To what extent does
digital distribution affect the marketing and consumption of media products?
What is digital
distribution?
This is the
way that media products (in this case film) is distributed using technology.
For example, trailers are a form of digital distribution. Rather than just
using posters to distribute films there are now hundreds of different ways a
film can be marketed to audiences online, through television, radio and so on.
Examples of when
it is used:
Online: Films can now be digitally
distributed online; on social networking sites such as Facebook – films can
have their own page, with information and images on the film, promoting it to
its target audience. It might also be shown on an official website, that target
audiences can find out as much information about the film as they want. This
might be advertised further using Google Ads, therefore the website will be
shown at the top of the page, therefore is easier to grasp audiences.
How has this
affected marketing and consumption of films?
This has
hugely affected the film industry, as now there is more competition between
films, in terms of technology used. For example, a film like Sherlock Holmes 2:
A Game of Shadows has amazing special effects such as: CGI elements, the SI –
2K Camera, the Spider Camera, Electronic arms to levitate characters, The
Foundry’s programme (making water droplets more realistic). All of these
elements can be portrayed through digital distribution, making the film much
more appealing, as the quality of the film is instantly high. However, if this
is put in comparison to a film such as Shaun of the Dead, which had no special
effects, then Sherlock Holmes 2 is going to have a larger consumption from a wider
range of people.
“Successful media products depend as much upon marketing and
distribution to a specific audience as they do upon good product practices” to
what extent would you agree with this statement.
I agree with this statement to a certain extent as I feel
some films depend on marketing and distribution equal amounts to them depending
on good production practices. However, there are some occasions where a film
will not be promoted as much, but the film is of great quality and ends up
winning Oscars. And other circumstances where a film will be hugely promoted
but the quality of the film itself isn’t so good.
The King’s Speech was produced by Bedlam Productions; a London based independent production company operating since 2009. The film was Bedlam’s first ever award winning major feature, winning 4 Oscars and 7 BAFTA awards. It was distributed by UK Momentum Pictures; a leading independent motion picture distributer in the UK owned by Paramount Pictures. This is an interesting film to talk about in reference to this question as the film itself was low budget, in comparisons to Hollywood’s average budget for a movie being $30 million, whereas The King’s Speech cost £8m ($15m) to produce.
Therefore, the film was not able to spend as much money on the marketing of the film and just focused on typical promotion techniques such as trailers and posters, not being too elaborate in order to save money. The posters used close-up shots to highlight to audience’s that the narrative of the film is based on the restriction of the kings’ life due to his stammer. However, surprisingly the film had a box office earning of £250 million ($400 million). This could have been down to the film’s standing ovation at the premier, which led to a huge ‘word of mouth’ situation, alerting other people on the ‘feel good’ film. This even lead to the BBC reporting how the film encouraged and inspired young students with stammers, tempting people to go and watch it. This is a prime example of how good production practices can outweigh marketing techniques.
The film managed to grasp global awareness as it was shown in film festivals such as; Toronto, Berlin, Telluride, BFI London. This ensured that enough people around the world were aware of the film. This is a successful way to market the film, as it would have been reported about in the press, causing more ‘word of mouth’, therefore promoting the film without the use of money. Due to this, the opening weekend earned the film £3,510,000. It was shown to earn over £3 million after running 1st in the box office for four weekends in a row, being the first film to do this since to success of Toy Story 3 (2010). This made the film the most successful British film ever!
This film appeals to a wide target audience. The certificate for the film is 12A, however with much commotion, as people argued it should be a 15 due to the extent of swearing. However, Bedlam argued their case, managing to get the film rated as 12A, grasping a much larger target audience, earning more money for the film in result. The film hugely appeals to people from the UK as it allows audiences to see the royal family humanised by their troubles. It also appeals to America, as they like their connection to the British monarchy and enjoy the thought that someone like them (from a colony country) could develope a friendship with a member of the royal family. Therefore the general story line had a huge impact on the success of the film.
Because of this the film was released first in the USA on September 6th 2010, as distributers felt if the film was accepted in America, it would make it in the UK as ‘word of mouth’ would spread. It was later released in Britain on the 7th of January 2011. This highlights the power America has over the film industry, that a British film will be released to America before the UK.
The King’s Speech was produced by Bedlam Productions; a London based independent production company operating since 2009. The film was Bedlam’s first ever award winning major feature, winning 4 Oscars and 7 BAFTA awards. It was distributed by UK Momentum Pictures; a leading independent motion picture distributer in the UK owned by Paramount Pictures. This is an interesting film to talk about in reference to this question as the film itself was low budget, in comparisons to Hollywood’s average budget for a movie being $30 million, whereas The King’s Speech cost £8m ($15m) to produce.
Therefore, the film was not able to spend as much money on the marketing of the film and just focused on typical promotion techniques such as trailers and posters, not being too elaborate in order to save money. The posters used close-up shots to highlight to audience’s that the narrative of the film is based on the restriction of the kings’ life due to his stammer. However, surprisingly the film had a box office earning of £250 million ($400 million). This could have been down to the film’s standing ovation at the premier, which led to a huge ‘word of mouth’ situation, alerting other people on the ‘feel good’ film. This even lead to the BBC reporting how the film encouraged and inspired young students with stammers, tempting people to go and watch it. This is a prime example of how good production practices can outweigh marketing techniques.
