Was 'A Taste of Honey' a typical film of the British New Wave?

The British New Wave was the name adopted by a filmmaking trend in Britain between 1959 - 1963. Hill (1986, p.5) states that 'There can be little doubt that the key to understanding Britain in the 1950s resides on the idea of "affluence" of a nation moving inexorably forward from post war austerity'. The British New Wave shares many stylistic characteristics with the French New Wave; usually being shot in black-and-white with a pseudo-documentary style. Also being shot with the use of real locations and no extras, to capture life as it happens.

1950s British New Wave films finally gave the working-class a voice and celebrated their common identity. Previously the lower classes had been depicted on film as comic characters or as a nondescript and ancillary group. Now their daily lives were considered relevant enough to be the very premise of a story and they were portrayed as individuals with personalities, opinions and emotions. The nature of these films, which concerned the everyday events of ordinary people, earned them the tag of kitchen sink dramas. Unmissable available classics from the period include the brilliantly authentic and acutely observed 'This Sporting Life' and the timelessly poignant 'A Taste of Honey'.

The impact of the 50s/60s kitchen sink dramas on the British filmmaking industry was enormous. 

A Taste of Honey (Richardson, 1961) is the story of a young girl who falls pregnant by a black soldier, befriends a young homosexual and gradually develops into a woman. It is one of few films out of the movement whose main character is a young woman. 'A Taste of Honey remains an outstanding example of the British New Wave, shot by its star cinematographer Walter Lassally' (BFI).

A common theme found in New Wave films was that they were all set in under explored areas of England, such as the industrial Midlands and the North West. Nowadays, this does not seem like such a radical idea, however, back then a majority of films were set in London of in a studio. A Taste of Honey, along with other films were shot on real locations so they could capture real life and give the audience the most accurate sense of realism possible. The Blackpool amusments sequence in A Taste of Honey shows 'emphasis on degrading the spectacle, similar to Lindsay Anderson's O Dreamland.' (1986, p. 153) 

British New Wave cinema did not just focus on the characters and their interests, but also the visuals and aesthetics. 'The shots of Jo by the canal in A Taste of Honey reveal not so much an interest in their characters as their subordination to aesthetics, their visually pleasing positioning as "figures in a landscape"'. (1986, p.134)

'A Taste of Honey is the real thing' (1986, p.208) It is clear to see that many agree with the statement of A Taste of Honey being a typical film of the British New Wave with it's stylistic characteristics of black-and-white shot and a pseudo documentary style. Also due to it's use of real, unexplored locations gives it a more realistic feel than those New Wave films shot in a studio. It has been said that the key to understanding Britain at the time of the New Wave was its idea of "affluence", however in New Wave cinema, the protagonists were very much from a working class background and the New Wave films finally gave the working-class a voice and celebrated their common identity and their daily lives were considered relevant enough to be the very premise of a story. The British New Wave created a huge impact on the Film Industry with their stories of everyday people and ultimately Tony Richardson's A Taste of Honey is 'poetic, full of hard, glowing realism' (1986, p.208) which was the typical focus of The British New Wave.

Report - Superheroes, Politics and Terrorism

This essay will be focusing on the influence that the aftermath of the September 11^th attacks has had on superhero movies. As well as looking at the possible affects it has had, there will be focuses on discovering whether of not the genre has become more politically and socially accurate in the 21^st century, and it will also explore the possible changes in how the comic book genre is perceived.

When viewing potential sources that could be used to support and give evidence, the three that stood out as useful in both contexts are the three Batman films directed by Christopher Nolan; Batman Begins (2005), The Dark Knight (2008), The Dark Knight Rises (2012). This trilogy has been chosen because it offers effective comparisons of the Nolan films of post 9/11 to those made pre 21^st century. Additionally, there are four key topics in the films that can be concentrated on; setting, which looks at how the directors perception of Gotham City has changed. Characters, which focuses on how the main protagonist has developed and how the villains are influenced by the idea of terror. Marketing, which looks at how the films posters have changed the way audiences perceive them and the films themselves. Finally, film analysis, which pinpoints how the films are presented and how audiences’ perceptions have changed.

