Since we first talked about genre theory in week one, I have developed my understanding of genre. I think that modern films can never truly stick to one genre, as John Frow theorises, genre is a dynamic process that reflects the time. Films and genres talk to each other. Genre doesn’t imply a set of rules, or boundaries you cannot cross when film making, but acts as more of a guide for film discussion.

After 12 weeks of exploding genre, the following things stand out about what I have learnt:

• Media management is really important when you are creating content.
• How to use an EX3 camera, from turning it on to focusing, exposure, and white balance.
• How to hire an camera equipment, haul it around the city and not get blacklisted for winding earphones the wrong way.
• How to write an exegesis, (not to leave an exegesis to the last minute).
• And of course genre; genre conventions, purity, hybridity and the problems and opportunities for us as creators that genre poses in filmmaking.

‘Subject matter doesn’t determine genre. Genres only start existing when there’s enough of them to form a sort of critical mass’ (Gaiman & Ishiguro 2015). So for creators, remixing genres allows us to draw on a range of genre rubrics, using varying visual, aural and narrative styles.

This studio has been really worthwhile and makes (slightly) easier to motivate yourself to come to class at 8.30AM.

References:

Frow, John. Genre. The Critical Idiom, Series ed. John Drakakis. London: Routledge, 2006.

Neil Gaiman & Kazuo Ishiguro (2015, June 4), Let’s talk about genre, New Statesman.

As Kimberly Jackson talks about in Technology, Monstrosity, and Reproduction in Twenty-First Century Horror, genres are are being created over and over again, which leads to genre exhaustion,and  as a result genre hybrids emerge. When the audience is aware of conventions and tropes it becomes fun to play around and defy audience expectations.

The Cabin in the Woods (2011) had abilities that meant you were aware you were watching a horror movie; you knew what was going to happen yet you were still scared when it happened. ‘simultaneously asserting and denying the genre structure and knowledge’ (Jackson 2013, p.12).

You were able to be removed from the situation and see humour but then return to the scene and forget comedy sequence that just happened and sit on the edge of your seat again. Drew Goddard did this in such a succinct and smooth way that you were aware what was happening but still enjoying the film. The Cabin in The Woods (2011) ‘utilizes his in-between space to create and preserve layers of mediation and to comment on the horror genre’ (Jackson 2013, p.21).

I think that genre hybridity is a positive thing for film, it means we can test the limits and as film makers, draw on a range of conventions and visual styles which makes creating content exciting. The trouble is when studying genre theory you aren’t able to talk about genres as their own.

References:

Jackson, Kimberly (2013). Metahorror and simulation in the Scream series and The Cabin in the Woods. In Technology, Monstrosity, and Reproduction in Twenty-First Century Horror, pp. 11-30.

I always associate the action genre with destruction, it has a ‘dramatic physical action with a dynamism and intensity that marks it out from other sequences’ (Purse 2011, p.56). It is probably the genre screening I was least looking forward to. Despite the fact that I like big blockbuster films like the Avengers, and co and action is a ‘crucial ingredient in the block buster format’ (Purse 2011, p.59). The unnecessary death and damage always frustrates me. All I can think about is how much it is going to cost to repair an entire city or how ridiculous it is to constantly be shooting and wasting bullets when you can’t even see your target.

However, I did enjoy the plot of Ronin (1998), There seems to be a wise, skilled character in a lot of action films that always knows the right answer, such as Captain America (Chris Evans) in the Avengers, Dom (Vin Diesel) in Fast and the Furious and Sam (Robert De Niro) in Ronin (1998).

Although Purse’s reading was very focused on Fast and the Furious, there were some useful points. I always considered action films only possible for producing companies for blockbusters with massive budgets, if you wanted to pull off realistic and captivating content, but the readings helped me realise you just have to be smart about how you make it, if you combine techniques such as fast cutting, bursts of images, whiplash pans, jerky re-framings, rack focusing, bursts of lights, rapid editing and unstable camerawork (Purse 2011, p.59).

Despite the fact that I dismissed making an action sketch for any of my screenings if I could go back I would have read this reading at the start of the semester and attempted to make my own action short film.

References:

Purse, Lisa (2011). Chapter 3: The action sequence. In Contemporary action cinema. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 56-75.

This week we discussed bottle dramas, they are not recognised academically as their own genre, however Dan used them as one of the genres this week because they have a unique format.

Bottle dramas are easy to recognise but hard to produce. They are dialogue heavy, which means that the writers have to be skilled in scriptwriting. They have a minimalist cast and are based in a single location. However there are no signifying conventions of tropes past these that restrain it from being it’s own genre. This may make it difficult to create and adhere to any rules.

Bottle drama’s are usually the result of producing companies running out of money but still needing to produce something. The producers are forced to rely on existing sets and focus on dialogue. ‘rather than limit a show’s creative potential a bottle episode can unleash it’ (New York Magazine 2015).

