Showing posts with label guest blog. Show all posts
Showing posts with label guest blog. Show all posts

Wednesday, 22 August 2012

Welcome Wednesday: Siân Thom: Can music make or break a film?


Hey Guys,


Wednesday is the day I introduce a guest onto my blog and let them write me a post. They will be posting something about their area of knowledge and each week I will try and have a different area.

Sometimes I may post a response to what the guest has written.

This week I have Siân Thom guest staring on my blog.

Siân is my fifteen year old sister; she is going into the second year of her GCSEs. Afterwards she wants to go to college and focus mainly on acting and drama. Her ambition is to end up as a well-known actress.

This is her guest blog and underneath is my response:

There isn’t one film that I’ve watched that hasn’t had music in it, when films were first created as silent movies they weren’t really silent, yes there was no speaking but there was music and depending on the music you could tell the mood change in the film, even though the music had no lyrics or that it was just a pianist sat under the scene with a sheet of music that he had to play all the way through the film, the tempo and the pitch would change to notify the audience that the scene is meant to be funny or sad. In modern day films, there is speaking in the scenes but it still boils down to the music chosen by the producer, director, music producer or whoever puts the music in. A film would not be a film without music it would just be words and pointless actions with the audience not fully understanding what is going on in one scene to the next.

The right music makes you feel more for the characters, it makes you believe what the characters are saying, and even if the acting isn’t great you can still feel happy, sad, angry or excited by the right chose of music in that scene.

When I’m watching a film and a sad scene starts to play out, it’s not the acting or the words that make me cry really, it’s the music, the slow sad music that emphasises that it’s a sad scene and that is what sets me off crying. The other night I was watching Life as we Know it [(2010) Directed by Greg Berlanti and staring Katherine Heigl] and [slight spoiler] when the little girl calls holly mummy there are little chimes in the background, and I know that isn’t that much of music but just that little can make a scene, I think if the chimes weren’t in that scene I would of cried as much or realised the full extent of her calling holly mummy. I always listen to the music in films, if the music is right for the scene and connect with the film then it will make the audience feel like they are part of the film. But there are other cases where the music does not suit the scene what so ever and if it’s an important scene then the whole film is ruined in my opinion.

I watched a film a few years back with my brother and the music starting playing in the background and both Matt and I cringed because the music didn’t suit the scene or the film. So for the rest of the film we couldn’t get into the film or relate with the characters because, it was an important scene that explained what the whole film was about and it was ruined by a few minutes of music played quietly behind it.

Also sometimes in a film they can play the music too loud so you can’t hear what the characters are saying, this mostly happens more on the television in series or one-off shows. If a pilot is coming on T.V and you watch it and the music is too loud so you can’t hear what the characters are saying so you don’t know what is going on in the whole episode then it is unlikely that they are going to get a series because that pilot determines whether they get their series and if the public aren’t getting into because of the music then it won’t be back on our television screens for another 6 episodes.

So in conclusion if the music isn’t right for the scene the film is over. I mean don’t play an upbeat song if someone on the screen is crying and don’t play a slow sad song if someone has just received some really good news. The music has to flow with the words and actions of the film otherwise it’s doomed from the start.

My Response:

Well My response is going to contrast rather a lot in comparison to my sister’s views, but this happens quite a lot so I’m sure she will understand.

First of all, there is a guest post I wrote quite a while back discussing music and mood.

http://malikagandhi.wordpress.com/2012/07/16/a-film-director-in-the-making/

So my response to what Siân said.

Music and sound works in two different ways in film, there is diegetic and non-diegetic.

Diegetic: Music or sound that the character can hear. It is happening inside the scene and effects the character in a certain way

Non-Diegetic: Music or sound that is placed over the top, almost like a score. It tells us, as an audience, how to feel in that scene.

My argument is why, as an audience, should we be told how to feel? As my sister said it does add to the tension to a scene where the monster is about to jump out. It adds to the sadness of that part where the guy breaks the girl’s heart.