The film managed to grasp global awareness as it was shown in film festivals such as; Toronto, Berlin, Telluride, BFI London. This ensured that enough people around the world were aware of the film. This is a successful way to market the film, as it would have been reported about in the press, causing more ‘word of mouth’, therefore promoting the film without the use of money. Due to this, the opening weekend earned the film £3,510,000. It was shown to earn over £3 million after running 1st in the box office for four weekends in a row, being the first film to do this since to success of Toy Story 3 (2010). This made the film the most successful British film ever!
This film appeals to a wide target audience. The certificate for the film is 12A, however with much commotion, as people argued it should be a 15 due to the extent of swearing. However, Bedlam argued their case, managing to get the film rated as 12A, grasping a much larger target audience, earning more money for the film in result. The film hugely appeals to people from the UK as it allows audiences to see the royal family humanised by their troubles. It also appeals to America, as they like their connection to the British monarchy and enjoy the thought that someone like them (from a colony country) could develope a friendship with a member of the royal family. Therefore the general story line had a huge impact on the success of the film.
Because of this the film was released first in the USA on September 6th 2010, as distributers felt if the film was accepted in America, it would make it in the UK as ‘word of mouth’ would spread. It was later released in Britain on the 7th of January 2011. This highlights the power America has over the film industry, that a British film will be released to America before the UK.
On the
other hand, Sherlock Holmes 2: A Game of Shadows shows that money spent on
marketing and distribution might often make a film successful. It was produced
by Warner Brothers Pictures, an American production company. It’s one of the
six major conglomerates in the USA and it has many subsidiary companies including
Warner Brothers Studios. This meant it had a great deal of money that could be
put into Sherlock Holmes 2 (2011).
It was released on Friday 16th December 2011 in both the UK and the USA. The certificate 12 film did this as it’s around the time of the Christmas holidays, meaning it will be viewed a lot more by families. The budget for this Hollywood Blockbuster was $125 million, way over the average budget of a Hollywood film. A lot of this money was spent on the distribution of the film as they could afford to create individual posters for each cast member, informing the audience on which actors will be starring in the film, further selling it to its target audience. The posters were even re-created at one point, as producers felt it portrayed the film in the wrong light.
Warner Brothers Pictures also teamed up with the film ‘New Years Eve’, managing to have advertisements for Sherlock Holmes in the background of the film, on billboards and posters, behind actors. This was a huge promotion campaign as it grasped more global awareness, and managed to have the film directly appeal to their target audience who will have been interested in the film ‘New Years Eve’ also. This is not the only synergy we see with Warner Brothers Pictures. They also combined with ‘Obsessed With Film’ to market merchandise for the film (e.g. tarot cards, hoodies, key rings). Also, there was synergy between Warner Bros and Facebook, to form a Facebook page promoting the film to younger audiences.
The film was also exhibited at a range of different film festivals: Heartland, Indy, London and so on. This huge effort to distribute the film and market it world-wide obviously proved successful as the overall box office from this film was $509,717,354. In its opening weekend it earned £14.6 million, which was less than the original Sherlock Holmes which earned $26.6 million. However, the film held well throughout the holidays and managed to beat the first films overall earnings of $209 million. Sherlock Holmes 2 was ranked 12th highest grossing film in 2011 worldwide!
The films target audience would generally be ages 30-60, ranging from that age as they would be most interested in period dramas set in the same era. However, the rating of 12 allowed it to appeal to families, grasping more viewings over the holidays when families would go out together. Younger audiences might enjoy this film as it portrays a range of different genres, from Action Adventure, to Romance, to Thriller and so on.
Other factors that might help to distribute a film through the trailers would be technology. Sherlock Holmes 2 spent large amounts of money on effects such as CGI, and the Foundrys programme (that creates realistic water droplets). Also, Warner Bros used the SI-2K camera that has the ability to capture focused shots. The King's Speech also tried to keep up with technology by using wider camera lenses, in order to reflect the Kings’ feelings of constriction.
In conclusion, there is no yes or no answer to this question, as it can depend entirely on the film itself. As shown in the way the Kings Speech focused more on the production of the film and relied on ‘word of mouth’ to promote the film, due to their low budget. However, this resulted in The King’s Speech being the most successful British film ever. Whereas, Sherlock Holmes 2 spent large amounts of money on the distribution of their film and managed to earn $5 million back from their film. Therefore, I feel both factors, distribution and production are shown to have equal importance, yet depend on the situation. I feel the future of the film industry will become reliant more and more on the distribution of the film, as the marketing of films is becoming even more competitive than ever, as there are new interesting ways being discovered to distribute films.
It was released on Friday 16th December 2011 in both the UK and the USA. The certificate 12 film did this as it’s around the time of the Christmas holidays, meaning it will be viewed a lot more by families. The budget for this Hollywood Blockbuster was $125 million, way over the average budget of a Hollywood film. A lot of this money was spent on the distribution of the film as they could afford to create individual posters for each cast member, informing the audience on which actors will be starring in the film, further selling it to its target audience. The posters were even re-created at one point, as producers felt it portrayed the film in the wrong light.
