Recently, my friend showed me a video on Youtube. The video is called "The Website Is Down" and is about a web technician who is dealing with a sales person he works with. All the viewer sees is what is on the web technician computer screen. The web technition shows what can be done with the internet if you know enough about it. He simultaneously plays Halo online, talks to people using Skype, changes received email content and uses another persons computer from is desktop. The reason why I like this video is because it is funny and also because it is a film based entirely on the internet. It was made available on the internet and is based on what can be done with it. I think it is very clever because the audience does not need much knowledge about the internet to enjoy it and people who do know a lot about the internet will also enjoy it.
I thought it was real at first but it is a film that was scripted. This is a film that only exists because of the internet. The internet is having a huge impact on how people make films. People no longer have to normal film making conventions. Since the arrival of the internet, people have accepted more different types of video than what is seen in cinemas or on TV. Audiences can accept the content of the video because they understand what is happening. I think it is more visually interesting that a lot of films because the audience must watch the screen at all times to keep up with the plot and also to get the jokes. With a lot of films one can look away and not miss anything but with this, it is all about what you see.
I like this video because I think it is a good example of what we talk about with regards digital media. Its a good example of the product of the digital age. It was distributed on the internet, the view is only of what is seen on a computer, its about the internet and for people who use the internet.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Monday, November 10, 2008
Goal of My Project
One thing which I have not talked about much but which is very importaant is the goal of my project. What is the point of my reality TV series?. What I always had in mind but never really mentioned was that I would like to show teenagers that school today is not as difficult as it was for their parents when they were going to school. Sinse I changed from just having teenagers to including adults, the goal has also changed. Along with opening teenagers' eyes to the difficulties of school years ago, the series will also show adults that teenagers have to deal with a lot of issues they never had to deal with when they were in school (computer skills etc.).
The series also needs to have something to work towords. What will be the conclusion? Each group will have to attend classes and also undertake tasks. The group who do the best in the final exams and winn the most tasks will be the winner. If the teenagers win, they will each recieve a top of the range personal computer worth 2000 euro. If the adults win, they will win a holiday worth 2000 euro each to a destination of their choice.
The series also needs to have something to work towords. What will be the conclusion? Each group will have to attend classes and also undertake tasks. The group who do the best in the final exams and winn the most tasks will be the winner. If the teenagers win, they will each recieve a top of the range personal computer worth 2000 euro. If the adults win, they will win a holiday worth 2000 euro each to a destination of their choice.
Film and Copyright n the Digital Age
There is no doubt that film making has undergone a massive change because of the Digital Age. With technological advances, the audience demands more from a film than they used to. Before, people would go to the cinema and be happy to just watch a film. Today however, the audience demands and also expects more from a film than just a singular cinematic experience. Graham Roberts argues in his chapter of Web Studies that the extra features element of DVD's may be the model for future film content. People today buy a DVD as much for the extra features as for the film itself. People want to get as much out of a film as they possibly can and the extra features part of a DVD allows this. The internet also provides extra content on films. A lot of new films being released have a web site with interviews with the actors and director along with previews of the film. Technological advances are the reason for these extra demands from films. Why should the audience settle for just the movie when extra content can be provided?. Take The Blair Witch Project as an example. Without all the content about it on the internet prior to its release, it would not have been the huge success that it was.
Technological advances has also changed the distribution of films. Pretty much and film you can think of is now available on DVD. The internet is now also playing a huge part in distribution. The problem film companies are having is that their films are widely available on the internet free of charge. There is huge work going on to change this and in the future films will be available on a "video on demand" basis. Whaterver the future holds for the film industry, there is one thing I am sure of: the industry has had to adapt to changes before and will once again be able to adapt because it is more than capable of keeping up with technological changes.
Technological advances has also changed the distribution of films. Pretty much and film you can think of is now available on DVD. The internet is now also playing a huge part in distribution. The problem film companies are having is that their films are widely available on the internet free of charge. There is huge work going on to change this and in the future films will be available on a "video on demand" basis. Whaterver the future holds for the film industry, there is one thing I am sure of: the industry has had to adapt to changes before and will once again be able to adapt because it is more than capable of keeping up with technological changes.
