So... Let's do some comparing!
In Bruges
Actors and Characters.
Top billed is Colin Farrell, a fairly well known actor but not huge. The film also stars Brendan Gleeson and Elizabeth Berrington, again not hugely known or acclaimed actors. The Character that Farrell plays, Ray, is incredibly normal, his Irish accent, slight rudeness and general pessimistic attitude is very common of independent British films, especially as this character is a realistic representation of British people, which other British people would find appealing, but an American audience might not find the same appeal. The characters in general are pretty much perfect examples of average, in fact it's only when they've guns in their hands and you see that they are hitmen, that their irregular side shows. The fact that all the characters are typically British and average is what creates the comedy and drama by placing them in Bruges, where they spend most of the time moaning and insulting people and causing small petty disputes over comical things.
Sound.
There are no well known tunes used in the trailer, in fact I don't think there is even a soundtrack, just some generic music with no copyright that they could use for a cheap price. As far as dialogue goes, the first part sets the scene and starting point of the plot but everything after is merely there for comical or dramatic effect and does nothing to add to the narrative of the film. Also the accents are mainly Irish and what was the last blockbuster, box office hit that you saw with two Irish guys with strong accents as leading roles.
Camerawork & Editing.
Camerawork is pretty basic, mostly stationary shots with a couple of tracking and tilts/pans. Nothing particularly fancy, most scenes are shot on location as a result of this allowing studio costs to be cut, adding realism also. Lots of mid shots, hardly anything that would have needed cranes or expensive rigs. Editing is quite simple but energetic and fast. Lots of shot reverse shots with basic cuts, some for comical effect/timing. There are no special effects, no CGI, jaw dropping stunts or explosions. Not much technology would have been needed to film and edit, meaning it could have been done on a low budget.
Mise-en-scene.
Most of the film is shot on location, nothing was made specifically for the film, they just worked around what was already there. Little expense on props. Overall finish is quite good but not incredible.
Wanted
Actors and Characters.
Top billed is Angelina Jolie, a very well known and loved actress and the better half of Brad Pitt. Also starring Samuel L Jackson, a highly acclaimed actor with scores of awards, globally known and respected. The character that Jolie plays is ultra sexy, wild and deadly. She isn't average in anyway and is almost superhuman with the way she moves and the tricks she pulls off, this would appeal to a much more broad audience as who doesn't want to see something fantastic. She is upbeat and cool, stylish and a very good assassin, this appeals to a whole range of people, from boys watching just because they think she's good looking to women who see Jolie standing up for feminism somewhere in the role. All the characters are fantastical, all cool and good looking, the people you may dream you were, doing the things you may wish you could do. Who dreams of being a moody, average, normal looking man from Dublin, I doubt very many do. Who dreams of being a sexy, cool, stylish, superhuman assassin? Yeah, not really any competition. This means that more people would be appealed by the characters in Wanted as they could imagine themselves assuming the roles of the characters on screen.
Sound.
There is a score running from the beginning to end of the trailer, which starts small and builds in volume and pace, adding dramatic choir sounds and building tension creating a dramatic and sincere tone. The dialogue reveals the narrative which everything said furthering the plot, everything said being of importance and significance to the story. Unlike "In Bruges" where the dialogue really does nothing for the narrative and bears no significance or importance.
Camerawork & Editing.
Nearly every shot in this trailer looks expensive. Cranes, helicopters and all sorts of expensive rigs would have been needed to film these shots. Also there are lots of special effects and jaw dropping stunts, a clear and vast use of CGI. This all would have been very expensive. Lots of top of the range technology would have been used and would have needed skilled people to operate it. Again raising the budget. Their would have been large studio costs as I doubt there was much on location filming. Editing wise, lots of fast cuts, short shots, adds to the excitement and adrenaline of the trailer.
Mise-en-scene.
Money, money, money. This film would have sucked the budget dry, shiny sports cars, huge looms, hi-tech weapons, explosions. Everything gets shot and blown up. There would have been a lot of money put towards props and set as most of it looks like it was made especially for them. And then they blow it up! The finish is quite superb with Wanted too, everything looks rather perfect and shiny.
Hollywood will cast the most famous and most loved actors as these have the biggest appeal, the bigger the appeal, the more people go see the film which means the more money they'll make from it. Independents will cast the actors most suitable for the roles and of course who they can afford.
Hollywood invests large amounts of money into camerawork, editing, CGI and props, the more cash they put in, the more they get out. Independents don't have the money to do this and don't need to as the financial reward really isn't as important. Hollywood only care about money. Independents care about good film and art. Unfortunately Independents have to fight over the 14% of the film market they get as the rest is taken up by money guzzling Hollywood films with no heart and no real meaning.
No comments:
Post a Comment