEXUALITY: Represents the norm of the time, heteronormativity, homosexuality was a punishable criminal offence.
AGE: This is a film mainly focussing on young middle-aged characters, teens and children are not present in the opening sequence. The old Professor stereotypically stands for intellectuality.
CLASS/STATUS: Middle-class, Alice Swallow has delusions of grander when she reacts to Huxley using the phrase: "I'll knock him over", she responds by saying:
David, no slang, remember who and what you are.
ABILITY/DISABILITY: Able-bodied, no physical or mental disabilities, unless you count the glasses of, which are more there to connote his status as a scientist.
NORMATIVE OR COUNTER-HEGEMONIC?
All in all this is a very typical representation in US cinema of the time, however we do get a more unconventional emasculated male who throughout the film will never be the true strong, masculine action hero.
SOUNDTRACK:
Start off with the first track for the titles from the soundtrack, we then get. For the discussion between the characters we only get their voices as diegetic sound, with them projecting across the wide space, this adds a sense of realism.
TRANSITION TO MAIN FILM:
There is no sound added, just a cross-fade into the next scene, the change of location is the main transition, the protagonist is now on his journey as Joseph Campbell would say.
Production companies: New Line Cinema, The Safran Company, Evergreen Media Group
Distributor: Warner Bros Pictures
Budget: $20m
Worldwide (US + International)
The UK
Critical Success:
Trailer
THE SHOT
Before the opening shot we get a black. We have voiceovers, all American, denoting the location of the film, USA (not the south). We have the female. Although we don't know. We have a binary opposition already, an unsure female character assured by a male character, ancient stereotype?The first shot exposes a central character, the antagonist. It is more usual that we have a protagonist (as Shawn in This Is England), but in a sense one of the protagonists has already been introduced before through the voiceover. Binary opposition, real life human
The camera zooms out slowly to a close-up. Rule of thirds isn't applied, further anchors this is something abnormal, the monster lurking in the corner of your eye. The eye is looking at the audience, viewers empathise with the feeling of surveillance the dummy will give all the characters throughout the film.
I had a track covered by an independent musician that
was assigned to a record label owned by main company, so
just like with Duffy I had horizontal integration,
but very limited, more like the Arctic Monkeys in Warp's Le
Donk + Scor-Zay-Zee and Submarine. but arguably
even less so.
My film ended up being a 12 and PG-13, so I'm not
taking the same risk as an 18-rated film.
POSSIBLE POINTS OF INFLUENCE:
As I've seen in Warp Films, the danger of my film being
rated 18 can even increase my limited commercial success along
with the major setback of an indie and no A-List stars, however even
without an A-Lister and an actor who has some recognition in the US
(I would eventually choose Rachel Weisz), if one has a genre
that can appeal to a certain audience it can be successful, as
the Krays are culturally recognisable in the UK, and the gangster genre
will be more appealing in the USA in, the violence and possible
blood having similar appeal to that of horror. This can increase
digital streaming interest for teens.
TITLE
Director, 2009
PRODUCTION COMPANIES:Working Title, UK Film Council, Aramid Entertainment
Notice how a lot of the praise is on the double performance of Tom Hardy.
TRAILERS:
...
The opening sequence after idents and titles and before we cut to the main title has been made available on YouTube by STUDIOCANAL Australia.
INST
the-numbers.com graph highlights the downside of working-class characters in a UK set film
One of the production companies is Amazon Instant Video. An example of convergence with the film cycle step exhibition being challenged. The distributors providers/exhibitors are now also becoming producers. This is can be seen as vertical integration
The opening sequence after idents and titles and before we cut to the main title has been made available on YouTube by STUDIOCANAL Australia.
SYNPNOSIS
A clear exposition of the setting, 1960s London, and the narrative, the Krays brothers. The two twins are introduced as a rising force in the criminal underworld, however their differences aren't anchored in the opening sequence, but by the time of the opening sequence it is shown who we are meant to follow as the protagonist.
IDENTS
20 seconds you get the Studiocanal. Universal is the distributor but we don't get their ident. A look at the Universal UK YouTube channel shows that the conglomerate owned by Comcast didn't show that much interest in this film, which its box office shows. However, Working Title had much more belief in it than for example The Program, a film which flopped both internationally and in the UK with only a UK box office of 500km, which was not on their YouTube channel along with Grimsby from their most recent films.
Working Title started with promoting their films on YouTube with behind the scenes footage in 2013 with the adaptation of the hit musical Les Miserables. The Program and Grimsby aren't shown here, signifies not their lower importance.
TITLES:
There are very few titles, the rest were shown at the end credits. These only include the distributing and production companies as separate white on black captions
STUDIOCANALPRESENTS
IN ASSOCIATION WITHANTON CAPITAL ENTERTAINMENT
&AMAZON PRIME INSTANT VIDEO
A WORKING TITLEPRODUCTION
LEGEND
MISE-EN-SCENE: There is use of CGI for the city. The car is
glamorised, it shines, it's not clear whether it has been
editing. . There are multiple people in the background.
REPRESENTATIONS: When a text today represents (it
can never truly show what the past was like, just like any media
representation) an historical time period, it can be difficult to judge whether
there has been
But nevertheless, the constant repetition of 'able-bodied',
caucasian, heterosexual etc. characters in the media creates a normative effect on society.
SEXUALITY: Through the line "My Reggie", the left
Kray is signified as heterosexual, and so is the narrator, immediately
showing that there are more heterosexual characters.
Ronnie's homosexuality is not signified. AGE: The classic image of the gangster is The
Godfather, age is status there.
SOCIAL CLASS: These are working
class lads who rose up in the crime world. Is this a somewhat different
representation of class than is typical for Working Title? REGIONAL IDENTITY: This is closely linked with class and status, and the expectation of
GENDER: Bechdel Test? Decision to
focus not just on symbols of male power but have it narrated by a female
character
NARRATIVE, GENRE, EXPOSITION: From this line we expect
The Krays aren't clearly morally anchored heroes as the film
will show, however we will see that Ronnie has a more sensitive side. So here
he is called: "Bloodthirsty" and the smoke like a fire breathing
dragon seems to anchor he is the more malicious twin, and then Reggie
is called different. So this sets up an apparent
THE CENTRAL PROTAGONIST?: As
we transition to the main film, we follow Reggie as he asserts his
authority, meets his love interest.
In this opening sequence this is signified by the narrative
This two-shot that could signify closeness is made to look cold
by them not looking at each other.
SOUND: We get an audio
bridge of the non-diegetic incidental music
from the Working Title ident to the opening shot. We then get
diegetic
The track of the closing credits is foreshadowed
by this line:
Believe me when I say, It took a lot of love for
me to hate him the way I do.
This track also intertextuality references a Led Zeppelin song of the time period, also called Whole Lotta Love.
*Screenshot of Spotify*
This track is an example of horizontal
integration, Duffy is contracted with