Bottle dramas provide great viewing experiences because they rely entirely on the skills of the cinematographers, editors and actors performances. They have to prove their skills and originality. Dinner parties are common in bottle dramas, such as in the film we watched this week, Coherence (2013). I loved this film and thought it was so innovative. It shows you don’t need a multimillion-dollar budget to produce good content.

Personally, I don’t think of bottle dramas a genre so much but more a convention, it is recognisable predominantly in TV shows and can be used as a style within any kind of genre.

References:

New York Magazine 2015, Bottle Episodes: “Vulture’s Secret History of Television” Episode 2, online video, 8 July, YouTube, viewed 22 October 2016, <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usql12uOUVg>.

EXPLODING GENRE – WEEK EIGHT

‘Most of these films were about crime, often murder, and the harsh world of private investigators, police detectives, and the criminals they seek. These films centred on “a world of darkness and violence, with a central figure whose motives are usually greed, lust, and ambition, whose world is filled with fear. ” The setting was almost always an urban one, with rain-slicked city streets reflecting neon signs in the night. The world presented in these films was almost always totally corrupt and devoid of any human sympathy.’

(House 1986, p.62)

I didn’t actually know what a noir film is until this week. Now I realise it is a genre I really enjoy. Dan raised the question, what are the defining characteristics of noir films? There was a lot of talk in the readings about if it can be labelled it’s own, or if it is simply ‘a movement rather than a genre’ (House 1986, p.64), a period of film making rather than it’s own type of film.

As House states, ‘it is not defined, as are the western and gangster genres, by conventions of setting and conflict, but rather by the more subtle qualities of tone and mood’ (House 1986, p.64). As an objective observer who is unfamiliar with film noir I would classify it as it’s own genre, because when you watch these films you recognise them as noir. They are unique and are identifiable from an impartial perspective. As Rebecca House discusses, unlike other genres, film noir is unique in how it is distinguished. It is the ‘elusive qualities of mood, style, and tone’ (House 1986, p.64).

There is a mood that noir films exhibit that is unlike any other genre. This feeling comes from the overtly fake sets, obvious lighting and sets. The producers care more about the way the story is told than the story itself. Films such as The Killers (1946) show that the story takes a back seat and the aesthetic becomes more important.

References:

House, Rebecca R. (1986). Night of the soul: American film noir. Studies in Popular Culture, 9(1), pp. 61-83.

I haven’t seen a lot of vampire films, although after the screenings this week, Interview With A Vampire is definitely on my list to watch. It was interesting to see how the rules and rituals of the vampires changed throughout the films. Common tropes such as not being able to go out in sunlight and sleeping in coffins have become less common with the more modern films. Yet they all have a traditional, rich, culture with an all-white cast in the roles of the vampires. It is also interesting how most of them are told from the vampires point of view, so despite them killing a human they are still at our sympathies and we are non fazed by the deaths.

I liked how each film had a different way of presenting the vampires, Interview with a Vampire and Dracula were very traditional, the Underworld and Twilight are more modern, they use technologies and also play with the vampire vs werewolf convention. The newer films also submerse the vampires in human life whereas Interview With a Vampire the pack may have interactions with humans but they are still somewhat above them in hierarchy.

As I spoke about in my presentation, I think that I understand the theory of genre a lot more now, especially in the genres we have focused on each week. By the end of the semester I hope I master actually creating these genres on film. It is much easier to analyse them than to create them as I learnt through the first two sketches. So I hope I really hone my skills in for project 4.

I have never thought about what defines a musical compared to a film with music in it before this week. Barry Keith Grant states in The Hollywood Film Musical that the ‘definition of the film musical is a matter of some debate’ (2012, p.1). I think that music has to be relevant to the narrative advance the story. I think that a defining characteristic of a musical is that the characters don’t realise that they’re singing, they’re in an ‘imaginary space’ (Grant 2012, p.1).

As Grant explains, ‘music does comment on the characters and their situations, but does not emanate from them. This makes all the difference between a musical film and (…) the film musical.’ For example in 10 Things I Hate About You (1999) Patrick (Heath Ledger) serenades Kat (Julia Stiles) with a rendition of Can’t Take My Eyes Off You. This doesn’t make the film a musical simply because there is a musical number in it, the song doesn’t move the narrative forward , it’s just decoration.

The charmed space that exists in musicals, such as One Night the Moon (2001), allows the characters to sing their emotions without other characters noticing. As Fiona Probyn (2002) states, the music in the film ‘is a vehicle for moving the narrative forward and underscores a central theme of the film’ (p.2). The song, This Land is Mine/This Land is Me played a big part in delivering the message of the film about land ownership vs belonging. When watching the film I actually didn’t notice how little talking there is, only communication via songs. This shows Grant’s point that ‘musical’s privileged space is a place of transcendence when time stands still’ (Grant 2012, p.1).

References:

Grant, Barry Keith (2012). Introduction. In The Hollywood Film Musical. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 1-6.

