A Field in England

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

A Field in England INSIGHT REPORT A Field In England bfi.org.uk 1 Contents Introduction 3 Executive Summary 4 Section One: Overview 5 Section Two: Planning and Execution 6 Section Three: Results 9 Section Four: Conclusions 14 2 INTRODUCTION The following is the report on the DAY AND DATERELEASEOFA Field In England. It uses a wide range of data to measure performance on all platforms, and tries to address the key questions about the significance of the release. A Field In England was released on 5 July 2013 The conclusions are based on an objective view on cinema screens, DVD, VOD and free terrestrial of the data, interviews both before and after broadcast on Film4. the film’s release, and on experience of the UK distribution and exhibition market. The BFI Distribution Fund supported the release of the project with £56,701, which contributed The report evaluates the performance of an to a P&A spend of £112,000. The total production individual film but it also tries to explain the budget was £316,879. context of the release and to suggest lessons for other films trying similar strategies. This report uses a number of measures to assess the success of the release: s "OXOFFICEREPORTSDAILYFOROPENING weekend, weekly thereafter) s /PENINGWEEKENDEXITPOLLSFROM&IRST-OVIES )NTERNATIONALFOR0ICTUREHOUSECINEMA s $6$"LU 2AYSALES/PENINGWEEKEND s 4ELEVISIONRATINGS s /NLINEMONITORING"RILLIANT.OISEFOR Picturehouse Cinemas) 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY sA Field In EnglandISANEXPERIMENTAL GENRE s4HEPRIMARYAUDIENCEWAS!"#n YEARS busting film set in the English Civil War OLD ANDFREQUENTCINEMAGOERSINTHE ANDDIRECTEDBY"EN7HEATLEYDown Terrace, bracket, who might have already been aware Kill List, Sightseers). of Wheatley’s work. s4HEFILMSBUDGETWASa WITHAa s4HEMARKETINGPLANWASTOBUILDINTEREST P&A spend supported by £56,701 from the BFI. across all platforms – Channel 4, Film4, It was fully financed by Film4. Film4OD, Picturehouse Cinemas, the related websites and social media channels and s4HERELEASEPLANWASENTHUSIASTICALLYSUPPORTED through VOD channels. by Channel 4, Film4, Picturehouse Cinemas, the FILM MAKERSANDCAST s7HEATLEYANDTHEWHOLECASTSUPPORTEDTHE release plan and mobilised their active social s4HEFILMOPENEDON*ULYONCINEMASCREENS media fan base. ON$6$AND"LU 2AY ON6/$ ANDONFREE TO AIR television through Film4. s!MONGTHEMARKETINGINNOVATIONSWASANIN depth masterclass website, which attracted a s/NTHEOPENINGWEEKEND THEFILMTOOKa large, engaged audience. in theatrical revenues from 17 venues. s!NINNOVATIVERISK SHARINGDEALWASAGREED sOFTHECINEMAAUDIENCESAIDTHEYKNEWIT with theatrical and other platforms to ensure was available free on television. that there was no unfair burden on any one area of exploitation. s4HEFILMAVERAGED VIEWERSDURING THE&ILMFREESCREENING REPRESENTINGA s)NTERVIEWSWITHEXECUTIVESSUGGESTEDTHE SHAREOFTHETELEVISIONAUDIENCEnUPFORTHAT film would not have bettered its performance slot in the schedule in terms of audiences and through a conventional release. ONSHARE s4HERELEASEWASANOBJECTLESSONINTEAM s4HETOTALTELEVISIONREACHOFTHEFILMWAS working across platforms. VIEWERS OROFTHEPOPULATION s#OMBINED(-6AND!MAZON$6$AND"LU 2AY sales on Friday and Saturday reached 1,462 with "LU 2AYOUTSELLING$6$ sOFTHETHEATRICALAUDIENCE ACCORDINGTO the cinema exit poll, rated it ‘excellent’ and @VERYGOODGIVINGA@HIGHLYFAVOURABLE SCOREOF 4 SECTION ONE: 1.1 Release strategy OVERVIEW The simultaneous multimedia release looked promising, given the strong, even cult following OFANUNCONVENTIONALFILM MAKER4HETARGET A Field In England is the fourth feature from audience for the film was also expected to be open director Ben Wheatley, who has established a to the new release pattern and to the online and reputation as a bold and innovative director and SOCIALMEDIA DOMINATEDMARKETINGCAMPAIGN built a strong fan base through his films, Down The distributors identified the primary audience Terrace, Kill List and Sightseers. AS!"