1.
Description and analysis of three audience
theories
There are three main types of audience theories, the first
one is the hypodermic syringe theory,
this theory dates from the 1920’s and is to believe that mass audiences
submissively receive information from the media that is given to them with no questions;
the information is being ‘injected’ into them, and so this creates an audience
who are passive, meaning that the opinion and intelligence of the individual receiving
information from the media isn’t relative to the reception of the text. In the
1920’s and onwards, this was a way of propaganda, especially in the world wars
(e.g. Hitler and getting the German people to support him) as they thought this
was a way to change the populations way of thinking, as mass media was new to
them. In present times this theory still exists, some people believe that the
trends at the time will influence how people will be and determine their lives
as well as the thought that subconsciously we perceive our opinions on what we
have heard from the media, for example, you don’t really pay much attention to
the television during adverts, but the name of a film or product that is played
on adverts throughout the day and for weeks, subconsciously you receive and
remember that name and so that is what you first think of if you decide to go
see a film/buy a product. A successful
example of the hypodermic syringe theory is when ‘War of the worlds’ was
broadcast on October 30th 1938, millions were listening and although
it was introduced, the script (set in the present day) and sudden news bulletin
saying how martians were invading the planet, many people believed this and so
went into panic, this caused traffic, hysteria, began to ration food and people
left home to seek safety – this is how one small broadcast can influence a mass
audience into believing something is real and correct, without them questioning
it.
The next theory is uses
and gratifications, this is the complete opposite to the hypodermic syringe
theory, this theory suggests that audiences aren’t passive, they in fact are
individuals and consume and interpret the media texts in different ways and for
different reasons (you choose what to watch for your own gain); this first developed in the 1960’s as this was the
generation that was growing up with media surrounding them. In 1974 a theory
published by Blulmer and Katz stated that individuals might choose a text down
to these reasons: Diversion (an escape from reality), Personal Relationships
(emotional/interactions), Personal Identity (your personality reflected in
texts, learning behaviour and values from them) and Surveillance (useful
information for life). Of course these have modernised over the years, nowadays
it is more about social networking, on social network sites such as Twitter,
Facebook, YouTube, we can use it as surveillance e.g. we can keep up with news
and what is happening all over the world in an instant, for personal
relationships e.g. finding someone the other side of the world or even from
your own country who you have similar interests with and connect. Television is
another way to the reception theory comes into place, e.g. watching the film
Twilight or Harry Potter, you are transported to a magical world that is to
exist within everyday life, and you can escape the reality of life and live in
this magical world. This theory suggests that the media have no input on your
decisions and that decisions and your opinions are completely up to the
individual, also that it is more social, such as going to the cinema with your
friends, even if you do not want to see that film, you go for the social side
of it, so it is less about what the film is like but the reasons for going and
the effect the film can have instead.
The last theory is the reception
theory, this is a 1980’s/90’s development of the uses and gratification
theory, meaning that a text is read and interpreted differently depending on
the individuals lives (their gender, age, ethnicity, location, social class).
Stuart Hall’s model of encoding and decoding, meaning that the text can be
interpreted in totally different ways, from the producers encoding of the text
to the audiences decoding of it. A way for the producers to get around this and
get the audience to agree to a certain extent what its intended message and
purpose was so they can agree on certain aspects, this can be done through
expectations of the codes and conventions in genres and what celebrities are
appearing. There are three different interpretations and readings of a text,
firstly there is preferred reading which is where the audience agree with the
messages and values that the producer is putting across through the text, an
example of this is Miley Cyrus’ music video for ‘Wrecking Ball’, the preferred
reading for this is for us to see she is hurt, is fragile after her heart being
broken, very emotional and also introducing her new identity as she has grown
up and changed her look. A negotiated reading is when the producers and
audience agree on some but not all of the ideas of the text, for example we
agree that Miley is hurt and has gone through emotional pain and has grown up,
she’s no longer a teenager however we disagree that there should be nudity in
her video as she is a role model for children and was the main character in
kids programme Hannah Montana, so it is not appropriate. Lastly oppositional
reading, when the values and preferred reading of the media text is completely
rejected by the audience, the example of this is that Wrecking Ball’s video
idea is stupid, that it is unethical and a terrible role model for a child
because she was Hannah Montana, completely gone wild and away from what she
was. There are many different ways a person can interpret and read a text,
depending on the individual as they have the choice of how they want to read it
and why, the same text can be read in many different ways which can be both a negative
and positive thing (positively it means we are all individuals with our own
opinions and choices but on the other hand it is negative as we all will not
understand what is meant by it and so it can be misunderstood and taken the
wrong way so possible offence). However mass text can reach a mass audience in
a certain way still and so in the future the ways we receive and interpret
texts will develop and differ.
