It is likely that any question you attempt in Section A: Producers and Audiences on the FM2: British and American Film paper will require you to discuss the differences in the types of films produced by Hollywood and the UK.
Keeping abreast of box-office takings and release patterns is useful, and you will usually notice that the box-office in the UK is dominated by what we might describe as Hollywood blockbusters, popcorn movies produced and distributed by recognisable Hollywood film companies (such as 20th Century Fox, Paramount and Disney) owned by the huge multimedia conglomerates that dominate the film industry.
If you click on the link above, taken from the Guardian Film section, you can see box-office takings for a number of films for the weekend of 20-22 November 2015 (including discussion about the relatively disappointing performance of The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part II).
You may notice that the majority of the films listed in the top 10 are either part of a franchise, sequels or are based on existing source material (even the British film The Lady in the Van).
Not only does the top 10 reveal just how dominant Hollywood films are in the UK (year on year roughly 90% of box-office takings in UK cinemas is for Hollywood movies, whilst only 5% is for UK-produced films) but it also highlights the importance of franchises, sequels and existing source material.
Hollywood studios are not, by their nature, risk-takers, and basing films on existing source material, or creating sequels, goes some way to guaranteeing an audience. Existing fans of a novel, videogame, comic-book or television series are more likely to see a film that is based on their favourite characters and this means that is easier for the film to find an audience.
The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part II is based on the series of bestselling teen novels by Suzanne Collins and is the final film in the franchise (with the last novel in the trilogy having been split into two parts - a recent trend seen with other Hollywood adaptations such as The Hobbit and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Parts I and II, as a means of generating further revenue for the franchise). Despite the article suggesting that the sequel hasn't performed as well as the previous film in the franchise, it is still the number one film at the UK box-office (a title that all blockbusters hope to achieve).
Many of the other films in the list are also franchise movies or based on existing source material. Spectre, for example, is part of perhaps the most successful and, certainly, the most famous franchise of all. It is the 24th film in the franchise which has a huge existing fan base.
Hotel Transylvania 2 is a sequel which the producers Sony hope will develop into a multi-picture franchise, both Brooklyn and The Dressmaker are based on a novels, Steve Jobs is based on the biography of Apple's co-founder and Pan is an origin story of characters made famous by J. M. Barrie's novel (which has been adapted a number of times for film).
Keep an eye on the weekly listings for your nearest multiplex (easily accessed online) and you will find that the majority of films on show at these types of cinemas will be Hollywood-produced movies, many of which will be part of a franchise, sequels or films that are based on existing source material. In the exam it is fine just to give the names of these films BUT if you can also give rough figures for box-office takings, all the better.
What is most important is that you make sure that you have number of examples to hand - make lists of franchises/sequels, but also extensive lists of films that are based on the following different types of existing source material: books (Harry Potter), videogames (Tomb Raider), comics (The Fantastic Four), TV series (The Simpsons) and even other sources such as musical theatre (Rock of Ages), toys (Transformers) and theme park rides (Pirates of the Caribbean).
The Wentworth AS Film Studies Blog is back again - it's been a while but over the course of the next few months I will be posting lots of links, case studies and other tips to help you with the AS Film Studies exam and preparation for your coursework.
Please use this blog alongside the notes I will be handing out, to help get you ready for the exam in May. The new material that I post will help keep your answers up-to-date, but you should also study the older posts carefully as they are packed full of relevant examples to help you discuss stars, marketing, genre, merchandise and topics such as exhibition, distribution and the differences between Hollywood and British cinema that will be useful for any question in Section A of the exam.
There are also specific sections on the blog for Section B and Section C of the AS exam with detailed analysis, essential clips and tips on approaching specific questions. Please look through each of the posts carefully as part of both your learning as we move through the topics BUT also as part of your revision.
Here is last year's FM2 - British and American Film Past Paper, with the Resource Material in a separate link.
As we complete a topic it is in your interest to attempt questions from this and previous exam papers - if you email me your answers to alexmorphey@btinternet.com I will mark them and add suggestions for improvement.
In the 2014 FM2 British and American Film paper, one of the questions for Section C: American Film - Comparative Study asked candidates to discuss the films' closing sequences in relation to the films as a whole.