In Christopher Nolan’s Batman movies, Gotham City is seen to be much more classical and realistic in comparison to he impression of Gotham given in Tim Burton’s Batman (1989). This is because Nolan used real locations for the films instead of a studio set, which was the path Tim Burton followed. Burton also used a gothic painting to set the scene in his movie, which gave the impression of a traditional, gothic style, where as Nolan used a landscape shot of Chicago to set the scene in Batman Begins (2005). He did not just use Chicago, as he also used elements of New York and Tokyo for the elevated freeways and monorails. Hassler-Forest (2012, p.141) states that ‘The Dark Knight (2008) use of real locations… connects the films familiar superhero paradigm to a different form of visual realism’ which suggests that Nolan has really taken into consideration how society developed and he has attempted to avoid adding nostalgia and instead he is ‘…drawing on images and themes associated with 9/11 and its aftermath’ (p.87) Moreover, the use of real locations and drawing on such themes creates an environment that seems realistic, threatening and constantly plagued by civil unrest and terror.

The main protagonist in the trilogy is of course, that of Batman/Bruce Wayne. Since the 1960s, this character has transformed from a spandex wearing comic book hero to a heavy armoured hero. This transformation from man to machine does give the suggestion that a hero surrounded by weapons is a metaphor for a super power, USA, at war. However, Di Paolo (2011 p.56-57) states ‘the restraint with which Batman uses his weapons of war is striking, giving the suggestion that one day America might be able to do the same’. By this he is implying that the protagonist is not a metaphor of war, but that of a peacekeeper who is looking to protect, not fight.

In Batman Begins (2005), the villain placed as opposition to our protagonist is Ra’s al Ghul, noted to be Batman’s first arch nemesis. C, Collins (“30 Superhero Movies You Didn’t Realise Were Political”, 2013) proposes that the character of al Ghul has ‘an apocalyptic aim, supposedly similar to organisations such as Al Qaeda… and he echoes extremist views that western society has become corrupted.’ Di Paolo (2011, p.53) also views the character in a parallel way to Collins and he states that ‘Nolan chose to muddy the ethnic background of al Ghul to underscore potential similarities between Muslim and Christian fundamentalists.’

In The Dark Knight (2008) Heath Ledger gives an Academy Award winning performance as The Joker. Christopher Nolan has based his interpretation of The Joker on the foundations of torment, as well as terror. Every time torture is employed in the film, it fails, howbeit there are a number of times where The Joker looks to antagonise Batman into killing him. He does this not to just prove the protagonist is a hypocrite, but to also end his own torment. In The Dark Knight, The Joker himself says ‘Terrorism works only when we let it make monsters of us’, this clearly reiterates that his own torment and insanity has driven him to become a terrorist.

‘There is a key link between themes in The Dark Knight Rises (2012) and Batman Begins (2005)… that being once again a villain is introduced to terrorise Gotham, because Gotham is a metaphor for USA’. C, Collins (“30 Superhero Movies You Didn’t Realise Were Political”, 2013). The Villain introduced in The Dark Knight Rises (2012) is Bane, who is used by Christopher Nolan as a representation of class war. A key scene from the film is the attack on Wall Street, which gives the interpretation of how the American banking system is failing. In conjunction with that particular scene, the football stadium explosion scene is also key because it shows Bane as not just an enemy of Gotham City, but instead an enemy who looks to terrorise the whole country.

The posters used in marketing the films are key in showing audiences what to expect from a film. In the poster for Christopher Nolan’s trilogy, different elements have been used to describe and explain the movies. Firstly, the costume used in the posters is very dark in tone, which gives emphasis towards both physical and emotional characteristics of the protagonist. They emphasize the mysterious emotion of Batman and the muscular outline of his suit gives the suggestion of strength and superiority. Furthermore, the overall setting of the poster is very dark in tone and is based on destruction. The falling buildings in the background are used as a metaphor for breakdowns in society and attitudes. Also, the use of only one character, the protagonist proposes that he is a lone ranger fighting against a crumbling society.

Throughout the Nolan trilogy there is a recurring them of torment and struggle to stop the threat of terrorism. In Batman Begins (2005) the protagonist is tormented by his desire to rebuild Gotham City, in The Dark Knight (2008) he is tormented by the villain and the wrong choices that he makes and finally in The Dark Knight Rises (2012) he is tormented by the biggest terror threat he has faced and his struggle to eradicate the villain. It is quite clear that Nolan has attempted to show the protagonist as a character that the audience can easily sympathise with and relate to, as Di Paolo (2011, p.51) states ‘… obviously rooted firmly in the present and clearly reflects contemporary anxieties about the destruction of the World Trade Centre and the “war on terror”.’

