2)
The Sweeney
Financing: Budget was estimated to around £3,000,000.
Cultural Test: 30/31
Attack the Block
Financing: £13,000,000 estimated
Cultural Test: 24/31
The King's Speech
Financing: Estimated to be £15,000,000
Cultural Test: 28/31
We Need To Talk About Kevin
Financing: £7,500,000
Cultural Test: 8/31
Skyfall
Financing: £250,000,000
Cultural Test: 28/31
3) The main problem is that UK films are made but, in order to get the film exhibited, the film makers have to sell the film to a distribution company. Once sold, all revenue from cinema screenings, DVD and Blu-ray sales, plus sales to television companies, are lost. Which means that the film maker themselves don't make as much money. The biggest example of this is Slum dog Millionaire as it's classified as a British film but the makers of it haven't profited anything from it because it is not technically their film anymore.
Another problem is that American actors and actresses from Hollywood are seen to be more glamorous than British actors because of their big name and popularity. A household Hollywood name is usually picked for the lead role of a film in order to encourage people to watch it as their more likely to watch it if there's someone acting that they are familiar with.
The final and biggest problem in the British film industry is that although there are many talented production members and actors, they are often lured into the world of Hollywood because of the better pay and increase of popularity over there. There are many examples such as Christian Bale and Tom Hardy who are British but mostly act in Hollywood because of the high pay and popularity.
4) There's key strengths in the UK film industry such as the outstanding creative skills and productions like Love Actually which grossed billions of dollars worldwide and grabbed the attention of a vast audience. The Harry Potter franchise further emphasises the fact that there is an outstanding creative set of skills within the British film industry.
There are also outstanding facilities in the British film industry like Ealing Studios and Pinewood Studios which makes it the third biggest film industry in the world. British films also take 5% of the world box-office takings. They also have outstanding camera companies and digital post-production houses which attract all sorts of investments from overseas which boosts the countries' economy.
5) The two options for the future of the British audience are that British film makers could choose to reply upon co-op productions with American studios to keep the industry afloat and keep money getting pumped in the British film industry. However one disadvantage to this is that these American studios and production teams will have an influence in the team and could change regional accents, dialects and cultural/political references. Since issues that are mainly occurring within British society might not have anything to do with American and the American audience, it would be unlikely that those American studios and production teams will even consider working and helping the British film makers.
The second option is that British film makers could choose to make low budget films targeted at a small British audience. Although the production costs will be significantly lower than usual therefore box-office takings and profit will also be decreased and a lot lower than Hollywood blockbusters but the film makers will be able to retain what is it that makes British films so distinctive with compromise. Also, closely and carefully managing sales of distribution rights could also mean that profits are pumped back into the British film industry.
6) I believe that the second option is the best option for the future of British film industry because it will make it distinctive and therefore will keep the traditions and cultural issues will be further addressed in these films. It also gives the film maker a lot more freedom with their choice of film and production means as they won't be pressured to make something for a production company that will want to profit a lot. Also, having a low budget but producing a great film sounds a lot more impressive than having a massive budget because then it's evident that the film maker has immense array of skills which makes them unique.
Making low budget films targeted at a small British audience is a lot better as well than cooperating with American companies and Hollywood because they will ruin the touch of authenticity. It's not always about the money and film makers should care more about the films they produce and exploiting their creativity rather than care about the money they'll make from box-office sales or production companies. Personal satisfaction and talent cannot be bought.
Another problem is that American actors and actresses from Hollywood are seen to be more glamorous than British actors because of their big name and popularity. A household Hollywood name is usually picked for the lead role of a film in order to encourage people to watch it as their more likely to watch it if there's someone acting that they are familiar with.
The final and biggest problem in the British film industry is that although there are many talented production members and actors, they are often lured into the world of Hollywood because of the better pay and increase of popularity over there. There are many examples such as Christian Bale and Tom Hardy who are British but mostly act in Hollywood because of the high pay and popularity.
4) There's key strengths in the UK film industry such as the outstanding creative skills and productions like Love Actually which grossed billions of dollars worldwide and grabbed the attention of a vast audience. The Harry Potter franchise further emphasises the fact that there is an outstanding creative set of skills within the British film industry.
There are also outstanding facilities in the British film industry like Ealing Studios and Pinewood Studios which makes it the third biggest film industry in the world. British films also take 5% of the world box-office takings. They also have outstanding camera companies and digital post-production houses which attract all sorts of investments from overseas which boosts the countries' economy.
5) The two options for the future of the British audience are that British film makers could choose to reply upon co-op productions with American studios to keep the industry afloat and keep money getting pumped in the British film industry. However one disadvantage to this is that these American studios and production teams will have an influence in the team and could change regional accents, dialects and cultural/political references. Since issues that are mainly occurring within British society might not have anything to do with American and the American audience, it would be unlikely that those American studios and production teams will even consider working and helping the British film makers.
The second option is that British film makers could choose to make low budget films targeted at a small British audience. Although the production costs will be significantly lower than usual therefore box-office takings and profit will also be decreased and a lot lower than Hollywood blockbusters but the film makers will be able to retain what is it that makes British films so distinctive with compromise. Also, closely and carefully managing sales of distribution rights could also mean that profits are pumped back into the British film industry.
6) I believe that the second option is the best option for the future of British film industry because it will make it distinctive and therefore will keep the traditions and cultural issues will be further addressed in these films. It also gives the film maker a lot more freedom with their choice of film and production means as they won't be pressured to make something for a production company that will want to profit a lot. Also, having a low budget but producing a great film sounds a lot more impressive than having a massive budget because then it's evident that the film maker has immense array of skills which makes them unique.
Making low budget films targeted at a small British audience is a lot better as well than cooperating with American companies and Hollywood because they will ruin the touch of authenticity. It's not always about the money and film makers should care more about the films they produce and exploiting their creativity rather than care about the money they'll make from box-office sales or production companies. Personal satisfaction and talent cannot be bought.
No comments:
Post a Comment