Warner Brothers Pictures also teamed up with the film ‘New Years Eve’, managing to have advertisements for Sherlock Holmes in the background of the film, on billboards and posters, behind actors. This was a huge promotion campaign as it grasped more global awareness, and managed to have the film directly appeal to their target audience who will have been interested in the film ‘New Years Eve’ also. This is not the only synergy we see with Warner Brothers Pictures. They also combined with ‘Obsessed With Film’ to market merchandise for the film (e.g. tarot cards, hoodies, key rings). Also, there was synergy between Warner Bros and Facebook, to form a Facebook page promoting the film to younger audiences.
The film was also exhibited at a range of different film festivals: Heartland, Indy, London and so on. This huge effort to distribute the film and market it world-wide obviously proved successful as the overall box office from this film was $509,717,354. In its opening weekend it earned £14.6 million, which was less than the original Sherlock Holmes which earned $26.6 million. However, the film held well throughout the holidays and managed to beat the first films overall earnings of $209 million. Sherlock Holmes 2 was ranked 12th highest grossing film in 2011 worldwide!
The films target audience would generally be ages 30-60, ranging from that age as they would be most interested in period dramas set in the same era. However, the rating of 12 allowed it to appeal to families, grasping more viewings over the holidays when families would go out together. Younger audiences might enjoy this film as it portrays a range of different genres, from Action Adventure, to Romance, to Thriller and so on.
Other factors that might help to distribute a film through the trailers would be technology. Sherlock Holmes 2 spent large amounts of money on effects such as CGI, and the Foundrys programme (that creates realistic water droplets). Also, Warner Bros used the SI-2K camera that has the ability to capture focused shots. The King's Speech also tried to keep up with technology by using wider camera lenses, in order to reflect the Kings’ feelings of constriction.
In conclusion, there is no yes or no answer to this question, as it can depend entirely on the film itself. As shown in the way the Kings Speech focused more on the production of the film and relied on ‘word of mouth’ to promote the film, due to their low budget. However, this resulted in The King’s Speech being the most successful British film ever. Whereas, Sherlock Holmes 2 spent large amounts of money on the distribution of their film and managed to earn $5 million back from their film. Therefore, I feel both factors, distribution and production are shown to have equal importance, yet depend on the situation. I feel the future of the film industry will become reliant more and more on the distribution of the film, as the marketing of films is becoming even more competitive than ever, as there are new interesting ways being discovered to distribute films.
SELF REFLECTION: I feel that Pamela Ngo and I worked very well in a group. Before beginning to create the Prezi, we shared it so both of us had access to it, to edit and add things as the weeks went on. We assigned different tasks to each other, to ensure that neither one of us were doing too much or too little. For example, I wrote the exhibition, audience and exchange, marketing. Pamela Ngo wrote distribution, technology, definitions and the rest we did together. This worked well as there were not enough lessons for us to finish the task together, therefore by having separate tasks we could work on the Prezi at home, developing our case study further.
“Discuss the ways in which media products are produced and distributed to audiences, within a media area you have studied.” - Avatar
I decided to do a case study on Avatar, focusing on how the film was produced and distributed considering its target audience. Avatar is a 2009 American epic science fiction motion capture film written and directed by James Cameron. The film is set in the mid-22nd century, when humans trying to obtain a precious rock that is worth a lot of money, from a different planet.
The target audience of this film is fairly large as is does not fall under one genre, as it covers many types of film. For example; sci-fi, adventure, romance, comedy and so on. I would say this film would widely appeal to the ages of 14-30 and adults with children. This is because it uses more modern technology to film it and the merchandising is products such as video games, that younger people would find more appealing, and parents that have children as they can get involved in the game also! The audience's opinion on the film will vary depending on how they consume the movie. After researching and asking people, we have concluded that people that saw the film in the cinema in 3D rated the film 10/10 as it was visually appealing and an entertaining film overall. People that saw it in the cinema but not in 3D still gave it a high rating of 9/10 as the film had 'a great story line, beautiful picture and great sound'. However, those who saw it on DVD, rated it 7/10 this is because they felt the film was still entertaining and well produced, however did not have the opportunity to view to special effects of the film in full as the fact the film is 3D makes a huge difference to the experience. The film would appeal to its target audience because of the: Graphics, Storyline, Sound effects, Realistic Characters. The film was acclaimed as use for the use of escapism and personal identification as the audience can relate to the feelings of the characters.
The film was released on the 10 December 2009 in London and the 18 December 2009 in the USA. It was marketed in many different ways internationally: there were lots of promotions with the typical conventions such as: trailers, bus posters, regular posters, billboards, radio, news press, and website. They also did some merchandising on the pre release and things like phone apps and games. There was loads of press on the film, to begin a 'word of mouth' on the film. It was shown at numerous film festivals also such as Marrakech Film Festival 2011, Tokyo International Film Festival, Leeds Film Festival, and Bermuda Film Festival. This is good as it allowed the film to be exhibited globally, ensuring more people around the world would be aware of the film, therefore its audience would be larger - guaranteeing more profit.
