burntends88

A husband, father and teacher. Film is my passion, and I believe learning is a lifelong journey. You can find me on Twitter @BurntEnds88

Breaking his duck in TV with uncredited roles in Chicago Fire and The Chi, Toom Chanda is now looking to make waves on the big screen.

His latest short film, The Cure (2020) centres on a man on a mission to rescue his kidnapped wife from a hired gang intent on stealing a lifesaving serum. The action is reminiscent of Jet Li and Donny Yen with some John Woo graphic violence thrown in for good measure. But this is what sets it apart from other short films of its ilk, having scored the Hollywood Gold Award for Best Action in June 2020. Devised as a calling card to raise awareness and finance for a feature, The Cure is currently looking for investors.

Toom Chanda's journey to the promised land began with much more humble beginnings. As a child growing up in poverty in Laos, doing his homework outside under streetlamps or beside lit candles, Chanda dreamt of a brighter future for himself and his family. Things were about to get real for him when his parents immigrated to the U.S. when he was 7.

Influenced by the martial arts scene, Chanda took up the challenge to become a Muay Thai fighter at the age of 12 and has never looked back. Fast becoming skilled in various disciplines of the artform, Chanda set up his own business as a trainer and coach from his own gym before embarking on a much more ambitious project… This is where Toom Stunt Team (TST) was born.

Screenshot from Betrayal

Founded by Chanda, the team now operates with 12 members. 3 in marketing, 1 director of photography and the rest combine to form actors and stuntmen.

1. What do you want people to learn from TST?

I started TST in 2019 but established in 2020 as LLC. The way it represents to me is you don’t need to be great to create, but you need to create to be great. I want people to learn that in life you don’t need to wait for permission or wait on an opportunity. You have to create the opportunity.

2. What would you advise other ethnic minorities on how to go about becoming an actor or filmmaker?

I would advise them to keep creating their own content, don’t worry about what people will have to say about you. Don’t be afraid to get creative, so get your brand out there.

3. What do you believe are the driving factors someone needs to achieve success?

The struggle is hard, but dedication is the key. Remember where you came from before thinking of giving up.

4. What’s something you learned about working in the industry that you take with you to set on your own productions?

Something I’ve learned a lot from the industry is that teamwork is God. Everyone will have their own assigned responsibility for their roles. Without a team you won’t go far. So everyone will have to come to terms with that knowledge, and professionalism will show.

5. What was the turning point for you to embark on a journey to become a Hollywood star?

I’ve been to countless auditions, that I soon realized minorities in this industry is hard to get into Hollywood. I don’t want to just be chasing Hollywood, it challenged me to rise up and be an international actor.

6. Top three martial artists to have had an influence on your own style

My top three martial artist would be Jet li, Bruce Lee and Jackie Chan of course. They surpassed what the world once thought of them. They were the true underdogs of Hollywood and they fought their way to the top. They had the drive to make their dreams come true.

7. Top five films to hold significant influence on you personally

The Big Boss, Once Upon A Time In China, Rush Hour, Ong Bak and John Wick.

8. What style of martial arts do you most identify with?

My style is Muay Lao, Wresting, Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu and weapons such as knives, swords and firearms.

9. How would you say you intend to stand out different from the crowd in the world of martial arts movie stars?

I want to show the world my heritage and culture of Muay Lao style. The world have scene Muay Thai, Silat, TKD, Karate and MMA, but they have never seen Muay Lao in action yet.

10. What’s next for Toom Chanda?

Working on my first feature film debut. Might film in Laos my homeland and Thailand.

You can follow Toom Chanda on Facebook and Instagram

Thank you for taking the time to give us a sneak peak. We wish you much success and look forward to seeing more of your work in the near future!

Source for images used in this interview.

For more of my content, find me @BurntEnds88

Twitter | Facebook | Instagram | CinnamonVideo

Subscribe for a bonus sneak peak into the making of Toom Chanda's short film, Man With Crowbar.

Read more...

A blend of martial arts and horror, with a dollop of good old-fashioned British humour, the film dishes out an entertaining romp through tunnels and caves in this low-budget actioner.

