Before I start looking at genres, I want to present some of my research into the theories behind genre, since it is often linked with the marketing of a film and could aid my approach in selecting a genre for my own product.
John Fiske
He states that genre 'attempts to structure some order into the wide range of texts and meanings that circulate in our culture'. In other words genre operates as a system of categorising films.
Henry Jenkins
Jenkins strongly agreed with the convergence of multiple genres, or 'hybridisation', since he felt that genre should not be seen as labelling or as restrictive, but as an opportunity to use diverse creativity. He sees hybridisation as a way to 'maximise audience appeal but also to offer a unique selling point by appearing to break the rules.' This can be associated with sub-genres and how they are used to give the film a different perspective. For example a thriller can be seen as psychological, action, conspiracy, crime etc.
This is something that I would like to consider in my work, because breaking the rules of conventional genre and using a hybrid blend seems like a far less predictable way to construct a story.
John Hartley
Hartley's primary belief is that 'genres are agents of ideological causes' which is centered around the concept that genre is interpreted differently depending on cultural factors. As needs and desires change, then so will the way we perceive genre. For example traditional romances will have been defined by their convention to focus on heterosexual relationships. However in contemporary society that would no longer be politically correct since governments and laws surrounding other sexualities have become far more accepting, so romances are just as likely to occur between two men or two women, as can be seen in Brokeback Mountain or Blue is the Warmest Colour.
In terms of whether I would use this, I don't think it has relevance to my project. Although it is important in terms of wider media issues, I think that I will focus on current genre ideologies rather than how they have changed. As a result I am going to discard Hartley's theory from my actual product.
This is something that I would like to consider in my work, because breaking the rules of conventional genre and using a hybrid blend seems like a far less predictable way to construct a story.
John Hartley
Hartley's primary belief is that 'genres are agents of ideological causes' which is centered around the concept that genre is interpreted differently depending on cultural factors. As needs and desires change, then so will the way we perceive genre. For example traditional romances will have been defined by their convention to focus on heterosexual relationships. However in contemporary society that would no longer be politically correct since governments and laws surrounding other sexualities have become far more accepting, so romances are just as likely to occur between two men or two women, as can be seen in Brokeback Mountain or Blue is the Warmest Colour. In terms of whether I would use this, I don't think it has relevance to my project. Although it is important in terms of wider media issues, I think that I will focus on current genre ideologies rather than how they have changed. As a result I am going to discard Hartley's theory from my actual product.
Daniel Chandler
Chandler perceives genre as restrictive. By categorically labelling films their uniqueness is immediately undermined by being classified under a heading with thousands of others. He identifies genre as being based on the notion that products are conventionally similar through aspects of content or structure. I am definitely in agreement with Chandler regarding how genre is more of an institutional concept established for marketing purposes. I think that it often misunderstands the deeper expression of a film by asserting it a label through stereotyping. This is distinguishable with the two Captain America films, Winter Soldier and Civil War. Although they are instantly labelled as blockbusters, superhero films and part of the Marvel franchise, the directors see their products as a 'political thriller' and a 'psychological thriller' respectively.
I think that this theory will enable me to feel less restricted by conventional techniques for my short film. Although selecting a genre can assist in providing the basis for my research, I will use Chandler as a way of not becoming too reliant on genre, combining it with Jenkins' theory of hybridisation to go beyond the limits of one particular genre.
Chandler perceives genre as restrictive. By categorically labelling films their uniqueness is immediately undermined by being classified under a heading with thousands of others. He identifies genre as being based on the notion that products are conventionally similar through aspects of content or structure. I am definitely in agreement with Chandler regarding how genre is more of an institutional concept established for marketing purposes. I think that it often misunderstands the deeper expression of a film by asserting it a label through stereotyping. This is distinguishable with the two Captain America films, Winter Soldier and Civil War. Although they are instantly labelled as blockbusters, superhero films and part of the Marvel franchise, the directors see their products as a 'political thriller' and a 'psychological thriller' respectively. I think that this theory will enable me to feel less restricted by conventional techniques for my short film. Although selecting a genre can assist in providing the basis for my research, I will use Chandler as a way of not becoming too reliant on genre, combining it with Jenkins' theory of hybridisation to go beyond the limits of one particular genre.
Steve Neale
He states that 'genres are instances of repetition and difference' and goes on to elaborate that 'difference is absolutely essential to the economy of genre'. By 'repetition' he means that a film must conform by using enough conventions of a particular genre in order for it to still be recognised under that heading. On the other hand, by 'difference' Neale is expressing that a film needs to subvert genre conventions in order for it to stand on it's own merit rather than being recognised as a poor imitation.
This is a theory I would definitely have used, even if it had been without researching Neale. I want my product to retain characteristics of the genre but also modify it into something new and original, which would mean adopting both 'repetition' and 'difference' into my short film.
He states that 'genres are instances of repetition and difference' and goes on to elaborate that 'difference is absolutely essential to the economy of genre'. By 'repetition' he means that a film must conform by using enough conventions of a particular genre in order for it to still be recognised under that heading. On the other hand, by 'difference' Neale is expressing that a film needs to subvert genre conventions in order for it to stand on it's own merit rather than being recognised as a poor imitation. This is a theory I would definitely have used, even if it had been without researching Neale. I want my product to retain characteristics of the genre but also modify it into something new and original, which would mean adopting both 'repetition' and 'difference' into my short film.
David Buckingham
Buckingham proposes that genres are 'in a constant state of negotiation and change' which relates to Hartley's theory that genre is shaped by the changing society. Like Hartley, Buckingham believes that genres are not fixed and our understanding of them will change over time. He sees the media as a way of molding culture into our lives. But also as I found with Hartley, I feel that this bears little relevance to my work. Analysing how genre is changing over time is not a theoretical approach which will enhance the quality of my short film, so I am very unlikely to include Buckingham's research in the planning of my work.
Buckingham proposes that genres are 'in a constant state of negotiation and change' which relates to Hartley's theory that genre is shaped by the changing society. Like Hartley, Buckingham believes that genres are not fixed and our understanding of them will change over time. He sees the media as a way of molding culture into our lives. But also as I found with Hartley, I feel that this bears little relevance to my work. Analysing how genre is changing over time is not a theoretical approach which will enhance the quality of my short film, so I am very unlikely to include Buckingham's research in the planning of my work.
Jason Mittel
Mittell is a theorist who views genre as a commercial label, seeing it as a ploy by institutions. He believes that genre is a marketing strategy that thrives on 'exploiting an audience who enjoy certain types of representations.' Despite being rather critical of institutional control, I think that the basis for his theory is applicable to my work, even though it is just highlighting how genre and audience are interconnected. However I would disagree and point out how there is no genre that is aimed at a singular audience, for example Westerns can be aimed at an adolescent demographic, like The Magnificent Seven or Lone Ranger remake, or it can be aimed at older viewers, like Bone Tomahawk and The Hateful Eight. Even animated films (which are historically renowned for having a demographic of younger children) can be aimed at adults, an example of which is this year's Sausage Party.
I agree that genre is related to audience, but I probably won't use Mittell's theory since Neale's and Chandler's are more compatible with my task. Mittel's, on the other hand, focuses on media ownership.
Mittell is a theorist who views genre as a commercial label, seeing it as a ploy by institutions. He believes that genre is a marketing strategy that thrives on 'exploiting an audience who enjoy certain types of representations.' Despite being rather critical of institutional control, I think that the basis for his theory is applicable to my work, even though it is just highlighting how genre and audience are interconnected. However I would disagree and point out how there is no genre that is aimed at a singular audience, for example Westerns can be aimed at an adolescent demographic, like The Magnificent Seven or Lone Ranger remake, or it can be aimed at older viewers, like Bone Tomahawk and The Hateful Eight. Even animated films (which are historically renowned for having a demographic of younger children) can be aimed at adults, an example of which is this year's Sausage Party. I agree that genre is related to audience, but I probably won't use Mittell's theory since Neale's and Chandler's are more compatible with my task. Mittel's, on the other hand, focuses on media ownership.
Barry Keith Grant
Grant acknowledges that 'defining film genres is surprisingly complex and difficult' but his most appropriate studies are focused around the use of sub-genres. Sub-genres are underlying subdivisions that are not as prominent as the main genre, but Grant expresses that all film genres have sub genres working within them. He suggests that this allows audiences to identify and ultimately connect with the film on a more specific level, taking away a deeper understanding of it.
Grant's theory is similar in a way to the study of hybridisation proposed by Jenkins, since both function around the fact that films contain multiple genres which operate at different levels of overtness. I will employ Grant's theory into my work probably alongside Jenkins' since I would like to demonstrate my ability to draw on different genres to evoke a variety of emotion from the audience and hopefully develop an expressive piece of work.
Now that I have explored the variety of genre theories and their compatibility with my task, I will take a look at genre itself and determine which of them are most suitable to my coursework.
Grant's theory is similar in a way to the study of hybridisation proposed by Jenkins, since both function around the fact that films contain multiple genres which operate at different levels of overtness. I will employ Grant's theory into my work probably alongside Jenkins' since I would like to demonstrate my ability to draw on different genres to evoke a variety of emotion from the audience and hopefully develop an expressive piece of work.
Now that I have explored the variety of genre theories and their compatibility with my task, I will take a look at genre itself and determine which of them are most suitable to my coursework.
No comments:
Post a Comment