Witness

Witness

The film 'Witness, which was directed by Peter Wier in 1985 is about an Amish boy who witnesses a murder at a train station in Philadelphia. The first shot within the murder scene shows the small boy looking up at a large statue, The statue seems to be some form of war memorial and this is an important symbol because the Amish boy does not understand war and modern society. We also see his innocence when the camera angle is from the statue looking down at the boy, The way in which he looks up (with his large hat creating a Halo) shows that he is bewildered by the norms of this new society. The next scene shows the young boy and his mother sitting alone in the vast empty station. The small boy asks to go to the toilet and forgets his hat, his mother reminds him and puts it on his head. This to me sums up the Amish community and the child's personality, not only does it show that they are keeping themselves innocent so that they do not become part of the apparent evil of our communities. The boy is so innocent that when he enters the toilets not only does he smile at a strange man but also leaves the toilet door unlocked and slightly askew. This shows that he does not understand danger or in fact any for of evil. We see the small gap in the toilet door throughout the following scene as two men enter the toilets after him. The two men brutally attack the man and kill him.

This is a very sudden turn of events, this shows the boys sudden change of emotion, from being safe to in danger. One of the murderers is washing his hands when the small boy lets out a small noise (something between a grunt and a squeal). The imagery of a murderer casually washing his hands usually shows guilt, but in this situation the casual way in which he washes shows no guilt within the character. The Murderer (who has heard the noise) starts to kick in the doors. The boy changes his heart and locks the door, This shows that he now understands danger. when the man gets to the final door (in which the boy is situated) he cannot open it, as the man kicks the door the small boy climbs under the side of the cubicle and into the next basin. As he does this he drops his hat on the floor, when he picks it back up he does not place it on his head, this is because the halo which used to show is innocence no longer has an relevance to him. 

Possible case Studies

1) Reservoir Dogs (1992)
A thriller about several criminals who after a failed jewelery heist return to a warehouse only to begin suspecting each other of being a police informant. After watching this thriller I instantly went through all of the other Quinten Tarantino (The films director) films which had managed to navigate around my search for every film in existence. This film would make a good case study because within the 99 minutes that we are glued to the screen and seat, there is a perfect build of suspense and tension between the characters. The camera angles are also highly effective and I have already thought of 5 camera angles to include within my own thriller, they are not recreated shots from within the films because that lacks originality, instead they are shots which have entered the vast emptiness of my mind whilst I intake the film.

2) The second Film I could use as a possible case study is Memento (2000)
The film stars Guy Pearce as a young man hunting for his wife's killer, He suffers from short term memory loss and must use photos and tattoos to remember important facts about the man he is searching for.
The film is non linear and every scene we see is the memory of the scene before, this overlapping system leads to several different interpretations of the same situation. This would make a good case study because it slowly builds not only suspense but also because it keeps the audience thinking and would help teach me the techniques used to make a film more entertaining and gripping when watched.
3) I spent a long time thinking about what my third potential case study would be, at first I thought that 'The day of the Jackal' would make an interesting study. This idea was quickly removed due to several reasons, one reason is because of definitions. Language is always changing and therefore has changed a lot since 'The day of the Jackal' was aired in 1973. This therefore means that the film itself may not fit the modern definition of a Thriller. Another reason is because the film itself is hard to acquire and having watched it quite long ago I doubt that with just memory it would make a sufficient case study. Finally I narrowed my choices down until I decided that my third case study would be 'Inglorious Basterds'. The reason behind choosing another Quentin Tarantino film was because with my cravings for more of his films the only logical answer was to involve his most recent work. I believe that 'Inglorious Basterds' stuck out was not just because it was his most recent work, it was most likely because it was so far from his usual work. 'Inglorious Basterds' is set within an alternative history in which the Americans succeed in an attempt to kill Hitler. The film would make a good case study due to the situation of the Jew's hiding in Nazi occupied france, this creates excellent tension on stage, whilst also creating a surreal evil within the strong Nazi characters within the Film.

Preliminary Evaluation

Preliminary Task

When I first started work upon the preliminary task I instantly wanted the dialogue to be the key feature, in my minds eye I imagined capturing the perfect scene between our teenage actors. After several seconds I realised that I was going about this entirely the wrong way, when filming for the first time, we are not trying to create a cult classic, instead we are merely supposed to show that we can hold a camera without spontaneously combusting or falling out of a window. 

With this new, slightly improved mindset, I wrote a script and set about to the important business of finding the best shots. The end product is what I can only describe as being a 'colourful checklist', where each shot that was listed is shown one after the other. I know that this was not exactly the most imaginative system but with a preliminary task I personally believe that the best way to flourish is to merely successfully do everything that was asked of us.

From the preliminary task I have gathered one thing, dialogue will not work without a boom. The sound is so clunky and irritating that either we add a warning at the beginning of our video, or we find some non-diegetic sound and use it to replace the diegetic sound. 