2.
Why was your own product produced?
My chosen film ‘Hook’ would come under a fantasy adventure
genre, it comes under this genre as it involves not only magic, but mythical
creatures such as fairies and mermaid as well as it being in a magical, made-up
location and having supernatural abilities like flying. It is an adventure film
also as it is in an exotic, magical location, there is mystery, pirates,
challenges and training for a battle as well as the big battle scene at the end
– we see the main character Peter travel to Neverland with his children and it
is unknown what will happen once there or what it would be like or who’d he
come across. The genre expectations for a fantasy adventure film are that it
takes you to a fantasy and not known location, which is fulfilled in the film
Hook when they go to Neverland (a place that everyone knows through the
children’s story Peter Pan). When you think of a fantasy film, you think of
mythical creatures, a different dimension, a world that doesn’t exist that you
wish did, they fulfil all your childhood wishes to have superpowers or beliefs
in these magical creatures, these films bring that to life and take you to a
different world where you can escape from reality. In an adventure film you
expect the unknown, battles, a villain and an exotic location, you want action
but at a slower pace and not that being the focused aspect. I think personally
that Hook fulfils the codes and conventions of a fantasy adventure film and
lives up to the genre expectations, that it is specific and a successful
fantasy adventure film for its target audience.
The target audience for this film would be children between
the ages of 8 – 15, although this is a fantasy film that includes magic and
mythical creatures that younger kids would enjoy, the story is a lot darker and
more complex, this is a twist on the typical Peter Pan, although Captain Hook
and the pirates are bad in all other Peter Pan versions, in this version they
are scarier and their characters are more developed in this film. Younger
children might not understand or relate to this film as much as the older
children as all the characters (apart from the children and the lost boys, who
are older than originally) all the characters are adults, like Peter Pan and
Tinkerbell and this isn’t the perceived image of them when you think of Peter
Pan. Older children like the target audience will understand the problems and
emotions in the complex storyline more (Peter has to battle with Rufio to
become the leader of the lost boys, while tinkerbell is in love with peter,
while the kids are being enticed by Hook, it is no longer the simple story that
young children understand), they tend to pick up codes and conventions and
emotions of the characters rather than just sit and watch the film for
entertainment. Not only this but the look of Neverland is very different to the
other adaptations, for example, in the 1953 and 2003 versions, it is an
tropical island full of jungle and lagoons where the only inhabitants are Peter
Pan, The Lost Boys, Fairies, Mermaids and The Pirates, whereas in Hook, there
is a town with shops and civilisation as well as a baseball arena and town
clock, there is a community. Another reason why it would not appeal to a
younger audience is that it is not an animation, but has real actors, this is
not appealing to younger children whereas to older children, they know who the
actors are and so if one of them is their favourite actor, they will enjoy
seeing them act; it is more real and connects more with the audience this way.
Fantasy adventure films have been proven to be popular and a success through all
Disney films (e.g. Frozen, The Wizard of Oz, Aladdin), franchises such as ‘The
Lord Of The Rings’ ‘Harry Potter’ and ‘The Chronicles Of Narnia’ as well as
films such as ‘Night at the Museum’ and ‘The Spiderwick Chronicles’. All of
these films have had tremendous success with not only children, but with adults
too, they are all so well known that they are known as classics, the majority
of the population have seen them. The popularity of these films show that
although they are fantasy, not only children enjoy these films but adults too,
and I think this is why they were such a big success. Films in the Harry Potter
and Lord of the Rings series are aimed more at the 8+ year olds, this is
because they are a more complex storyline and scarier whereas Night at the
Museum is a comedy as well as having that fantasy and adventure element. The
success of these films show that fantasy-adventure is an up and coming genre
where films are increasingly being made thanks to the special effects and
technology that we have in the modern world.
3.
How was it received?