This type of question, where you will be asked to discuss key scenes, is not unusual and it is important that you know a couple of scenes from each film in detail. You must be able to relate your chosen scenes to your wider discussion of the films' respective institutional contexts, themes, genre and narrative structure.
In the previous post I have outlined how the films' opening scenes relate to the films as a whole, reflecting the fact that Ocean's Eleven is a mainstream Hollywood movie that strictly conforms to the narrative pattern that audiences would expect to find in a heist movie, whilst Reservoir Dogs (as an independent, low-budget film) deviates from this pattern considerably.
Below, I have included the films' closing scenes, alongside analysis of the ways in which these scenes reflect the films' respective institutional contexts. You could be asked to discuss either the opening or closing scenes - or, the exam board may use the term 'key scenes' (in which case, a discussion of either the opening or closing scenes would be fine). Remember to start by focusing your discussion on the scenes you have been asked to discuss before opening your discussion out to incorporate the films as a whole. You are not required to talk solely about the chosen scene BUT you must make detailed reference to it (particularly in your introduction and conclusion), before discussing the influence that the films' institutional contexts have on the films' presentation of the three act structure.
As is typical of a mainstream Hollywood movie, Ocean's Eleven ends on a positive note. The aftermath also comes in the third act of the film (where audiences would expect it to be) rather than dominating the majority of the narrative, as it does in Reservoir Dogs. In a heist movie, the aftermath can either be positive (with the robbers getting away with the loot - typical in mainstream Hollywood versions of the genre, like Ocean's Eleven) or negative (with the robbers getting caught or killed - more typical of independent versions of the genre, such as Reservoir Dogs). In this sense BOTH films, it could be argued, confrom to audience expectations - once we factor in that Ocean's Eleven is a Hollywood movie and Reservoir Dogs is and independent film). What is unusual about Reservoir Dogs with regards to the third act, is that the aftermath does not appear at the end of the film - instead, it becomes the focal point of the film rather than the heist itself (which we do not even see).
As non-diegetic, upliftingly positive music plays, we witness the SWAT van arrive back at the warehouse where Ocean's crew have been planning the robbery. We witness each member of the crew walk out of the warehouse towards the huge fountain outside the Bellagio casino - their figure behaviour is relaxed and their facial expressions reflect the fact that the robbery has been a success. As they stand around the casino, they silently reflect on the success of the job, before leaving one-by-one. We also witness Tess walking purposefully out of the casino, leaving Terry Benedict behind, as she makes her way towards Danny, who is being placed into a police car. This element is crucial - and typical of the ending of mainstream Hollywood films. In the opening scene, Danny Ocean was established as the film's central protagonist and we were made aware of his goals: robbing the casinos and winning his wife back. The ending of the film reinforces these ideas, showing the protagonist achieving both of his goals - as audiences would expect from a mainstream Hollywood film.
Even the epilogue, tagged onto the end of the film (which sees Danny released from prison after serving a few months for breaking the terms of his parole), conforms to the narrative pattern audiences might expect from a Hollywood movie - it confirms that Danny has won his wife back (she is waiting in the car for him as Rusty picks him up from prison) and also sets up the sequel to the film as we witness two of Benedict's men tailing Rusty's car as it drives off. The most important point to make, however, is the fact that the heist ends successfully and that the aftermath element of the heist genre's narrative structure appears where it should do - in the third act of the film.
In comparison, the closing scene of Reservoir Dogs involves a shootout involving Mr White, Nice Guy Eddie, Joe and Mr Orange - a shootout that leaves all of those involved in the heist dead (with the exception of Mr Pink - though the sound of gunfire outside the warehouse suggest that he, too, is killed). The point to make here is not that the film necessarily ends unconventionally (particularly for a less family-friendly, independently produced version of the genre) but that the aftermath element of the narrative dominates the whole film - with only flashbacks to some of the moments of preparation and planning and an absence of the heist itself. Unlike a mainstream Hollywood film, Reservoir Dogs ends with the the characters not achieving their goals - the heist is unsuccessful - and ends with the deaths of the main protagonists - including Mr Orange, the undercover cop, whose goal it was to successfully infiltrate the gang.
Just remember, if you are discussing the aftermath in detail, you should make reference to other scenes in Reservoir Dogs - there are many to choose from, all of which would be suitable when making the point that the aftermath dominates the film.
