DISNEY!!!....and Pixar, Anime and Manga.

In our last lecture we looked at Disney, Pixar, Anime and Manga animation with Bambi being the chosen Disney movie. We talked about how much of a breakthrough Disney was in film, with real foliage and live deer being brought in so that the artists and animators could observe and perfect all the specific movements and details. They also used the same process for The Lion King. Such time and effort was put into creating these movies (the stampede scene in The Lion King took 3 years to animate). Growing up watching Disney movies, they, to me, represent perfect animation and stories.


Since it began in 1979, Pixar has taken animation to a whole new level. I remember seeing Monsters Inc (2001) for the first time and being absolutely amazed by Sully's fur!

The way it looked and moved was so realistic. It blew me away. The detail was astonishing and I remember wondering at the time what else they were able to achieve. The possibilities were infinate.

And of course they didn't disappoint. Take the film Up (2009) for example. A brilliant film with characters that are extremely human-like. Everything from their appearance to their emotions and mannerisms.

This was another film where I instantly thought 'wow' when seeing it for the first time. The similarities to real humans was uncanny.

My first experience of anime was Pokemon. I didn't really 'get' this type of animation as its a world away from what I was brought up on. The characters are very different and seeing anime and manga for the first time with its edginess and the shapes and angles they used for the characters seemed very alien to me. I still find it slightly difficult to connect with the characters.

 

Its very clear that English and American animation differs greatly from Japanese. As I mentioned previously, English and American animation takes inspiration from real life, bringing in animals to draw from. With Japanese animation however, it seems to be the other way round. Japanese animation seems to be inspiring people reather than taking inspiration.

For example, special contact lenses are now available in Japan to give you the large eyes you see in the characters. They were also featured in Lady Gaga's video for Bad Romance.

                              

By looking at how animation has progressed you can see not only how far the animators have come by creating characters that greatly resemble humans, but also how it has gone on to effect its audiences. The fact that women in Japan are going crazy for this fad says a lot about how influential animation is in today's culture.

Are You Game?

Continuing on with the violence theme we also looked into gaming. Not being a big fan of computer games myself I must admit I may have let my mind wander slightly here, but thinking about the violence that is featured in games you notice it is very similar to the violence featured in film. The range of gaming has definately progressed greatly over the last 30/40 years; we were shown an early depiction of violence from the 1970's game Deathrace. Seeing how much gaming has improved with characters now looking very realistic, it also makes the violence seem more real.
Sticking by what I said in my previous post I don't believe film violence really influences people, however game violence differs slightly. Insted of watching a person hurt or kill someone in a film, you are actually able to personally control the character to do this within a game. You're the one who has the ability to cause pain. It seems much closer to the real thing.

A film I watched a few months ago on this topic was Gamer, starring Gerard Butler.


 


Set in the future, it shows a world in which people are placed in a gaming environment with their actions controlled by other humans. To involve real people in violence for entertainment I feel is definately a step too far.

And yet the popularity of these types of games seem to be soaring. A scary possibility perhaps? Or just harmless fun?

Violence:Is It All That Bad, Really?

Well I never thought I'd say it but I quite enjoyed our lecture and seminar on violence! When thinking about violence that you see on screen you notice that it can be portrayed in many different ways, such as through assassination, war, torture and moster movies to name but a few. I find some of these types of violence are much easier to handle than others, for example I love watching big battle scenes in films like Gladiator and Braveheart, yet I can't bring myself to sit through any of the Saw films because of the torture. I think its purely down to the amount of suffering you see.
One film I did manage to sit through that includes this sort of content is Mel Gibson's The Passion Of The Christ. I felt totally sickened throughout the film because I just couldn't believe the amount of hatred and brutality shown towards one person. Not only did the violence shock me but it was also extremely upsetting. No one has the right to cause another human being such pain and The Passion Of The Christ really pushed the boundaries, causing outrage and backlash when released, with Slate's critic David Edelstein describing it as "the Jesus Chainsaw Massacre", and hearing numerous reports of people fainting in cinemas due to the sheer amount of brutality that was shown. It wasn't easy viewing.




Like it was stated by Ivan, stabbings and beatings etc are much more personal than gunshot and therefore harder to watch. Its continuous and very emotional, this type of violence usually being carried out by someone you know or are related to rather than a stranger.


During our seminar we were asked what our personal threshold for violence is. For me its cruelty shown towards both humans and animals and also anything specifically directed to the brain. And the latter is all down to Hannibal Lecter (which has, by the way, scarred me for life). The particular scene I am refering to is when he cuts open a mans head and removes part of his brain to cook and eat....urgh...its just way too much. I think we'll stop there, just thinking about it makes me feel sick.
Heres a picture from the film showing the exact the scene I'm talking about:




Moving swiftly on.....
Looking back at movie releases over the past year there has been one film that has stood out from the rest, namely Kick Ass. Using a child to portray an assassin was always going to be a risky move, especially with bad language thrown in to boot, but the way it is filmed - its based on a comic book - and showing the characters committing these violent acts as superheroes, they have made it seem funny and silly in a way and by achieving this they have managed to detract from the initial shock of seeing a child kill numerous people. Its more of an action adventure comedy rather than a serious depiction of what happens/could happen in normal society.




