Tuesday, 15 March 2016

Disability RE-Write

Coming down the mountain- Representation of Disability

In the extract from coming down the mountain, disability is represented as being very difficult both for the people affected as well as for the people who have to care for them, which can come out in various different ways such as through cruelty to those around you or the person who is disabled themselves.

Our establishing shot for the scene already classes the two brothers, Ben and David, as binary opposites of each other.   Ben represents disability as he is the disabled brother.   In our aerial shot of the room, Ben’s half is extremely bright and colourful compared to David’s dark and much more neutral side.   With these two comparisons, Ben appears to already be labelled as a child, since bright colours are very often symbolic of children, connoting to the idea of innocence and not understanding the world.   Children are often very much protected by those around them, and in this way it could be seen that Ben is very much being treated like a child, protected but also looked down upon by those who look after him.   There is a physical distance between Ben and David within the room, with their beds being on opposite walls; the mise-en-scene in regards to the physical layout of the room is already suggesting that there is distance between Ben and David and beginning the ideas of the difficulties of being a carer for someone who is disabled.

We hear David’s edited in voice over as the camera zooms into the room, as if we are joining David in the room.   Due to our first introduction being with David, it can be assumed that the preferred reading of the director would be to pity David and agree with what he believed.   However, we are very soon challenged in this with David’s very first line to the audience being “Last summer I decided to kill my brother”.   This is very confusing to the audience, as we assume we are meant to be on the side of David though he begins with such an awful statement, which almost fits in with the mise en scene that is on his side of the room, such as the skull by his window.   We dissolve into an arc shot at mid-close up of David.   We are very close to him and he is half naked.   With this being our first encounter with David, the bareness of him seems to appeal to the idea that he is very vulnerable, despite his emotionless face.   Though we may consider Ben vulnerable due to his disability, which we can also see with the cut to a close up of a sleeping Ben since in sleep everything is very vulnerable, this once again fits in with the idea of the difficulty of caring.   The fact that David is awake and Ben is asleep also appeals to the idea of protection, as in most situations where survival instincts are needed, the idea of ‘keeping watch’ is a common one.   However, this is the complete opposite of what David has already said and this scene begins to take on a more predatory look.   Due to the emotionless of David’s face, which is merely blinking, emphasised by the arc shot, it almost becomes the idea of a hunter stalking its prey ready to kill.   The irony of this scene is the non-diegetic music playing in the background, with the piano music reminiscent of science fiction, but also strangely bubbly for such a dark scene.

Once again, we dissolve into a black and white montage of the stages of evolution, as David’s voice over continues, talking about the idea of chance that we are able to be here at all.   This emphasises some cruelty from David once again as he calls his brother “a big potato with eye tentacles” as if he is calling his brother a mistake.   We once again are challenged about our loyalty to David as a character, as the ferocity seems unprecedented, since Ben can’t help the way he is.    Again, the music seems strangely wrong, changing into cheery pop song “Wouldn’t It Be Nice” by the Beach Boys, which gradually becomes diegetic music on the radio as we are introduced to the lower class estate house that Ben and David live in.   This setting appears to once again suggest the burden that looking after someone with a disability is, as the dining room/ kitchen area does not look particularly spacious.

In this scene in the kitchen, we do see some of where David’s anger is coming from, hearing how Ben “ate all the bloody Weetabix” and seeing the mother and father’s somewhat favouritism in regards to Ben.   Through the use of shot reverse shot, we can understand the problems that Ben and David are having, in regards to the way that David does have to somewhat make sacrifices for Ben.   They sit on opposite sides of the table, once again highlighting the idea that they are very much two separate beings.   We also see the physical contact that Ben and the mother have, with Ben having a kiss on the head and David not.   It can be seen that David’s now seeming jealousy is quite natural, and his anger at Ben somewhat justifiable.   David’s description of how pigs are killed is also somewhat comic despite being mean.   However, the viewer is still unsure that the idea of killing Ben is necessary, despite how hard it is on David.

We move on to a montage of Ben and David’s relationship, seeing them sitting at the dirty bus stop, still within the estate area and the different experiences they have together.   We have gone back to a voice over once again.   We see the ways that Ben annoys David, such as squeaking the toy in David’s ear, which is shown in a close up.   Yet, we also see David pretending to shoot Ben as he is learning to ride a bike, going back again to the idea of innocence and children and David’s horrifying confession about wanting to murder his brother.   We do also see David’s protection of Ben as he discusses the idea of making sure no one will drag him off, with a focus pull to odd-looking man shown at the bus stop.   Despite everything we have seen of David so far, this is almost repentance for what he said.