Directed by Matthew Routledge (Manipulation, Mersey Cop), Tribal: Get Out Alive provides ample opportunity for him to show off his martial arts experience thanks to his previous collaboration with the female lead, Zara Phythian (Doctor Strange, Transit 17). Written by newcomer Johnny Walker, the low budget film packs a punch with a twist calling on the tropes of the horror genre.

source

Caitlin (Zara Phythian) and Ross (Ross O’Hennessy) are ex-soldiers working for a private eviction firm tasked to secure the Kenning Farm Estate overrun by homeless squatters. Joined by a small team and the film’s villain Richard Kenning (Thomas Dodd), looking for a quick profit as the heir to the property he’s inherited, they soon find themselves trapped in a maze of underground tunnels being hunted by a horde of machete wielding manufactured zombies. Kenning’s father and scientist developed a potion to enhance human abilities but didn’t count on the degenerative defects resulting in feral-like creatures with low intelligence and a hunger for human flesh.

There’s plenty of quips and one liners between the two leads to keep in line with the conventions of British horror and allow them to shine in arguably a vehicle to showcase their talents. And they don’t disappoint, taking their opportunity with both hands. While O'Hennessy is the more well known of the two having a string of acting credits to his name including Game of Thrones, Mission Impossible: Fallout and Hanna, it's Phythian in particular who leads with a commanding performance to set the wheels in motion for her to make the leap into more high-profile productions.

[source](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt10126136/mediaviewer/rm4082278913)

Routledge too impresses with his skills to capture moments of genuine terror along narrow corridors and dark tunnels. The action is handled with skill and efficiency, while the chemistry between the paring of Phythian and O'Hennessy comes across as natural, helped largely by developing their characters as longstanding colleagues from the outset.

While some of the more open framed action in the underground scenes suffer from needing more money to stitch together so as to match the claustrophobic tight shots, it should not detract from what is an entertaining popcorn thrill-ride to entertain the more ardent fans of the genre.

7/10

Tribal: Get Out Alive is available now to rent or buy online

**For access to an** **exclusive interview** **with director, Matt Routledge, sign up to Coil and watch in the subscriber's section.**

Read more...

The advancement in film technology has unlocked the potential of filmmakers the world over.

There have been many technological movements in film to swing the needle towards it as a science. To accentuate it further, the construction of a film can be thought of as a mechanical process in as much as the equipment used to capture footage through a lens to create a print or image that plays frame by frame is designed as though it’s actually a moving piece. In essence, an illusion of reality tricking the mind into thinking it’s ‘live’.

All the moving parts of the camera, the lighting rig and the software in post-production are more examples of evidence to suggest the medium of film has more in common with the likes of WIRED, Stuff or Computeractive than it does with The Art Newspaper, Aesthetica Magazine or The Great Discontent. Perhaps if that’s the case then it would be considered more prestigious as a subject of study inside and outside of the classroom than it is thought of today. Unless you’re a film critic chances are, you’ll see film as a mere form of entertainment to please the masses for a couple of hours before doing something more ‘meaningful’ and ‘academic’. Forgive me for saying, but I sense an elitist attitude from those who turn their noses up at film for thinking of it as a bottom feeding form of intellectual pursuit.

From Disney’s pioneering days of developing the multiplane camera to computer generated imagery used to blur the lines of reality, it’s fair to say that film has undergone a technological transformation over the years. Cinema verité gave prominence to a new form of cinema that allowed us closer to the subject matter with smaller and lighter cameras. The digital age has given rise to new filmmakers able to afford equipment and become social media sensations utilising all the new tech has to offer them at the download of an app.

How else can film be considered anything but a science – one that’s firmly situated around technology?

Infographic created on [Photopea](https://www.photopea.com/)

From the first captured footage screened to the masses in an auditorium to video streaming platforms such as Cinnamon.video placing control into the hands of the creators reaching out to you in your very homes or through your mobile devices, technology has had a profound impact on the industry.

Three Benefits of the Digital Age for the Independent Filmmaker:

1. Affordable Prosumer Hardware Products: the cost of video recording equipment pre-digital was financially inaccessible for amateur filmmakers or hobbyists. Today you can purchase cameras at relatively low costs and achieve the look and feel of cinema with some tweaking in post. The cameras today are lightweight and compact, allowing more freedom for the filmmaker to experiment with style. And with the improvement in smartphone technology, filmmakers have even more choice!

If you were were concerned about the affordability of a helicopter to capture the sprawling city through an aerial shot to establish your narrative's location, then fret no more. You only have to look at how Hollywood are now utilising drone technology to reduce their own costs. Drones are now affordable for the enthusiastic amateur filmmaker and photographer.

2. Non-Linear Editing Software Makes it Easy: analogue editing was cumbersome and time consuming. Since moving to digital, professional editing software packages such as Final Cut Pro and Sony Vegas have been designed for all users to download onto their own home computers.