The truth of it is we were all brought up watching violence on t.v, this is obvious if you have ever watched the likes of Tom And Jerry or any of the Warner Brothers cartoons. Over the years the violence has got worse, with film makers desperate to produce something to truely shock you but I don't think showing violence in film is particularly a bad thing. Violence happens in real life whether we like it or not and has done since the evolution of man, and if someone is going to commit these acts they don't need movies like this to set them on that path. (If that was the case then how can you explain the violence that was commited hundreds of years ago?)

I think the scariest thing about this topic is purely that humans are capable of committing these crimes, that we are all capable of it, regardless of whether you actually do anything about it. But in a situation where we are pushed to the edge to protect the people we love, how far would we be willing to go?

New Media

Well, Bill's first lecture was erm...interesting. Not much in the way of special effects, character and model, more to do with gaming. I did however enjoy watching the three early film clips; An American Fireman (1903), The Great Train Robbery (1903)and Broken Blossoms (1919), and seeing how audiences of the time had only one viewpoint. For the modern audiences of today the thought of watching a film in this manner seems quite restricting. These days we get multiple cut-scenes and even such things as flashbacks, flashforwards and flashsideways - yes I an talking about Lost! By creating complex scenes like this the viewer is able to ascertain more from the situation along with the history of the characters involved.
Another good example of this can be seen in Vantage Point (2008). The film tells of an assassination attempt and repeats the incident over and over again from many different viewpoints of the characters involved. By witnessing the event happening from various perspectives you catch details that you would otherwise have missed. This way you are able to see the big picture and understand how and why certain things are happening.

Guillermo Del Toro "Masters of Horror"

The genius that is Del Toro



After re-watching the masterpiece that is Pans Labyrinth and searching for more of Del Toro i found this interview on You Tube and thought I would share. Interesting info on his early experiences of horror and how he created his own special effects.

Wow, haven't updated the blog in a while :s! So, Imap done. Essay done. Just one more deadline to go! 
Hmm..and a lot of catching up on here...and project research...ok maybe no relaxing for me. Better get on it.

Imap/Essay

After weeks of undecidedness over which essay question to use I've finally opted for question 3. The character I am going to use to analyse will be Captain Jack Sparrow from Pirates Of The Caribbean.
Denotation/connotation/myth is definately the one...now just to decide on the other set. Hmm.....iconic/arbitrary....or maybe binary opposition?..choices choices..

Damon Reads Twilight

Just a little extra.....

There was a certain quote mentioned in the lecture that 'maker's are aware of makers'. Following on from the topic of vampires heres a clip from The Vampire Diaries that instantly came to mind upon hearing this.

Made me laugh!

Vampire: Human or Creature?

In our seminar following the Intertextuality lecture we discussed early vampire films Nosferatu (1922), Nosferatu:The Vampyre (1979) and Dracula (1993). Now, personally I could sit and discuss this topic all day. I love the vampire subculture and having always wanting to see Nosferatu but having never got round to it (I know, I know, shocker), getting to watch a clip, if only for 5 minutes was a real treat. (I will now be buying the film!)
Seeing how a vampire was portrayed in the '20's compared to the recent more modern vampires, the look has changed drastically but the story still the same.
In the '20's vampires were made to look like what they are, a monster - scary, creepy, disgusting etc, someone you would want nothing to do with and avoid like the plague. But as the years have gone on film makers have been able to take the fact that this 'creature' is dangerous and evolve it into a type of danger that draws you in. (Of course casting handsome, young actors and making the vampire look more human plays a big part in this!) By making them attractive and human-like you can relate to them a lot more, but theres still that part of them that sets them apart from the rest of us, which is very intriguing and mysterious. This can be seen from the releases of 'The Twilight Saga', 'The Vampire Diaries' and 'True Blood'. All three shows doing very well and being extremely popular over the past couple of years. I think this transformation has been possible as ideas have changed over the years, people becoming a lot more relaxed about certain types of context not only on t.v but in life in general. For anyone who has seen True Blood will know how sexy the programme is - compare this to the bedroom scene in Nosferatu where he takes her heart, no physical contact, the action being carried out to the viewer by his shadow. 

Nosferatu (1922)



The Twilight Saga (2008)

True Blood (2008)



The Vampire Diaries (2009)

As you can see Nosferatu is someone you would cross the road to avoid: scary eyes, sharp teeth, pointy bat ears and long fingernails - an all-round nasty creature, whereas the others are all pleasing to the eye. And going by these pictures alone you can't tell them apart from a normal person. The same can't be said for Nosferatu!