New technologies such as DVD and blu-ray discs also helped to reach and target more of the audience too, with the release of the DVD itself, and special collector's editions too. With extra bonus features, different cuts of the films and documentaries, this helped to target the audience, especially large fans of the film. This is because fans of the film are keen to find out about the production and behind the scenes of the film, meaning that they will buy the DVD/blu-ray edition, meaning more reach and profits for Fox and Lightstorm. The film will have had to be exhibited in many different forms: general release, re-release, DVD, blu-ray, and 3D.
The film was shown in many different ways, in order to find out which form of exhibition was most effective. For example, on airplanes, in independent cinemas, in large cinemas, the premier and so on. This gave audiences a chance to acknowledge the film in different social situations, and allowed the producers to understand which form of exhibition was most effective.
Production occurs in three stages: Pre production- Where ideas for the film are created, rights to scripts, books and plays are bought. Preparations are made for the shoot, cast and film crew are hired, locations are selected, and sets are built. In avatar the preproduction was very important mainly because of the set and technology that had to be used to create the fantasy world which the film is set/based in. Production— it is where the actors and crew film the essential elements for the film. Post-Production—The film is edited; production sound is edited, music tracks are composed, performed and recorded, if a film is sought to have a score; sound effects are designed and recorded; and any other computer-graphic 'visual' effects are digitally added, all sound elements are mixed and ‘’locked’’ into the film, which then the film is finally completed.
In avatars case the Preproduction was the director James Cameron writing an 80 page script for Avatar in 1994. Then project would cost $100 million and involve at least six actors in leading roles "who appear to be real but do not exist in the physical world". Then lastly from January to April 2006, Cameron would have worked on the script and developed a culture for the film's aliens, the Na'vi.
The Production would have been the stages of when it started in 2007. They did not have to build a particular set for Pandora as it was primarily a digitalised movie. However, they had to record a live musical orchestra as long with the usual principal photography. More than a thousand people worked on the production. In preparation of the filming sequences, all of the actors underwent professional training specific to their characters such as archery, horseback riding, firearm use, and hand-to-hand combat. They received language and dialect training in the Na'vi language created for the film. Cameron made use of his virtual camera system, a new way of directing motion-capture filmmaking. The system is showing the actors' virtual counterparts in their digital surroundings in real time, allowing the director to adjust and direct scenes just as if shooting live action.
Lastly there would be the stages of Post Production. During this, 2/3 of the movie was done digitally, which meant synergy and convergence was used heavily, in terms of technologies such as sound manipulation, special effects, and digitally creating the world of Pandora. To achieve the face capturing, actors wore individually made skull caps fitted with a tiny camera positioned in front of the actors' faces; the information collected about their facial expressions and eyes is then transmitted to computers. At one point employing 900 people to work on the films post production stage.
In conclusion, the film was produced specifically to aim at its target audience, thinking about the graphics, story line, genre, visual images and general experience to try to appeal to as wider audience as possible. In terms of distribution, it was distributed in many different ways such as trailers, posters, premiers, film festivals and so on, in order to appeal to the right audience and also to gain as much public attention as possible, to gain as much profit as possible.
Discuss the issues raised by media ownership in the production and exchange of media texts in the British and American film industry
I am going to focus on the media ownership of film. My argument is going to discuss how the British film industry is dominated by the American film industry due to their strong media ownership when it comes to production of film. I will explain how production companies such as Walt Disney overpower British film companies such as Film 4.
Media ownership is defined as where progressively less organisations and individuals control the shares of the mass media. This is the concentration of media ownership. Media ownership could be explained to have increasing issues due to the oligopoly (where the market is dominated by a small number of companies); this is because American film companies seem to have general ownership over the film industry.
The American film industry have the most media ownership when it comes to the film industry, this could be down to their dominance over the Big Six film studios. These are: Warner Bros; Paramount; 20th Century Fox; Walt Disney Pictures; Columbia Pictures and Universal Pictures. Five of these studios are all subsidiaries of major media conglomerates, which means they are all smaller companies owned by a parent company (a parent company being a company that owns smaller companies) as the world’s biggest conglomerate is Walt Disney Pictures. This gives America a bias opportunity in the American film industry, as they own the biggest parent company in the world; this means they instantly have control over all the other smaller production studios too. Therefore, American can control who can and can’t have access to these particular film companies, leaving Britain in a weaker position as they will have to get approval from American before managing to produce a successful film, especially if they want to use one of the Big Six as a studio for their film.
As Walt Disney Pictures is the biggest conglomerate in the world, this implies that the most popular genre of film will be aimed at a target audience of family. This is because Disney is famous for making entertaining animations for children such as Wall-E (dir. Andrew Santon, 2008) and films aimed at the family, in other words that parents will also find entertaining, such as Bedtime Stories (Adam Shankman, 2008). This means that other genre’s of films might not have as much of a chance as profiting as much money as the production studio will not be the world’s biggest conglomerate.