Special effects are now achievable through affordable packs. Apps such as Action Movie FX, FX Guru and Videorama have revolutionised the home entertainment editing market. Take a look at some of the top app editing products:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PELmOrlZlZw

3. Marketing & Distribution is Now in Your Control: since the advent of the internet, it is no longer a requirement to spend millions of dollars producing print-based campaigns or hiring out advertising space on traditional television broadcast for trailer time. The internet is unregulated and to a large extent 'free'. Video streaming platforms have a wide reach and accept digital file formats.

Imagination is now the only barrier to entry into the film industry. With open source software available to creators, digital technology has transformed the way we consume content.

Header photo by Noom Peerapong on Unsplash

Subscribe to read part 2 – Film as Art – and let me know which side of the bread is buttered for you by checking out the Twitter thread:

https://twitter.com/BurntEnds88/status/1321064890149330944

Read more...

Film Language: Sound

I’m often reflecting on my own practice for ways in which I can improve as a professional.

When I set my students an assessment I expect them to have done the revision beforehand as to give it their all. Only then can my feedback be constructive in a way for them to make the required improvements on the next turn. These assessments are my form of QA (quality assurance) to monitor their progress and understanding.

We are no different as adults and as teachers. We too require QA, not because we can’t be trusted (though in some cases I would argue we feel we’re not), but because we are meant to offer our students our best. And if our best in the classroom isn’t cutting it then we need to do something about it. There are various strategies to improve your own practice with training offered much in the way we deliver the knowledge to our students. We put into practice what we have learned and are assessed on it during a lesson visit. From there we are provided with feedback – verbal and written. This is much in the same way students undergo a process of learning before taking an assessment to which we provide feedback – verbal and written. Written feedback bespoke to their response. And verbal feedback to the whole class to address common errors or misconceptions.

But how often do we turn our noses up at feedback, constructive or not? We don’t like to hear about our failings. We don’t want others to pick our faults. So, is it any wonder why students dread getting their papers back with comments? They don’t want to read what we have to say about their performance. Instead they look at the mark our of 40 or whatever the question total was and ask what grade it is. My response is always the same, look at the feedback – read it and make the improvements. Worse still, is when they say their mark is good enough! I intend not to offer a raw mark in future. There needs to be a change in the culture of education, but cultural change tends to be the hardest to make happen because of how long we have been moulded from it.

When we complete a project or test or task we often marvel at the finished product. As a society we become consumed by the final image. But it's the journey we go through to get to that moment which becomes our true accomplishment. The hunger to want to experience the process repeatedly because of what it led to is what’s going to get you the top grades. Every. Single. Time.

Header photo by Sarah Noltner on Unsplash

Let me know your thoughts on the topic by replying to this thread on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/BurntEnds88/status/1317918027829170180

Read more...

With Halloween just around the corner I thought I’d reflect on a film that fostered my love for the genre.

I was only young when I first watched An American Werewolf in London (Landis, 1981) – I wasn’t in my teens even! It was a Saturday morning – usually we’re watching cartoons together. I say we, as in my three brothers and me. The four of us lined up on the couch with a blanket cutting across us all. It was a good job we had it, as we were about to watch a horror film. I’d say it was the first horror film I remember watching.

I’m a huge classic monster fan so any movie narrative involving lycanthropy is right up my street. Landis was able to capture a mood and tone from the opening sequence to have us on the edge of our seats. The first attack was glorious because we weren’t really given a full-blown shot of the monster. Instead we were treated to extreme close-up shots that transitioned with sharp edits and sounds of flesh being torn that cut deep in terms of our emotional response. We were teased with a shot of the monster’s eyes to close the scene. The threat and terror had been well and truly established.

Then came the other memorable sequence, and one that raised a chuckle, but I’ll come back to that in a moment. You see, one of the tropes of horror is a jump scare. I’m susceptible to those more so than gore. In fact, gore really doesn’t concern me so much as I find it unnecessary on most occasions with the more recent torture porn style horrors of Hostel and Saw. Those films rely on its usage to thrill their fans, but I find that to be lazy filmmaking. Horror for me is not about what you see on screen, but more about what you don’t see and subsequently imagine instead. Those are the images that truly linger in the mind and leave an imprint. Others will disagree I’m sure, but that’s the beauty of film. The subjectivity and debates they generate is truly why the subject lends itself to developing those all-important critical thinking skills.