The second thing I have learnt is that we need to think outside of the very small box that is commonly referred to as 'logic'. For this outburst I would of course need to be very ambitious and somewhat over prepared. Seeing as I currently have no idea how I will manage this I must make haste to the drawing board and work on either the use of shadows or darkness, for they would be the hardest shots to capture.

My original ideas behind my Thriller

From my persepective, there are three ways to make a great thriller, these three things are not what makes a thriller but personally what should be included to make a thriller successful.

1) Dialogue:

Dialogue is by far one of the best features of any extraordinary film due to its effect on the audience and ability to create tension and suspense between characters. For example, Pulp Fiction is a long stream of perfectly written dialogue. The script is written in such a way that throughout the film that the dialogue does not give the effect of being informative, instead the film is portrayed to the audience as being a sequence of events. The very idea that watching a film should be like watching extracts from potentially real events, is what most films miss out on having, I believe that most modern thrillers are instead seen more as being a story which leads from A to B. This simple story technique does not allow the audience to truly emerse themselves within the plot-line and therefore does not allow the audience to see any form of tension of suspense.

2) The Camera Angles:

A film of course work with a well written script, but without a visual aspect, I doubt many people would watch or appreciate the film. And so came about the unintentional invention of camera angles and shots. The visual side to films sadly dominates the audio side, and therefore films like Avatar can entertain an audience with beautiful scenes whilst having a script and storyline equal to the conversations shared between children and toys at a lonely teddy bare tea party.

Certain shots are what create amazing films, within Animal Kingdom, there is one scene were the Josh (the main character) is standing in a hallway, he has a blank emotionless look on his face and slowly looks behind him to see the police run from one side to the other of the hallway. This shot stuck with me because it not only uses an amazing angle but it also utilised the characters facial expressions to adapt the imagery of the shot.

Another amazing shot is in fact Quinten Tarantino's commonly used 'Car boot shot' which is used in 'Reservoir Dogs', 'Pulp Fiction', 'Jackie Brown', 'Kill Bill' and 'Death Proof'. The angle of the camera is placed in a car boot and looks up towards one or more other characters, the camera symbolises somebody within the car and it portrays the characters above not only as being dominant but also as being deviant. This shot is also used in 'Inglorious Basterds' but from the forest floor instead of a car boot.

3) The Actors:

The largest effect on how people perceive a film is the actors playing each part. The way an actor looks and acts can change the script entirely, for example if Bill Murray was born with a less glum looking face but the same acting abilities, then groundhog say would of been seen in a less humorous way. 

All great films have had great actors flourish from them, this is because these certain actors are good at the role they played, for example Hugh Grant is not inept because he knows that his best suiting role is as a british romantic. If he were to try and star in another awful Hulk film, yes it would be funny, but he would not pull off the role successfully.

I have decided that I shall base my thriller upon some of if not all of these three rules... I shall also jazz up the name of the rules so that I may add another small glimpse of hope to the world of potential media success. The Three Filming Forms, seems like a fitting name and now I shall decide how to utilise each 'Form' within my 2 minutes of thriller filming.

1) Dialogue normally slowly builds over time, and if there is one thing we are not given it is time. To have a two minute scene of dialogue would show that we understood about the 180 degree rule, but it would show no real talent with a camera, merely scripting.

2) If we have already ruled out the idea of complex and well written dialogue then we shall add more effect upon the actors and camera angles.

3) If we are to use camera angles then we must show skill without danger, I will most likely wrack my brains for several days before concluding that in fact my mind is a barrel of hope and that I understand millions of never before shot scenes.

4) With good scenes a plot must be amazing, or at least as amazing as a plot can be within 2 minutes.

5) Actors, if we are intending on using actors that fit the roles then we would most likely need a stern looking man with a strong jawbone etc... I personally believe that this is to mainstream and that if anything we should have someone who doesn't fit the role and then adapt them so that the stereotype we are fighting is what makes this character not only fit the role well but also work better than the stern man.

6) The stereotype shall be that of a young female doing what a male character would usually do within thriller films.

7) Finally we need to link both the character and camera with the idea of suspense and tension, this is because the Three Filming Forms (I really wanted to say it again) are created to fit any film, not just thrillers, in order to create a thriller we must add in thriller features as well.

8) With the previous 7 steps followed to some level of success we should have the basic structure to our Three Filming Forms Thriller... 