Monday, October 20, 2008
Why I chose the Format I chose
The main reason why I chose TV as my format is because it is the format which is most familiar to me. Another reason why I chose TV is because it is a digital medium which has a lot of potential to be used in conjunction with other digital media formats. For example, a lot of TV stations today have websites with additional information about their programmes. The BBC has a web site called bbc.com/iplayer, on this site one can watch the programmes that were shown on the BBC channels over the past 7 days. This is a trend which is catching on with other channels as well. On a lot of programmes where voing is involved, voting can be done on line.
I think there is great potential in merging TV with the internet.
I would have liked to have done a film script but I thought that it was not very interesting. I think there is more of a potential with TV with regards digital writing.
I think there is great potential in merging TV with the internet.
I would have liked to have done a film script but I thought that it was not very interesting. I think there is more of a potential with TV with regards digital writing.
Blog an Anything
I decided to write my blog on my project idea because I feel like I need to. I have decided to change some of it because I get the feeling it isn't digital enough. I was looking back in time while I should have been looking forward. I'm still going to keep the teenagers going to a school in the past but they will not be from disadvantaged areas. I said before that there would be 40 teenagers but I decided to cut it back to 15. To bring the numbers up to 30 people, the other 15 people will be adults with no experience with computers and they will have to learn computer skills like teenagers today do. The adults could be the parents of the children in the old school or they may not, I have not decided yet. The only technology the teenagers will be allowed use is a web cam to keep diaries. These will then be put on the internet where they can be viewed in their entirety. The same applies to the adults. The adults will be allowed access to some parts of the internet. If they try to communicate with the outside world, they will be made type pages and pages of HTML.
In addition to the school work, both groups will be made to do tasks. The tasks will be chosen by the viewers by going to the web site and and voting. Full profiles of each individual will also be available on the web site.
The idea of the series is to show teenagers the difficulties their parents had going to school and to show parents how difficult school is today for their children. I added the parents learning computer skills, the web cam and the web site to make the whole project more digital orientated.
In addition to the school work, both groups will be made to do tasks. The tasks will be chosen by the viewers by going to the web site and and voting. Full profiles of each individual will also be available on the web site.
The idea of the series is to show teenagers the difficulties their parents had going to school and to show parents how difficult school is today for their children. I added the parents learning computer skills, the web cam and the web site to make the whole project more digital orientated.
Monday, October 13, 2008
Film Theory and Criticism
Last night for the first time I watched "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy". Like almost all DVDs now, there is an extras feature on the DVD and one of those features was a documentary on the making of the film.
The documentary was called "Don't Crash: the documentary of
the making of
the movie of
the book of
the radio series of
The Hitchhiker's Guide
to the Galaxy".
I did not know much about the history of The Hitchhiker's Guide but while watching the documentary, one thing was very obvious; every one involved in the film was a big fan of the book and wanted to try their best to be as true to the books as possible. The author Douglas Adams died before he could see his work turned into a film so no one could tell what he would have wanted his story to look and sound like on the big screen. The producer and director of the film put a great deal of effort to make the film very similar to the book. For example, for the narrator, they choose Stephen Fry because he has a factual, non threatening voice. This is what the tought the voice would sound like from the book.
Dudley Andrew in his chapter on Adaptation in Film Theory and Criticism says that there are three modes of relation between a film and the text it come from. These are borrowing, intersection and fidelity of transformation. The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy comes under fidelity of transformation in my opinion. Andrew says that fidelity of transformation is a "film trying to measure up to a literary work, or of an audience expecting to make such a comparison".
I believe this is true with Hitchiker's Guide. The making of documentary showed how artists spent years drawing in sketch books to come up with all the dfferent aliens in the film. They wanted the film to live up the the popularity of the book so they literally put in years of work in the pre production phase.
There is a film called Zeitgeist which was put on the internet to be watched free of charge. The film deals with conspiracy theories. Near the end of the film the narrator tells us that film and TV were only created to draw the publics attention away from what was really happening in the world. A scary tought. I do not believe this. In fact, I love film and TV. I could watch TV for hours, even the really bad TV. Because of this, I found Anne Friedbergs chapter The End of Cinema: Multimedia and the Technological Change very interesting. The chapter tells us how TV and the internet has changed cinema and the way we watch what is on the screen in front of us. Today, because of technological advances, film and TV are always just one click away. The way we watch film has changed. We can still go to the cinema but we can also rent or buy the film on DVD and we can also watch the film on the internet.
I would not say that TV and the internet are bringing about the end of cinema. The cinema industry is a resilient one and can adapt to the changes that happen. An example that comes to mind is the film Cloverfield. Th film incorporates the style of filming which is mainly seen on the internet. Usually a shaky hand held camera is used to film an event. In Cloverfield, it looks like all the footage was caught with a hand held camera. This gives the audience a sense that what they are watching actually happened. Because people are used to seeing this type of video on the internet, they can watch a full film in this style. I do not think TV and the internet is bringing about the end of the cinema. The cinema industry is too resilient.
The documentary was called "Don't Crash: the documentary of
the making of
the movie of
the book of
the radio series of
The Hitchhiker's Guide
to the Galaxy".
I did not know much about the history of The Hitchhiker's Guide but while watching the documentary, one thing was very obvious; every one involved in the film was a big fan of the book and wanted to try their best to be as true to the books as possible. The author Douglas Adams died before he could see his work turned into a film so no one could tell what he would have wanted his story to look and sound like on the big screen. The producer and director of the film put a great deal of effort to make the film very similar to the book. For example, for the narrator, they choose Stephen Fry because he has a factual, non threatening voice. This is what the tought the voice would sound like from the book.
Dudley Andrew in his chapter on Adaptation in Film Theory and Criticism says that there are three modes of relation between a film and the text it come from. These are borrowing, intersection and fidelity of transformation. The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy comes under fidelity of transformation in my opinion. Andrew says that fidelity of transformation is a "film trying to measure up to a literary work, or of an audience expecting to make such a comparison".
I believe this is true with Hitchiker's Guide. The making of documentary showed how artists spent years drawing in sketch books to come up with all the dfferent aliens in the film. They wanted the film to live up the the popularity of the book so they literally put in years of work in the pre production phase.
There is a film called Zeitgeist which was put on the internet to be watched free of charge. The film deals with conspiracy theories. Near the end of the film the narrator tells us that film and TV were only created to draw the publics attention away from what was really happening in the world. A scary tought. I do not believe this. In fact, I love film and TV. I could watch TV for hours, even the really bad TV. Because of this, I found Anne Friedbergs chapter The End of Cinema: Multimedia and the Technological Change very interesting. The chapter tells us how TV and the internet has changed cinema and the way we watch what is on the screen in front of us. Today, because of technological advances, film and TV are always just one click away. The way we watch film has changed. We can still go to the cinema but we can also rent or buy the film on DVD and we can also watch the film on the internet.
I would not say that TV and the internet are bringing about the end of cinema. The cinema industry is a resilient one and can adapt to the changes that happen. An example that comes to mind is the film Cloverfield. Th film incorporates the style of filming which is mainly seen on the internet. Usually a shaky hand held camera is used to film an event. In Cloverfield, it looks like all the footage was caught with a hand held camera. This gives the audience a sense that what they are watching actually happened. Because people are used to seeing this type of video on the internet, they can watch a full film in this style. I do not think TV and the internet is bringing about the end of the cinema. The cinema industry is too resilient.
Something that exists in two forms
The first thing that came to mind which exists in two forms is Resident Evil. It began its life as a video game and was then mutated into a movie trilogy. The first game came out in 1996 on the Sony Playstation and was met with praise for its style and originality. Because of its success, two other games were commissioned, Resident Evil 2 and Resident Evil 3: Nemesis. In 2005, Resident Evil 4 was released and is considered to be the best game in the series and also one of the best games ever released on the Playstation 2.
In 2002, the first Resident Evil film was released. The film had mixed reviews. Some praised it for its similarity to the game but others criticized it for being too much of a standard horror film and not having any meaningful dialogue. Despite the mixed reviews, it was a commercial success and two other films were made: Resident Evil: Apocalypse and Resident Evil: Extension.
I have played the games and saw the films and in my opinion, the games are better, especially Resident Evil 4. The reason I think they are better is simple, one interacts much more with the games than with the films. For me its all about the scare factor, I love horror films and I want them to scare me. The Resident Evil movies did not scare me because they adhere too much to the standard Hollywood horror formula. Sure one might jump when a zombie suddenly appears on screen but we are so used to that trick that it is almost expected in a horror film at this stage. Resident Evil 4 (the game) scared me much more than the films for a couple of reasons. The main reason is that it is a game, you are control of the main character so your decisions affect what happens. With the films, you know that the main character is not going to die, but with the game, you can, and do die (a lot). There is more of a sense of danger to the game because of this. Also, in the films when Alice, the main character gets hurt, it does not really affect the audience. With the game however, when you get cut with a chainsaw, you know because the controller vibrates. This is a representation of the characters pain, and you do not get this with the films.
Usually with third person shooter games one is able to move the camera around the character to see the surroundings. In Resident Evil 4 and the other games, this can be done but only to a certain extent. When you are walking up to an important place or building, you loose control of the camera and it moves to a very low angle looking up at the building. It makes your character feel small and the building feel big and intimidating. It is this sudden loss of control that I think is scary. You get these angles in the films but you don't feel the lack of control because you never had any control to begin with.
I saw all the films in the cinema because I enjoy seeing films on the big screen. Because I was in a room with a lot of other people, I did not feel scared because I was not alone. With the games however, I play them in a room by myself with the lights off. All my attention is on the game so when I get shocked, its amplified because I am alone and the controller is vibrating wildly.
The difference between the films and the games is the interaction the individual has with them. With the films, there is very little interaction. You sit there with everyone else and absorb what you see. With the games, you sit there and become immersed in the game. You are in control of the character and it is up to you to reach the end of the game. With the films, you always know that the character is going to succeed.
In 2002, the first Resident Evil film was released. The film had mixed reviews. Some praised it for its similarity to the game but others criticized it for being too much of a standard horror film and not having any meaningful dialogue. Despite the mixed reviews, it was a commercial success and two other films were made: Resident Evil: Apocalypse and Resident Evil: Extension.
I have played the games and saw the films and in my opinion, the games are better, especially Resident Evil 4. The reason I think they are better is simple, one interacts much more with the games than with the films. For me its all about the scare factor, I love horror films and I want them to scare me. The Resident Evil movies did not scare me because they adhere too much to the standard Hollywood horror formula. Sure one might jump when a zombie suddenly appears on screen but we are so used to that trick that it is almost expected in a horror film at this stage. Resident Evil 4 (the game) scared me much more than the films for a couple of reasons. The main reason is that it is a game, you are control of the main character so your decisions affect what happens. With the films, you know that the main character is not going to die, but with the game, you can, and do die (a lot). There is more of a sense of danger to the game because of this. Also, in the films when Alice, the main character gets hurt, it does not really affect the audience. With the game however, when you get cut with a chainsaw, you know because the controller vibrates. This is a representation of the characters pain, and you do not get this with the films.
Usually with third person shooter games one is able to move the camera around the character to see the surroundings. In Resident Evil 4 and the other games, this can be done but only to a certain extent. When you are walking up to an important place or building, you loose control of the camera and it moves to a very low angle looking up at the building. It makes your character feel small and the building feel big and intimidating. It is this sudden loss of control that I think is scary. You get these angles in the films but you don't feel the lack of control because you never had any control to begin with.
I saw all the films in the cinema because I enjoy seeing films on the big screen. Because I was in a room with a lot of other people, I did not feel scared because I was not alone. With the games however, I play them in a room by myself with the lights off. All my attention is on the game so when I get shocked, its amplified because I am alone and the controller is vibrating wildly.
The difference between the films and the games is the interaction the individual has with them. With the films, there is very little interaction. You sit there with everyone else and absorb what you see. With the games, you sit there and become immersed in the game. You are in control of the character and it is up to you to reach the end of the game. With the films, you always know that the character is going to succeed.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)