#n YEARS OLD ANDTHERELEASEALSO A Field In EnglandISAGENRE DEFYINGPSYCHEDELIC TARGETEDFREQUENTCINEMAGOERSATTENDINGMORE take on the English Civil War, written by Amy THANONCEAMONTH INTHE BRACKET WHO Jump, produced by Andy Starke and Claire Jones might have already been aware of Wheatley’s for Rook Films, and financed through Film4.0. work. The audience was expected to skew towards men. 4HECASTINCLUDES*ULIAN"ARRATTThe Mighty Boosh, Nathan Barley -ICHAEL3MILEYSpaced, Kill List), There was an expectation that the target 2EECE3HEARSMITHThe League of Gentlemen), audience would have seen, or at least known 2ICHARD'LOVERSightseers) and Peter Ferdinando about Wheatley’s earlier films; and that they Tony: London Serial Killer). were likely to have seen work aimed at the same demographic group, including Shaun Of The Dead, Film4 has been a major supporter of Wheatley, Attack The Block and Four Lions. and had been developing ideas with him when HEPROPOSEDALOW BUDGETFILMTHATNEATLYFITTED The active involvement and support of an Film4’s innovative Film4.0 model. Film 4.0 was established theatre group, Picturehouse Cinemas created to find new ways of connecting talent and removed, to an extent, one of the key obstacles to ideas to audiences. ANYDAY AND DATESTRATEGYINTHEFORMOFACINEMA boycott. Picturehouse also made a vital contribution to the ideas and execution of the project, both as In fact, the stakeholders in A Field In England were EXHIBITOR0ICTUREHOUSE#INEMAS ANDDISTRIBUTOR convinced that any boycott would have had a 0ICTUREHOUSE%NTERTAINMENT minimal effect because such an unconventional film was likely to have been released on a The enthusiasm of the director and producers fraction of the number of prints that were finally Claire Jones and Andy Starke and the low budget DISTRIBUTED4HEDAY AND DATESTRATEGYTHENMAY of £316,879 reduced the financial risk and created have actually increased the theatrical reach. room for freedom and invention. The unique combination of committed supporters, multimedia skills and clear strategic thinking was critical to the success of the project. It is crucial to understand that the release model for this project was not an afterthought but an integral part of the development. All of the contributing parties were convinced that such an unconventional and daring film had little chance of fulfilling its potential under TRADITIONALRELEASEMODELSBUTCOULDANDDESERVED to) find an enthusiastic audience with a fresh approach to releasing. 5 Another major advantage provided by SECTION TWO: Picturehouse was the local loyalty towards its PLANNING AND cinemas around the UK. EXECUTION The aim of all parties was to build a single momentum around the film in all its forms that would make its opening weekend a real event. The film opened on July 5 on 17 screens, on DVD AND"LU 2AY ON6/$ANDONFREE TO AIRTELEVISION That sense of event encompassed all through Film4, beginning a multiplatform media, avoiding the impression that it was release schedule. SIMPLYATHEATRICALPROJECTWITHSOMECROSS media extensions. 5 July 2013 .ONETHELESS MAKINGAPLANWORKWITHSUCHBROAD Cinemas ambitions, and with as many moving parts, was VOD (iTunes etc.) HIGHLYCHALLENGINGANDTHEENDRESULTSSEESECTION three) were a considerable achievement. Free TV (transmission C4) DVD/Blu-Ray 2.1 Channel 4, Film4 and Film4.0 The strategy identified the main platforms for The release of A Field In England managed to the release as: free TV, DVD, Transactional VOD mobilise a coalition of parties willing to put 46/$ ANDCINEMAS tremendous energy behind a clear strategy. Channel 4 was involved directly, or indirectly, in !NNA(IGGS #OMMISSIONING%XECUTIVEAT&ILM all areas of exploitation except theatrical. As well was an energetic champion of a simultaneous as television, Channel 4 has its own DVD label CROSS MEDIARELEASEFROMTHEEARLYSTAGESOF $6$ WHICHALSODISTRIBUTESTOTRANSACTIONAL development, and she was backed by the Film4 6/$46/$ PLATFORMSSUCHASI4UNES production team. And crucially, she was supported The channel was enthusiastic about the approach, TOTHEFULLBYTHEFILM MAKERSANDPRODUCERS not least because of the previous track record The release strategy for A Field In England had of Wheatley. The flagship film channel, Film4 THESIGNIFICANTADVANTAGEOFAFILM