Kill Bill Vol 1 Intro

 Bill Vol 1

This is the introduction to a thriller by Quinten Tarantino, from these few minutes we, as an audience, are instantly gripped. The film starts with a black screen, over the diegetic sound of pained breathing. We are left for only 2 seconds with this, before an extreme close up of a blood covered woman hits the screen in black and white. These 3 seconds have already been used wonderfully to not only add suspense but to also create an image of classic thrillers. This close up is left for another 8 seconds before any other sense of action is added, this if anything is to add suspense within scene. The only time we see the camera move in the entire introduction, this shot is very low and only covers the feet, this not only means that we cannot see the face of the actor but also that the man is the dominance within the room. The best feature within any of Quinten Tarantino's films is dialogue, and Kill Bill is no exception, the first 5 words are an instant hit. "Do you find me sadistic?" are the first words of the film, and in a way should be the last. The entire film is just the story of how people are sadistic and how they are. I believe that this is one of the best structural devices used within the entire film. The second best feature of any Tarantino film is the camera angles and shots used. In this scene we see the dominant man leaning over the deviant woman and wiping blood from her face with a handkerchief labeled Bill. These two devices work hand in hand to create an entire plot within 20 seconds, The Title is Kill Bill, and the man within the shot is named Bill, this means that we already know the that this woman plans to kill this man and that he has greatly pained her in a somewhat sickening manner. To end this short introduction we see the woman crying as bill shoots her in the head. This is very sudden and adds tension upon our tower of suspense, we are left wondering whether or not this is a flash back or whether or not the end is in fact the beginning as "do you find me sadistic?" once implied. 

How has Working Title adapted to changes in the film industry?

Everything within the film industry changes over time, and Working title is no different. Since 1984, when working title was founded, there have been many changes throughout the entire film industry. We saw the creation of HD, 3D and 4D films, which all helped recreate the idea of a children's film. In the film industry Working title may appear, in comparison to most other film production companies, to have not changed since it was originally started. In fact, it has changed just as much as others over the past 27 years.
Working Title is known most commonly for its many rom-coms, which became very popular in america due to the repetitive idealistic British and American relationship, which appeared in almost every rom-com they made. For example: Notting Hill, is the story of a British man falling in love with a famous American actress. This is very popular in the united states because they lap up the idea of British romance and also the imagery of rich famous Americans (which appears in most of Working Titles rom-coms) pleases the audience, because they enjoy seeing other people portray their positive sides.
Working Title uses the same actors in many different film genres to link one audience to a different aspect of their films. The use of Rowan Atkinson in both 'Johnny English' and 'Four weddings and a funeral', is very effective, because it makes the audience of one film want to watch the other. The two films are completely unrelated, but the fact that an actor influences whether or not to watch a film, shows us how Working Title effectively use this sales technique.
Working Title use DVD sales in many different ways in order to gain the target audiences attention. When shopping recently, I noticed that there was several working title films, being sold in a bundle, the films involved were, Love actually, Bridget Jones' diary and four weddings and a funeral. There was only three bundles left on the shelf, which shows us that Working Title has been creating many films that all follow one genre. This is an interesting technique because it means that their audience never falters.
Tinker Tailor Solider Spy is the main film that shows Working Titles adaption within the Film Industry, it is the first film too have a completely new spin on the Working Title audience, the film is a thriller based upon the book by John Le Carre. The film was not as much of a success on the classic Working Title audience as their other films were. This is due to the fact that Working Title has never taken this angle before. The thriller of the mind, was so far from being what Working Title usually produce that Universal refused to finance it at all. Studio Canal took the risk instead and helped finance the first ever Working Title Thriller.
In my opinion the film was a success, it showed a new side to Working Title and it proved that they were in fact adapting to the film industry. The Film gave Working Title a completely different audience and was very highly reviewed even though it was such a jump from classic Working Title films.
The leap from Rom-coms to thrillers did however give Working Title one advantage. It gained the audiences of European countries and helped show small independent film companies how they can adapt to the film industry as well.

Johnny English

The second trailer from Working Title is the incredibly well known Johnny English. Armed with Rowan Atkinson and millions of juvenile jokes 'Johnny English' hit off immediately. But looking back at the trailer several years on, I realised that I must of been insane to go to the cinema and watch this. The trailer not only has the cheesiest voice over ever, it also brings attention to the worst aspects of the film. The only part that I can see within the two minute trailer that sells the movie to me, is the fact that we get an image of Rowan Atkinson for almost every single second. I feel slightly conned of a childhood when I peer into the depths of Johnny English, and realise that it became so successful only because it targeted an audience of children and their kind parents. Now, I am not going to just insult a trailer because I have seen the full film, I also think that there are many good points. For one, the over use of Rowan Atkinson's face is a clever technique that means the audience can predict that if they liked other films staring him, they will also like this one. Another sales technique I noticed was the positioning of the cheesy voice over. At one point in the trailer we see Johnny English covered in excrement whilst the cheesy voice says, "From the producers of Mr. Bean". This is effective on the audience because Mr. Bean normally came hand in hand with looking filthy in supposedly funny situations. Throughout the trailer the over use of well known actors and bad jokes gives the audience the slight giddy feeling where they are so stunned by the trailers random sequence of events that they suddenly find themselves in the cinema watching the full film in 3D with premiere seats and large popcorn. To conclude, The trailer for Johnny English contrasts well with Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, because they both target different audiences and use sales techniques that were more common when the film was made.