Marketing Campaign of Blockbusters

In this article I will discuss blockbusters and how the budget & star factor won’t affect the success of a film even if it is classed as a blockbuster. Star factor is often used/seen in big budget films, most recently ‘Cowboys and Aliens’ (Dir. Jon Favreau, 2011) who used Daniel Craig and Harrison Ford, to draw in a larger audience. Marketing strategies and target audience will also be discussed.

Blockbuster. A blockbuster is a film that signifies a popular and in most cases a successful production; and is usually high budget and employs well known stars in order to draw in an audience (Also known as Star Factor). 2011’s biggest winter blockbusters were ‘The Thing’ (Dir. Matthijs van Heijningen, 2011) a prequel to 1982 classic of the same name and ‘50/50’ (Dir. Jonathan Levine, 2011), although they were both close with their opening weekend takings when it came to their overall gross there was difference of $18,056,517 making 50/50 the more successful film.

There are multiple ways to advertise a film; Billboards, Social Networking Sites (Facebook and YouTube etc.), Print adverts and reviews/interviews (newspapers and/or magazines) as well as TV trailers. Magazine interviews and reviews are one of the biggest ways to market a film as the interviews let the stars give their opinion on the film which will convince their fans to watch it for them. Reviews are difficult as they can go either way, if the film gets a really good review more people are bound to go and watch it but if it’s a bad review less people will want to watch it. The best way to gain a fan base for a film would be through the trailer as it shows all the best points of a film and can be edited to entice different target audiences. Trailers shown in the cinema depend upon what certificate the film is that the audience is currently watching, these trailers are usually longer and more detailed than the ones shown on TV whereas trailers are up on YouTube months before there on television whether it’s just teaser trailer to get the audience excited for the full length trailer or it’s the feature length trailer showing all the highlights of the film to interest the target audience. A page is usually created on Facebook for the film with trailers, promotional picture as w ell as a few spoilers in order to create hype around the film and to gain a bigger audience due to the popularity of Facebook. There are several ways to market a film, two of these theories are Reception theory and Star theory. One believes that the actors that star in the film affect its popularity and success where the other believes it’s the relationship between the viewer and the context, that meaning is created whilst the viewer watches and processes the film. Reception theory argues that it’s the contextual factors within a film that influence the way the audience views the film. Contextual factors are things like social, historical or political issues and circumstances of exhibition as well as the viewers preconceived notions about the genre and production. This theory takes into account the multiple factors than will influence the viewer in how they read and create meaning the film from the text from elements of the viewer’s identity.

Star theory became popular after the First World War when the French cinema world chose to use big named film stars in order to generate interest and excitement around the films; it is now applied in Hollywood to films that are classed as Blockbusters. The use of big named celebrities not only generates big money for studios but the actors themselves take a lot of money for themselves if they generate a greater profit for the film. When thinking about star theory; everyone has that one favourite(s) actor/actress where they would watch a film just because they were in it, even if it was just a small cameo part, this is classed as a fandom. One of mine is Tom Hiddleston (TH), who recently played the part of Loki in ‘The Avengers’. There are many reasons why I like TH a few being the fact that he embraces all the characters he plays and doesn’t just stick to similar/familiar parts. He’s played a range of characters from an evil, mischievous trickster to an honourable, brave WW2 army Captain. He is known for taking parts of his own personality and twisting it into his characters making them more real and relatable. Although I’m not an actually fan of Scarlett Johansson I can understand why many are, she is often classed as a modern Marilyn Monroe due to the fact that she often plays character that are a version of herself, very feminine and often strong characters, making them more real.