When answering questions in Section C: American Film - Comparative Study on the FM2 Producers and Audiences exam paper, you may be asked to discuss key scenes from both Reservoir Dogs and Ocean's Eleven in relation to the films' themes, messages and values, narrative structure or genre.
We have already discussed, at length, that the focus of any essay should be on the ways in which the narrative structure of heist movies is presented conventionally in Ocean's Eleven and unconventionally in Reservoir Dogs (largely as a result of the films' respective institutional contexts), and I think that the opening scenes of both films are useful to look at in this context.
The opening scene of Ocean's Eleven takes place in prison and immediately establishes Danny Ocean (played by George Clooney) as the film's central protagonist - something that is typical in the openings of mainstream Hollywood movies (regardless of genre). Ocean appears centre frame (further indicating his central role in the narrative, emphasising that he is the main protagonist) and the focus of the camera stays on him throughout the scene, instantly positioning us with him. We get hints at his character traits (his wit, his composure under pressure) and his dialogue also hints at the goals that his character has in the plot - winning Tess, his wife, back, and robbing the casinos. Whilst these are not explicitly expressed yet (we learn of both goals in more detail in the rest of the first act), in hindsight they are certainly apparent. It is typical of opening scenes in mainstream Hollywood movies to set up a goal-orientated plot - preparing the audience for the narrative that follows (which will follow the pattern of the central protagonist attempting to achieve those goals).
As the first act of the film progresses, we see what audiences would typically expect from the first act of a heist movie - the preparation and planning ahead of the heist itself, including the gathering together of all the major figures who will play a part in the robbery (including an indication of their specific roles) and an outlining of the plan (shown, in detail, in the meeting at Rueben's house where Danny goes through the blueprints and explains how they will rob the vault).
In the first part of your essay, you should talk in detail about the gathering together of the conspirators and the running through of the plan, pointing out how this exactly fits the narrative template that audiences would expect from the genre. You must be specific and give detailed description of the ways in which this manifests itself in the film, comparing it's presentation to the much more unconventional way this first act is dealt with in Reservoir Dogs.
Below, I have included various short clips of the gathering together of each individual character, as well as the meeting at Rueben's house to discuss the details of the robbery itself. Please watch them again, and make detailed notes that you can use in your exam essay.
The first of the conspirators that Danny Ocean visits is casino croupier Frank Catton (played by Bernie Mac), who is working in New Jersey under the alias Ramon, so as to avoid his criminal record being detected by the authorities. As Danny speaks to him, it becomes apparent that he has already formulated a plan to undertake another 'job', and we get hints that it will involve robbing a casino. Frank's role in the robbery is essential, as he will be the inside man at the casino in Las Vegas - providing the gang with the necessary information regarding security and the day-to-day running of the casino. He is also integral to the stealing of the codes to the vault from Terry Benedict's jacket pocket, providing a diversion as he pretends to attack Linus (who is posing as an inspector from the Nevada Gaming Commission).
The second member of the gang that Danny recruits is Rusty (played by Brad Pitt) who is operating a scam teaching young Hollywood actors how to play poker in Los Angeles. It is during this meeting that the audience come to understand exactly what the plan is (to rob three casinos owned by Terry Benedict) and we witness Danny and Rusty gaining access to, and studying, the blueprints of the casino and its vault. Rusty has a crucial role in the narrative - he is Danny's advisor and the gang member who organises the way that the plan will unfold.
The third conspirator that Danny and Rusty recruit is Reuben (played by Elliot Gould). They visit Reuben in his Las Vegas mansion and outline their plan to rob three casinos, with the express purpose of persuading him to finance the heist. They need Reuben's money to finance the robbery and they are aware of his animosity towards Terry Benedict; the man whose casinos they plan to rob, and a man who is conflict with Reuben as he muscled Reuben out of the casino business (we see Danny reading a newspaper article relating to the story at the beginning of the film as he waits for Frank Catton in the lounge at Ceaser's Casino).