MAKERWITH Channel was equally keen on the idea. The idea of ASTRONGANDACTIVEFANBASE 4WITTER compressing the windows was seen by both sides followers), and who himself had a keen interest in as a good way of enhancing the value of their new forms of communication and distribution. respective platforms. The support of Film4 was a major factor, not In addition, both Film4 Channel and Film4.0 felt just in terms of reach, but because it has that the approach was a neat fit with their brand rare strength in UK film in a recognisable brand positioning – exciting, innovative, and centred on associated with quality innovation. Channel 4 empowering the audience. offered another important means of marketing to Importantly, the marketing department of a large audience. the Channel 4 group also bought into the idea, The other key party was Picturehouse, both as improving profile and reach in the market exhibitor and distributor. It helped devise, refine place and able to tap into the Channel’s 23 and execute the strategy and it shared the risk million people that in one way or another WITH&ILMONALLASPECTSOFTHERELEASESEEPAGE visit the Channel. for more). 6 There was, however, one potential obstacle 2.3 Theatrical release because Channel 4 needed to operate within the guidelines set out by Ofcom regarding rules about The theatrical partner for A Field In England, CROSS PROMOTINGCONTENT Picturehouse
Recommended publications
  • Best Practices Re Regulatory Regimes and Incentives to Develop the Audiovisual Sector in the Caribbean
    Best Practices re Regulatory Regimes and Incentives to Develop the Audiovisual Sector in the Caribbean Draft Report on World Best Practices in Legislation, Regulatory Regimes and Incentives Juillet 2009 Best Practices re Regulatory Regimes and Incentives to Develop the Audiovisual Sector in the Caribbean Contrat Nr: 042/2009/WP2/ Project no 28.1-1.048 Cariforum Region By : Yvon Thiec Fernando Labrada Submitted by Altair Asesores S.L. Les opinions exprimées dans ce rapport n’engagent que les auteurs et ne reflètent pas nécessairement celles de la Commission Européenne / The Views expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Commission TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ........................................................................... 3 I. Foreword ..................................................................................... 7 II. Introduction: Audiovisual regulation for cinema and television programs ........................................................................................ 11 III. The origin of audiovisual regulation ............................................ 13 IV. Quota requirements ................................................................. 15 1. Quota Requirements for theatrical exhibition ............................ 15 1.1. International rules related to quota requirements for theatrical exhibition .................................................................................. 15 1.2. Application of quota requirements for theatrical exhibitions in Western
    [Show full text]
  • Festival Schedule
    T H E n OR T HWEST FILM CE n TER / p ORTL a n D a R T M US E U M p RESE n TS 3 3 R D p ortl a n D I n ter n a tio n a L film festi v a L S p O n SORED BY: THE OREGO n I a n / R E G a L C I n EM a S F E BR U a R Y 1 1 – 2 7 , 2 0 1 0 WELCOME Welcome to the Northwest Film Center’s 33rd annual showcase of new world cinema. Like our Northwest Film & Video Festival, which celebrates the unique visions of artists in our community, PIFF seeks to engage, educate, entertain and challenge. We invite you to explore and celebrate not only the art of film, but also the world around you. It is said that film is a universal language—able to transcend geographic, political and cultural boundaries in a singular fashion. In the spirit of Robert Louis Stevenson’s famous observation, “There are no foreign lands. It is the traveler who is foreign,” this year’s films allow us to discover what unites rather than what divides. The Festival also unites our community, bringing together culturally diverse audiences, a remarkable cross-section of cinematic voices, public and private funders of the arts, corporate sponsors and global film industry members. This fabulous ecology makes the event possible, and we wish our credits at the back of the program could better convey our deep appreci- ation of all who help make the Festival happen.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact Budgets Classic Engagement Activity Evaluation Toolbox
