Distribution - third part of the film supply chain, often referred to as 'the invisible art'
Licensing - the process by which a distributor acquires the legal right to exploit a film. In distribution, licensing itself can take place on two levels.
International distribution - ensures that films find their way to the 90+ market 'territories' around the world
Local distribution - involves the distributor acquiring the licence to release and exploit the film in a particular country.
The launch of the film - in the UK, feature films are released initially theatrically. A theatrical opening is seen as the most effective way to create interest in a new film.
Marketing - in the UK, new films are released theatrically on Fridays. A distributor will look for a 'light' week. A further consideration for scheduling a release is the seasonality of the film.
Thursday 7 March 2013
Who should have the right to decide audiences should be protected - and from what?
Audiences are protected by many different people depending on their age group, for example cinemas, BBFC, parents, production companies and the writers themselves make decisions on what gets seen by who based on the contents of the film, whether it involves strong language, violence, sexual content etc. In this essay, I will be exploring who should have the right to decide audiences should be protected and from what.
I think that when it comes to children (up to the age of 12), parents should have the biggest right on what their children should be protected from. When it comes to taking your child to the cinema and for example if they are 13 and you want to take them to a 15 rated film, I think that it should be your choice as a parent its meant to be a childs guardian, so they will have more of an idea what is suitable for their child than the cinema and BBFC. It is also a parents responsibility to ensure that their child is being looked after and they have to make sure they do this everyday as part of being a parent, so it would be common sense to allow a parent to choose. Saying this, when the film is available on dvd, the parent then has the choice on whether they allow their child to watch the film or not so protection from the BBFC is still limited as people underage can still get access to films via parents, television or internet.
I think that we, ourselves should also be able to decide what to be protected from. No one knows you as well as you know yourself therefore you yourself know whether you are suitable to watch a certain film. I don't think that institutions such as the BBFC should have full control over who should be protected and from what, because different people are suited to different things. People usually make the right decisions for themselves for example, if a person knows they do not react well to horror films, they will be unlikely to watch them as they will be unlikely to enjoy them.
Although I think a lot of responsibility in what we choose to watch relies on ourselves, I think that the BBFC also contribute a lot towards this. Before watching any film, we are warned with what the film contains on posters etc, they tell us whether they contain unsuitable contents such as drug usuage, violence etc. I think that the BBFC are in a good position to give some protection to the general public in what they watch because if there was no protection what so ever, there could be a development in more extreme and disturbing films being distributed to anyone, which could cause many problems after such as disturbance or lead to more violent crimes being committed as people won't feel it's wrong if they constantly see it in cinemas/tv.
I think the production companies should also contribute into who should be protected and from what, as they would have contributed into producing the film so they will know what kind of things it contains and will know what kind of age groups the film would be unsuitable for. They will know before anyone what the films contain and will be able to come to a decision on roughly which age group the film will be targeted at. As I previously mentioned before, I think that we ourselves have the biggest decision in what we protect ourselves from but we can only protect ourselves from what gets produced, and before we can do any protecting the production companies will have already created the film.
In conclusion, I think that each individual should choose what they get protected from, as they are aware of what things frighten them or make them uncomfortable. Although I think this, I think that we also need institutions such as the BBFC to warn us of what films will contain so we are protected/warned before watching the film.
I think that when it comes to children (up to the age of 12), parents should have the biggest right on what their children should be protected from. When it comes to taking your child to the cinema and for example if they are 13 and you want to take them to a 15 rated film, I think that it should be your choice as a parent its meant to be a childs guardian, so they will have more of an idea what is suitable for their child than the cinema and BBFC. It is also a parents responsibility to ensure that their child is being looked after and they have to make sure they do this everyday as part of being a parent, so it would be common sense to allow a parent to choose. Saying this, when the film is available on dvd, the parent then has the choice on whether they allow their child to watch the film or not so protection from the BBFC is still limited as people underage can still get access to films via parents, television or internet.
I think that we, ourselves should also be able to decide what to be protected from. No one knows you as well as you know yourself therefore you yourself know whether you are suitable to watch a certain film. I don't think that institutions such as the BBFC should have full control over who should be protected and from what, because different people are suited to different things. People usually make the right decisions for themselves for example, if a person knows they do not react well to horror films, they will be unlikely to watch them as they will be unlikely to enjoy them.
Although I think a lot of responsibility in what we choose to watch relies on ourselves, I think that the BBFC also contribute a lot towards this. Before watching any film, we are warned with what the film contains on posters etc, they tell us whether they contain unsuitable contents such as drug usuage, violence etc. I think that the BBFC are in a good position to give some protection to the general public in what they watch because if there was no protection what so ever, there could be a development in more extreme and disturbing films being distributed to anyone, which could cause many problems after such as disturbance or lead to more violent crimes being committed as people won't feel it's wrong if they constantly see it in cinemas/tv.
I think the production companies should also contribute into who should be protected and from what, as they would have contributed into producing the film so they will know what kind of things it contains and will know what kind of age groups the film would be unsuitable for. They will know before anyone what the films contain and will be able to come to a decision on roughly which age group the film will be targeted at. As I previously mentioned before, I think that we ourselves have the biggest decision in what we protect ourselves from but we can only protect ourselves from what gets produced, and before we can do any protecting the production companies will have already created the film.
In conclusion, I think that each individual should choose what they get protected from, as they are aware of what things frighten them or make them uncomfortable. Although I think this, I think that we also need institutions such as the BBFC to warn us of what films will contain so we are protected/warned before watching the film.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)