Whilst we don't see Rusty or Danny recruit the Malloy brothers (played by Casey Affleck and Scott Caan), we do hear them discuss recruiting them as drivers, over images of the brothers racing a monster truck against a remote controlled version of the same vehicle. The scene outlines their role in the heist as drivers, but also establishes their traits as the comic characters within the narrative - their constant squabbling is important as a distraction at various points during the execution of the plan (for example, delivering the balloons to the casino to obscure the cameras so that Livingstone can set up the surveillance OR causing a fuss about a lost key card so that a real member of staff, with security clearance, will deliver the container, with Yen inside, to the vault).
We hear Rusty and Danny discuss the need for an electronics expert to help tap into the surveillance system at the casino and whilst we don't see them visit Livingstone (played by Eddie Jemison) to recruit him, we witness images of Livingstone working freelance for the FBI on a surveillance project whilst Danny and Rusty talk. His role in the heist is crucial, as he deals with all of the technical hacking elements that are crucial if the gang are to avoid detection during the heist. His expertise is essential for not only having 'eyes' on the security at the casino, but also for redirecting the call that Terry Benedict makes to the SWAT team during the heist.
Danny and Rusty discuss recruiting a munitions expert, to handle explosive charges for breaking into the vault, and as they speak we witness Basher (played by Don Cheadle) being arrested on another job (having successfully penetrated a vault, he is caught because one of his accomplices had not neutralised the alarms). Rusty, posing as a police officer, frees Basher and outlines the plan to him. Basher's role is crucial in a number of respects: he cases the power sources to the casinos, coming up with a plan to shut the power down so that Danny and Linus can avoid being detected in the elevator shaft, he crafts the explosives into jewels so they can be put in the briefcase that is to be deposited into the vault (and be used by Yen, Danny and Linus to blow open the vault door), and he suggests using the 'pinch' when the demolition of Reuben's casino alerts the casino owners to a weakness in their power system.
Danny and Rusty visit Barnum's Circus in San Diego to recruit Yen (played by Shaobo Qin), a Chinese acrobat, as the gang's 'grease man'. Yen's role is central to the success of the heist as his size and flexibility mean the gang can place him inside a container so that he can get access to the heavily guarded vault. His acrobatic skills are necessary so that he can spring across the vault and avoid the infra-red sensors on the vault floor.
As they leave the circus after recruiting Yen, Danny and Rusty talk about recruiting Saul (played by Carl Reiner), before Rusty visits him in Florida, with details of the job and a plane ticket - whilst we don't initially know exactly what his role will be, it becomes apparent that he will be disguised as a European arms dealer visiting Benedict's casino. His role in the heist is crucial as he has to get Benedict to agree to placing a precious safety deposit box/briefcase into the vault (the jewels inside are actually explosive charges) and he fakes a heart attack at the crucial moment to act as a distraction so that Linus doesn't get spotted on the monitors and so that Livingstone can switch to video.
Finally, after Danny and Rusty decide that they need one more conspirator to complete the gang, Danny travels to Boston to recruit Linus (played by Matt Damon), a master pickpocket. Linus has a number of roles during the heist, starting with menial tasks shadowing Benedict before moving onto a central role during the heist with Danny. The skills that are displayed in this scene (where he is shown expertly stealing a businessman's wallet on the train) are used to steal the vault codes from Terry Benedict's pocket later in the narrative.
One last scene from the first act of Ocean's Eleven that is worth discussing is the meeting that takes place at Reuben's house, where Danny goes through the vault plans in detail. Audience's would expect to find this type of scene in the opening act of a movie from the heist genre and it is important that you mention that this planning element is largely absent from Reservoir Dogs (stressing that what little planning there is in Reservoir Dogs does not appear at the start of the film, in the first act, as audiences would expect). In Ocean's Eleven Danny presents the blueprints of the vault, gained courtesy of Frank Catton, and goes through each stage of the process of entering the vault - he does not give every detail about how the robbery will work (many of these details are given in the next scenes, once the heist is underway), but he certainly outlines the plan, indicating how much money they intend to steal, also highlighting the potential dangers associated with the heist. We hear exactly what the targets are (The Mirage, The MGM Grand and The Bellagio casinos), we witness the schematics of the vault, the casino cages and the elevator (which is rigged with motion detectors), we are given details about the security system (including guards with machine-guns, an impregnable vault and security cameras), and we learn of the codes required to open the doors leading to the vault (and the fact that those codes are changed every twelve hours). You should write about the opening act of the film, and the ways that Ocean's Eleven strictly conforms to the genre template, in detail - regardless of the essay title - making comparisons with the ways that Reservoir Dogs chooses to barely follow the template at all.