    INDEX INTRODUCTION PLANNING IMPACT IN ACTION IMPACT DISTRIBUTION EVALUATING 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 INTRODUCTION PLANNING IMPACT IMPACT EVALUATING IN ACTION DISTRIBUTION Welcome Why vision & strategy matter Equipping for impact What is impact distribution? We love evaluation The power of film Defining your vision The role of film teams How commercial are impact films? What makes great evaluation Analysing the story environment Developing your strategy Meet the impact producer Types of distribution deals Embracing complexity How change happens Map the issue Consider your subjects Review distribution pathways Making your evaluation plan The challenge for filmmakers The 4 impact dynamics Writing impact budgets Classic engagement activity Evaluation toolbox Know thyself Draft your strategic plan Finding impact funders Impact distribution at work New tools for impact documentary Making impact partners Sign on the dotted line Wrapping up INDEX INTRODUCTION PLANNING IMPACT IN ACTION IMPACT DISTRIBUTION EVALUATING PDF • CL LE ICK AB A K BL IC E L P C Use the top D F • and side • F tabs to navigate D P C through! L E I L C B K A A K B C L I E L C P D F • Please don’t print me! IMPACTGUIDE.ORG Get the printable version INDEX INTRODUCTION PLANNING IMPACT IN ACTION IMPACT DISTRIBUTION EVALUATING A set of tools and guides designed to help all of us who are working with film make even greater impact than we do already. Brought to you by: Made possible by: britdoc.org fordfoundation.org | berthafoundation.org | sundance.org | knightfoundation.org
    [Show full text]
  • Provision of VOD Access Services: 2012 Report
    Provision of Video on Demand Access Services - 2012 Report - A report on the level of provision by On Demand Programme Service providers of subtitling, audio description, signing and other services for people with disabilities relating to sight or hearing or both Published 28 November 2012 The Authority for Television On Demand Limited Registered in England and Wales No. 5137314 Provision of Video On Demand Access Services: 2012 Report 2 Contents Executive Summary……………………………………….…. Page 3 Introduction .......................................................................... Page 4 The Questionnaire................................................................. Page 4 The Responses ..................................................................... Page 5 Services for people with disabilities relating to hearing….. Page 6 Services for people with disabilities relating to sight……... Page 9 Platform capabilities……………………………………….......... Page 10 Barriers to provision of access services…………………..... Page 11 Next steps .............................................................................. Page 12 Annex 1: The questionnaire ................................................ Page 13 Annex 2: List of providers asked to respond……..…….. Page 18 The Authority for Television On Demand Limited Registered in England and Wales No. 5137314 Provision of Video On Demand Access Services: 2012 Report 3 Executive Summary As part of ATVOD’s duty to encourage services providers to make their On Demand Programme Services (“ODPS”) more accessible to people with disabilities affecting their sight or hearing, ATVOD conducts an annual survey of current levels of provision of such ‘access services’. The first such report was published in November 2011. This report details the responses we received to our second major survey of regulated service providers which closed on 21 September 2012. ATVOD invited all providers of ODPS to indicate the scale of provision of each type of access service, together with any future plans for access service provision.