We begin our new scene in the school with an over the shoulder shot of David drawing a horse.   The drawing is very good, and the idea of it being on its hind legs as if it is about to ride connotes to the idea of freedom.   This could link to the idea that David wants to be free from Ben, but also that Ben may be stopping David from pursuing his art in someway.   We also David’s intelligence in this scene as he highlights his historical knowledge.   The teacher is very judgemental of those without knowledge in her class, and this links back to the idea of Ben having problems being disabled, as intelligence is valued and he still has the mind of a child in many ways.   This is also shown through the fact that David looking after Ben is known as ‘babysitting’, as if Ben is truly a small child.   Ben’s innocence is further shown on the bus, as his fear appears to be prominent as he clings on to the seat in front of him.   We feel sorry for Ben, since his brother has abandoned him, especially as the sad piano soundtrack heightens the emotion.   Ben’s eyes are particularly focused on in slow motion as the sound effect of children’s laughter is heard in the background.   He seems very alone.

Regional Identity Stereotypes

Northerners-

  • Hate Margaret Thatcher and blame her for unemployment- all working class
  • Unhealthy- like gravy on everything, chips with everything
  • Big drinkers
  • Stubborn
  • Stupid
  • Friendlier than Southerners
  • Save their money
  • Community orientated
  • More rural
  • More chilled out- go at a slower pace
Southerners-
  • Middle, Upper-class OR cockney
  • Rude
  • Spenders
  • Fast paced
  • Intelligent
  • Condescending
  • Built up city space- don't understand green space

Digital Technologies Re-write

*corrections in yellow*
Evaluate the role of digital technologies in the marketing and consumption of products in the area you have studied

My American conglomerate case study is Guardians of the Galaxy (here on abbreviated to Guardians), from Marvel, directed by James Gunn and released on the 31st July 2014 in the UK.   My British independent case study is Kingsman: The Secret Service (here on abbreviated to Kingsman), from MARV, directed by Matthew Vaughn and released on the 29th January 2015 in the UK.

My case studies come from Marvel Studios and MARV films.  Marvel Studios was created in 1993 and was called Marvel Films until 1996.  It is a subsidiary of Walt Disney Studios but owns Marvel Worldwide Inc. also known as Marvel Comics.  They have created 3 multi-film-franchises, which have earned over $1 billion in revenue each.    The current president is producer Kevin Feige.  Comparatively smaller, MARV Films, also known as MARV was founded in 2004 and is owned by Matthew Vaughn, who also directs the films.  Their most famous and successful films to date have been Layer Cake (2004), Stardust (2007), Kick-Ass (2010) and Kingsman: The Secret Service (2015).  Both case studies used a variety of different digital technologies in the marketing and consumption of their products.

One of the biggest aids to marketing using digital technologies was the use of social media and websites by Marvel and MARV.   James Gunn, Kevin Feige and the official Marvel Twitter account were consistently posting about Guardians during its pre-production, production and post-production phase.   This was used to get people interested in the film from the very beginning and keep people updated on how work on the film was progressing.   Marvel also put up bloopers from Guardians onto YouTube to further indicate that the film was fun and worth watching.   Marvel used many of their own accounts to post about Guardians, which may have been a little unsuccessful since they were also posting about many of their other films at the same time.   Marvel also created websites and webpages to get people interested in the film.   For example, Galaxy Getaways was created to allow people to find a little bit about the different planets that are mentioned in the film.   This would most likely have been very helpful, as, due to the fact that many people’s names were also somewhat “alien”, it is very easy for planets and names to be confused.   It also was quite novel, as “Launchpad sites” were the location of cinemas, adding to the fun element of the film.   They also created a webpage for the film; this was somewhat more boring as it merely linked back to the original Marvel website.    MARV took a somewhat similar approach; they created social media accounts specifically for Kingsman on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube, as well as other social media sites.   This could easily have been more effective than Marvel using their own since it was all Kingsman.   However, it also didn’t have the same personal touch as was had by James Gunn and Kevin Feige using their own accounts, since Matthew Vaughn doesn’t have a Twitter account.   They also created a Kingsman website which linked up to a game, the merchandise and people who were in the film, to introduce people to the film in an interesting way.   Overall, in regards to marketing using social media and websites, both Marvel and MARV came up with unique and interesting ways to advertise their products, though Marvel did fall down on its decision to use its one Twitter account to post major news about Guardians as it could easily be lost in the other posts that may come up regarding comic books or other films.