As horror conventions go, jump scares should never be relied upon or used with frequency because they leave a hollow impression of a film. However, incorporating two or three to meet our expectations is key to maintaining the integrity of the genre. When making Jaws, the tale goes that when Ben Gardner’s head floats into shot to give us our first jump scare in the film, Spielberg felt the audience needed one more to provide balance. Hence why we have one of the most quoted lines in film history from the scene where Brody is shovelling chum into the sea to lure the shark. There was no sound to that scene other than the shark raising its head above sea level. It’s the composition and unexpectant timing that made us all jump and forever repeat, “We’re gonna need a bigger boat.”

source

So that leads me onto the most terrifying moment from my memory of An American Werewolf in London – the dream sequence involving the Nazi zombies breaking into our protagonists’ home and murdering the family. We had that blanket over our eyes, but we really weren’t prepared because it was an open-weave blanket so we saw everything! We screamed out… only to hear laughter coming from upstairs. Well, that was my mother listening out for that moment and she guessed the exact scene at which we experienced our first truly terrifying horror film viewing moment. Whereas the opening sequence was exciting, this was horrifying. It was offset with comedic moments of course, like when his friend, Jack would appear to him to warn him of his impending transformation, making the film delightfully British. There are conventions that make British horror recognisable, one of which is a moment or scene of dry wit and humour proceeding one of horror. This can be exemplified by many Hammer Horror productions of the past to distinguish themselves from our cousins across the pond on the Universal lot.

Any film involving body horror – a character undergoing a physical transformation is one that is roped in by a core theme, isolation. It’s something we can all relate to I’m sure. It’s something that burrows deep into the mind because as a species, we fear it. The sense of abandonment is very much associated with our protagonist as a student taking a gap year to travel with his friend. He ends up alone in a foreign city and separated from his own family thousands of miles away. It’s this distance from his own familiarity that provides an emotional core to the narrative. Genre should only ever be added to a story to supplement the drama. It’s why Kafka’s Metamorphosis is considered a classic and one that many films make cultural reference to, particularly of the horror genre, including this one.

For An American Werewolf in London, the physical metamorphosis David undergoes is stunning in its craftmanship as it is in its ability to create a cinematic moment that reverberates to this day. The diegetic sounds of the cracking of bones and the real-time footage of the monster’s face pushing out to form a snout, captured in glorious close-ups was instrumental in rightfully winning it’s Makeup and Hairstyling team an Academy Award.

Five Must-Watch Horror Films For A Fun-Filled Night Of Terror This Halloween:

Poltergeist (Hooper, 1982)

A family is haunted by an evil poltergeist after they buy a house unbeknown to them was built atop of a sacred Indian burial ground by a shady developer. All together now, “They’re here.”

I remember watching this for the first time with my mum when I was young. It wasn’t until years later when it was premiering on television when I re-watched it only to find there was an additional 30 minutes at the end I hadn’t seen. My mum then revealed how she stopped the tape that first time round because it was getting too scary. I didn’t mind, because I didn’t know any better – I had actually thought the film finished. So, to watch it again, was like experiencing it for the first time.

The Ring (Verbinski, 2002)

A single mother has seven days to stop an evil entity from killing her son after he mistakenly watches a videotape known to haunt its victims.

I saw this twice at the cinema! This first time was with my brother. Yes, you could say I’m a glutton for punishment… or, I was just safeguarding my own protection by taking my friends on the seventh day to absolve me of the curse! I remember watching the film and looking for their reactions knowing what was about to happen at various moments – they shuffled in their seats and squirmed on many occasions. It fascinating watching how others respond to film.

Fright Night (Holland, 1986)

A teenager suspects his neighbour of being a vampire and hires a late-night television actor to help him get back his kidnapped girlfriend from him after no one believes him. As vampire films go this one plays to all the tropes and provides some laughs to ease the nerves.

For two alternatives to the vampire lore then feast your eyes on 30 Days of Night (2007) and The Lost Boys (1987). The former features an Alaskan town besieged by a horde of blood-thirsty vampires at the time when there is no sun for 30 days. There’s impressive imagery almost lifted straight from its graphic novel origins that’s worth watching for alone. The latter is an 80s pop culture masterpiece involving a terrific soundtrack and director, Schumacher on top form.

Trick ‘r Treat (Dougherty, 2007)

Three tales intertwined around a thread on one Halloween night. There’s ghouls and monsters galore in a frightfully funny series reminiscent of the Twilight Zone. It took a while for this one to be given a release in the UK. On finally being given the green light, I snapped it up on DVD, allowing me to watch it with gleeful pleasure once a year.