Hook was an international success and made a worldwide gross
profit of $300,854,823, in fact, it had more foreign success than domestic,
with foreign countries making up 60% of the overall profit. We can see on box office mojo that it was the number
one film for a month before dropping chart position, although still being
highly ranked; we can also see that the opening week was less successful than
the second and third week of release, this shows us that people thought the
film was good so spread the word to their friends about it, telling them to
watch it to. The film was also in cinemas from the beginning of December until
the end of May, this tells us that this film was very popular in order to stay
in some cinemas that long as it is quite rare that this happens. On IMDb, the film got 6.6 out of 10,
although reading through user reviews, the majority rate this film very highly,
saying ‘reminds me of childhood’ ‘a classic’ ‘I love this film!’ ‘Dustin
Hoffman gets you hooked’, so this shows that the audience who watch this film,
no matter the age, enjoy it however the film critics are a bit more harsh and
marked it down, as they know more information about films and therefore don’t watch
them just out of enjoyment, but to analyse them. One critic from BBCi said that
the sets and props were beautiful however it was “a messy and incoherent effort”.
Another from the New York Times says that “the film is too much” as for the
target audience, it is hard for them to connect and identify with them however
he does praise Dustin Hoffman’s performance. On Rotten Tomatoes the critics gave it 31% out of 100%, saying that it
was a “40 million dollar set and a 5 cent script” and “No matter how much cash
Hook earns, it will take more than pixie dust to fly this overstuffed package
into our dreams.”, most calling it appalling and Spielberg’s worst – these are
critics looking at the finer details of the film rather than seeing it in a
social, entertainment way, we can see a difference in this (the way you watch
it determines how you perceive it as) the audience/public gave it 76% out of
100% so a lot more positive.
4.
Audience Theory
I think the message of this film is that everyone grows up,
but that doesn’t mean you lose your imagination, shows children that it is
important to be true and remember who you are and as you grow up, don’t lose
yourself in work, focus on yourself and put your family first; I don’t think
this came across as an obvious message so audiences wouldn’t particularly
accept them, however it is the main message and theme of the film. I don’t
think the hypodermic syringe theory applies to this film as a mass audience
haven’t been impacted and passive to the messages in it, as there aren’t any
that are very prominent.
I think the Uses and Gratifications theory applied most to
this film, it was a very social film, as we saw by the length of time it was in
the cinema and the box office success of it, I’m guessing by mainly word of
mouth. Because it is a fantasy film and set in a mythical land and has magical
creatures, it is a diversion, an escape from reality, because the time that it
is on, you are transported to another world, one that isn’t like reality and I
think that is a big draw to not only this film, but all fantasy films – it takes
you out of reality and a world where we wished we lived. I think audiences
enjoyed this factor of the film and so that’s the reason why it was successful.
In terms of personal development, you can, as an adult, relate to the emotions,
issues and life of the adults in this film, it is a twist on the original Peter
Pan story and this version has a lot more real life problems that a lot of
people can relate to so it becomes more real for them, they can see themselves
in them characters. I think it is also a social film, where you would go to the
cinema to watch it with your friends even if you weren’t particularly
interested in watching it, and also a nice film to sit and watch at home with
your family; it is a social, entertainment film that you’re meant to sit back
and relax watching, escaping from the real world.
In terms of the reception theory, I think the preferred
reading of what the director wanted you to view it as is that it is a complete
and clever twist on the original Peter Pan, and as the name suggests, focus more
on the character Captain Hook. We’re meant to see that the design was beautiful
and the plot was well thought out with the basic plot line of Peter Pan but
make it different enough that it stands out from the other adaptations. On the
other hand, the oppositional reading that the audience could have is that it is
too different, that having the main character that said he would ‘never grow up’
as an adult is a big mistake and that it is too different from the original and
so they have ruined the original and magical story of Peter Pan for children,
and that they would not be able to relate to it and so be less interested. The
negotiated reading of Hook would be that it was a clever idea to have a grown
up Peter Pan going back to Neverland and relearning everything he once knew as
his life, and that it is a twist and stands out, however it ruins the original
magic of the film and children will not be interested as it is too complex and
is not what they see as Peter Pan as it is so different. You can read this film
in many ways and it all depends on who the audience is and how they receive the
film.
No comments:
Post a Comment