Cinema then became known for films known as ‘talkies’ in which the audience would actually be able to hear the actors talk. This excited audiences, yet it was still not enough. We then developed colour films that contrasted against the ordinary movies that were filmed in black and white and coloured sepia. Then special effects (SFX) began to creep into films. The Execution of Mary Queen of Scots in 1895 was one of the first films to use a special effect, using a substitution shot with a dummy to enable them to shoot Mary Queen of Scot’s execution. The world of cinema then discovered the wonders of animation: now able to integrate the two types of films. Pete’s Dragon in 1977 was the first film that combined animation and live action. The team behind this managed it by creating three scenes that they could composite together with a live foreground and background, but an animated middle ground. These developments were then followed by CGI and 3D (Three Dimensional) films – and these are only a few of the technological advancements that have been made throughout the history of film.
So, it would be a valid question to ask whether it is new sensations that interest the audience. However, there are many other factors to take into consideration. What would a technologically able film be without good actors, a good director or an inspirational plotline?
The Wizard of Oz is a film that when released, was highly publicised for it’s technological advances – this was a film that was able to boast Technicolor! One IMDB user was able to reminisce of the film being introduced with the sentence:
“The following program is brought to you in living colour on NBC!”
The Wizard of Oz was filmed half in three-strip Technicolor (the sequences of Oz) and half in black-and-white (the sequences of Kansas) and later coloured with Sepia. The film was publicised as being in colour – although the black-and-white sections of the film were not mentioned. This gives us the impression that audiences would not be interested in the film had it not been advanced technologically.
When the film was first released, it is easy to say that the fact that it was in colour was the main reason for its popularity as it amazed audiences all over the country. However, this is no reason for the film to be still popular today. I believe that the secret behind its vast popularity is due to the storyline: it holds interesting characters and songs to keep children entertained; for the elder generations, it holds a significance in their past that assists reminiscence and it has also grown increasingly popular with the LGBT (the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender cult.) It is said that this film is the first that represented acceptance towards their sexuality (the black and white sections of the film presenting homophobia juxtaposing against the colourful land of Oz which implicates acceptance.) As a consequence of this, Judy Garland - who plays Dorothy, has since become a big gay icon.
The film of a scarecrow, a tin man and a cowardly lion has since gone down in history – although it may be remembered significantly for it’s technological advancements; its popularity demands a look at the plotline – which in my opinion, has made the film what it was.
Another film that was known for its advances in technology is Toy Story. Disney’s Toy Story was the first ever feature-length animation. The film was made up of 114,240 frames, each of which took two hours and fifteen minutes to complete. As you can imagine, this was a lengthy progress, but was time well spent. To date, Toy Story has grossed over $356 million worldwide and even now is still being widely publicised: for example, a 3D version of the sequel is now being shown in selected cinemas – something you could say that emphasises how demand for new sensation is shaping cinema. However, an argument to this statement is that had it not been for the amazing plotline of Toy Story, would it still be the one film out of thousands chosen to be re-released years later in 3D.
The film Toy Story is loved by many, and remembered fondly by those that saw it in the cinema as children. The plot is easy to relate to – even for younger children. They could relate to Woody (having to compete with somebody for your best friend) and even Buzz Light-year (being new and having to find new friends.) This basic plot made interesting with the use of toys has been extremely popular and also loved by parents for the moral ending of them working together and becoming friends themselves.
It is obvious that this film wasn’t only successful for its technology, and although it played a bit part in the original publicity and income, it has since become infamous for its moving storyline.
The most recent film advertised specifically for its advances in cinematic technology is 2009’s Avatar. The phenomenon of filming in 3D has created a new craze within fans of cinema. One IMDB user stated that the new method of filming debuted in Avatar was “one of the best cinematic experiences ever” which provides us with an argument for the statement that audiences are forever in want of a ‘new sensation.’ Avatar was filmed using two high-definition cameras in a single camera body to create a better depth perception as well as photo-realistic computer-generated characters that were created using motion-capture animations. The characters were made with real actors performances captured on a visual counterpart so audiences could still watch ‘real’ action. The mix of technologies has created a film that audiences have gone crazy to watch. As of yet, bearing in mind it has only been out a few months, the film has made $910,847,633 and has been titled as the highest-grossing film of all time in Australia, Russia, Spain and Vietnam amongst others.
This is a true sign that a film has become popular, and also shows us how willing audiences were to pay more to witness a film more advanced that would increase the pleasure in their cinematic experiences. Avatar is an example of a point towards the fact that moving images production is led by the audiences demand for new sensation: and if this is the reaction willingly given by today’s generation then who would argue?
In conclusion, although technology obviously plays a big part in the advancements of cinema and new films of today, audiences can be extremely stubborn. If the storyline or plot in a film is not enough to impress, then a film will not become successful. Therefore, I believe that although it is important, and although the audience do determine how films are made, technological advancements are not the main reason for changes in the production of film.
Bibliography:
The Wizard of Oz:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wizard_of_Oz_(1939_film)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0032138/
Toy Story:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toy_story
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114709/
Avatar:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avatar_(2009_film)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0499549/
Other:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete%27s_Dragon
http://www.filmsite.org/visualeffects1.html
No comments:
Post a Comment