If it’s a monster mash you’re after then two films in particular strike a chord with me, first, Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein (1948), and The Monster Squad (1987). Both features bring together the classic monsters like no other films have managed. The former is a laugh-riot, and if you’re not familiar with the comedy duo then give them a try. As for the latter, it’s very much a recommendation out of my love for classic monsters. Does wolfman have nards? Watch it to find out!

Psycho (Hitchcock, 1960)

Alfred Hitchcock delivers arguably the first ever slasher film. There is of course that memorable shower scene, but the film truly delivers the shocks because of Hitchcock’s ability to draw on taboo subject matter for the time-period and builds suspense and anxiety through his camerawork. The film follows an unscrupulous woman on the run who turns off at Bates Motel only for it to be her final stop in life.

Hitchcock's signature is very much rooted in German Expressionism. The film style was developed by filmmakers such as F. W. Murnau (Nosferatu and Sunrise) and Fritz Lang (Metropolis) who explored the mindset of an oppressed society in Germany, which began before the First World War. The aesthetics involved distorted sets, optical illusions and low-key lighting. True horror lies within the mind and German Expressionism is an artform that taps into a world of people petrified by the autocratic rule that has them conform. Horror is truly indebted to the pioneering filmmakers who fled Germany to set up camp in Hollywood.

Honourable mention to Vacancy (2007) for harking back to Psycho in a film about a couple who’s relationship is on the rocks before having to stop off for a night at a motel, which is when their real troubles become a living nightmare.

Header photo by Andyone on Unsplash

What horror favourites would you recommend for a Halloween night film fest? Let me know on Twitter by replying to this thread:

https://twitter.com/BurntEnds88/status/1316743875344715776

Read more...

Film Language: editing

There was a definitive divide between the quality of content we were able to see at home and the need to have attended a cinema in search for something new.

For those of you old enough to remember, there were only a few channels to choose from growing up. We were governed by a schedule – a TV Guide to inform us of what day, time, and channel to turn to. Choice was limited and representations were addressing a narrow audience manufactured by an ageing male hierarchy. Some would argue that power is still in play today, but a breeze has since picked up and the winds of change are surely upon us.

CHANGES IN SOCIETY IMPACTING ON OUR SHIFT AWAY FROM CINEMA

The audience of today is different to that of the past. We are for all intent’s purposes mobile – literally and figuratively. At the touch of a button we can access the internet on our phones, and we can do this while sat on the bus on the way into work or school. No longer are we told when to watch. No longer are we told where to watch. No longer are we told how to watch. We choose how we are to do any of these things because technology has made it possible. Content is available for every single minute of the day, unlike back when I was a child when you were greeted with static through the early hours of the morning because there was no broadcast.

We have become a horde of immersive viewers, a polite term for binge watchers, racing to complete a series such is our insatiable appetite to consume new content streamed in the comfort of our own home. The once bane of many viewers, post watershed has become irrelevant, instead bypassing regulation by accessing content on demand over the internet. It’s the freedom to access whatever the content whatever time of day that is so appealing to audiences all over.

Just how much has technology impacted on your viewing experience? Does the screen size matter that you end up viewing long form drama on your mobile device? Does it trump the restriction of having to sit in a fixed place for any length of time to watch your favourite drama? No longer do you need to watch what others are watching in your household, huddled around one television set. We each have our own preferences and due to the convergence of media technologies, we can now enjoy whatever WE want on whatever platform. The largest cinemagoing demographic is the 14-24 age bracket, but their numbers are in the decline – perhaps reflecting the societal changes in technology affecting their ‘free time’ lifestyles.

It’s not just television, the video gaming industry is booming largely due to the converging of technologies, alerting developers to create content that’s accessible across varying devices. Content is downloadable instead of requiring physical copies. I wonder how long it will be before you’re able to pay a premium subscription or ‘bolt on’ for the likes of Netflix or Prime and have access to games on demand in the same way we do of film and television?

Of course, technological advances have had a profound impact on our ability to communicate, but not necessarily always positively. When was the last time you sat together as a family to watch the same programme? Our needs have changed and so too have our lifestyles. We’re too busy to watch at a predetermined time, scheduled to us by broadcasters. Adapting to the changes means we no longer ‘talk’ in the same way we used to. Technology allows us to connect without needing to be there. But is that always a good thing? I miss that part of my childhood – the ability to spend time as a family bonding over the same programme used as a device to find common ground with one another. Dinner table conversations together are few and far between today because what was once a scheduled event has now been replaced by the changing shift patterns in our everyday lives.