Below I have included the opening scene of Reservoir Dogs, alongside a number of other scenes from the film which you may find useful to discuss in the context of Reservoir Dogs deviating from the typical first act that audiences would expect from a film belonging to the heist genre.
As outlined in the discussion of the opening scene of Ocean's Eleven, Hollywood films typically use opening scenes to establish the film's central protagonist (instantly positioning the audience with them), highlighting important character traits and setting up that character's goals (which we will witness the character trying to achieve throughout the course of the rest of the narrative). In Ocean's Eleven we are made aware that Danny Ocean is the film's central protagonist and we learn something of his character traits and his goals. The opening scene of Reservoir Dogs, however, fails to establish any one individual as the film's central character, giving the majority of the characters in the scene roughly equal screen time. It is almost to impossible to determine who the central protagonist is - it certainly doesn't appear to be either Mr White or Mr Orange (arguably the film's two main characters), and on the basis of the discussions that take place we may be forgiven for believing that it is either Mr Brown (whose discussion of Madonna's Like a Virgin opens the scene) or Mr Pink (whose discussion of the merits of tipping waitresses dominates the scene). As no central protagonist is established, the audience are not really made aware of important character traits, nor is the protagonist's goal established (something that is crucial in the opening scenes of the majority of Hollywood movies).
What is even more unusual about the opening scene of Reservoir Dogs is that despite the fact that the conspirators are all gathered together in one location (eating breakfast in a diner, presumably just before they embark on the robbery), they do not discuss the robbery at all. The scene would appear to be the perfect opportunity for them to discuss the heist (coming, as it does, at the beginning of the film), yet their conversation instead focuses on popular culture (exemplified in the analysis of the meaning of the lyrics to Like a Virgin), tipping waitresses, the contents of Joe Cabot's address book and a 70's themed radio station the characters have been listening to. Not once do they run through the plans and preparations regarding the robbery. Neither do we see the recruiting of the various characters who will be involved in the heist, and no reference is made to their respective roles in the robbery. The scene that immediately follows the diner sequence shows Mr Orange bleeding out in the back of Mr White's car - clearly after the heist has taken place (and therefore, we move instantly to the aftermath, before we have even seen the preparation and planning audiences would expect to find in the firat act of a heist movie).
What little of the planning and preparation that we do see is shown through flashbacks during the aftermath - and even here we only see some of the characters being recruited - Mr White (played by Harvey Keitel), Mr Blonde (played by Michael Madsen) and Mr Orange (played by Tim Roth). We do not see the recruiting of Mr Brown (played by the director Quentin Tarantino), Mr Blue (played by Eddie Bunker) or the seemingly central character Mr Pink (played by Steve Buscemi). Significantly, what little of the recruiting of the conspirators we do see DOES NOT come where we would expect it to - during the first act of the film.
The first of the characters that we see being recruited is Mr White, which occurs in flashback once he, Mr Orange and Mr Pink are already back at the rendezvous point at the warehouse. This is after the robbery has already taken place and only includes the barest of details about the heist as Joe Cabot outlines the 'job'.
The second character we witness being recruited is Mr Blonde, which comes even further in the film (again during the aftermath) and the majority of the scene focuses on the fact that Mr Blonde is having trouble with his parole officer and that he needs to find regular, 'official', employment. The heist is only very briefly mentioned towards the end of the scene, and no real details are given.
The last of the characters that we see being recruited is Mr Orange, who by this stage the audience have learned is an undercover cop - the 'rat' that the other characters have been discussing. The recruiting of Mr Orange is shown in quite a lot of detail BUT comes in the last third of the film, just before the film's climax, and not as audiences would expect, in the first act.
Alongside this, any scenes that show the running through of the plan are scarce and, again, do not appear in the first act of the narrative as audiences would expect in a film from the heist genre. These scenes include Joe discussing the names the characters have been given, and Mr Orange and Mr White discussing the robbery whilst parked outside the jewelry store. Both scenes appear just before the films climax.