Probyn, Fiona (2002). “This land is mine/This land is me”: Reconciling harmonies in One Night the Moon. Senses of Cinema, 19.

Julian Hanich discusses the pleasure that people feel from watching horror films in Cinematic emotion in horror films and thrillers, ‘while I watch a frightening movie I am not aware that I respond to my life world- I can only become aware of the pleasure I experience’. (Hanich 2010, p. 25). Although I don’t receive pleasure from watching horror personally, I can admire them and how they are made. I like horror as a genre to analyse because it’s so distinct. I especially noticed this after binge watching criminal minds lately; in the opening scene before the opening credits when there is the crime. In these scenes they last no more than 5 minutes but they are still able to scare me by applying elements familiar to horror films.

Sound plays with the emotions of an audience and is an important part of producing their fear. Berberian Sound Studio demonstrated the effect sound has, hearing the sound effects just on their own was creepy without even seeing what was on screen. Hearing the noise without seeing what it belonged to on the screen left a lot to the imagination and this meant that the sound alone was enough for the audience to experience discomfort.

After seeing the behind the scenes of sound in Berberian Sound Studio, it got me thinking about music as diegetic sound in horror films. This is a feature used in a lot of horror movies, the radio suddenly starts playing a creepy song on it’s own. It’s interesting the effect this has, non-diegetic music has such a different use, building suspense and controlling your mood. But when the characters can here the music too it is very creepy and forever ruins the song. I would like to try to ruin a pop song for everyone for my PB4.

References:

Chion, Michel (1994). Chapter 1: Projections of Sound on Image. In Audio-vision: Sound on Screen. New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 3-25.

Hanich, Julian. (2010). From ‘Pleasures and Counterbalances’ on p.24 to just before ‘The Structure of this Study’ on p. 36. In Cinematic emotion in horror films and thrillers. New York, Routledge.

In Jeffrey Brown’s, Gender and the action heroine: Hardbodies and the Point of No Return, I think that the idea that heroines are ‘really only ‘boys’ in ‘girls’ clothing’, and a ‘male impersonator’ (Brown 1996, p.53) pretty ridiculous. It suggests that women can’t be anything but a secondary character and a damsel in distress. This notion depicts ‘men as active [while] women are passive’ (Brown 1996, p.53) and I definitely disagree. Just because a female character is strong and isn’t afraid of the ‘monster’ doesn’t mean that she is pretending to be a man.

I really enjoyed the debate in the workshop this week. I was on the team arguing that Aliens is only science fiction and nothing more. I was hoping to be on the other side of the argument but I actually managed to convince myself that it is only sci-fi. We looked at a text that argued that sci-fi draws from a lot of different genres but that doesn’t mean it is more than a sci-fi. This draws back to the week one reading from Neil Gaiman and Kazuo Ishiguro (2015)  about referencing genres. We live in a time where referencing different genres is big and directors are becoming like remixers. As Kazuo Ishiguro said, ‘we have to distinguish between something that’s part of the essence of the genre and things that are merely characteristic of it’ (2015).

Just because there is a battle in the movie doesn’t mean it’s in the war genre as well. One of the tropes of a sci-fi film is that there is a battle when humans protect humanity, this simply satisfies the genre of sci-fi films. And there is action in the film but that simply propels the film forward, it doesn’t imply that it is an action movie.

References:

Neil Gaiman & Kazuo Ishiguro (2015, June 4), Let’s talk about genre, New Statesman.

Brown, Jeffrey A. (1996). Gender and the action heroine: Hardbodies and the Point of No Return. Cinema Journal, 35(3), pp. 52-71.

Romantic comedies have always been a favourite genre of mine so I was excited to explore them this week. I have actually never seen Sleepless in Seattle before so it was useful to be able to watch at it from a fresh perspective.

The most interesting thing I noticed was that despite Annie being engaged, you wanted her to end up with Sam and didn’t care about her fiancé being hurt. The creators introduced her character so you understand where she is coming from and sympathise her struggle with her feelings. They also made her fiancé blasé enough for us not to care about him being hurt. It’s bizarre that you are hoping that Annie will ‘cheat’ on her fiancé and meet Sam, whereas in films where the main character is cheated on the cheater is automatically the bad guy and you feel sympathy for the protagonist.

Clair Mortimer explains that a romantic comedy is a love story with a happy ending compared to a love story with an unhappy ending, which is is a tragedy. I enjoy romantic comedies because I always feel unsatisfied finishing a movie with an unhappy ending. The ‘highly predictable narrative path’ (Mortimer 2010, p. 69) although repetitive, I find satisfying. Even though you knew Annie and Sam had to end up together in the end you still exasperatingly wait for Annie to pursue Sam and for them to notice each other and meet.

References:

Mortimer, Claire (2010). Chapter 4: The comedy of romance. In Romantic comedy. Oxon: Routledge, pp. 69-83.