APPLYING ACADEMIC THEORY

While the conventions of long form dramas are integral to our engagement with a series, it must not be underestimated how much theory is invested by producers to target us as individuals. No longer are we considered an audience, which is defined as a mass group, instead, audience theory is far more sophisticated than that today.

Stuart Hall is a prominent media theorist who explored representation in programming as a concept designed around stereotypes. In addition, his Reception Theory should be noted here as one that allows us to actively engage with content instead of passively accepting messages from within it. Just like how we understand now that narrative concepts such as structure and binary opposites are used to establish ideologies, Hall proposed that while producers are able to encode these messages, we as an audience have the ability to decode them according to our own beliefs. The theory is broken up into three areas – preferred, negotiated and oppositional. Producers encode messages through semiotics, which we decipher, and on the strength of this, we choose to accept the meaning and subsequent message that comes with it. However, our own personal experiences might not align with those of a producer of a long form drama and as such we reject it by having an oppositional reading to the product. In blunt terms, a drama centred around the concept of corporations seen as the protagonists profiting from slave labour will not go down well with those holding anti-establishment views.

https://cinnamon.video/watch?v=392370693938873364

Semiotics is a language theory situated around the way we interpret signs. The video explores the concept.

When it comes to the autonomy of the audience, David Gauntlett’s Identity theory suggests that media offers us the ability to explore our own identities through different products. In the case of long form dramas, perhaps their success is determined by the diversity in its cast and characters. In the past, character representations were fixed, particularly when looking at gender. Women were marginalised in programming offering two types – the submissive housewife or the sexualised object. There wasn’t much for a female audience to relate to or aspire towards when looking for dramas to suit their needs. Today, dramas feature stronger and tougher female representations in positions of power for a female demographic to latch onto and thus, engage with irrespective of genres such as science fiction or action, which were once the domain of a male audience. You need look no further than Snowpiercer featuring Jennifer Connolly in a prominent role, or House of Cards with Robin Wright taking up position as a President. Identity theory can be likened to a pick ‘n’ mix whereby we seek out the traits of various characters we like and hang our hats on those as a way to relate and hold up a mirror to.

Long form dramas featured on subscription services are diverse in offering a range of representations for a contemporary audience in search of an identity they can best relate to. Perhaps that is why they succeed more so than formulaic dramas that play it safe. With on demand-based platforms generating their income through each sign up per month, they can afford to take risks with their content to address each and every individual for their monthly subscription. Whereas, with commercial based networks, their reliance is to appease advertisers by casting their nets wide with formulaic plotting as to not offend while they fight for market share.

Unfortunately, the concentration of media ownership means a small number of conglomerates control the messages we’re subjected to. Curran and Seaton explore the concept of power in media and they assert that such conglomerates have the overriding say in what representations and messages are featured in the dramas we watch. Merging conglomerates will result in them having more control over what we watch, hear and read, thus, inhibit variety, creativity and stifle individuality. Netflix on the other hand looks to disrupt the establishment generating a substantial income from over 190m subscribers worldwide. they are not formed as a conglomerate, instead, they operate online, free from regulation.

While Hall and Gauntlett suppose the audience is the one in control over the interpretation of these messages, Curan and Seaton suggest otherwise. Now that conglomerates are competing with Netflix for online space, who is to argue?

Statistics show the most popular platform for young adults is SVOD further implying the disruption to the traditional methods of film consumption.

In conclusion, there’s a war emerging on the new big screen – inside our homes – with players large and even larger vying for our attention. Netflix’s spend on original content is a staggering $17b per year in 2020, shaking a defiant fist against the world order. However, with the emergence of Disney+ and Apple TV+ as members of conglomerates, they are looking for a back door in to reassert their dominance unregulated and unashamedly free to dominate our every thought.

With more content lined up the future’s bright for binge watchers. The future’s on demand!

If you missed it, click here for Part 1 of this series exploring the contributing factors to the success of Long form Television Dramas.

What are your thoughts on how technology has influenced the way we access content – is cinema on its last legs? Let me know on Twitter by replying in the thread.

https://twitter.com/BurntEnds88/status/1312710999141765120

Header image by Glen Carstens-Peters

Ever since and took to the small screen, Long Form television Drama has gone from strength to strength. But what is it about them that lures us in, has us binge watch and hunger for more?