However, srcatch beneath the surface and you find they are all the same, blood drinkers, shy away from human contact (for the most part!) and where ever they go death surely follows.

By changing the look to appeal to a younger audience the subject has gained a cult following, the world currently going vampire crazy!

Haven't I seen That Somewhere Before?

I found last week's lecture on Intertextuality really interesting. Sitting through many films in the past I have often found myself thinking a particular scene looks quite familiar, certain I had seen it somewhere before and then it annoying me for ages after, not being able to figure out where from and why. Now knowing what it is and why film makers do it, I find myself intentionally looking out for these signs when watching not only films but also T.V programmes and adverts.

During the lecture, one scene that instantly came to mind was from The Hangover. Zach Galifianakis, aka Alan, riding escalator into the casino with Bradley Cooper, mimicking the scene from Rain Man with Dustin Hoffman and Tom Cruise:

The Hangover (2009)

Rain Man (1988)

I instantly recognised it and said as such to my friend. And yes, I did feel a little smug. heehee :)

A T.V series that encorporates intertextuality on a big scale is Spaced. Anyone who has seen this programme will know that sci-fi in particular is referenced A LOT! - Star Wars mainly (as can be seen on the cover of the DVD.) Its very cleverly done and anyone who hasn't seen it then please do!! Its so very good.

Episode 1:Beginnings (just to get you started):

SEE VIDEO ON PREVIOUS POST!

or use this link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYXP05_pV7M

Simon Pegg has then stepped it up and proceeded to take certain jokes from this series on to future projects of his, such as Shaun Of The Dead and Hot Fuzz. So in some way all of his work links together. Watching one of his films for the first time and hearing a one of the jokes you wouldn't think anything of it, but having watched his previous work you feel that you know and understand him and the characters he potrays on a more personal level.

Logos

Whilst browsing through some magazines I have also seen images and logos that are intertextual. For example the Gucci and Chanel logo:



Although not exactly the same, the idea of the initial letter linking together is clearly very similar.

Photographs

Demi Moore's  iconic naked photo whilst pregnant on the cover of Vanity Fair in the early '90s sparked a lot of controversy when first published but has now been recreated many times over by other stars over the past 20 years for various magazines:

What with all of this intertextuality it does make you wonder when it will end but the fact is (as correctly stated in the lecture) it can't. People will always be influenced by other people's work whether consciously or subconsciously. 

In a way I think this is a really good thing as you can take that first idea and improve on it in a big way until its 10/50/100% better. The natural process is that this will keep happening as time goes on, which makes you think of all the possibilities that we have yet to encounter in the future.

And whats not to love about that?! 

Beginnings

Burke And Hare Premiere!

Slightly off track here...but I must mention..

Having managed to attain a pair of tickets I was able to attend the premiere this week!!
Now, you must understand, having neither of us been to a premiere before, to say that my friend and I were a little excited is quite an understatement! We were, in fact, positively ecstatic.
So good news for us, the turnout was surprisingly good, Simon Pegg - looking very dapper in his white suit, along with the majority of the main cast; Andy Serkis, Isla Fisher, Ronnie Corbett and Jessica Hynes.

The film itself was very entertaining with many other famous faces making an appearance such as Tim Curry, Jenny Agutta and Bill Bailey, and not to mention a very funny cameo by Paul Whitehouse!
Crew-wise a special mention was given to the costume designer by director John Landis, which I must admit was well deserved. I also thought the prosthetics were very good, the film being perfect for it with bodies being very prominent throughout!

Overall a great film and lovely evening :)

(Needless to say we didn't pester anyone for photos or autographs like obsessed fans because we are, in fact too sophisticated and mature for all of that(!))

Understanding The Signs

Sooo after much hesitation and deliberation my very first post - and blog for that matter!
Exciting stuff! :) (and just a tad scary)


So I thought I'd start it all off with a little bit of semiotics...

I'd always taken the majority of images I view at face value (having never studied semiotics and being quite ignorant of it.)
Now, having learnt of the subject in all its glory I am able to read more into the photographs that I see everyday in magazines, newspapers, online etc. Not only images by photographers but also my own photos.

Taking one of my own, for example, I am able to produce certain facts about the image that the viewer may easily discern:

Denotation - Trees. Flowers

Connotation - The absence of leaves on the tree show that Winter has just passed with the white blooms proving that Spring has arrived.


By doing this you open yourself up to the image and allow yourself to understand more of the world of which the photographer has captured. 

I actually really enjoyed this lecture (even though i started off a bit confused) and feel that wanting to know more and looking for the signs will definately be something I'll be doing whenever certain images catch my eye.