I agree with my sister when she says that some films and TV shows over-use non-diegetic sounds/music and it can cause the show/film to lose believability, the audience start to lose interest. Some films even get to the point where there is only non-diegetic music and too much action. The action therefore means nothing; the audience does not know how the characters feel.

My belief is there should be more diegetic music and sound so the audience know how the character feels which shows that when something bad happens to the character, they are affected more because they understand that character fully.

I’m not saying the use of non-diegetic music is wrong and it should not be used because I have seen some good films that use non-diegetic very cleverly and leave the audience in suspense a lot of the time, but my question is: could you do this with diegetic sound and music?

My final point is that music affects us, just as it does a character in a film and people who say music is not important have not had the experience of discovering what it can do for you. 

If you want to know more about Siân, then check out her Twitter: @Ginger_Thom

If you can think of any films where the music does complete the whole film let me know. Also if you can think of any films where there is not much music but the film is still brilliant then please comment. I really want to know all your opinions on this one.

If you have any comments or views on what has been discussed then please place them below. If you would like to appear on my Welcome Wednesday blog then let me know.

Stay safe,

Matt 


Wednesday, 15 August 2012

Welcome Wednesday: Tim Popple: Moon, Monsters, and Money


Hey Guys,



Wednesday is the day I introduce a guest onto my blog and let them write me a post. They will be posting something about their area of knowledge and each week I will try and have a different area.
Sometimes I may post a response to what the guest has written.

The major theme running through this week seems to be Sci-Fi, and why break the running theme? This week we have Guest Star, Tim Popple who will be discussing the thrills of British and Low Budget Science Fiction. Make him welcome:

Tim lives and works in Bristol, and spends his spare time living and breathing cinema. He runs http://the24thframe.co.uk/, a website dedicated to film reviews and features (one current feature involves looking one Star Trek film a month, until the new film is released next year!). The site has a Facebook page, www.facebook.com/the24thframe, and you can follow Tim on Twitter @VoxPopple.

Low budget SciFi has often been something of a contradiction. Take an idea that seems like it ought to need a big budget, and craft something unique and wonderful with a tiny budget. Use that budget’s limitations to focus your creativity. From films like Silent Running – directed by 2001: A Space Odyssey’s effects guy, Douglas Trumbull – through James Cameron’s classic The Terminator, and on past oddities like Shane Carruth’s Primer (an altogether different take on time travel to the Schwarzenegger film) across different countries like Spain’s Timecrimes, and South Africa’s District 9, and on to recent times with the one-two Brit SciFi punch of Duncan Jones’s Moon and Gareth Edwards’s Monsters, and the US’s grunts’-eye view of an invasion with the underrated Battle: Los Angeles.

With Nir Paniry’s film Extracted getting good press at festivals, I wanted to look at these most recent British SciFi low budget films which are not only sterling examples of low budget SciFi done well, but are actually two of the best films of recent years. Indeed Moon topped my list of films of 2009. Sam Rockwell is the sole occupant of a base on the moon, mining precious fuel discovered there to help an ailing planet below. Coming to the end of his “shift”, slowly he realises things are not entirely as he thought. With nods to 2001: A Space Odyssey in the Kevin Spacey-voiced ship’s computer, as well as the solitary life of Silent Running, it has fine SciFi as its touchstones. Yet even without that historical layer, Moon still works as an astonishing piece of SciFi. It takes a futuristic setting – a realistic futuristic setting, no less – and posits the age old question of what it means to be human, how human is human? The struggled relationship between man and machine is brought to bear most succinctly, and man’ resilience, his fight for survival, is made frightfully real. Tonally, Moon has heart, pathos, and in a lovely touch to the wake up call, humour. It is, quite simply, one of the greatest debut films since an upstart 20 something decided to make a little film mocking the most powerful newspaper magnate in America, with snowglobes, pleasure palaces, and a mystery called ‘Rosebud’.