Today, we are truly spoilt for choice with various streaming platforms such as Netflix, Amazon Prime and Disney+ vying for our money and our time. With Apple TV+ snapping up the talent of Spielberg to revive his anthology series, Amazing Stories, and their attempt to snare JJ Abrams with a $500m deal shows just how serious television has become over the years. Is it any wonder why there’s been a lot of talk about the declining cinema admissions? Make no mistake, COVID-19 is not solely to blame for this. Cinema admissions have had a rough time of late, stagnating over the last 20 years, but is still a far cry from the all-time high post-war. With the recent news of Cineworld closing its doors after further delays to releases, the current pandemic could be the catalyst for studios to make changes on how they distribute content in the future.

Tenet struggled to get audiences back into the cinema, though it did fare a great deal better than Disney’s attempt to fleece audiences with Mulan, insisting you not only sign up to their platform, but then pay a premium to watch it also. Now they’re charging another $30 for those without a subscription much to the dismay of those that signed up initially to watch it a few weeks back. If you’re really eager to watch a film whose 'family friendly' company filmed next to a concentration camp, then you could wait to watch it for free on their platform on December 4th.

With both of these films costing their studios north of $200m each, could this signal the end of tentpole budget sized blockbusters? Disney release on average 12 ‘pre-sold’ films per year, all of which have sizeable budgets – if they’re unable to collect on their ROI then surely something has to give.

Examples of long form dramas are Big Little lies, Stranger Things, Deutschland 83, Better Call Saul and Snowpiercer. Their conventions involve a series of 8 to 10 episodes with each lasting roughly 45 minutes. A main narrative thread runs through each episode before concluding at the end of the series. Each episode will end on a cliff-hanger of sorts to leave the audience wanting more. Whereas typical dramas have standalone stories and can run for 24 episodes a series – think NCIS, Bull and my favourite, Quantum Leap.

What makes a great long form drama? The way a story is told can affect our enjoyment and experience of the drama – who we see and what’s said of various groups can provide certain messages and values, which are then reflected in our own behaviour.

NARRATIVE

The structure within long form dramas tend to be complex, involving multiple narrative strands and storylines told at the same time. This is important because each strand will have its own characters, and with more characters there’s an increased chance someone is able to relate as per Gauntlett’s Identity theory (read part 2).

There are two structures we’re familiar with – linear and fragmented narratives. Firstly, linear narratives have clear beginning, middle and end. They follow a chronological timeframe where each action leads on to another until its conclusion. The main benefit of a linear story is it’s easier to follow. However, this could be to the dramas detriment in that it can become predictable and plodding in its execution. These structures tend to appeal to a more mainstream audience whereby a producer wants to engage as wide a group as possible. As touched upon, the downfall of such programming is that it can become formulaic. These dramas will rely more so on characterisation and genre to help it to standout from others.

A fragmented narrative on the other hand is one where its narratives are disjointed and don’t necessarily follow a chronological order. Instead, flitting back and forth in the form of flashbacks and flashforwards. It’s a technique that can help tell of parallel storylines within the same episode. These types of structures help to engage and challenge the audience to be more active, affording them opportunities to piece together the story as it unfolds much like a puzzle. These structures help writers to flesh out and develop characters, piecing together plot points in a disrupted order to replicate how our own mind works.

Consider your favourite long form drama, how does the structure help you to engage more so with it? Does the narrative unfold in chronological order or is it fragmented?

When considering the type of narrative there are two kinds – restricted and omnipresent. The former explores how we view the story through the mind of just one character. We discover new things as and when the protagonist does and are not privy to details they are not familiar with until things are revealed to them. A restricted narrative works wonderfully for crime related dramas and mysteries, luring us into the story through the investigator as they navigate their way through a labyrinth of deceit before uncovering truth and often surprise. An issue with this could be that slow-burning stories could lose its audience.

An omnipresent narrative is an all-seeing view of the world explored through multiple characters, helping the audience to see the story through several contexts. These narratives appeal to audiences who want to stay one step ahead of the characters on display as though we are the main focal point. We feel as though we are being treated and as such experience a sense of satisfaction. In addition, tension is accentuated when we are privy to information our protagonists are not, and so when action leads to another, we are on edge knowing a collision is about to occur.