The scene in the warehouse, where the criminals argue over the names that they have been given by Joe, is set up in a similar way to the scene in Reuben's house in Ocean's Eleven. All of the major figures involved in the heist are gathered together and we can clearly see a plan of the location where the robbery is to take place on a blackboard behind Joe. Unlike Ocean's Eleven, however, there is no detailed discussion of the plans - instead the focus is on the names each character has been given. As Joe says 'let's go to work', and the audience expects finally to see the planning of the robbery, the scene ends.
The closest we get to seeing the preparation for the heist is a scene in Mr White's car as Mr White and Mr Orange discuss each character's role in the robbery. Parked outside the jewelry store it is revealed that Mr Brown is the driver, and that he will be parked outside the front of the jewelers. Mr Orange will be stationed outside the door, making sure that nobody goes in or out of the store, whilst Mr Blonde and Mr Blue will be 'crowd control', handling the customers and employees. Mr White and Mr Pink will be escorting the manager to the safe to get the diamonds. Crucially, this scene comes not at the beginning of the narrative in the first act (where audiences would expect it to be) BUT just before the climactic shootout that ends the film.
Remember, you are not expected to mention all of the scenes above in detail in your essay BUT you must discuss some of them, making sure you make repeated comparisons between both films. This is just part of your essay - you must also discuss the second act (the heist itself) and the third act (the aftermath).
Questions that often catches students out in Section C: American Film - Comparative Study, are those that specifically ask you to discuss key scenes from the films (often either the opening or closing scenes, or sometimes both).
I have included clips of these scenes in separate blog posts, with detailed analysis of each in relation to narrative structure, genre and the respective films' institutional contexts, so that you can study these scenes in more detail ahead of the exam.
Remember, you should discuss how these scenes are a reflection of the films as a whole, reinforcing the point that the scenes in Ocean's Eleven are indicative of what audiences might expect from a mainstream Hollywood version of a heist movie, whilst those in Reservoir Dogs reflect the film's independent nature.
Obviously, if the question makes reference to key scenes then you are free to discuss any scenes from the films (including the opening and closing scenes), and you may want to make your own notes on any scenes from the films that you feel are particularly important. It would be valid, however, just to focus on the opening and closing scenes from the films as conventionally, with any film, these scenes are particularly crucial in delivering information to an audience and creating/fulfilling/cheating audience expectations. Feel free to use the analysis of the scenes in the separate blog posts (if the question specifically asks you to make reference to certain scenes), and practice incorporating this information into your essays (where relevant).
At some point in your answer to the question in Section A: Producers and Audiences on the FM2: British and American Film paper, you will need to consider some of the reasons why Hollywood dominates the film industry. This will inevitably require discussion of Hollywood in a global context.
Recent studies (some of which can be read by clicking on the links below) have suggested that international box-office revenues (that is, money taken outside of the US market) have grown from roughly equal to domestic revenue in 2000 (that is, money taken at the box-office in the US) to double the level of domestic revenue in 2009.
You should be able to argue that from as far back as the 1930s and the Studio Era, that Hollywood realised that the key to success was making films that appealed to a global audience and not just viewers within America. Related to issues regarding Hollywood's global success are discussions regarding the current organisational structure of Hollywood (in terms of multimedia conglomerates), the focus on making movies based on internationally recognisable source material such as worldwide best-selling novels and universally popular comic-book characters, producing films with relatively simple, formulaic, recognisable narratives that translate easily into any language because they cover universal themes, and the use inclusion of globally-recognisable stars, who will be used extensively in the marketing of the films.
It is worth looking at the box-office figures on the links below (taken from the very useful website www.the-numbers.com) related to the top-grossing films of all time.
Not only will you find that many of these movies are based on existing source material with a huge fan-base (something that is key to the continued dominance and success of Hollywood) or that they are sequels/part of a franchise BUT, you should also notice that the majority of the films towards the top of the list (particularly those that have taken over $1 billion worldwide) have taken double the amount of money internationally (outside of the US market) than they have within the US domestic market.
This suggests that many of these Hollywood movies would have struggled to have broken even (in terms of the combined production and marketing budgets) with domestic box-office takings alone.
The reality for other national cinemas, including the UK Film Industry, is that they simply cannot compete with Hollywood in terms of the international reach of its films.