    [Show full text]
  • STRANGER by the LAKE Bfi.Org.Uk CONTENTS
    INSIGHT REPORT STRANGER BY THE LAKE bfi.org.uk CONTENTS CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 3 CHAPTER TWO: PLANNING AND RELEASE 6 CHAPTER THREE: REVENUES AND BENEFITS 10 CHAPTER FOUR: OVERALL CONCLUSIONS 16 INTRODUCTION The following report analyses the near day-and-date release by Peccadillo Pictures of French thriller Stranger By The Lake. The report, supported by the New Models strand The results were supplemented by a survey of of the BFI Distribution Fund, sought to answer the Peccadillo’s Facebook and membership email lists, following questions: which resulted in another 140 questionnaires being completed. • What are the advantages or disadvantages for releasing Stranger By The Lake on VOD at the same Industry data: The report uses data from a number of time as cinemas? sources to provide objective analysis of performance, and to provide useful comparisons. Data includes • How do the VOD platforms affect cinema going? theatrical box office results and sales information, • And how does a VOD offer so close to the cinema supplied by Peccadillo. The analysis of this kind of release date affect consumer demand? day-and-date releases are also increasingly informed by knowledge acquired from the Insight Reports from the series of releases supported by the BFI’s 1.1 METHODOLOGY New Models fund. The study relied on evidence from a number Analysis: The conclusions are based on a study of sources: of all the sources of data and interviews with key stakeholders. The expectations and perceptions of Exit Polls: Four exit polls of 117 people were carried performance from the distributor Peccadillo were out at Bristol, London, Cambridge and Manchester, discussed before and after the film.
    [Show full text]
  • Emma Scott Make-Up & Hair Designer
    Lux Artists Ltd. 12 Stephen Mews London W1T 1AH +44 (0)20 7637 9064 www.luxartists.net EMMA SCOTT MAKE-UP & HAIR DESIGNER FILM/TELEVISION DIRECTOR PRODUCER POSSUM Matthew Holness The Fyzz Cast: Sean Harris THE SNOWMAN Tomas Alfredson Working Title Cast: Michael Fassbender, Rebecca Ferguson, Charlotte Gainsbourg Universal Pictures FREE FIRE Ben Wheatley Rook Films Cast: Sam Riley, Cillian Murphy, Brie Larson, Noah Taylor, Armie Hammer Studio Canal Official Selection, Toronto Film Festival (2016) Official Selection, London Film Festival (2016) Nominated, Best Director, BIFA (2016) PRIDE, PREJUDICE & ZOMBIES Burr Steers Cross Creek Pictures Cast: Sam Riley, Matt Smith, Lena Headey, Jack Huston, Douglas Booth BABYLON (Pilot) Danny Boyle Nightjack Cast: Brit Marling, James Nesbitt Channel 4 THE GOOB Guy Myhill BBC Films Cast: Sean Harris, Hannah Spearritt, Liam Walpole Winner, Golden Hitchcock Award, Dinard British Film Festival (2014) ’71 Yann Demange Warp Films Cast: Sean Harris, Jack O’Connell, Paul Anderson, Sam Reid Nominated, Outstanding British Film, BAFTA Awards (2015) Official Selection, London Film Festival (2014) Official Selection, Berlin Film Festival (2014) Official Selection, Toronto Film Festival (2014) MUPPETS: MOST WANTED James Bobin Walt Disney Pictures Cast: Ricky Gervais, Tina Fey, Ty Burrell SOUTHCLIFFE (Mini-series) Sean Durkin Warp Films Cast: Sean Harris, Rory Kinnear, Shirley Henderson, Eddie Marsan, Joe Dempsie Nominated, Best Mini-Series, BAFTA TV Awards (2014) UTOPIA (Season 1) Marc Munden Kudos Film & TV Cast:
    [Show full text]
  • Wfs Filmnotes Template
    30 April 2013 www.winchesterfilmsociety.co.uk … why not visit our website to join in the discussion after each screening? Sightseers UK 2012 Every season when the committee Ben Wheatley is the outstanding young whittle down a long, long list to just British film-maker who got himself Directed by 16 films, there are one or two that talked about with his smart debut Down Ben Wheatley really intrigue us and we can’t wait to Terrace; then he scared the daylights out Director of Photography see. Sightseers is that film for 12/13! of everyone, as well as amusing and Laurie Rose baffling them, with his inspired and There is no direct French translation for ambiguous chiller Kill List. His talent Original Music and signature are vividly present in every Jim Williams the word ‘sightseers’, so Ben Wheatley’s new film is titled Touristes in Cannes, frame of this new movie, Sightseers, a Screenplay where it has screened as part of grisly and Ortonesque black comedy Alice Lowe Directors’ Fortnight. In a way, that’s about a lonely couple played by co- Steve Oram perfectly fitting: this flesh-creepingly writers Steve Oram and Alice Lowe. funny comedy turns into something that, Again, Wheatley is adept at summoning Cast rather worryingly, you can’t imagine an eerie atmosphere of Wicker Man Alice Lowe happening in any other country but disquiet; the glorious natural Tina England. Lowe and Oram’s script surroundings are endowed with a golden Steve Oram balances nimbly on the thread of razor sunlit glow and the trips to quaint Chris wire between horror and farce: the film venues of local interest are well Eileen Davies is frequently laugh-out-loud funny but observed: particularly Tina's heartbroken Carol the couple’s crimes are never trivialised, solo excursion to the Pencil Museum.
    [Show full text]
  • Channel 4 and British Film: an Assessment Of
    Channel 4 and British Film: An Assessment of Industrial and Cultural Impact, 1982-1998 Laura Mayne This thesis is submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of the University of Portsmouth. September 2014 i Abstract This thesis is an historical investigation of Channel 4’s influence on the British film industry and on British film culture between 1982 and 1998. Combining archival research with interview testimony and secondary literature, this thesis presents the history of a broadcaster’s involvement in British film production, while also examining the cultural and industrial impact of this involvement over time. This study of the interdependence of film and television will aim to bring together aspects of what have hitherto been separate disciplinary fields, and as such will make an important contribution to film and television studies. In order to better understand this interdependence, this thesis will offer some original ideas about the relationship between film and television, examining the ways in which Channel 4’s funding methods led to new production practices. Aside from the important part the Channel played in funding (predominantly low-budget) films during periods when the industry was in decline and film finance was scarce, this partnership had profound effects on British cinema in the 1980s and 1990s. In exploring these effects, this thesis will look at the ways in which the film funding practices of the Channel changed the landscape of the film industry, offered opportunities to emerging new talent, altered perceptions of British film culture at home and abroad, fostered innovative aesthetic practices and brought new images of Britain to cinema and television screens.
    [Show full text]
  • POST-BRITISH CRIME FILMS and the ETHICS of RETRIBUTIVE VIOLENCE Mark Schmitt (TU Dortmund University)
    CINEMA 11 152 “THEY’RE BAD PEOPLE – THEY SHOULD SUFFER”: POST-BRITISH CRIME FILMS AND THE ETHICS OF RETRIBUTIVE VIOLENCE Mark Schmitt (TU Dortmund University) In recent years, British popular genre cinema has displayed a tendency to allegorise the ethical ques- tions resulting from the nation’s social and political challenges of the 21st century.1 Whether it is the Blair government’s decision to join the US in the Iraq war in 2003 and the ensuing disillusionment with democracy and the futility of public protest, the austerity measures and subsequently increasing social divisions in the wake of the global financial crisis of 2008, the ongoing process of Scottish and Welsh devolution that challenges the very notion of a United Kingdom, Britain finds itself in a stage that Michael Gardiner has described as “post-British.”2 On the level of the nation-state, and especially with regard to Scottish and Welsh devolution, the post-British process can be identified as the “demo- cratic restructuring of each nation within union and each nation still affected by Anglophone imperial- ism”3, while the social structure of Britain is still marked by the internal fault lines of class divisions of class. The notion of “post-Britain” has been addressed in British film studies. William Brown has sug- gested that Britain’s cinematic output in the 21st century offers a “paradoxically post-British” perspec- tive which is reflected in subject matter, ideological points of view and modes of production.4 As Brown argues, such post-British perspectives can particularly be found in popular genre films such as 28 Days Later (2002) and V for Vendetta (2006).5 In the following, I will argue that this post-British sensibility in contemporary national genre cinema is aligned with urgent ethical questions regarding the nation state on both the British level as well as within a larger European context.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Long Time Dead
    1. LONG TIME DEAD In 2002, the filmmaker Richard Stanley sounded the death knell of ‘the great British horror movie’. His ‘obituary’, which appeared in Steve Chibnall and Julian Petley’s edited volume British Horror Cinema, lamented the general absence of any real directorial talent at the turn of the millennium, noting that the horror film directors ‘who really knew what they were doing escaped to Hollywood a long time ago’ (Stanley 2002: 194). Stanley cited the direct-to- video occult horror The 13th Sign (Jonty Acton and Adam Mason, 2000) as offering a glimmer of hope, but concluded that it was ‘still a long way below the minimum standard of even the most vilified 1980s product’ (2002: 193). Stanley’s pessimism was not unfounded (even if his assessment of The 13th Sign was perhaps a bit unfair). Hammer Films – the once-prolific film studio responsible for the first full-colour horror film, The Curse of Frankenstein (Terence Fisher), in 1957, and a host of other classic British horrors over the next two decades – buckled under market pressure and ceased making feature films in 1979. The 1980s, therefore, saw the production of only a handful of British horror films, which, at any rate, were mostly thought of as American productions that had peripheral British involvement, such as Stanley Kubrick’s blockbuster The Shining (1980) and Clive Barker’s franchise- initiating Hellraiser (1987). Others from the decade were artsy one-offs, such as the Gothic fairy tale The Company of Wolves (Neil Jordan, 1984), or (as was most often the case) amateurish flops, such as the cheap and clumsy monster movie Rawhead Rex (George Pavlou, 1986).
    [Show full text]
  • Film Reviews
    Page 78 FILM REVIEWS Kill List (Dir. Ben Wheatley) UK 2011 Optimum Releasing Note: This review contains extensive spoilers Kill List is the best British horror film since The Descent (Dir. Neil Marshall, 2005). Mind you, you wouldn’t know that from the opening half­hour or so. Although it opens with an eerie scratching noise and the sight of a cryptic rune that can’t help but evoke the unnerving stick figure from The Blair Witch Project (Dir. Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sánchez, 1999), we’re then plunged straight into a series of compellingly naturalistic scenes of domestic discord which, as several other reviews have rightly pointed out, evoke nothing so much as the films of Mike Leigh. (The fact that much of the film’s dialogue is supplied by the cast also adds to this feeling.) But what Leigh’s work doesn’t have is the sense of claustrophobic dread that simmers in the background throughout Wheatley’s film (his second, after 2009’s Down Terrace ). Nor have any of them – to date at least – had an ending as devastating and intriguing as this. Yet the preliminary scenes in Kill List are in no sense meant to misdirect, or wrong­foot the audience: rather, they’re absolutely pivotal to the narrative as a whole, even if many of the questions it raises remain tantalisingly unresolved. Jay (Neil Maskell) and his wife Shel (MyAnna Buring) live in a spacious, well­appointed suburban home (complete with jacuzzi) and have a sweet little boy, but theirs is clearly a marriage on the rocks, and even the most seemingly innocuous exchange between them is charged with hostility and mutual misunderstanding.
    [Show full text]
  • Download the PDF (7Mb)
    belfast film festival 1st-9th APRIL 2020 :o wat*esd ev! Awat* adi _ ck m8hed 20 selly raby kane 1 OUR FUNDERS INTRODUCTION For more than 20 years we have celebrated the creativity, politics and joy film brings. We have witnessed with pride the growth of the indigenous filmmaking sector; hosted exciting ‘movie star’ guests; showcased brilliant international filmmaking talent; and shared thousands of diverse stories and cultures with you, our audience. Over the coming decade we will do it all again, re-energised and excited by the wealth of talent and love of film that surrounds us. Michele Devlin. Festival Director From Belfast to the World When I grew up in Belfast, there was no film festival. I was passionate about movies, and visually hungry, but there was no annual event to feed my hunger. I went searching elsewhere, and have ended up working with some of the greatest ACCOMMODATION OFFICIAL MEDIA people in cinema – Tilda Swinton, Jane Fonda, Sean Connery, etc. – but I think back to the 70s and 80s and imagine what more we could have achieved as movie PARTNER PARTNERS lovers and makers if we’d had a film festival. Thankfully we’ve seen brilliant changes in our society since then. Peace has returned, new populations have moved to our city, and we now have world class film studios and programme makers. The quality of our lives has improved and our horizons have opened. Film is the great horizon-opener. Since its birth 20 years ago, the Belfast Film VENUE Festival has had a centrifugal imagination.
    [Show full text]