Gareth Edwards’ Monsters is a kind of road movie. It takes the familiar set up of an alien invasion, and fast forwards to the end of that film. The aliens have arrived, we’ve become accustomed to them, and they live in a specific area. So far, so District 9. But while District 9 was a thinly-veiled nod to apartheid within South African history, Monsters looks at a more specifically American concern: border control. Trapped with no option but to travel through the area infected with the mysterious aliens, a photographer and his boss’s daughter struggle with each other as much as they do with their environment. It’s a SciFi road movie buddy movie, if you will. People turning up expecting Independence Day 2 were always going to be disappointed. Of course you see the aliens here – to not do so would have been a huge cheat on the audience, micro-budget or not – but it’s about the situation, the interactions, and the relationships. And surviving a potentially hostile environment. Monsters is a brilliantly realised vision that, like Moon paints a painfully realistic future. That is its strength. By framing the unbelievable within a believable structure, it improves the suspension of disbelief.

Throwing money at a film can often do it a disservice. Necessity begets invention, and it is necessary with a smaller budget to be inventive in one’s portrayal of the fantastical in a way that remains believable. Monsters, by its overt necessity to visualise creatures of another world had a harder job than Moon which required a Moon base, and shots in space. Both achieve, both excel, and both show how much is possible, even on the tiniest of budgets.

If you have any comments or views on what has been discussed then please place them below. If you would like to appear on my Welcome Wednesday blog then let me know.

Stay safe,

Matt

Wednesday, 1 August 2012

Welcome Wednesday: Tonya Polk: Movies Vs. Books

Hey Guys,



Welcome to Wednesdays. Every Wednesday I will introduce a new person who has a simular interest to myself who I think that both myself and you guys can learn from, understand and take things from. Each week I will post a short intro to the person, what they have to say and their important links. Maybe even do a response once or twice.

This weeks guest post is my American friend, Tonya Polk:

Tonya is a fourty one year old housewife and mum, who ‘refuses to ever grow up’. She lives in Bangor, Maine, USA. She is very proud that ‘It’s also hometown of famous author Stephen King’. She considers herself to be ‘an unofficial expert’ on such things as movies and books, which is what her guest blog is about. Hope you enjoy what she has to say:

Movie vs Book. 

Hey Guys,

This is something I never gave any thought to as a teenager or young adult.  I remember sitting in a packed movie theater anxiously waiting to see my favorite Stephen King novel brought to life in front of my eyes.  

Having read just about every book he ever published, I didn't care that the movie didn't exactly follow the book~ who would care when your hometown author has just filmed an entire movie in OUR hometown?!? 

Many years later, after I re-discovered the joy of reading again (I have to thank Stefanie Meyer for that, and yes, I am a proud Twihard) was when I discovered how a director and screen writer can ruin a great love story, or any story for that matter.

Don't get me wrong, not all screen adaptations are BAD (Harry Potter was spectacular)  but for ME, reading is an escape from reality, like a little personal vacation into a fantasy land.  Using your imagination, getting your own personal vision of what the characters look like, visualizing the scenery, smells, sounds...all are very different and personal to each reader. 

Do the directors and screenwriters actually READ the book (s) ? Or do they just read the back cover and get some input from the author?  Do they understand that readers have a very personal connection with the characters and the storyline? Do they even know HOW WELL we know the book, every detail, every love scene, every detail of every place the characters have been?  Do they even care? Who is to blame? 

As talks are in the works and directors are being talked about,I am very nervous about my beloved "Fifty Shades" being made into a film.  Will the actors be good enough?  Will they pay attention to the LOVE story and not just the "other" stuff in the books?  Will I even WATCH the movie? Or let MY Christian and Ana live in my head?  Seems silly to stress over fictional characters in a book, but if you are like me, and love to read, you will understand exactly what I mean. 

