Little Miss Sunshine American Independent Film Case Study

Little Miss Sunshine is an American comedy-drama film. It is one of the more successful American independent films, released in 2006. The film is also the directorial debut of husband and wife Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris. The screenplay was also written by first time writer Michael Arndt. 

Although this is an independent film, which usually consisting of an unknown cast, this film includes several famous actors and actresses such as Steve Carrell, Greg Kinnear, Toni Collete, Paul Dano, Abigail Breslin and Alan Arkin. This pushes away from the typical independent film techniques of casting unknown actors, however this particular independent film is not one that was received by the public in the usual way such as film festivals and dvd. This film was picked up by major Hollywood studio, Fox Searchlight Pictures, who bought the rights to distribute the film and released it into cinemas, making it a complete success.

There are a few different reasons as to why Little Miss Sunshine is classed as in independent film. One being the controversial matters shown in the film, such as the pageant world and how it sexualises and glamourises children in an unconventional way. Many of the girls shown in the film being genuine pageant contestants who dressed in costumes and performed real acts from their own previous pageants. This issue is something that would not necessarily be shown in Hollywood box office films as it is seen as shocking and a bad representation of society with winning being their ideal life goals.

Another reason Little Miss Sunshine is independent is due to the production of the film, done by Big Beach Films. As previously stated, the directors and screenplay writer are both performing their debut with this movie and are not well known, successful and wealthy, which are usually the traits that major Hollywood production companies look for in directors and writers. Also, this film is not a big budget film with large sets and technology used. Instead, this film was made with a budget of around $8 million and was filmed in Arizona and Southern California over a period of 30 days, which is and incredibly short amount of time to film compared to the months that it takes for mainstream Hollywood films. Yet another reason this film is seen as independent is due to the way it was released. Being low budget and not yet having the support of a major Hollywood studio company, the film was premiered at the Sundance Film Festival on the 20th of January 2006, a well known film festival used to display many indie films. August however, is when the film expanded to a wider release, due to being picked up by Fox Searchlight Pictures for over $10 million and 10% of all gross revenues, and being one of the biggest film deals in the festivals history.

This it what makes the film one of the most successful indie films in recent times. Overall, the film grossed over $100 million worldwide, which compared to the films production costs of $8 million is an astounding success

The Stone Roses: Made of Stone British film case study

The Stone Roses: Made of Stone is a 2013 British music documentary on the acclaimed band The Stone Roses directed by Shane Meadows. The film stars Ian Brown, John Squire, Gary Mounfield and Alan Wren. The film was released in the united Kingdom on the 5th of June 2013. The film follows the band reforming in 2012 after a 16 year split, capturing the band at work and in their everyday lives as they rehearse for their much anticipated reunion on a tour across Europe, which came to a close when the band performed three triumphant homecoming gigs at Manchester's Heaton Park. Although the band ore widely known and extremely successful, the genre of this film, being a music documentary, is primarily targeted at a niche audience of The Stone Roses' dedicated fans, whether that be young or old. It also is a film that was not shown in cinemas and didn't have a big budget marketing campaign, meaning that the audience of this particular film would be people who knew of it's existence and followed this particular music genre. Another way in which it may pick up viewers, would be because of the successful British director of this film, Shane Meadows. As well as this close up documentary, looking into the world of The Stone Roses, Shane Meadows has directed several other well established British films such as the 1997 feature film Twenty Four Seven, and the widely known 2006 film This Is England, which was also a successful television programme, partly directed by Meadows. As he is known for being a stand out British film director, Meadows could very well have a significant impact on audiences and have a following, causing this particular music documentary to be viewed by people who are familiar with his work. 
As well as the director, there are several other reasons why it may have picked up an audience. One being the films reviews. The Stone Roses: Made of Stone picked up positive reviews by many. The Guardian wrote about this film, describing director, Shane Meadows' insight and portrayal of The Stone Roses as a "great, heartfelt tribute". It also describes the film itself as "warm, energetic and purposeful". These positive and passionate reviews could easily influence potential viewers, causing the film to reach out to a wider audience of intrigued and interested people. 
Although there is no specific budget written down for people to see, it is easy to make an assumption that this film, being a documentary especially, would have a significantly low budget to not only Hollywood blockbuster hits, but also successful, bigger budget British films. There is however, a figure for the amount that this film has made to date, being £473,282. To the film industry, this figure is significantly smaller than the high budget, Hollywood blockbuster hits, however compared to the low budget and the fact that this film is a British documentary with a niche audience, the money made on The Stone Roses: Made of Stone is a significant amount, and I would say, labels this film as a success. 
To me, being a documentary about one of Britain's many successful and influential bands, this film is an incredible insight to the lives of The Stone Roses that is rarely seen, and is something that I would definitely watch and be fascinated by. Although many do not relate to their world, it is something which is not seen by many. Therefore every single lover of this brilliant band, along with myself, will thoroughly enjoy and appreciate the well filmed documentary, The Stone Roses: Made of Stone.

The Great Gatsby American Blokbuster Case Study

The Great Gatsby is a 1925 Novel written by American author F. Scott Fitzgerald that follows a cast of characters living in the fictional town of West Egg on Long Island in the summer of 1922. The story mainly follows the mysterious, unknown world of millionaire Jay Gatsby and his relationship with the young and beautiful Daisy Buchanan. "The Great Gatsby explores themes of decadence, idealism, resistance to change, social upheaval and excess, creating a portrait of the jazz age that has been described as a cautionary tale regarding the American Dream."

There have been several film adaptations of this novel, the most recent being in 2013. This particular adaptation has been extremely successful within the box office world, and there are a few different reasons why. The most obvious proof that film has been successful is the money it has made. The budget for this film was $105 million, which in itself, proves that The Great Gatsby is a huge Hollywood Blockbuster. So far, this particular Great Gatsby film has made just under $350 million, which compared to the budget, is a very large amount of money. This statistic alone proves that this film adaptation has been a complete success in the box office world, however there are other possible reasons why this film may have been such a success, as well as reasons that argue the statement that the film has been completely successful.

Apart from the money made, another factor as to why The Great Gatsby may have been so successful could be due to the cast of this particular adaptation. The cast includes top Hollywood stars such as Leonardo DiCaprio, Tobey Maguire, Carey Mulligan and Isla Fisher. These stars already have a huge fan base, as well as a successful acting career, making them incredibly admired by film producers and the public alike. 

Along with the factors i have already discussed, another factor that may have influenced the success of this film adaptation could have been the story itself. As mentioned previously, The Great Gatsby is a famous novel, written by a famous author. This alone could have brought in an audience of many, as not only is there just the novel alone, there has been several adaptations already made in the past. A point that could argue against this being part of the success of The Great Gatsby adaptation could perhaps be how much this particular film has modernised the original novel. As it is a recent film, released in the modern day world where technology has drastically improved, this film has heavily modernised the original. One particular way the producers have done this, is through the soundtrack. The songs played throughout this film do not relate too well to the film itself, in fact, some of them are completely new songs, sung by well known pop stars. It has been argued that this has ruined the authenticity of this famous novel, however it has also been argued that the modernisation of The Great Gatsby has helped this adaptation become so successful. Many people have said that the recent pop songs and well known Hollywood cast have brought in a much wider audience to the film, helping it to appeal to many more viewers, even children. If this argument includes truth, then I feel it is more than likely that these adaptations have definitely increased the success of The Great Gatsby

Captain Phillips Research

Domestic Total as of Nov. 26, 2013: $101,140,974
Production budget: $55 million
Worldwide grosses: $177,440,974
Opening weekend: $25,718,314

Captain Phillips is a 2013 American action thriller directed by Paul Greengrass and starring Tom Hanks and Barkhad Abdi. The film tells how merchant mariner Captain Richard Phillips was taken hostage by Somali pirates in the Indian Ocean during the Maersk Alabama hijacking in 2009 led by Abduwali Muse.

The film premiered premiered on the 28th September 2013, opening the New York film festival. The film was praised for its direction, screenplay, production values, cinematography and the performance of Tom Hanks and Barkhad Abdi. It was described as "smart, powerfully acted and incredibly intense, Captain Phillips offers film goers a Hollywood biopic done right and offers Tom Hanks a showcase for yet another brilliant performance."

This film would appeal to audiences as there is a film star cast as the main character. Fans and supporters of Tom Hanks will want to see this film no matter what the story, because he is in it. It may also appeal to people who are interested or knowledgable about the issue that this film is based on, with it being a true story. 
Although the genre and story of this film is typically related to male audiences, female viewers may also go and see this film just to watch Tom Hanks.

By looking at the statistics of the money this film has made so far compared to the budget of the film and how much it cost to make, I would say that this film is definitely successful.

Practical Coursework Ideas

Storyboard

Urban/ Social Realism
- young target audience
- drugs, drinking, violence

Horror
- young girl (teenager)
- vulnerable, naive, innocent
- use camera as killer (never seen)
- modernised for younger target audience

Young Romantic
- teenagers at school/college
- dramatised struggle of love

Noir (hybrid?)
- romance (doomed
- bars (drinking/smoking)
- some parts in colour (red)
- voice overs
- low key lighting





Aims and Context:
- genre: noir/romance hybrid
- storyboard
- target audience: teenagers and young adults (18- 25), female, middle class
- focusing on lighting and cinematography
- explore gender roles and how they are portrayed

Horror Film Sequence

In groups, we were given the task to produce a film sequence of 10 shots in the genre of horror. Our group had the idea to use one female character as our visual. We shot her in an establishing shot of a comfortable, well lit environment. We then changed the mood by cutting out the lighting and filming the character frantically panicking. We also chose to use diegetic sound as our 'killer' as we felt this caused more suspense to the audience as they would never know where the killer was.
      I feel we portrayed the horror genre well in our short sequence and captured panic and fear in the characters' eyes. I feel that to improve we could have introduced some non diegetic sound to increase the amount of tension and suspense that the audience may feel.  I also feel our lighting let us down as although we aimed to use low key lighting to help with the emotion portrayed in the sequence, the outcome of our shots were underexposed and we lost the effect we wanted to achieve.

Written Essay - The Lovely Bones

How does the use of sound and cinematography contribute to the suspense in The Lovely Bones killing scene?

This scene starts off with a close up shot of Susie’s face, clearly showing panic and fear in her eyes. The camera then moves to the killers face, framing him as being quite relaxed and calm. It then uses a shot reverse shot of close ups from each of their faces to show the contrast of emotion between them. The camera also uses high angle shots looking down on Susie and low angle shots looking up to the killer, clearly showing the power and strength difference between them. This gave me clear knowledge of who is in control from the very start of the scene.

            As the scene continues, dietetic sound is introduced as the killer starts talking to Susie, asking her things such as whether she would ‘like a refreshment?’ or if she would like to ‘take [her] coat off?’ It soon became clear to me however, that he is not really giving her a choice with these questions; he is merely pretending to give her an option, as when she refuses the drink offered to her and tries to leave, the killer’s voice becomes more domineering, telling her she must ‘always be polite’ and pointing in her face, again using a low angle shot of him, adding to his sense of power. The camera continues to use close ups of both of the characters faces, once again showing the contrast of emotions in each of them. During this part of the scene, the camera also starts to look around the room from Susie's point of view, with close ups of certain objects such as old pictures on the wall, board games and toys. This shows such detail which almost makes Susie feel comfortable however it made me feel slightly on edge as I knew of his plans and saw his attention to detail as frightening. Another scene in a films that gave me the same emotional response was in Taken, when the young girl gets kidnapped from her hotel. As it is about a young girl being captured, it is also similar conceptually, perhaps relating the emotions I felt in both films. In one this scene, jus before the girl gets taken there are certain visual similarities to The Lovely Bones. The slow camera movement creates tension and suspense as the scene is building, as well as the fact that there is no sound at all apart from the characters' voices, which is also similar to The Lovely Bones scene. The mood of the scene then rapidly changes, along with my emotions, causing me to feel panic as the scene erupts and the camera movement is a lot quicker, as well as loud, non diegetic sound being introduced as the girl is struggling against the men trying to take her.

            Throughout The Lovely Bones scene, camera shots are used effectively to create suspense. Close ups of objects are prominently used as part of the mise en scene, such as when the killer opens a drink for Susie, and when he reaches over for her to grab the bottle opener. These shots are when sound is mostly used, although sound is only used briefly for the majority of the scene.  When the camera uses these close ups on movements of small, insignificant objects such as a small toy dog, quick bursts of non-diegetic sound are used. These build the suspense leading up to the killing of Susie as the sounds are quite sharp and fast, and the close ups that are used with these sounds mean the audience cannot see anything else going on in the scene which then caused me to feel even more tense. These shot types are similar to those used in a previous film that director Peter Jackson had also made, Heavenly Creatures. The similarities between storylines make the films relate to one another very well. The slow camera movement used in both films creates tension well and shows the clear similarities in the director’s work.

            As the killer slowly removes his coat, he caresses the side of Susie’s face chuckling to himself as Susie flinches. There is then a quick cut to her face, which shows the fear and dread she is clearly feeling. Once he has sat down opposite her he tells her she is ‘very pretty’, to which she quickly thanks him, through fear. He then nods his head and smiles at her, however she is looking at the ground, which she does for a large section of the scene. There is also a dark shadow on one side of his face for some part of the scene, showing that the dark side he has hidden for so long is now becoming clear. The camera also continues to shoot close ups of objects around this underground room, still with the use of sharp, fast non-diegetic sound. The behavior of the killer at this point caused me to feel on edge and tense. It also increased the hatred I felt towards the killer and my emotions towards Susie made me apprehensive and sad for what was happening to her.

            Although the two characters are set in a confined environment, they are rarely shot in the same frame. Slow and quick cuts are used from one character to the other, which also shows a high contrast between them, as well as what they are wearing. The mise en scene shows Susie wearing coloured clothing of blue and yellow with a red hat whereas the killer is wearing dark simple clothing. This made me feel completely different and caused my emotions when either of them is in the frame. As the killer becomes more comfortable, the camera movement is a lot softer around him, which links to his relaxed, confident mood. With Susie however, as the scene progresses she becomes a lot tenser, panicked and scared. The camera also helps to show this through the sharper, quicker shots than the ones used to show the killer. High and low angle shots continue to be used, showing that the power is constantly left with the killer, such as when the killer is standing over Susie pouring her a drink 

            Susie’s panic is shown further as a stronger narrative is introduced when diegetic sound is used as the killer begins to ask her about the room they are in, which he built for her, telling her how special it is. She then responds by agreeing with him. “Yes. Yes it is, it’s very special”. Her voice starts to become louder and a lot faster paced, stammering as she speaks, clearly showing the panic through the sound of her voice. The camera still continues to use close up shots on both of their faces. As Susie becomes more frightened the killer seems to get more relaxed, shown through the close ups used on his face as he smiles and nods to her stuttered response.

            As the scene slowly builds, more close up cuts are used on the both of their faces, especially when the killer is talking to her, asking her if she has a boyfriend. Now however, Susie’s eyes are starting to move around the room. The camera then freezes on her face as she looks into his eyes and states she ‘has to go’, looking to the ladder leading out of the underground room. This caused me, the viewer, to feel extremely tense as the camera movement has stopped and a sudden fast movement is expected, however this does not happen straight away, which causes more suspense to the audience.

Although the killer has picked up on Susie’s plans, he remains calm, staring at her, with more diegetic sound used, he says ‘but I don’t want you to leave’ and slowly shaking his head. It the cuts to another close up of Susie’s face, showing her pleading to him with her eyes, not saying a word but looking more frightened than ever.

            This is when the killer states “I’m not gonna hurt you Susie”. This phrase, although said in a calm, friendly manner, almost immediately put panic into my emotions, knowing that he most definitely is going to hurt her, however she looks confused and unsure through a shot of her face.

            This is when the majority of non-diegetic sound is introduced into the scene, as Susie leaps out of her seat and jumps towards the ladder leading to the exit. The killer then jumps and tries to catch her. Suddenly, there is a vast amount of non-diegetic sound playing over the scene. The use of loud strings and percussion is used to make the audience panic. The camera shots also become a lot faster paced and still keep the characters separate. As Susie jumps up the camera lets her run out of the frame and focuses on the killer left in his seat. The camera then uses a mid-shot to watch the killer chase after her. It cuts from Susie on the ladder, using a shallow depth of field to put the killer grabbing her out of focus, to the killer standing at the bottom of the ladder pulling her down. The cuts become a lot quicker and long shots are used to show the intense body movements and struggle between the two characters even though they are still being shot separately. The non-diegetic sound becomes louder and continues to build up suspense within the audience to whether Susie will escape or not.