In the trailer for 2011 blockbuster ‘The Thing’ they use the grotesque sound of the Thing changing form as well as the change in the tempo of the non diegetic music to indicate when the thing is about to attack to create a sense of dread and excitement. The mise en scene is dark at the start of the trailer which gives us the indication that it is a horror but throughout as the fear and suspension builds the mise en scene continues to get darker until all your focus is on the characters and the anticipation of the thing attacking. All this easily catches the attention of horror buffs as it creates multiple senses of dread, fear, suspense and excitement everything a horror buff wants to feel when watching a good horror film. ‘The Thing’ is aimed at the niche horror audience; we know this as the film is a prequel to one of the most terrifying classic horror movies of recent generations. Not only would it already have a large following due to the success of the original ‘The Thing’ but the trailer appeals to all the aspects connected to horror films. The mise en scene is dark and dull which creates the atmosphere of the film; and given the fact that you don’t actually see the monster in the trailer it creates even more suspense for the actual film, this technique was used all throughout the Steven Spielberg blockbuster ‘Super 8’. The trailer could have affected the box office takings as it only targets those who enjoy horror films dismissing those who might prefer other genres more. In order to gain more of an audience they shouldn’t have made the trailer so horror orientated as it looks like that is all the film is about, a lot of people enjoy horror films especially if they have a good storyline and create more emotional reactions other than fear. I believe the producer set the 2011 ‘The Thing’ in 1982 as a prequel to the original as it will bring in the audience and fans of the first film as they get to see how it all began. According to the UK film council website The Thing grossed $27,428,670 in box office takings, although it was much more heavily marketed than 50/50 its lack of star theory let it down when it came to the box office takings. 50/50 grossed $39,185,691 in the box office takings, this was mainly due to the appearance of Seth Rogan who not only produced the film but also chose to play one of the main characters boosting the films appeal.

Although ‘50/50’ is about a serious subject of a man who learns he has cancer, the trailer manages to appeal to a wide target audience due to the upbeat music and the strong sense friendship & family shown in the mise en scene. Whilst the trailer managers to show the comedic side it also appeals to those who prefer Dramas especially at the beginning of the trailer where it focuses on the reactions to the news by the main character and his family & friends, the non diegetic sound begins with a slow tempo & beat and gradually speeds ups as he comes to terms with what’s happening to him as his best friend (Seth Rogan) helps him through it.

Even though Seth Rogan isn’t the main character he is a big part of advertising for the film, as his comedy appeals to young adults. The trailer for 50/50 focuses quite heavily on his star appeal in order to gain a larger audience, whilst the storyline will appeal to adults the comedic input from Seth Rogan appeals to the younger generation. This is because it is easy for young adults (Students/rebellious adults) to relate to him as he is a self named stoner who is laid back and understands teen comedy (Superbad, 2007), and in my opinion I

 believe the appearance of Seth Rogan contributed greatly to the film’s success as he brought in a larger audience. The appearance of Seth Rogan is also a big factor of Reception theory as the target audience of the film can relate to the character that he plays because they perceive that they are from similar backgrounds, and can identify with the multitude of characters he plays therefore emphasizing the comic effect which boosts the popularity of any of the films he appears in.

Seth Rogan brings a lot of his self to the characters he plays, this is called personification, and a lot of the characters he plays are stoners, boorish and often crude as seen in his previous films Superbad (Dir. Greg Mottola, 2007) and Pineapple Express (Dir. David Gordon Green, 2008). With bringing Seth Rogan into a film with such a serious core matter, it brought a lot of understanding to young adults about cancer and how it can affect not only the person who has but everyone around them. It is not as unusual as it seems for Seth Rogan to appear in a film with such a serious core subject as a few of his previous films also focus on serious subjects, Knocked Up (Dir. Judd Apatow, 2007) focuses on pregnancy and all the problems that come with having a baby as well as Monster vs. Aliens (Dir. Rob Letterman and Conrad Vernon, 2009) which if you look closely focuses on the subject of how people are different and how they are treated because of this.

Although the marketing campaign is a big factor in a film’s success when looking at 50/50 and The Thing it’s easy to see that star factor is more significant when boosting the appeal of a film.

Me and My Movies

Me and My Movies

View more presentations from KatieHam94.

Originals and Remakes

In this essay I will discuss the Spanish film REC and its American remake Quarantine, both were filmed in a documentary style using handheld cameras, imitating reality TV which was a big trend during the production of the films. I will also talk about how Quarantine made money for Screen Gem using the success of REC and how a trend is a production factor that influences all remakes whether its stars/celebrities, political factors or vertical integration and synergy.

A lot of people don’t like reading subtitles in films and Rec was so popular that the production companies thought a remake for English speaking audience would be very successful and earn large box office takings, as it would gain a bigger audience than the original and larger distribution. Through vertical integration and synergy Screen Gems continued to profit from both Quarantine and Rec, as they re-released Rec at the same time Quarantine was released, in a way to hit an even larger target audience. Screen gems basically piggybacked of off the success of REC in order to gain a larger profit. At the same time of the release of Rec and Quarantine two other films of the same style were also released, Cloverfield and Diary of the Dead, this was due to the two main trends of the time reality TV & video games so all of the films had to be released whilst they were still in popular demand.