Due to America’s unbelievable advantage over the film industry, their films are always produced on a mass scale, with more special effects, bigger explosions. This is because they obtain a larger budget, meaning they can afford to take risks with their films. America also has advantage with synergy. This is when different elements of a media conglomerate work together to promote linked products across different media. In more basic terms, it defines a chain reaction that a conglomerate can create when promoting a film. For example, Disney’s film ‘High School Musical’ being in cinema promotes the DVD. The DVD then promotes the soundtrack, which promotes the advent calendar, which promotes the doll, which promotes the sequel, which promotes the Disney store, which promotes the film and so on. Giving America a bigger profits on films produced by the Big Six
It should now be clear why Britain struggle to produce a successful Box Office film, with extraordinary profits without the help of America. The film market in Britain is of course dominated by America. This is shown through the statistics that American produced films account for 75% of the total UK box office. Eighteen of the top twenty films at the British Box Office were produced by the Big Six, as the Big Six is dominated by the United States, inevitably the content of those British films would have been limited to the opinions and approval of what America wants. This means that stereotypical films such as The Queen (Stephen Frears, 2006) would be more likely to be accepted by America as they portray Britain in an stereotypical and clichéd way.
Where America produce their films using the Big Six, in Britain film producers are more likely to produce using an independent film company. This is because they will obtain more money, rather than loosing large amounts of their profits to America as they are reliant on them for production. An example of an independent film company is Film 4, who famously produced the film This Is England (Shane Meadows, 2006). This is a film that stereotypically portrays Britain in a way that reflects British life during the 1980’s. This film suffered as it did not sell as well to countries outside of Britain; this is because it didn’t create any personal relationships with audience’s who were not British, therefore making it less profitable. This contrast between This is England and Disney’s production portrays how the media ownership is unarguably controlled by America. Even Film 4, which is supposedly an independent film company, has produced many if not most films as a co-production with one of the Big Six, for example 127 Hours that was a co-production between Film 4 and Warner Bros, and other film companies.
In conclusion, the media ownership in the production and exchange of media texts in the film industry is dominated by America, this is because they have more control over production companies and studios, for example the Big Six, therefore can control the content in the film industry, limiting British film companies’ chances of producing a successful box office film. From my own personal experience as a consumer I find films that have been produced by the Big Six to be more entertaining as they are produced with a higher budget therefore I can expect to see bigger explosions, stunts and more exciting scenes. However, I am often equally intrigued by films produced by independent British film companies such as Film 4, but this could be for the reason that I am a British citizen, therefore can relate to the content more than people outside of Northern Europe.
Media ownership is defined as where progressively less organisations and individuals control the shares of the mass media. This is the concentration of media ownership. Media ownership could be explained to have increasing issues due to the oligopoly (where the market is dominated by a small number of companies); this is because American film companies seem to have general ownership over the film industry.
The American film industry have the most media ownership when it comes to the film industry, this could be down to their dominance over the Big Six film studios. These are: Warner Bros; Paramount; 20th Century Fox; Walt Disney Pictures; Columbia Pictures and Universal Pictures. Five of these studios are all subsidiaries of major media conglomerates, which means they are all smaller companies owned by a parent company (a parent company being a company that owns smaller companies) as the world’s biggest conglomerate is Walt Disney Pictures. This gives America a bias opportunity in the American film industry, as they own the biggest parent company in the world; this means they instantly have control over all the other smaller production studios too. Therefore, American can control who can and can’t have access to these particular film companies, leaving Britain in a weaker position as they will have to get approval from American before managing to produce a successful film, especially if they want to use one of the Big Six as a studio for their film.
As Walt Disney Pictures is the biggest conglomerate in the world, this implies that the most popular genre of film will be aimed at a target audience of family. This is because Disney is famous for making entertaining animations for children such as Wall-E (dir. Andrew Santon, 2008) and films aimed at the family, in other words that parents will also find entertaining, such as Bedtime Stories (Adam Shankman, 2008). This means that other genre’s of films might not have as much of a chance as profiting as much money as the production studio will not be the world’s biggest conglomerate.
Due to America’s unbelievable advantage over the film industry, their films are always produced on a mass scale, with more special effects, bigger explosions. This is because they obtain a larger budget, meaning they can afford to take risks with their films. America also has advantage with synergy. This is when different elements of a media conglomerate work together to promote linked products across different media. In more basic terms, it defines a chain reaction that a conglomerate can create when promoting a film. For example, Disney’s film ‘High School Musical’ being in cinema promotes the DVD. The DVD then promotes the soundtrack, which promotes the advent calendar, which promotes the doll, which promotes the sequel, which promotes the Disney store, which promotes the film and so on. Giving America a bigger profits on films produced by the Big Six
It should now be clear why Britain struggle to produce a successful Box Office film, with extraordinary profits without the help of America. The film market in Britain is of course dominated by America. This is shown through the statistics that American produced films account for 75% of the total UK box office. Eighteen of the top twenty films at the British Box Office were produced by the Big Six, as the Big Six is dominated by the United States, inevitably the content of those British films would have been limited to the opinions and approval of what America wants. This means that stereotypical films such as The Queen (Stephen Frears, 2006) would be more likely to be accepted by America as they portray Britain in an stereotypical and clichéd way.