In conclusion, the aftermath of the September 11^th attacks have caused innovations into how superhero films are made. As quoted by Johnson (2012, p.188) ‘Many stories from the first decade of the 21^st century mirrored the fear and isolation that flourished in American society’. Johnson’s statement gives the injunction that many superhero movies have been influenced by social events. He also goes on to say that ‘Superheroes have become a product of society… that present a mirror for all Americans to view themselves as heroes’ (p.188)

Audience perception has also transformed, Hassler-Forest (2012, p.87) states ‘The most popular post 9/11 superhero movies have tended to add psychological depth to their protagonists’. The addition of this psychological depth has bolstered the genre to become more accessible to different audiences. Hassler-Forest finally states that ‘The September 11^th attacks are metaphorically re-staged in superhero movies…’ (p.99) Which gives the unclouded perception that the comic book genre has become far more realistic and accurate in comparison to the more fantasy based superhero movies created pre 21^st century.

Star Wars Fans & LEGO Collecting

Audiences are no longer seen as passive as fans that are engaged in a dialogue have helped replace the once common notion of the mass audience with that of the active audience. As John Fiske noted in 1992, fans are now giving more subversive and oppositional readings of media texts. Now fandom is very much a participatory culture, fans of different media texts, whether it be films, comic books, video games, music or sports have been resisting the dominant ideologies of their chosen texts and recycling elements of them to create their own, new material.

What Henry Jenkins is attempting to state in his definition is that a fan culture is where fans and amateurs create new and recycled texts and media that draw much of their content from mass-produced and mass consumed media. The text and media produced by fans are then sold and made available to fans in an unrecorded economy that is more often than not filled with fans of the same or similar texts and those of a niche audience. Now there are some pros and cons to Jenkins’ definition, if the fan community in question was based around a text that was part of the mass culture, then it can clearly be argued that they would draw their content from commercial culture. LEGO, for example, is a prime example of a community that draws much of its content from commercial culture and also makes their produce available through an underground economy. It can, and should be argued that Jenkins’ definition ignores fan practices such as fan fiction and cosplay, that only draws its content from the source material, not commercial culture. Also, the majority of fan practices, including fan fiction and cosplay don’t produce texts for mass culture, but produces new, diverse texts for those of a niche audience.

Fans find their identities wrapped up with the pleasures connected popular culture. Fans therefore inhibit social roles marked out as fandom, and fandom can therefore be seen as a form of cultural creativity. The work of fandom includes the way it can ‘heighten our sense of excitement, prompt our self-reflexivity, encourage us to discuss shared values and ethics, and supply us with a significant source of meaning that extends into our daily lives (Duffett, 2013, p.18). In his 2002 text Fan Cultures, Hills claims that practices of fandom are not too dissimilar to academic practices. He notes that fans, like academics create a sense of imagined subjectivity around a particular text or subject, with fans also both consuming and critiquing media texts, in similar ways to academics. Unlike Jenkins, Hills’ definition of fan culture does not omit the social and political issues regarding fandom and he argues that not all fan cultures produce texts for underground economies. Hills suggests that fans create and critique texts as a form of self-reflexivity and claims that such ‘mutual marginalisation’ between fans and academia ‘would suggest that fandom and academia are co-produced as exclusive social and cultural positions’. (2002, p.19)

In his 2005 text, Sandvoss states that fan culture is a form of self-reflexivity and completely disregards Jenkins’ definition of fan culture being dependent on fan texts being made for an underground economy. He also claims that the relationships between fans and objects of fandom are ‘based on self-reflective reading and narcissism’ (2005, p.121). Now as the majority of film practices; fan fiction, cosplay, fan film are often regarded as an extension of the self, rather that something produced for an audience, a fans chosen media text gives them the ability to extend themselves past everyday surroundings. It also enables fans to project an image of oneself within a different medium, not for profit, production or consumption, just simply for self-reflexivity.

In his text Cult Collectors (2014), Geraghty gives both acknowledgement and supporting evidence to Henry Jenkins’ definition of fan culture. He suggests that fan practices aside from fan fiction and cosplay, for example, collecting, is a fan practice that very much draws from commercial culture. Collecting action figures and LEGO are just two examples that represent an underground economy, which gives new meanings to fan texts and media. Geraghty also suggests that fans are personalised by commercial culture and gives examples through Star Wars fandom.

‘The LEGO Brick is a cultural object with its own history’ declares Lars Konzack in LEGO Studies (2014, p.1).  LEGO is a line of plastic construction toys that have been manufactured since 1949. Since then, a global LEGO subculture has developed. Supporting movies, games, competitions, and six Legoland amusement parks have been developed under the brand. As of July 2015, 600 billion Lego parts had been produced.