Balaguero chose to create the film in a documentary style, only using a handheld camera because he wanted to ensure REC retained the highest credibility and kept a dynamic and terrifying live feeling, the only way to do so was to shoot the film as if it was an actual live TV news report. Trends also factored into the way the film was created as reality TV shows were very popular at the time REC was produced, and the audience demanded more from horror films, to not only be spectator but feel as though they are there in the film. Also due to the advance in technology, video games also became a massive trend, which brought Balaguero to create scenes that looked and felt like a first person shooter game like ‘Left for dead’. Handheld cameras do this effectively while also upping the scare factor by making the audience feel like they are a part of the film. Although Rec and Quarantine were only a year apart and were almost identical shot for shot there was a big jump in budget (Rec: €1,500,000 and Quarantine: $12,000,000) and box office with Rec taking just $32,492,948 and Quarantine $41,319,906.

Another example of a remake being the Karate Kid films which were made 26 years apart unlike REC and Quarantine, both Karate Kid films were distributed by the same company Columbia pictures that was bought by Sony pictures so now they can profit from both films via synergy due to Horizontal Integration. (Horizontal integration is the merging of two or more companies).

Star factor was a big aspect of the remake with both Will and Jada-Pinkett Smith producing the film and their son Jaden being the main star along with Jackie Chan who is classed as a screen idol in China. In order to profit even more from the Karate kid films Sony re-released the 1984 Karate Kid at the same time the remake was being released which is exactly what they did with Rec and Quarantine. The franchise of the Karate Kid grew larger with the release of the remake, with the karate kid video game (1984), online games & apps (2010) and sound tracks for both films; this was another motive for the remake of the classic. Another being the reason why a lot of remakes are made; the original film already gained a large fan base from when it came out and with the release of a remake not only will it bring in a new audience but it will catch the eye of the old who would want to watch it to compare, an example of this being the Nightmare on Elm Street films and War of the Worlds.

Steven Spielberg decided to remake the War of the Worlds in 2005 because of 9/11, in an interview with MSN Movies when asked if Sept. 11 never happed would he have done the remake Spielberg answered “Probably not”, and further stated that the 1953 film coincided with the cold war-era when Americans feared Nuclear war and that his version “also comes at a time when Americans feel deeply vulnerable” due to the threat of terrorism after the events of 9/11.

In 1953 Byron Haskin adapted H.G Wells’ novel ‘War of the Worlds’ into a film; where residents of a small town in California become excited when a meteor lands in the hills only to realize that it has passengers that are not very friendly. To create Haskins version of War of the worlds they had a budget of $2,000,000 whilst Spielberg had $132,000,000 to play with, both Spielberg’s and Haskin’s versions of ‘War of the Worlds’ were distributed by the same company Paramount Pictures, Spielberg’s ‘War of the Worlds’ brought in $588,929,061 worldwide in box office takings.

(http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/10549050/ns/today-entertainment/t/steven-spielbergs-obsession/)

How Do We Analyse a Film?

There are multiple ways to analyse a film sufficiently I am going to be using two, specifically Genre analysis and Auteur theory.

Genre analysis is where you take different scenes from a film and analyse them separately using the seven key points of Genre Analysis; the three I believe to be important would be the characters present in the film, codes & conventions and the iconography. An example of genre analysis being the codes and conventions present in Action/Thriller films like James Bond; they always have guns, explosions, fast paced action sequences, Exotic Locations, beautiful women and men wearing sharp suits. Auteur theory is when a director takes a generic genre and twists it into something unique placing their fingerprint on that genre. There are also seven key sections to Auteur theory; but the three I believe to be the most important are whether the film is for artistic merit instead of commercial value, has an individual style & theme and the filmmaker solely creates meaning/ideological message.

An example of Auteur theory being the Quentin Tarantino films such as Reservoir Dogs (1994) is a unique type of Heist film. Tarantino not only directed Reservoir Dogs but he also starred in and wrote the film, this is also a signature of an Auteur. Like all of Tarantino’s films Reservoir dogs breaks away from the conventions set by the genre, unlike other Heist films Reservoir dogs doesn’t show the actual heist just the aftermath and is only set in one location the warehouse, although it cuts to other locations the shots are usually very short only a few seconds or minutes long. Contrasting with other films Reservoir dogs is set in one location that isn’t very big as the audience only sees two of the rooms in the warehouse, the warehouse itself is dirty and urban while in other heist films like Oceans 11 (sequels) is set in exotic locations like the Caribbean.