Where America produce their films using the Big Six, in Britain film producers are more likely to produce using an independent film company. This is because they will obtain more money, rather than loosing large amounts of their profits to America as they are reliant on them for production. An example of an independent film company is Film 4, who famously produced the film This Is England (Shane Meadows, 2006). This is a film that stereotypically portrays Britain in a way that reflects British life during the 1980’s. This film suffered as it did not sell as well to countries outside of Britain; this is because it didn’t create any personal relationships with audience’s who were not British, therefore making it less profitable. This contrast between This is England and Disney’s production portrays how the media ownership is unarguably controlled by America. Even Film 4, which is supposedly an independent film company, has produced many if not most films as a co-production with one of the Big Six, for example 127 Hours that was a co-production between Film 4 and Warner Bros, and other film companies.
In conclusion, the media ownership in the production and exchange of media texts in the film industry is dominated by America, this is because they have more control over production companies and studios, for example the Big Six, therefore can control the content in the film industry, limiting British film companies’ chances of producing a successful box office film. From my own personal experience as a consumer I find films that have been produced by the Big Six to be more entertaining as they are produced with a higher budget therefore I can expect to see bigger explosions, stunts and more exciting scenes. However, I am often equally intrigued by films produced by independent British film companies such as Film 4, but this could be for the reason that I am a British citizen, therefore can relate to the content more than people outside of Northern Europe.
Distribution
Role of the Distributor: Bringing the film into the movie market place and doing this by deciding how to decide how to promote the film.
Independent film distributors: They get films from film festivals by looking and seeing which genre/particular film they feel they can sell to the public.
USP (UNIQUE SELLING POINT) – One line that sells the film.
What does this?
- big actor names
- genre/genre marketing.
What does this?
- big actor names
- genre/genre marketing.
Target audience:
Distributors have to decide what target audience a particular film has and how to appeal a film to them.
Typical audiences – 15-24/Family’s
Distributors have to decide what target audience a particular film has and how to appeal a film to them.
Typical audiences – 15-24/Family’s
Release dates:
Distributors have to consider the time to distribute a film...
This could depend on:
- school holidays
- summer
- times that don’t class with other films
Distributors have to consider the time to distribute a film...
This could depend on:
- school holidays
- summer
- times that don’t class with other films
Research:
- Listen to the audiences
- Interpret what their saying
- getting people to fill in questionnaires.
- Listen to the audiences
- Interpret what their saying
- getting people to fill in questionnaires.
Budget:- How much is spent on marketing?
Advertising/Publicity:
- newspapers/posters/billboards and cost
- radio advertisements
- trailers
- premiers.
- newspapers/posters/billboards and cost
- radio advertisements
- trailers
- premiers.
Distribution part 2:
The marketing campaign must be the best.
Look at:
- Actors
- Soundtrack
- Editing
Look at:
- Actors
- Soundtrack
- Editing
How to sell?
- internet
- mobile
-poster
- media (TV, Radio)
- internet
- mobile
-poster
- media (TV, Radio)
The Poster:
- teaser campaign
- many people’s first view of a film
- teaser campaign
- many people’s first view of a film
Trailer:
- sound
- image
- the way the film is portrayed.
- sound
- image
- the way the film is portrayed.
Teaser trailer – before film has even finished
Main trailer – in the cinema
Main trailer – in the cinema
There are many features the trailer which are typical:
Comedy – voiceover to tell the story
Thriller – captions to tell the story
Comedy – voiceover to tell the story
Thriller – captions to tell the story
Foreign Language films – use subtitles to tell audience what their seeing.
Internet:
There is always an official website for a film now that helps to further distribute the film.
There is always an official website for a film now that helps to further distribute the film.
Publicity:
- Film company chooses to put film in magazines and on websites
- Star ratings from newspapers has an impact
- Film company chooses to put film in magazines and on websites
- Star ratings from newspapers has an impact
Tracking – percentage of people interested in seeing it.
WORD OF MOUTH:
The most effective way to distribute a film is by word of mouth. If there are positive opinions on a film, the film will generally do well. They often hold preview screenings and ask their target audience to come and view the film, in order to start positive rumours that the film is good.
The most effective way to distribute a film is by word of mouth. If there are positive opinions on a film, the film will generally do well. They often hold preview screenings and ask their target audience to come and view the film, in order to start positive rumours that the film is good.
The crucial opening weekend is even more important, as if the film is not done well on this weekend, the reputation of the film is lost.
Film Production
The role of the producer is the person who finds the idea of film – sees film all the way through to distribution. It is also to protect the director and to make everything possible.
Once you have decided what film you want to make you must create a script.
There are three main components that make up ‘The Package’:
- Who is going to be in it?
- What production team?
- How are you going to make it?
- Who is going to be in it?
- What production team?
- How are you going to make it?
The Regional Film Fund is financers that will find locations for a particular film.
An advantage of an Independent film production is that as the director you have complete control as you do not have any other companies that are trying to influence your decision.
What is a finance plan?
A finance plan is how you are going to pay for actors, editing, cameras, locations, camera men and so on.
Above the line costs: the money spent on the script, screenplay, producer, director, principle class (main actors), writer so on.
Below the line costs: people who make film, shoot it, costume, set up.
What helps to market a film?