So now, my thinking is, maybe it's better NOT to read the book first, that way all expectations are gone (well, except that the movie is at least GOOD) and you don't find yourself stressing over the screenwriter leaving out your favorite scene or changing dialogue that make you want to get up and walk out?  Or will the screenwriter be so amazing and blow all my expectations away? ( Hunger Games comes to mind on that note). 

So which would YOU choose? Book or Movie?

Stay safe,

Tonya

My Response:

Most, if not all, movies are based on something. Such things as books, stories, poems or even other movies (postmodernism). So this is a good thing to look at.
When basing a film on a book you have got a lot riding on the end result, most of the time there is just too much in the book to possibly fit into the movie. Other times the auther themselves says ‘look I’m not that keen on that part, can we not place it in?’ but this does make the fans of the books unhappy.

As Tonya said, we all have our own imagionations and will read a book differently; we all pick out different immergry that effects us the most. So when we are getting shown how to feel, it is much different.

A good film, based from a book, that does not get much credit is Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005) Directed by Tim Burton. Whenever I mention this film I get ‘oh it’s not as good as the original’ but how can it not be better, when it follows Rhoald Daul’s creation to the last T, even including the original songs that Daul wrote?

So I do agree with Tonya, when reading a book you have your own vision and imagionation on what is happening and directors should take this into consideration more. They need to make sure that they try and read the book and consult with the Author, or as close as possible.

Let me know what you think? Do you agree with Tonya? Is there any films you can think of that are as good, or maybe better, than the book? Is there any film that ruined the books for you?

Check Tonya out on Twitter:

@Summersunluvr

Stay safe,

Matt

Wednesday, 25 July 2012

Welcome Wednesday: Guest Blog: Joseph Eastwood:Why Branding is Necessary


Hey Guys,


Welcome to Wednesdays. Every Wednesday I will introduce a new person who has a simular interest to myself who I think that both myself and you guys can learn from, understand and take things from. Each week I will post a short intro to the person, what they have to say and their important links. Maybe even do a response once or twice.

This week my guest is a good friend of mine from university. His name is Joseph Eastwood, he is 19 years old and studies English and Creative Writing at University. He is an aspiring writer who's book, Lumen, is coming out very soon. This is his blog about writing and how 'indie' writers should have a brand and a genre.

Hope you enjoy it:


Why Branding is Necessary

I feel that as an indie author you need to have a brand, you need to have a genre, you need people to remember who you are---being another self-published author is hard.
I'm going to kick this off by telling you that if your Facebook page doesn't have your name in the title, then there isn't much point in having it.
Book pages are useful, but they are also very boring and don't offer as much as author pages do. I find that author pages are more personal, where book pages just have pictures of the book...or random pictures of people they want to fill the characters etc. and yeah, that's fun and everything, and you want people to "like" your book, and unless that's the only book you're ever going to write, I would delete it!
I believe that if you want to be indie you will not become successful over just ONE book! So quit promoting it to hell and back! Instead, I think you should focus on your writing, Amanda Hocking did not become famous for that one book, nor did Stephen King, or anyone else for that matter. They all wrote several books and have a backlog.
Just like an musician must build a repertoire of songs because lets face it, if they listen to the same song over and over again it just gives you earache and you start to hate it. I think the same thing goes for an indie author who keeps on pushing their book everywhere you look and I've actually said to myself..."No, you're not buying that, it's just spam! The author has done nothing to try and sell it to me, just forever posting it and the reviews they've received."
You need to hone your genre and you need to write, write, write! Not everything you write should be published for money, some things you write can be free! You know, like in your notes that people can read because there aren't a lot of people who are going to be taking a chance on an indie author.

For more information on Joe, his writing or any of his blog posts, check out the following links below:


Blog: www.josepheastwood.com

Twitter: @JoeEastwood

Page: www.facebook.com/josephswriting

If any of you fancy writing me a guest post for next Wednesday, could you please get in contact with me. Either on here, or on Facebook/Twitter. Links below:

Page: www.facebook.com/MattThomFilm

Twitter: @No1MattThom


Stay safe,


Matt

Subscribe via email

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner