Technological Changes Essay

Grace Watson

5 June 2020

Media Studies

Technological Changes Essay

•

Over time, technology has developed and advanced to a point where nowadays audiences can consume media more easily, hassle-freely, from the comfort of their own homes with every series or movie they could ever dream of watching only a very click of a button away. The constant evolving of technology has caused significant changes in the actual film-making process in all levels of production, whether it be pre-production, production itself, post-production, distribution, marketing or promotion. These changes have had a significant effect on both the audiences of the films and the film industry as a whole.

For over 100 years, the sole way to make a film was using film. The production company would film the shots, send the shots to a printing laboratory, wait a day (called a ‘daily’) and then fetch the film. Once they fetched the film, they couldn’t change what had been shot. For some directors, this process was painful and frustrating because it consisted of enormous, costly systems and unchangeable mistakes. For others, film felt “more tangible”, like “magic”, and they enjoyed the feeling of “did we get anything today?” (because, of course, they couldn’t see what they had filmed straight after filming) in which the suspense excited them. 

A classic example of how technology has changed the film industry, is the transition from using film cameras to using digital cameras to capture scenes. Editing transitioned from “cutting and pasting pieces of film”, to “pressing all the buttons”. According to a source, without technology, “it would be nearly impossible for Hollywood to produce the volume of films that it does.” Technology drives “entire segments of film now, enabling movies that were not possible before.” Directors worldwide were initially quite scared of the whole idea of editing on digital, “they thought (that) that’s not editing,” and worried that if they accidentally pressed the wrong button, everything would be ruined. For them, they felt as though editing was rather supposed to be an art form of “manipulating images”, and that simply clicking a button seemed too easy and in-genuine. However, film is impossible to reuse, highly expensive and if shots are not successful, “every” resource used that day is WASTED. These disadvantages “dwarf the authenticity that the film maker is going for,” meaning that the desired vintage feel becomes almost pointless because getting there was way too costly and difficult to obtain. In post-production, the cinematographers must then develop the film which, too, is a costly process. Directors such as George Lucas realised that although the quality on film was fabulous, digital allowed them “to do what” they “couldn’t have done” before. For film makers, the advancement of technology and decision to go digital meant “forgoing the large canisters of film”, meaning less expenses and also less waste. According to Charles Matthau, technology’s “greatest impact is... felt in new cameras that allow cinematographers to shoot in a higher definition.” George Lucas was the first director to film using a digital camera (where he filmed the movie 'Young Sherlock Holmes'). After filming with the digital camera, he instantly claimed that he wound never shoot with film again. George Lucas began to explain that the highest point of film had been reached, and that digital was filled with so much more to discover, encouraging other filmmakers to join him in the using of digital technology. And with all of that, the use of digital began to rise.

“As well as enjoying the higher definition made available by digital cameras, many directors also enjoy the ability “to be able to review” their “work as it’s produced” so that they know “what the final product might look like;” an example of this being director Robert Rodriguez who is famous for getting his shooting done “rather quickly” and then watching it to make sure he got some great shots, according to a source. Completing shooting at a great speed, having less finance needed for purchasing large film cameras and editing footage more easily and quickly digitally are all possible thanks to the change caused by technology.

Adding special effects to a film in editing is a painstaking process that editors no longer go through “thanks” to technology and digital. With digital, the “end result is a piece of film that looks cleaner, with effects that blend seamlessly with the movie.”

Similarly, in the actual shooting/filming process, more is done in less time in the sense that “shooting digitally” makes it easy to “shoot multiple takes, and to get multiple angles more economically.” According to Charles Matthau, coupled “with the new steady cam equipment that film has taken liking to, the end result is a more intimate and desired shot,” where the audience “feels present in the moment because the lens” they are “allowed to look through feels authentic” rather than “vintage”. 

Directors from the Side by Side documentary explain that they actually benefit from the constant debate regarding whether film is dead or not and the competition “to improve digital cameras”. These new digital cameras are lighter and more comfortable to set up, carry and pack away as opposed to the large and bulky film cameras. Many directors in the ‘Side By Side’ documentary on YouTube explain how they now feel able to “make movies in a small, private way,” feeling less intimated by a small and light digital camera than what they would’ve felt with a massive, bulky and complicated film camera. Similarly, three-dimensional technologies made available by digital and technology allow the editing team to capture the most “exquisite images”, such as characters, and place them into the scene even when they aren’t really there. For example, 3D was used in ‘Fast & Furious’ to superimpose Paul Walker’s image onto his brother’s body soon after he passed away. Without this ability, the producers of the film would sit with a major issue in terms of continuity and verisimilitude between films - without it audiences may have questioned what had happened to Walker’s character in the film, where he was, etc. Thanks to technology, algorithmic videos can now be added to shots in the editing process as well to further enhance the film and captivate the audiences. An example of where this was used is in the film ‘We Own The Night’ where the pouring rain was actually added completely in post-production. A few years ago this would never have been possible, therefore the scene may have been far less captivating and interesting for the viewer.

Over time, there has also been an increase in the number of platforms available for audiences to consume the media. This increase has been thanks to the development of technology. Platforms available now include YouTube, Netflix, Disney Plus, Neon, DVD Stores, the news, linear television etc... there are so many options. Where before audiences were UNIFIED, they are now fragmented, consuming the media from all different platforms with endless options available for them to watch. Not only has the number of platforms increased, but the number of visitors to cinemas has actually decreased where audiences now claim that they prefer watching movies from the comfort of their own “home”, where they can chose exactly what they want to drink and don’t have to stand in long “queues” before enjoying the movie. Directors realise that the cinemas are no longer as special anymore and that rather they have become “just another thing”, one director even explaining how he’ll never understand “why people want to watch movies on their computers.” Although directors such as Keanu Reeves do not understand this way of consuming the media, and believe that in that way “you won’t be able to feel it”, the audiences simply seem to prefer it that way, reverting to SVOD services such as Neon which’s subscriber growth went “BOOM!” according to a source. Slowly but surely, many of them are becoming aware of the fact that “digital projection has come a long way,” and that “the more people use it, then better it gets” (George Lucas).