- The actors in it
- If the director creates a ‘need to see’
- Genre
- The director
- The actors in it
- If the director creates a ‘need to see’
- Genre
- The director
The differences between an American film production and a British film production:
In America they make the film after already planning the distribution of the film. They think about how they are going to sell the film, what the release dates are going to be and the general image of the film they wish to portray.
In Britain, they make the whole film, film all the footage and then try to think about the best way to distribute the film – which is a possible fault in the British film industry.
In America they make the film after already planning the distribution of the film. They think about how they are going to sell the film, what the release dates are going to be and the general image of the film they wish to portray.
In Britain, they make the whole film, film all the footage and then try to think about the best way to distribute the film – which is a possible fault in the British film industry.
British Actors moving to America?
It has come to attention that British actors are relocating their careers to the United States of America as they feel they will achieve their working dream, to become a successful actor. This is a prime example of the difficulties that the British Film Industry are having, as they are loosing valuable talent, due to Britain's lack of work for small time, yet talented British actors.
Piracy
A recent appalling trend is the growing involvement of human trafficking gangs in DVD piracy. It is widely reported by enforcement agencies and FACT that Triads and Snakehead gangs are involved in forcing illegal immigrants from mainland China to sell pirate DVDs in the street, offices, pubs and even on the doorsteps of people's homes, in return for food and accommodation and to pay for their passage into the country.
It is also well known that terrorist groups use DVD piracy to fund their activities. For example, the Organised Crime Task Force in Northern Ireland reports: "Paramilitary gangs carry out 80% of organised intellectual property crime in Northern Ireland. Both loyalist and Republican gangs are equally involved."
News stories on piracy:
- 11 employees from cinemas across the UK have been presented with awards totalling £7,000 for their efforts in preventing illegal recordings (so called ‘camcordings’) taking place.
- Matthew Lisett aged 32 years from Fovant, Salisbury was given a two year conditional discharge at Salisbury Magistrates Court (Thursday 16th November 2011) for film piracy.
- Six market traders suspected of producing and selling vast quantities of counterfeit CDs and DVDs were arrested during a series of raids co-ordinated by Greater Manchester Police as part of a wider initiative to crack down on organised crime.
What’s wrong with the British film industry?
The British Film Industry has been the reason for some of the most famous films such as The Queen (2006) directed by a British film director called Stephen Frears, focusing on British culture. There are numerous brilliant British films however as time goes by, more problems arise. The problem of repetitive story lines, film spending cuts and piracy all contribute to why the British film industry isn’t as strong as it could be.
One major issue is that all films created in Britain, by British directors has to be approved by America first before being allowed into the cinemas. Evidence has shown that American’s are fond of stereotypical images of Britain, for example the royal family. Therefore, might not appreciate other genres of films as they do not portray Britain in this way. This explains why films such as The Queen and The Kings Speech (Tom Hooper, 2010) have been so successful. Therefore, Britain is being forced to repeat story lines in order to gain the Blockbuster successes that are desired. Because of this, less people are interested in British cinema, as audiences do not want to pay money to see a film they have essentially already seen.
This leads me to my next point, the cinema experience. People used to go to the cinema to have an experience of film that they cannot have at home. However, developments in technology have allowed people to have surrounded sound and high definition image on a big screen at home. This means that less people are visiting the cinema as they can watch films in the comfort of their own home. Piracy has even allowed audiences to watch new films on DVD before they have even come out in the cinema – which is another contributing factor that is affecting Britain’s film industry. This is because films are not earning back the money that has been spent on distribution, as people do not have to pay to see films anymore.
However, technology developments have issues too. This is because all films are sold on DVD now, with features such as Blue Ray and HD. This means they can only be watched by audiences who have an Xbox, Play station or modern DVD player. Resulting in older generations missing opportunities to see new films as they do not have the equipment or knowledge to watch them.
A very large issue is the government cuts on the British Film Council. This has had a huge impact on the industry as there is a lot less money available to use to produce new films. This means that Britain has even more competition with Hollywood, as they obtain a lot less money. This means the quality of British films will drop dramatically, therefore less people will watch the films, cutting Britain’s film profits massively. This could also affect Britain’s availability of actors, as more actors will be moving to America, as there is inevitably more work in work in the film industry over there as they have more money.
In conclusion, the British Film Industry needs more money to gain back the power America have, so Britain can be in control of what films they want to distribute and also in order to make higher quality films with effects and stunts that at the moment they cannot afford.
There are many different ways to distribute films, here are some popular ways:
- Trailers
- Film posters at bus stops, on buildings, in shopping centres
- Social Networking sites, e.g. Facebook, Twitter, Myspace
- Blogging on sites such as Blogger, Wordpress, Typepad, HubPages
- Film Festivals, e.g. The London Film Festival
- Email Signitures
- Advertisment Campaigns, e.g. Youtube, Google, Yahoo, Facebook ad's
- Cross Links on film websites
- Credits - when people search someones name that has been involved in your film, your movie will pop up.
- Film websites
About the Film Industry:
When we talk about the film industry, we're referring to its six different component parts: Development, Production, Facilities, Distribution, Exhibition and Export.
Of the companies in the film industry today, we can say approximately 43% are production, 13% are distribution and the remaining 44% are exhibition companies.
In 2006, the UK film industry contributed £4.3 billion to the UK economy, up from £3.1 billion in 2004.