In February 2015, Lego replaced Ferrari as Brand Finance's "world's most powerful brand". Since the 1950s, the Lego Group has released thousands of sets with a variety of themes and has licensed numerous cartoon, video game and film franchises. Although some of the licensed themes, LEGO Star Wars for example had highly successful sales (making up 10 out of the 20 most expensive sets), LEGO has expressed a desire to rely upon their own themes, and over the past 15 years investors in LEGO have secured a better return buying LEGO sets than from the stock market, gold or bank accounts.

LEGO isn’t just transmedial, it is also ‘transfranchisal’ (Wolf, 2014, p.xxiii) which is where many different characters from different franchises come together in one text. It is transmedia in both its themes and its representation. LEGO’s popularity with fans is demonstrated by its wide spread representation and usage in many forms of fan and popular culture, including books, films, art, clothing and video games. The LEGO group aim to intrigue their mass culture into becoming creative for the self, rather than for a secondary audience or economy, by aiming for their users to generate ideas and artifacts that combine existing themes, to expand an understanding.

As Susan Pearce wrote in 1995, there are three approaches to collecting. Souvenir collecting, which creates a romanticized life history for each object, these objects being used as an autobiography for the collector. Fetish collecting, where the object dominates and collectors gather as much as possible to create a sense of self and systematic collecting, which works on a completest method, where having the complete set is the aim and that achieves a full understanding of the fan text. As Geraghty states, collecting ‘represents a new form of “cultural capital” as fans collect in order to possess and gain special access to the movies and texts, making claims of ownership’ (2014, p.8). Collecting is ultimately based on a hierarchal system of whoever has the most collectibles, or the ‘ultimate collectors’ items and who has the most pristine collection.

Collectors can also be a part of what Jeremy Beckett coins ‘Peter Pan Syndrome’, where they attempt to recapture their youth through collecting toys from their childhoods to gain a sense of appropriation, cultural relevance and resistance to normality. Statistics show that the majority of Star Wars LEGO collectors are in there 30s and 40s, and even have their own name ‘Adult Fans of LEGO’. Geraghty supports the idea of collecting for memory by stating those who collect the merchandise today do so because the act of collecting, playing, and recapturing one’s youth is bound up in the modern desire to define oneself through symbolic possessions rather than through shared national beliefs’ (2006, p.220). Collecting has become a fan community in itself through its vast popularity and its secondary economy of underground buying and selling.

Star Wars has ‘morphed into something much more tangible, something much more real’ (Elovaara, 2013, p.8). It has blossomed into a phenomenon that exerts influence over fans in their daily lives and dominates pop culture, and is clearly evident in our society and global culture as a whole. All to similar to that of LEGO, which is made for the mainstream audience and its purpose is to be bought and sold to the everyday consumer. What makes LEGO into an underground community is the fact that people buy certain LEGO sets as investments, which they later sell on for in some cases, ridiculous profit. LEGO sets kept in pristine condition consistently increase in value every year and the second-hand prices of items sold on sites like eBay also increase, the ‘ultimate collectors edition’ of the Millennium Falcon retailed at £342.49 in 2007, almost 10 years on and is can be purchased for £2,712 on the second hand market.

Collecting the complete range of toys and figures has become an important part of the competitive struggle that can be seen in Star Wars fandom, and it is sites such as eBay that have ‘revolutionized collecting and made the physical objects of popular media culture all the more available’ (Geraghty, 2014, p.2). As soon as Star Wars minifigures became available, fans started to customise existing characters and creating their own completely new characters using official LEGO parts, but customising with their own paints, stickers and handmade accessories. Over the years MOCs (My Own Creations) have become a vital part of the LEGO fan experience and they give new use to old objects, subverting the narrative and making it something fresh and more self-reflective. It is through underground economy that MOCs become available and the buying and selling of second-hand merchandise circulates, this second economy makes merchandise once only available in the country of production, now available to audience across all borders.

Collecting is important to fan culture, but it tends to be inclusive rather than exclusive, the emphasis is not so much upon acquiring a few good objects as upon accumulating as many as possible. Individual items are often cheap and devalued by official culture and mass-produced and the ‘distinctiveness lies in the extent of the collection, rather than in their uniqueness or authenticity as cultural objects’ (Fiske, 1992, p.44).

Hierarchies within fandom are based on distinction, taste, value and productivity. There comes a sense of ownership, being the ‘best’ fan is based on what you own and your accumulation of knowledge. All of this creates a ground for movement; it causes a certain group of fans to be subversive from establishment, as they have come outside of the hierarchy to the top of a hierarchy based on their knowledge and collection. In terms of fan hierarchies, cultural capital is very much valued and is subsequently turned into economic capital.  

Knowledge is power and ‘social hierarchy is evident where ‘fans share common interests whilst also competing over fan knowledge, access to the object and status’ (Hills, 2002, p.60). Star Wars provides fans with a culture and devoutness outside of the mainstream. Symbolic capital suggests that the apprised audience poses a specific cultural capital when set against the commonly devalued mass audiences. Star Wars is one of the key texts in which fans make evident their subcultural capital through their knowledge of the text, which is more often than not unfamiliar to mainstream audiences.

In terms of Star Wars LEGO collecting, Henry Jenkins’ definition of a fan culture is accurate because collecting as a fan practice draws from commercial culture and collectible items represent an underground economy due to the buying, selling and modification of LEGO products. In terms of wider fan practices, this is not the case, fanfiction, cosplay and fan film are often created as a medium of self-reflexivity, not for the consumption of an audience and market. As a fan community, elements of Star Wars Fandom and fan practices show elements of what Jenkins is suggesting and other elements he has ignored. The fan practices involved in a community like Star Wars fans ranges from the aforementioned fanfiction and cosplay, which has no economical capital, to merchandise and pilgrimage, which does involve a certain level of economic capital.

When defining fan culture it is crucial that you do not define it as one individual practice. We must follow the likes of Matt Hills who argues that fan cultures cannot be constricted through one singular theoretical approach or definition. Fandom and fan culture does not simply have one definition. It is crucial that when attempting to define fan culture you are broad-minded in discussing the several different fan cultures that exist in fan communities, and not just those that develop on the idea of making new texts available for niche audiences aside from the masses.

Review - She's Funny That Way

Peter Bogdanovich returns after over a decade away from the screen with a film that pays tribute to the bedroom farces of Ernst Lubitsch in the shape of the nostalgic romantic comedy, She’s Funny That Way. The use of close up focus on emotional expression and the emphasis on the individual character’s burning desires gives a conceptual insight in to Bogdanovich’s style. Several younger filmmakers, including Wes Anderson and Noah Baumbach, both obvious admirers of Bogdanovich have teamed up here to produce this long awaited picture. It is their prestige mixed with Bogdanovich’s reputation, and the esteem he has gleaned over the years of working in the industry that no doubt helped haul together an awe-inspiring cast including Owen Wilson, Jennifer Aniston, Imogen Poots and a large amount of estimable cameos, including Michael Shannon and Joanna Lumley.

The films intricate web of romantic complications follows sex tourist theatre director Arnold Albertson (Owen Wilson) whose devotion to hookers and habit of giving them $30,000 to help move their lives into the direction of their dreams leads to complications, especially when one of the girls, Izzy (Imogen Poots), shows up to audition for his latest stage project. This is because his latest project just so happens to be staring his own wife Delta (Kathryn Hahn) and her some times lover, lothario Seth (Rhys Ifans), along with the supporting role of a prostitute. There is a stupendous tangle of twists, concerning another of Izzy’s clients, a judge (Austin Pendleton), who happens to sees the same therapist as her, the despotic Jane (Jennifer Aniston), whose scripter boyfriend (Will Forte) has in fact written the very play that Izzy is trying out for.

Imogen Poots, who plays Izzy, the hooker-turned-Broadway sensation speaks with the thickest of Brooklyn accents that can be slightly grating on the ears at times. Yet however annoying the accent may be, Poots is startlingly funny throughout as she meanders through all the hysteria, using her charming simper like a knock out punch. Whilst curiously brash at first, Jennifer Aniston’s therapist Jane gets funnier over the course of the movie as she blissfully nips away at anyone who stands in her way, including both her patients and her boyfriend. Wilson, who has a real knack for plagiarising some of the most enamouring lines imaginable, underplays nicely throughout, as the frantic and mischievous plot spin out of his control.

The film really seems to be a labour of love for all involved and has a light-hearted Woody Allen feel to it. It is an ensemble piece set in a big time city, the kind of movie that Woody Allen has been making annually for years. The tale of “fantasy” to which the film earnestly desires is rather optimistic, yet there are some extremely funny moments. The most stand out involving a cab driver’s brilliant protest against having to sit through a squabbling couple. Peter Bogdanovich appreciates that in comedy apprehension can be on all accounts as amusing as surprise. Towards the end of the film, an ingenious hotel-room-swapping skit is made all the more fitting because of Albert’s complete perplexity over the rules of screwball comedy. He looks on baffled as his wife rings him from the hotel lobby and then ten seconds later is outside of the hotel room.

One must wonder at a world in which one of the most successful theatre directors could repeatedly depart with large amounts of money with such looseness. Yet this does tie in with the idea of fantasy as Bogdanovich attempts to blend the capers of his 1981 mixed story lined romantic comedy They All Laughed with the behind the curtains antics of Noises Off.

She’s Funny That Way seems to be slightly stuck in the past, with its old fashioned clichés about the aspiring call girl with the heart of gold and the hopeless romantic. However, it is a delightfully entertaining hour and a half long revolving door of foolish shenanigans. Bogdanovich has been successful in his attempt to make what should be a strong, sober, realistic film about chasing dreams and becoming self-made into a comedy with the lightness that isn’t exactly present in most comedies today.

Examining Changing Practices Within Mockumentary Using The Office (2001) and Man Bites Dog (1992)

A documentary film is a nonfictional motion picture intended to document some aspect of reality, primarily for the purposes of instruction or maintaining a historical record. Documentary has been described by many as a ‘filmmaking practice, a cinematic tradition, and mode of audience reception’ that is continually evolving with it’s clear boundaries becoming disregarded.

There are three fundamental definitions’ to look upon when discussing documentary, John Grierson, who coined the term in 1926 defined it as ‘creative treatment of actuality’ (1966), which has gained some position of divergence with Soviet filmmaker Dziga Vertov’s provocation to present ‘life as it is’, life film surreptitiously and ‘life caught unawares’, life provoked by the camera. More present definitions include that of Nichols (2010) who states that ‘documentary film speaks about situation and events involving real people, social actors, who present themselves to us as themselves in stories… The distinct point of view of the filmmaker shapes this story into a way of seeing the historical world directly rather than into a fictional allegory’ and also Ellis (2011) who defines documentary as ‘an activity that consists of filming without fiction… Documentary is also a task. Its task is that of presenting reality, showing and explaining the world. Documentary has an ethical task laid upon it, bound up with the difficult questions of whether of not truth can ever be shown’.

The term ‘mockumentary’, which originated in the 1960s, was popularised in the mid-1980s. A mockumentary is a type of film of television show in which fictional events are presented in a documentary style to create a parody. This style of filmmaking is often used to analyse or comment on current events and issues by using a fictional setting, or to parody the documentary form itself. Mockumentaries are partly, or wholly improvised as an unscripted style of acting helps to maintain the pretense of reality. Comedic Mockumentaries rarely have laugh tracks, also to sustain the atmosphere, however there are some exceptions. Mockumentaries are often presented as historical yet witty documentaries, with talking heads discussing past events, or as cinema verite pieces that follow people as they go through various events.

Fake documentaries do and undo the documentary form, the film’s subject (theme, topic, storyline, characters), and the moral and social orders. They are formally rich as well as uniquely situated to reveal the certainties, as well as the lies about history, identity, and the truth that have sustained both documentary and the world it records. As Juhasz & Lerner (2006) suggest in F is for Phony, ‘fake documentaries imply, sometimes state, and often critique the crucial relations between documentary and the textual and actual authority it assumes, reflects and constructs. This send up may be in the service of a good laugh at authority, but it as often serves as a serious critique of power.’ (pp. 2-3)

The Office (Gervais, 2001) is a mockumentary sitcom about the day-to-day lives of employees in the Slough branch of the fictitious Wernham Hogg Paper Company. As well as directing, Gervais also stars in the series, playing the central character, David Brent. The show centres on the themes of social clumsiness, the trivialities of human behaviour, self-importance and conceit, frustration, desperation and fame. The Office notably attracted wide audiences and critical acclaim, with its success leading to a number of adaptations, resulting in somewhat of an international Office franchise. As Rhodes & Springer propose, ‘a series such as The Office was a site for social and cultural commentary.’ (p.24). The central conceit of The Office is its ‘mockumentary discourse’ (Hight, 2010), the central narrative device of the format is a camera crew observing the employees of the fictitious paper company in their work routines and conversations in a typically open-plan office, observing them and intercut with personal interviews (talking heads). As such, being a perfect mimicry of the conventions of reality television in which the protagonists get to reflect on their behaviour and the events the viewer has just witnessed.

Another aspect of the dissection of The Office’s distinct performance style points to the general challenges of performing and acting in order to create ‘the illusion of authenticity and improvisation’ (Schwind, 2014). The performance is based on more than just the written dialogue in the show and points to the necessity of scripting for an unscripted feel, in order to meet the requirements of the mockumentary discourse. The Office can be read as critique and parody of the intrusive paradigms of reality television, as well as ‘the mediums compulsive need to make performers out of people, and as Francis Grey suggests in her analysis of The Office as a mockumentary reacting to the imprint left on television by reality television, ‘the characters were not only aware of being televised; they were also are of humour as a discourse’ (in Schwind, 2014).

Eventually, the format assumes that, after decades of reality television, both the Wernham Hogg branch in Slough and the audience watching are aware of the fact that they live in a mediated society where ‘more of the events in everyday life are performances for which there is an audience and in which more people see themselves as performers being watched by others’ (Abercombie and Longhurst, 1998, p.96).

The multi-layered conception of the format’s type of performance is of course enabled by the generic conventions of the mockumentary discourse. Mockumentary, in mimicry of documentary, plays with the notions of ‘truthfulness’ as far as the depiction of ‘authentic human beings’ is concerned. The multidimensional performance by Gervais and David Brent both emulate and simulate the switching back and forth from not acting to acting, and it can be localised in the anxieties around the notions of authenticity and truthfulness that is visible in the simple actor-cast of reality television formats.

Inserting the documentary camera into the site of mediocrity does not propel its characters out of the prosaic and insignificance of their lives, launching them into glamorous careers in the media. If anything, as (Juhasz & Lerner, 2006) state, the cameras that catch their every office move compound the workers ‘self-consciousness and an associated resignation about being stuck as this small time paper company… Rather than elevating their existence, the documentary evidence confirms their existential inconsequence. (p.3). The fake strategies of The Office satirize the ubiquity of the documentary camera on television and in its sister, reality.

The Office also provided an examination of work-place politics and psychology, but more importantly a commentary on the ‘docu-soap’. Mockumentary has been quick to use parody and satire to reflect on the rapidly changing nature of factual screen forms, especially in proliferation in ‘reality’ formats. As was the process through which ordinary people are turned into television stars by performing themselves, the form is obsessed with the mundane and banal being satirized. What is absolutely crucial is the relationship that is constructed between the audience and the text, the audience must be knowing and able to recognise the parody to be able to access the critiques that it offers. As Frederic Jameson amongst others has noted, ‘the actual content of parody is critical comment, although in many examples, the critical edge is muted or left implicit’ (Rhodes & Springer, 2005, p.24). With a combination of cruel satire and spirited parody, The Office was a perfect example of the mockumentary disrupting normal and stern communication to ask its audience to question both the form and context of the television documentary formats.

The mockumentary Man Bites Dog (Belvaux, 1992) ‘set a precedent in the genre for its unusual fusion of explicit violence, human comedy and social satire in a seamless documentary simulacrum’ (Coleman, 2009). Man Bites Dog, is a Belgian black comedy and crime mockumentary directed, produced and written by Remy Belvaux, Andre Bonzel and Benoit Poelvoorde, who are also the films editors, cinematographer and lead actor respectively. The film follows a crew of filmmakers following a serial killer, recording his gruesome crimes for a documentary they are producing. At first dispassionate observers, they find themselves caught up in the increasingly chaotic and nihilistic violence. ‘It is the deconstruction mock-documentary that brings to the fore an explicit critique of the doc form’, as proposed by Rhodes & Springer, 2005, p.17). Documentary texts such as Man Bites Dog have demonstrated a rather hostile appropriation of documentary codes and conventions and have utilized them in order to undermine and deconstruct the very foundations of the documentary project.

Though still compelling, the ‘shocking at the time’ mockumentary may have slightly less impact now, given the similar and even darker provocations that followed. However, its verite treatment of a preening serial killer cagily predicts the current era of reality television, where hollow fame-seekers get their 15 minutes of fame and the camera spurs them on, turning there lives into an uncomfortable form of performance. Man Bites Dog isn’t as much a comment on media so much as filmmaking itself, and the way it forces the moral compromises of both the people behind and in front of the camera. Man Bites Dog ultimately about how Benoit’s behaviour changes for the camera, it is much more about how the filmmakers become complicit in the crimes. Permitted, the idea of following a serial killer is absurd and riotously compromised, it does however allow the distance between filmmaker and subject to be bridged through slow progression.

