In our workshop we were a having a look at the differences of acting in film and television in contrast to acting to on the stage, as there are many things done differently in both.
It seems that acting for television is much more subtle and also more realistic than acting for the theatre and also in film. They say it is easier when you are acting for television as you can act quite naturally, whereas when you are acting on the stage you are very much over the top and project your voice and expressions. However in television you just talk quite normally and do natural facial expressions and gestures, but in film whilst acting is more realistic than at the theatre it is still not as easy as television as the emphasis on facial expressions is greater as there are more close ups and focuses on peoples faces to show their emotions which is something that they do not really focus on as much in television and especially theatre.
The lady doing the workshop was a former Emmerdale actress who had since moved onto theatre and then teaching and has an acting agency for all ages.
In the workshop she wanted us to show our rougher side or as she said “our inner chav” and we used inspiration from programmes like Shameless and did a few improvisations in those characters.
We met some people there that had come all the way from Culcheth High School in Warrington and they were studying Theatre and Media studies. They had also been going to the screenings as they had a film entered.
Overall I really enjoyed the trip and thought it was great to see all these different films from throughout the entire nation and see how different places did them with their own styles, the entries from the Rhondda were mainly music videos whereas the ones from Edinburgh were more dramatic.
Also nice to see the wide range of age groups from 5-19 and how different each film was and they inspired me for when we make our own film.
Monday, 5 October 2009
- High angle shots
- Shows terrace houses, trains, council estates
- Signifies lower/middle class area
- Shows teenagers- kissing, smoking, gambling, drinking
- Sex appeal- topless men and attractive girls
- Cheerful theme tune hints younger target audience
- Shows people of different ethnicity, sexuality, age
- Males kissing, westernized black and asian characters, female characters kissing
- Use of bright colour hints youth but also maybe drugs?
- Cheerful, happy images contradicting with adult themes like sex and drugs
- Looks like Britain, more so England due to scenery and geographical area
- Quite unconventional characters shown, not the normal types shown on television like homosexuals, asian characters, lower class people,
- Excessive drinking, taking drugs, smoking cigarettes
"Notting Hill" was released on the 21st of May 1999
Starring: Hugh Grant, Julia Roberts, Hugh Bonneville, James Dreyfuss and Rhys Ifans.
Written by Richard Curtis and Directed by Roger Michell.
Nominated for 3 Golden Globe awards.
Won a BAFTA and British comedy award.
Filmed at Coronet Cinema, Notting Hill Gate, London, England.
Music by Trevor Jones
Cinematography by Michael Coulter
Editing by Nick Moore
Budget of $42 million (US Dollars)
Gross Revenue of $363,889,678 (US Dollars)
Premiered at the Odeon Cinema, Leicester Square, London.
Sunday, 4 October 2009
The ideological and political bias of the Guardian newspaper is towards the left of centre of the political spectrum, or the liberal left.Historically the Guardian has supported the Labour Party and most defiantely New Labour and in 1997 they were very found of Tony Blair and supported New Labour's campaign. The Guardian readers are more likely to be educated social democrats than traditional Socialist Labour supporters.The Guardian seems to show a generally positive light on young people and it seems that they try to appeal to young people and get them to read their paper and they like talking about opportunites for young people. It seems that they try to get young readers to read a quality newspaper like the Guardian rather than just the tabloids.
It does not appear to be a Royalist newspaper at all, it comes across as being quite negative about HM the Queen and the Royal Family and they write articles about them in a rather negative light or a mocking way but this isn't surprising as the readers of the paper are likely to swing more to left and are not likely to be pro-Monarchy as it is a right wing institution.
The Guardian is also negative about the Invasion of Iraq and the war as this didn't seem like the sort of thing that a Labour government would do and as many people who lean towards the left are agaisnt war, like the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown is himself a pacifist.