Suddenly it cuts to a wide shot of an isolated field. Using low key lighting and slowly zooming out to show the vast amount of land. There is also no sound whatsoever. This shot contrasts what I knew to be happening under this specific field. It then cuts back to the same struggle happening between the two characters and the sound and quick cuts are introduced once again.

Susie is then seen to kick the killer and escape from him, running through the vast, empty, silent field, almost in slow motion, with a backwards tracking shot quickly moving in front of her. The vast amount of suspense that had been created by the sound and quick camera movement is gone and I began to feel calm and relieved, however this all changes as I realized that Susie did not actually manage to escape form the underground cabin, only her ghost did.

Written notes on The Lovely Bones clip

Scene - "I'm not gonna hurt you Susie"

- No sound except dialogue at the start
- Cabin under the ground (low key lighting, lots of shadows)
- Lit up by candles
- Starts with close up of Susie's face, her face is lit up but all of the background is black
- Camera is looking down on her (high angle)
- Switches to mid shot of killer
- Most of his face is lit up with some shadowing (could be to show the trickery of him seeming to be a friendly man but then turning out to be a killer)
- His face seems very relaxed, whereas hers looks worried and scared
-  Board games
- Antiques on the walls
- Candles
- Reaches over her for drink (close up and slow camera movement)
- Knocks against toy dog (close up)
- Short, fast play of non diegetic sound (builds tension)
- Asks to leave (shows her fear)
- He refuses (constantly smiling)
- Close up of him opening drink (emphasised sound)
- Extreme close up of her eyes (shows clear panic)
- Close up of moving toy dog again (quite slow paced)
- Very clear high and low camera angles between the two characters to show power
- Rule of thirds and framing used to show underground cabin
- Takes off jacket, asks her if she wants to take hers off also
- Quickly caresses the side of her face and she immediately flinches
- Half of his face is shadowed (could be to show his darker side is now becoming clearer)
- She doesn't look him in the eye (always looking at the ground)
- Close up of picture hanging from wall (shows the detail, thought and effort put into the making of this underground room)
- He tells her she is pretty (she thanks him, still looking at the ground)
- Editing cuts between each of them (rarely in the same frame)
- Camera shoots close up of both of their faces, lingering on him
- Her facial expressions seem to become a lot more tense and frightened
- Tells her this is a special place. She agrees, stammering as she talks
- Still no non diegetic sound
- Shot of children's toys in shelves in the background
- Long silence between both characters in the scene, shows emotion through facial expressions, contrasts between them
- "I have to go" "I'm not gonna hurt you Susie"
- Another long pause
- As soon as she tries to escape, killer jumps from his seat with his facial expression changing from smug to anger
- Non diegetic music is finally introduced into the scene, fast paced and tense
- He grabs her, shows her struggle through handheld camera movement
- He is wearing dark clothes and she is wearing colour (shows difference in character roles)
- Suddenly cuts to wide shot if field above cabin, shows everything is not what it seems. (rule of thirds and low key lighting)

Analysis of The Shining

In this essay I am going to analyse two scenes from the film, The Shining. I will be focusing on the camera and sound elements in these scenes and will briefly discuss the mise en scene. I will be discussing how these techniques relate to the horror genre. I will also discuss possible meanings and my personal response to these chosen scenes.