In a very similar way to using social media and websites, creating games was very popular with both companies, and encouraging cross media convergence by incorporating both computers and phones.  MARV included a game on their website; you could link your phone up to the computer and play the games via that.   This was probably quite effective, unless you didn’t have a smartphone and then you couldn’t play the game.   However, since the target audience was young adults, and most people nowadays have some kind of smartphone, the game introduced people to the film in an interesting way.   Marvel created Guardians of the Galaxy: The Universal Weapon, which could be found on the app store.   This had the same problems as Kingsman with the idea that without a smartphone you could not play it; as well, the game was not directly linked to the film and only included the same characters, meaning that the film does not automatically spring to mind.   However, since it was a game that could be played by anybody, then it also attracted the much younger audience that Guardians was aiming towards.   Once again, both Marvel and MARV had a similar idea in regards to advertising with the creation of games; both executed the idea in different ways.   Due to the general hassle of connecting your phone up to the computer however, I feel Marvel's game would have been more successful as it would have been easier to access.

Digital technology was also used to market through adverts such as teaser trailers, interviews and posters on websites.   The Guardians cast did almost all of their interviews in America, although they were also interviewed at the UK premiere.   However, many of the interviews could be found on YouTube, allowing them to be seen by people in countries all around the world.   The teaser trailers could be found in the same way- on YouTube, on TV as well as in cinemas and even in IMAX theatres.   This meant that a variety of people were able to find out about the film in a variety of different ways.   With Kingsman, the adverts could be also be seen in cinemas, online and on TV.  However, they were not given a trailer in IMAX theatres, as they weren’t showing their film in IMAX theatres either.   This meant that less people would actually be able to find out about the film, though this wouldn’t be a particularly large amount.   Many Kingsman interviews were British-led, but there were also interviews in America, meaning that more people could be targeted.   Similarly to Guardians, the interviews could be found online.   Posters for both films could be seen on film websites and blogs specifically, as well as popping up at the sides of web pages.   Traditional methods of advertising are still obviously used, which can be seen through this use of interviews and posters, and also demonstrates that despite the difference in budget, that the films would still advertise in the same way as their most effective method of campaigning.

Kingsman was released on digital format only, meaning it couldn’t be put in as many cinemas as Guardians was.   However, this didn’t stop its success, as it ended up making a profit of  $414.4 million.   Guardians was released in a lot more formats; as well as digital format, it was released in D-Box screens and IMAX screens.   By releasing it on more screens it could reach a wider audience.   It ended up making a net profit of about $204.2 million.   In regards to consumption, Marvel was able to reach a much larger audience.   However, despite Marvel being able to reach a larger audience, MARV more than quadrupled it's budget in profit.    This highlights the idea that despite the benefits of new technologies to the audience, such as the idea of being more in depth in the action, not investing your film into them does not necessarily decrease popularity.

When the two films were released on, they were both released similarly to their cinema formats, with the idea that Guardians was released on more formats.  Guardians was released on DVD, Blu-Ray, Blu-Ray 3D and digital download meaning that it could be seen on more things.   Kingsman was released on DVD and Blu-ray but was also released on digital HD, making it a higher quality than the Guardians copy.   This once again shows the idea in the change into the audience as producer, and the fact that higher budget films still need to be down to the earth, in the sense of still doing things that lower budget films do.


In regards to piracy, Kingsman was one of the top 10 films, which was pirated in 2015, with over 30,922,937 downloads by the end of 2015.   This may have had to do with the fact that it is not on Netflix and has to be bought or rented from Amazon prime.   Guardians  was also pirated over 10,000 times but was less popular to download, since all versions of the film to be pirated were bootleg copies recorded on a camcorder.   This highlights the idea that, due to it being a much bigger company, Marvel would be able to protect it's material easier than MARV could and does show some differentiation between American conglomerate films and British independent films in regards to digital technologies, since Kingsman was consumed illegally many more times than Guardians was.

Overall, both Marvel and MARV were very similar in the use of digital technologies in regards to marketing and consumption.  Both went down more traditional routes in regards to the teaser trailer, the posters and the interviews, but also went into the idea of new media in regards to Twitter.   They also went into the idea of more modern technologies by making apps or games.   However, Marvel could better protect its film from being pirated which does show, that despite both being successes, in the fight against piracy, the American conglomerate won.