Acclaimed UK films, such as Dead Man's Shoes, This is England, The Selfish Giant and Sightseers, perform badly in the UK (certainly compared to Hollywood movies) BUT, the reality is that they perform even more poorly in the international market, particularly in the US:
Dead Man's Shoes, for example, opened on only 1 screen in the USA, rising to 2 screens the following week before disappearing altogether - taking a total of $6,013 in the US
The Selfish Giant opened on 3 screens, rising to 4 and then 6 in the next two weeks, before its run ended - the film took a total of $12,189 in the US
Even the relatively successful This is England only opened on 1 screen in the US, before rising to a maximum of 14 screens halfway through its run. While the film took $327,919 during its US run, this is actually less than a fifth of its original production budget and therefore does not represent a particularly profitable return
Sightseers opened on 2 screens in the US before rising to 10 screens by the end of its run four weeks later. The film's total takings at the US box-office of $35,722 comes nowhere near recouping the film's production budget of £1.2 million
If you find yourself discussing the reasons why Hollywood dominates and, in particular, the reasons why UK films generally perform so poorly, you really need to consider what needs to be done to rectify this situation and make UK films more globally appealing.
As we have discussed, viral marketing is used by both Hollywood and more independent producers to help promote their films to audiences. It is likely that you will want to discuss the importance of viral marketing as part of your exam essay for Section A: Producers and Audiences on the FM2: British and American Film paper. Try to keep these examples as contemporary as possible - look out for any new, breaking viral marketing campaigns for forthcoming films - both Hollywood and independent.
Whilst viral marketing can be crucial to the success of low budget, independent films (low-cost, reaches target audience), major Hollywood studios producing big budget blockbuster movies - like The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 1 - are increasingly using viral marketing to target their audience (the 15-24 demographic, who use social networking most frequently and younger children, who have grown up with the internet and are familiar with sites such as YouTube).
Below are a series of posters and trailers that have been released alongside the more traditional forms of advertising (like the conventional poster above), that have been used to try and expand The Hunger Games universe. I have also included links to some of the sites used in the viral marketing campaign and other sites related to the film, so that you can look at them in more detail - this sort of detailed example would be excellent in any response to questions in Section A of the AS exam.
The viral marketing campaign began with the release of a teaser trailer for the film on the movie's official Facebook and YouTube sites in July 2014 (four months before the release of the film in cinemas). Prior to this though, in May 2014 TheHungerGamesExclusive.com was launched featuring stills of some of the film's main characters and short video interviews with some of the actors. A teaser poster and a page from the script of the film were also released on the site - making it a site that the fans would return to over and over again to find more information regarding the movie.
Alongside the traditional marketing techniques, such as the main cast appearing for a photo-call at the Cannes Film Festival (guaranteeing that the pictures would make newspapers around the globe, despite the film not even showing at the festival), the pace of the viral marketing campaign picked up with the release of a fake "government" website for Panem (the fictional world where the franchise takes place) called TheCapitol.PN.
The site had been used for the previous two films in the franchise. The website encouraged users to sign up, as "citizens of Panem", so that they would receive regular updates from Capitol TV - which essentially broadcast a series of fake Public Service Announcements - such as those included below.
The studio created partnerships with other social media including Yahoo and Tumblr through which they released the "District Heroes Collection", a series of posters representing many of the 13 Districts featured in the film series.
The first of the PSAs was released on June 25th 2014 and quickly became the most watched trailer in the USA in the last week of June, also trending as the most popular video on YouTube in both Australia and Canada.
A second PSA was released on July 9th 2014, again featuring President Snow BUT this time the announcement is hijacked and interrupted by a character from the second film stating that "the mockingjay lives" and that a revolution is under way. Within minutes of the release of this second PSA #TheMockingjayLives and #2 - Unity became the top two trending topics worldwide on Twitter.
On July 24th, shortly before the release of the "official" teaser trailer for the movie, a teaser poster was posted on the Capitol's Instagram account and was almost immediately deleted - shortly after the poster's removal, the account issued an apology suggesting that the poster's appearance was a result of the Instagram account being hacked by rebels from District 13.
When the film's official teaser trailer was released on July 28th, on the film's Facebook and Youtube accounts, again within minutes #MockingjayTeaserTrailerToday, #OurLeaderTheMockingjay and #OfficialTeaserTrailer became worldwide trending topics on Twitter.