The UK industry is an independent creator of feature films, a co-production partner and a provider of services to the international film industry.
In 2007, UK production activity was £747 million, making it the fourth highest production year on record. Inward investment productions including Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince and Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian and indigenous productions such as Brideshead Revisited and How To Lose Friends and Alienate People were just some of the productions made in the UK.
516 films were released across the UK in 2007, a 58% increase over the decade. UK films, including co-productions, accounted for 21% of releases and 29% of the market by value.
In 2007 the UK had the largest number of digital screens in Europe at 296 screens, double the number in 2006.
3D MOVIES
The lights dim in the screening room. Suddenly, the doomed Titanic fills the screen--but not the way I remember in the movie. The luxury liner is nearly vertical, starting its slide into the black Atlantic, and Leonardo DiCaprio is hanging on for life, just like always. But this time, I am too. The camera pans to the icy water far below, pulling me into the scene--the sensation reminds me of jerking awake from a dream--and I grip the sides of my seat to keep from falling into the drink.
Most of us have seen the top-grossing film of all time. But not like this. The new version, still in production, was remade in digital 3-D, a technology that's finally bringing a true third dimension to movies. Without giving you a headache.
Had digital 3-D been available a dozen or so years ago when he shot Titanic, he'd have used it, director James Cameron tells me later. "But I didn't have it at the time," he says ruefully. "Certainly every film I'm planning to do will be in 3-D."
Digital 3-D, which has slowly been gaining steam over the past few years, is finally ready for its closeup. Just about every top director and major studio is doing it--a dozen movies are slated to arrive this year, with dozens more in the works for 2010 and beyond. These are not just animations but live-action films, comedies, dramas and documentaries. Cameron is currently shooting a live-action drama, Avatar, for Fox in 3-D. Disney and its Pixar studio are releasing five 3-D movies this year alone, including a 3-D-ified version of Toy Story. George Lucas hopes to re release his Star Wars movies in 3-D. And Steven Spielberg is currently shooting Tintin in it, with Peter Jackson doing the 3-D sequel next year. Live sports and rock concerts in 3-D have been showing up at digital theaters around the U.S. nearly every week.
With the release on March 27 of Monsters vs. Aliens, Jeffrey Katzenberg, the head of DreamWorks Animation SKG, is betting the future of his studio on digital 3-D. While he's not the first to embrace the technology, he has become its most vocal evangelist, asserting that digital 3-D is now good enough to make it--after sound and color--the third sea change to affect movies. "This really is a revolution," he says.
Over the past few years, Katzenberg has repositioned DreamWorks as a 3-D-animation company. From Monsters on, all its movies will be made, natively, in 3-D. (Many animation studios create the 3-D effect in postproduction.) That's a pretty big commitment since 3-D involves even more computer power than usual. The DreamWorks crew invokes "Shrek's law," which holds that every sequel takes about twice as long to render--create a final image from models--as the movie that preceded it. Authoring the movie in 3-D effectively doubles the time called for by Shrek's law.
That requires an extreme amount of horsepower--the computational power of DreamWorks' render farm puts it roughly among the 15 fastest supercomputers on the planet. The studio partnered with Hewlett-Packard and Intel and built an enormous test bed on more than 17,500 sq. ft. in California. The Silicon Valley companies are hot on 3-D because they believe it's how people will navigate the Web and the desktops of their PCs and that it will be standard on computers and HDTVs.
The Government don't care about the film industry.
One of the best things about the award season is that when a British film succeeds at the Oscars and Baftas, such as Slumdog Millionaire in 2009 and The King's Speech this year, the British public get right behind it with an immense sense of national pride. And so they should: we have a film industry in this country that, at its best, amazing.
This is why its sad the government's short-sighted attack on our industry, by abolishing the UK Film Council and cutting the budget of the British Film Institute by 15%.
Because the sad truth is that, for every The King's Speech, there should be 10 other successful British films released.We have so many film colleges around the country filled with students who want to learn about the importance of the visual image, the worry about them is that they wont be able to fulfil their dreams of getting work in an industry that is shrinking before our very eyes.
It's not simply that British films do well at the box office and generate revenue, it's that they provide a window to the world of what Britain and its culture is about. Our films have the ability to tell global audiences who we are, and this is something the government should feel compelled to protect.
The London Film Festival:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqCrZ010gW0
Cinematographic Masterpieces:
According to The Sun in 2007, these 10 films were rated 'Cinematographic Masterpieces!':
1) SHICHININ NO SAMURAI
2) SCHINDLER'S LIST
3) WO HU CANG LONG
4) APOCALYPSE NOW
5) BEN-HUR
6) BARRY LYDON
7) MORTE A VENIZIA
8) THE GODFATHER
9) MEMOIRS OF GEISHA
10) AMERICAN BEAUTY.
Movie Studios:
A movie studio (aka film studio) is a company that produces motion pictures. In the literal sense, however, the term denotes a controlled environment for film making. This environment may be interior (sound stage), exterior (backlot), or both.
Examples of film studios:
- Fox Video (USA)
- 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment (USA)
- Republic Pictures (UK)
- Walt Disney Pictures (USA & UK)