The first scene I will be analysing is the opening scene. This begins with an establishing shot of a wide and isolated environment of mountains and hills. This still environment is then disturbed by a passing car. The camera uses a crane shot to follow the car along the roads, which almost gives the feeling of a bird flying over the car looking down on it, like it's hunting it's prey which is which could be foreshadowing the future character roles in the film. This shot makes the car look very small and almost insignificant in this vast scenery. Although this is quite a peaceful scene, the non diegetic sound drastically changes the mood of the scene and definitely sets the film into it's genre of horror, as this is common convention in horror films. The use of strings causes tension and as they are increased the feeling of discomfort and worry also increases in the viewer. As the strings get louder and fast paced, percussion is also introduced and put the viewer even more on edge. This shows that although nothing scary is actually happening in the scene, the sound plays a major role in the audience's emotion and personal response. The calm scene could be showing that at this moment in time there is an equilibrium in the storyline, however the tense non diegetic sound and ominous atmosphere could be to foreshadow that this will soon change and that a disequilibrium is going to occur.
In another scene the conventions are also similar, proving that this is a film of the horror genre. Danny, the young child, is innocently playing in the hotel he lives in with his mother and father. Riding his tricycle through the symmetrical corridors, a common occurrence in Stanley Kubrick films. The visual elements in this scene are quite comfortable and do not seem to put the audience on edge, apart from the camera movement as it follows Danny down the corridor and seems to hold back as it goes round corners, portraying a feeling of danger and making the audience feel tense. Adding to this tension is the non diegetic sound that is played over the top. There is quite a sharp high pitched sound as the scene begins and a beating continues as he is quickly riding around the hotel. As he turns a final corner the sequence is interrupted by two young girls standing before danny at the end of the corridor. As this happens, another sharp pitched sound is played which shocks the audience and jolts them as the fast paced sequence suddenly stops. The camera switches from a tracking shot of Danny's back, to a still close up of his face showing is reaction to the two young girls disturbing and frightening him as he is enjoying himself. It is also a high angle shot, making Danny look vulnerable and weak. The camera takes a while to look towards the two girls, building curiosity within the audience. The camera does soon after, turn to the girls standing strangely still at the far end of the corridor. It is known by the audience that these girls are ghosts and are previous residents of this hotel, who were killed by their father, similarly to how Jack tries to kill Danny later in the film. This knowledge creates a narrative within this scene and captures the audiences attention. The non diegetic sound, like in many  of the scenes in this film, plays a major role in how the audience feel emotionally towards this film. The contrast between quiet high pitched sounds and loud deep sounds create a large feeling of danger and tension, making the audience feel involved and almost making them want to help in certain situations that occur in this film.
To me, the sound in this film is one of the most influential cinematic techniques, along with camera work, and they are responsible for the emotional connection the audience have towards this film and make this film a part of the horror genre.

Analysis of Control

Camera Work:

-The very beginning of the clip, starts with the shot being divided by the wall of a house. It is also a low angle shot, as the camera shows the roofs of houses yet the camera is at ‘head height’. Shallow focus
-The shot used in this scene is a tracking shot. The scene starts with the camera focused on his face, following him down the street.
-Mainly close ups, mid shot near the end as camera stops moving and he walks off, flicking his cigarette in a casual, arrogant manner and he walks into the employment office, which is also in the shot
-Camera moves to the back of him. Handheld camera movement, makes the viewer feel as if they are walking on the street behind him. Also shows a clear shot of the back of his jacket quoting ‘hate’ on the back. This is significant of his personality, portraying him as perhaps a self destructive or rebellious character.
-Camera only shows the top half of his body, stays close to him until he walks away from the camera at the end of the clip.
-With the camera focusing on his face throughout the majority of the clip, it shows his facial expressions as quite determined and focused. He seems to look through the camera, not worrying about his surroundings, maintaining a mysterious persona, seems like he’s trying to block out anything happening in his own personal life.


Mise en Scene:

-Costumes clearly show the pop punk era that this film was set in. e.g. leather jacket
-The shirt and tie he is wearing connects to the fact that he is going to a job interview. He perhaps wouldn’t wear this on a day to day basis.
-Car that drives past clearly shows the era of this film, also the clothes other people captured in the clip are wearing.
-The way he walks down the street shows he walks with authority and purpose. However he is also walking quite casually and the way he discards his cigarette and then strolls into the employment office could also show he is quite care free which is symbolic of his age and lifestyle.


Lighting:

-The entire scene, in fact, the entire film, is in black and white.
-Low key lighting
-Almost symbolic of Ian Curtis himself and his dark personality.

The Great Gatsby

Personal response to my favourite film this summer.

Although I do not go to the cinema often, this summer I did go and watch a film I had been really looking forward to, The Great Gatsby. The reason I wanted to see this film so much was mainly due to the fact I adore the 20’s culture, style and music. I also loved the book, written by F. Scott Fitzgerald.