There are seven key sections to look for in a film when you are using Genre analysis; whether the characters and location are what you would imagine from a film of that genre an example being a western, you would expect it to be set somewhere hot and sandy but not exotic, the most common locations for western movies are places in America like Texas or Mexico. When watching a western you would expect to finds cowboys, spurs and all, as they are the stereotypical character of the western genre. Westerns always have the same three characters a sheriff, reluctant hero and a bandit (bad guy); although a lot of directors have tried to mix things up by making the bad guy the sheriff or the bad guy actually being the good guy at the end there is always these three characters; whether they are separate people or one person that takes on two or all these characteristics. This is proven in films like The Good, The Bad and The Ugly (Dir. Sergio Leone, 1966) and True Grit (Dir. Henry Hathaway, 1969) both of which have become classic examples of the western genre. If you were watching an action film there would be three types of characters you would expect to find; a villain who is often a psychopath, a good guy and an innocent female victim. Conventions are what you would expect from this kind of film; guns, explosions, fast paced action sequences, men in sharp suits and beautiful women are some of the codes and conventions you would imagine to find in an Action Thriller. What is the narrative of the film and does it have an ideological message. Not all films have an ideological message but one example would be Apocalypse Now (Dir. Francis Ford Coppola, 1979) which has a very strong anti-war message, this is depicted in a well known scene that cross cuts between the US army soldiers preparing to attack to a small village populated by Vietnamese women and children. There is a large contrast between the shots which profoundly established the anti-war message in the film, the scene begins with US army soldiers in the helicopters preparing to attack it is a very masculine shot and with the diegetic music playing it also very loud & almost harsh in the way it builds up the suspension this shot then cross cuts to a small Vietnamese village full of women and children unlike the previous shot it is quiet & tranquil. Is there any iconography present, an example of iconography in a film being the cars used in the James Bond films where the Aston martins represent British power as they always come out on top in fast paced car action sequences.

Having been a fan of Sci-fi since I was a kid I’ve learnt how to recognise the genre; which is easy when using Genre Analysis. When watching a science fiction film some of the codes and conventions you see are futuristic weapons and technology like the lightsabers in the Star Wars (Dir. George Lucas, 1979) Saga & spaceships, as well as Aliens whether they’re creatures from another planet or humans with special abilities like the character River Tam from the film Serenity (Dir. Joss Whedon, 2005). Science fiction films often follow the same narrative of there being some kind of alien invasion for example Skyline and Independence Day. The locations used in many science fiction films are usually urban cities/towns or a large expansive spaceship, the locations are contradictory because if the film is set on a spaceship it is usually empty with only a small number of characters aboard whilst the urban location is usually densely populated with multiple characters.

After watching Cowboys and Aliens by Jon Favreau, a hybrid film that is both a Western and Sci-fi, I was asked whether I believed Jon Favreau to be an Auteur. In my opinion, after watching some of his other films as well as Cowboys and Aliens, I don’t think Jon Favreau is an Auteur. Although Favreau’s films always have high technical excellence and he takes on multiple roles, a well known aspect of an Auteur, in addition to directing; for instance he usually plays a small part in the films he directs, an example being the character ‘Happy Hogan’ he portrayed in both Iron Man (2008 and 2010) films. Favreau has never been the principal creator of a film he has directed, they are often adaptations of graphic novels/comics like Iron Man and Cowboys & Aliens or were written by somebody else (co-written by Favreau and other writers). None of Favreau’s films have a unique meaning or ideological message behind them and there is no specific individual style that can be seen throughout his films. They are what you would expect to find in multimillion dollar blockbusters; general drama, comedy (often adult humour) and a lot of the time fast paced action sequences some other examples of block buster movies with a similar style to John Favreau’s work being Thor (Dir. Kenneth Branagh, 2011) and The Change Up (Dir. David Dobkin, 2011). When it comes to John Favreau he chooses to create films for their commercial value instead of artistic merit, a big part of being an auteur is that the director makes for film for artistic merit instead of commercial value.