Thanks to Web 2.0, audiences are now active consumers rather than passive consumers. Once consuming the media, they post reviews, comments, likes, dislikes, they spread the word (whether it be positive or negative), and because of all of the above, film makers have to think very carefully about where and how they actually release their films in order for them to be successful. In this sense, audiences are actually “changing the way films are being made.” An example includes BananaMana Films’ release of ‘Perfect Girl’, a digital series on Netflix which maintained a relatively low $1000 budget and yet reached such high successes that it is still getting distribution deals today. This film reached a “niche audience which many in the industry had not thought possible,” proving that finding a niche market and targeting a specific audience has become vitally important for a films success.

Social media allows “filmmakers to find an audience globally and grow it.” More and more, filmmakers are posting trailers and snippets from their films onto platforms such as YouTube to build up buzz and hype - excitement and anticipation - within the audiences for it, opening “an avenue for great audience involvement”. YouTube users now almost advertise the films for the companies by simply liking the post, “helping others to find new and interesting content without spending too much time digging for it.” Where before films would have to put an advert in the newspaper or TRY find a way to advertise their films successfully, technology and the use of platforms such as YouTube have simplified this process of promoting. Advertising and marketing through large blow-up billboards, online adverts on apps such as Instagram and Facebook etc allow companies to spread their awareness and gain popularity more easily, and the rise of technology has also meant that even the actual filmmakers are able to grow and rise within the filming industry. Jermaine Clement and Taika Waititi, for example, were normal, young NZ directors who are now famous in the USA, with Clement taking on the role as being the crab voice on ‘Moana’, a Hollywood blockbuster which reached $643.3 million on Box Office. Because of technology, the two directors were able to releasr their film ‘What We Do in the Shadows’ internationally in the FIRST place, which then enabled them to grow personally in their own roles, as well as their film reached GREAT heights, receiving ...likes on Facebook despite its being an Indie film. Basically in a nut-shell, technology creates opportunities for growth and development for both the films and those that make the films.

Despite all of its great advantages and advancements, technology has also brought about increased pressure in terms of competition. Films are now, more and more, being sent worldwide (even INDIE films) to audiences all over the globe. This means that films are now competing with each other to receive the audience views. The use of technology can be used to increase awareness of their film, however because Web 2.0 has leveled the playing field, film makers must be wise and entrepreneurial in how they go about their promoting of their film.

According to Charles Matthau, “digital promises an exciting new world of distribution.” During the distribution stages, simultaneous releases (where film makers release their films in cinemas and online streaming services (SVODs) such as Netflix simultaneously) are now becoming more common. With the rise in technology, companies seem more willing to distribute their films online, and therefore the rights to these films can be dealt with digitally - this means with quick communication internationally. Additionally, technology has made possible crowd-funding where films are able to set up funds and websites online for people to donate. The money donated is used to fund the film. Most people have cell-phones, their bank accounts connected to their phones, and so therefore they can easily pay and contribute to these funds if they would like too. ‘What We Do in the Shadows’, an NZ indie film, is an example of a film which was crowd-funded, and in this case, the directors easily met their production costs of $1.6 million thanks to all the audience donations.

The rise of large conglomerate companies which own many subsidiaries dominate the film industry in Hollywood. Through both vertical and horizontal integration, they saturate the media with adverts and information about their films. An example of vertical integration is Disney’s purchasing of Fox, another production company, for $2.9 billion, and an example of horizontal integration is Disney's owning and running of Disneyland and 'Star Wars Land'. Both of these forms of integration enable Disney to spread it's name far and wide, as well as promote itself through saturating the market, filling every area of the media. The conglomerates' dominating of the market also increases competition and makes it more difficult for smaller Indie and NZ films to prosper. This is why technology has been such a massive advantage to these films. With the rise in technology, production companies of all levels are able to INCREASE the quality of their film, they can film in rain with water proof cameras and can edit more easily.. there is no need to cut and paste film as discussed above. The playing field has been leveled and now, more than ever, the advantage of the large conglomerates no longer means no hope for Indie films.

Where before reels of film were stored in large warehouses for up to seventy years, the use of digital now means that the footage is not always exceptionally well preserved. It may even end up being lost. Where for some directors this is a worry, for others it’s a case of what’s “important to human beings" will be preserved as best as possible, and what is lost... is just “part of life”.

With all of the above said, it is clear that it is not the equipment used, but rather the actual story and how it is told that's most important. If technology “is used just to show off, then audiences won’t be impressed.” No matter what changes in the process, whether it be the equipment used to film, the distribution process, the promoting and marketing campaigns etc... whatever it is that changes, that is not the most important thing.

Digital development has somewhat “leveled the playing field”, and now anybody can make their own movie, “everybody’s able to do whatever they wanna do”. Despite the 'leveling', producing an excellent film is 100% a gift and talent. “Everybody and his little brother has a pencil, but how many great stories are on that piece of paper?” When the filmmakers are doing something they love, filming something they are passionate about, a great story.... then, what they use to film actually does not matter!

2455 words