          The story primarily concerns the young and mysterious millionaire Jay Gatsby and his passion for the beautiful Daisy Buchanan. The Great Gatsby explores themes of decadence, idealism, resistance to change, social upheaval, and excess, creating a portrait of the Jazz Age that has been described as a cautionary tale regarding the American Dream.

          The film also attracted me as I liked a lot of the actors and actresses cast in the film, especially Tobey Maguire, Leonardo DiCaprio and Carey Mulligan and feel they portrayed their characters very well.

          The story is based on Nick Carraway, a Yale University graduate and World War I veteran who is staying in a sanatorium to treat his alcoholism. He talks about a man named Gatsby, describing him as the most hopeful man he had ever met. When he struggles to articulate his thoughts, his doctor, Walter Perkins, suggests writing it down, since writing is Nick's true passion. He talks of meeting ‘The Great Gatsby’ and of how he formed an unlikely friendship with his billionaire neighbour, attending all of his extravagant parties and learning of the mysterious man.

          Through all the partying and glamour, Nick learns that Gatsby also has a darker side, and a broken heart, which has more to do with Nick than he may have thought.

          To me, the way this film is visually presented was very good and gave me an exceptional picture of what this story may actually have looked like.

          Although there have been several film and opera adaptations of the book, this version appealed to me most and it was a lot more modernised than others, attracting a younger audience, as well as keeping the traditional 1920’s style and image, which is what fascinated me in the first place.

          On paper The Great Gatsby also did very well, making over $331 million worldwide, with an overall budget of $105 million. This was also director Baz Luhrmann’s highest grossing movie, although he was criticised by certain critics saying ‘Luhrmann is exactly the wrong person to adapt such a delicately rendered story’.

          The film did receive mixed reviews, mainly for not being an ‘accurate’ adaptation of the novel and being too ‘modernised’.

          However I feel that although some of the films criticisms may have truth in them, this adaptation of the film may appeal to a wider, younger and different audience.

          I really enjoyed this film and do not regret paying to watch. I would definitely watch it again, mainly for the style, culture, music and lifestyle portrayed in this movie.

The Lone Ranger

The Lone Ranger is a 2013 remake of the American Western action films. It marks the first theatrical film featuring the Lone Ranger and Tonto characters in more than 30 years.

          Filming suffered with budget and production problems, which at one point, led to a premature cancellation of the film. The film was released in the United States on the 4^th of July 2013. the film received mixed reviews, however negative reviews dominated.

          It was seen as a huge disappointment, grossing 243 million dollars, despite an estimated 225 million dollar budget.

          On the 12^th August 2011, Disney announced that production on The Lone Ranger would be delayed due to budget concerns. After addressing the project’s production problems in October 2011, Disney confirmed that the film was back on track after the budget was reworked to give the studio a chance to recoup its costs. Initially, filming was reported to begin on the 6^th February 2012 and the film was given a release date of the 31^st may 2013 which subsequently was moved to the 4^th of July.

          As a result of the production setbacks, The Lone Ranger faced numerous changes in release dates. After underperforming during its opening weekend, the film was characterised by numerous media sources as a box office flop.

          Compared to Despicable Me 2, a film that opened the same weekend to 142 million dollars on a 76 million dollar budget, The Lone Ranger made just under a third of that, 48.9 million dollars, and had more than three times the budget, 215 million dollars.

          Along with the production and budgeting problems, the film also received generally unfavourable reviews.

Called “a jumbled botch that is so confused in its purpose and so charmless in its effect that it must be seen to be believed, but better yet, no. Don’t see it. Don’t believe it” and also described as a “bloated, misshapen mess. A stillborn franchise loaded with metaphors for its feeble attempts to amuse, excite and entertain.”

          The specific reason for the flop of The Lone Ranger cannot be determined, however the production, planning, timing, budgeting and critics opinions all factor in to why this film is considered by many, a box office failure.

In my opinion, the costs of the film are the largest factor as to why this film was not as successful as planned. Although the film made a large turnover, the costs of the production outweighed the cost made. If, like other films released at a similar time, The Lone Ranger had budgeted better then perhaps it wouldn’t have been as scrutinised by not only the critics, but the public as well.

Although the majority of people consider this film to be a ‘flop’ and ‘failure’, The Lone Ranger has definitely not been a disappointment to all, which is clear by the amount the film made, regardless of the overall costs.