With each episode of long form dramas, it’s important to feature open endings. In film, open endings can be frustrating because you don’t know if there will be a sequel to offer us closure. Long form dramas on the other hand invite the audience to continue watching. Open endings indicate a continuation to the story and the audience will stay the course in search of gratification to find out the resolution. Therefore, cliff-hangers at the end of each episode is a common feature of the format.

There are various academic ideas on narrative that help writers to explore messages for audiences to take in. Todorov focused on structures which featured stories told in chronological order. The resolutions to these stories would often demonstrate arcs whereby its ending would involve a better world than they way the narrative began. It’s the messages within these endings that audiences are aligned with as a direct result of its chosen structure.

https://cinnamon.video/watch?v=397487165367387265

Example used in the video can be applied to LFTD

Another theorist, Strauss argued that stories are structured around oppositions. When applying his theory, the audience is able to better understand the ideologies of the producer based on conflict between characters driven by themes such as good and evil.

https://cinnamon.video/watch?v=387299598646904126

Example used in the video can be applied to LFTD

GENRE

One of the key ideas about genre is that it is formed based on the repetition of codes and conventions in media products. As children we grow up to form an understanding of repeated motifs associated with genre. While not fixed, these conventions evolve over time and can borrow from one another to form hybrids.

Long form dramas are no exception in needing to meet the expectations of audiences. We like to anticipate the familiar aspects of genre or else our interest is lost. However, what is clear is the necessity to update the conventions to sustain the dramas’ appeal to audiences. There is a fine balance between the familiar and the different, as coined by Steve Neale, a theorist of genre. For the economy of the genre to survive, he suggests that difference is essential. This can be made up of several factors including hybridity. For example, Stranger Things looks to borrow elements from the science fiction and horror genre, referring to many films of the 1980s before it. The cultural references play on the nostalgia, attracting an additional audience to the series. It’s not a direct copy, but instead an adaptation to meet the needs of a new generation. This leads to the importance of addressing the attitudes and values of a modern-day audience of the time in which the drama is produced. Without appealing to the sensibilities of today’s generation, it is unlikely for the drama to exist. Therefore, social context in this instance is key – whether you’re addressing post 9-11 themes such as Showtime’s Homeland did with great success, or attempting to address the strong feminist movement of today much in the way HBO’s Big Little Lies or Sharp Objects did with aplomb, long form dramas must look for ways in which they can identify with their audiences by offering them a fresh take on a recognisable genre.

STAR POWER and HIGH PRODUCTION VALUES

Let’s go back and take a look at some of those long form dramas already mentioned – Big Little Lies, Sharp Objects and Homeland. Consider the cast within each of those titles. Recognise the stars? A key feature of long form dramas is its cast. Nicole Kidman, Reece Witherspoon and Meryl Streep of Big Little Lies indicates the importance of having recognisable names attached to each project.

Homeland’s Claire Danes, Mandy Patinkin and Damian Lewis pack a punch just as much as the high-profile and 6 times Oscar nominated Amy Adams does in Sharp Objects.

Go through the titles of you favourite long form dramas and consider the names attached to them. How many of them do you recognise? Do a quick search on the films they have appeared in and you’ll find a strength in long form dramas is being able to attract high-profile names to projects. Of course, this comes at a cost, but will be considered worth investing in. To truly appreciate this, the production values for long form dramas are lavish and on some occasions on par with some big budgeted films released in cinemas.

Stranger Things episodes cost anywhere between $8m and $10m – with 8 episodes each, potentially costing each series $80m to produce. And that’s cheap! Compare that to Game of Thrones costing in the region of $15m per episode and soon you’ll see that high production values are important to audiences to ensure they meet the demands of their respective fans. As an audience we are getting the quality of a cinematic production in the comfort of our own home. Disney Plus ratchets up the stakes with production budgets in excess of $150m and up to $200m for each of their series, with each episode of their slate featuring the likes of Falcon and the Winter Soldier, WandaVision and Hawkeye costing somewhere in the region of $25m per episode.

In conclusion, we enjoy spending time with these characters and the worlds they inhabit. We get to spend 8 hrs potentially, and see their journey unfold in a more realistic way, as each layer peels away to reveal more about them without the need to rush to get to the end. Often, characters are complex in their moral code, not governed by stereotypical conflicts. They reflect our selves to identify and relate with.

Click here for Part 2 of the series exploring the success of SVoD and Long Form Television Dramas.

What are you favourite Long Form television Dramas? Let me know on Twitter by replying in the thread.

https://twitter.com/BurntEnds88/status/1312709751134920709

Header image by Glenn Carstens-Peters

Film language: cinematography