Reflection
During Context of Practice one, my focus has been on that of the movie industry, and the unoriginality that has been building in the last 10-15 years. I have considered this a lot during COP 1, however I feel as though I have said all there is for me to say about this particular area without me regurgitating the same stuff over and over. My main focus, was to say that “Hollywood” has lost it’s own originality, and now suffers through endless remakes, reboots and sequels to classic films which should have been left untouched. With this, I used the quote by Adorno to explore what this meant, and visually, that there is no passion behind the movie industry anymore, and most movies that are labelled “blockbusters” are cash cows to bring in money, rather than a script that has been written passionately with love and attention to detail. I feel now, through my 3 essays, my concertina book and my storyboard, that I have done all that I set out to do with this, and I want to move away from this, and start looking at something more specific and direct towards what I want to study. Although my question for the second year of COP is not politically or socially motivated, it is a subject that I find incredibly interesting, and it is a subject that has a large effect on cinema even if many don't recognise it as doing so.Proposal
And so my question is “How has the effects on Monster movies change?”. Understandably, this question seems very vague, limited and simple as opposed to questions that I have dealt with this year. However my thinking behind it is a lot more complex, and I feel like I can go into a lot of detail and depth with what I mean by this. To expand further, my interpretation of this question would be looking into practical and digital effects on the monster movie genre, as well as looking into how this genre started, and how it affected the movie industry and how it inadvertently affects what we know as cinema today. Another question stemming from this would be how have certain movies changed the course of the cinema industry with revolutionising effects. My rationale behind looking into this question, came from the thinking of cinema being overpopulated by sequels and remakes, and that there surely is a reason for this, and the reason I concluded was that maybe it is just more accessible nowadays? And the technology surely must have come from somewhere? Which lead me on a path of thinking that the earliest revolution of effects in movies was King Kong 1933. This in itself lead to me thinking that monster movies, because of their scale, keep having to evolve effects to fit the purpose of creating larger and grander scenes. My thinking was that this must be why we see so few of this genre nowadays, and it might possibly be because of their scale, it takes time and effort to make them, and does this mean they are more passionately created unlike so much of blockbuster cinema at this time. This is the type of thing I want to explore and find out through COP 2, as it a subject I am passionate about, and one I would love to explore and expand upon.
Useful Links
http://sensesofcinema.com/2003/cteq/king_kong/
http://www.horrorfilmhistory.com/index.php?pageID=KingKong
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/10788996/Godzilla-why-the-Japanese-original-is-no-joke.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-significance-of-godzilla/
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/geneveith/2009/10/the-meaning-of-monsters/
Related
Books
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=XnP7vQAACAAJ&dq=monster%20movies&source=gbs_book_other_versions
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Hkk7DgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=monster+movies&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjWlY2S4cHTAhXI2RoKHU5UDBYQ6AEIIjAA#v=onepage&q=monster%20movies&f=false
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=f-YrDgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=monster+movies&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjWlY2S4cHTAhXI2RoKHU5UDBYQ6AEIPjAF#v=onepage&q=monster%20movies&f=false
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=zy_bCwAAQBAJ&dq=monster+movies&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjWlY2S4cHTAhXI2RoKHU5UDBYQ6AEITjAI
Images
No comments:
Post a Comment