‘If the protagonist in a documentary, or feature for that matter has enough charisma, no matter how terrible of irredeemable their actions, we as the audience will stay with them’ (Schwind, 2014). Humour is often underplayed in the favour of representations that seek to create ‘ethical unease’, which undoubtedly leads to critique. The latter quality is very much a part of the post-documentary cultural movement. ‘The film crew in Man Bites Dog, initially engaging in a more verite exposé, find themselves drawn more and ore into frame and gruesome but captivating activities occurring there’ (Juhasz & Lerner, 2006, p.11). The film commences with a strangulation, which is later followed by gruesome scenes of execution, dismemberment, attempted murder, robbery and a horrific group sex scene. These scenes of distressing gore and violence are complemented with scenarios that not only mock the bourgeoisie insincerity of Benoit and his relatives, but also the complicity of the film crew and much of Belgian society through the murderous ways of the films protagonist.

Man Bites Dog is additionally successful in areas with specific relation to the subversion of the documentary format. In the protagonist’s various musings, is an apt parody of the documentary format when the observation of a subject tips over into pure indulgence. It seems rarely noted by is an aspect that is recurrently present. Benoit, the protagonist discusses politics, femininity, innate racism, the mechanics of a hit and so on, yet rarely do we see the filmmaker reign in his self-deluded, philosophising on screen subject. The fact Benoit intimidates the filmmakers during the footage, the parameters of directorial responsibility seem to have become blurred, which gives suggestion that this is the cause of the directors inability to reign his subject in.

The film is a parody, which stretches the accuracies of cinema verite less than the audience may originally think. Man Bites Dog is rather self-consciously cinematic and looks to engage through satire, in an aggressive manner with its social context. The reality of the film’s presentation of reality is based around the subversion of documentary traditions and clichés, yet the world it aims to depict relies heavily on an ironically witty, ethnographic version of Belgian society. The blasé attitude of the protagonist infects his prowess as a killer and he is as careless with his actions as he is with his choice of words. The purpose of this particular paradox, that of the unrealistic murder depicted with seeming total authenticity, draws attention to the narrative manipulation of documentary, and its need to create the notion of subjectivity tempered by truisms, as a barometer of truth.

‘In both meanings of the word, technique, in the onscreen killings and the documentary editing exposes its own device in the paradigm of Man Bites Dog.’ (Coleman, 2009) The frequency of Benoit’s killings, and the boldness of his technique, is both obscene and hyperbolic. The ethnography of ‘sheep-like’ civilians and victims is thorough but ‘unnervingly monolithic (2009) and it is also rather perversely entertaining. The perverse pleasure in Man Bites Dog is found in the relentlessness of both its depravity and its humour, made all the more snappy through its documentary style. Man Bites Dog presents its case rather forcefully and reveals the lie of documentary ‘objectivity’, the false notion that filmmakers can be flies on the wall and record life as it really happens.

The term mockumentary ‘more effectively works to signal a scepticism toward documentary realism, rather than to reauthorize documentary’s ‘truth’’ (Juhasz & Lerner, 2006, p.224). No matter the subject, almost every mockumentary is multivoiced, speaking about its subject, its target, the moral, social and historical contexts and the multiple relations among them. A mockumentary multiplies the documentary by referring parodically ‘to itself and that which it designates’ (p.7) and at the same time satirically to the ‘mores, attitudes, social structures and prejudices’ (p.7) found in the world and the documents that record it. There have been attempts at blurring the boundaries between fact and fiction, or perhaps more specifically the modes of documentary and fiction filmmaking, including Man Bites Dog (Belvaux, 1992). Where Man Bites Dog differs from its early cinema predecessors, is in its conscious play with ‘spectorial expectations deriving from the deployment of documentary conventions’ (p.49), conventions that were not established in cinema’s early years.

Man Bites Dog aims to use shock factor and techniques to determine ethical unease in its documentary style, this stretches the boundaries of mockumentary as we as the audience resonate mockumentary with comedy, not the use of gore and violence for humour. The use of the violence is a rather extreme way to establish the filmmakers viewpoint on documentary critique and parody, however it is very clever as makes the film perversely pleasurable, the pleasure being found in the relentlessness of both its depravity and its humour, made all the more sharp through its documentary style. 

The Office (Gervais, 2001) similarly to Man Bites Dog uses parody and humour to critique documentary, however it takes a completely different stand using stardom and satire instead of shock factor and ethical unease. The Office provides an excellent examination of work-place politics and psychology alongside the fake strategies of that satirize the ubiquity of the documentary camera on television. A significant area in which The Office and Man Bites Dog differ is their focus on performance and reality television. Both, in some way or another give focus to the concepts, yet The Office plays on them excessively throughout. The Office can be read as critique and parody of the intrusive paradigms of reality television, as well as the mediums compulsive need to make performers out of people. The format assumes that, after decades of reality television, both the characters and the audience watching are aware of the fact that they live in a mediated society.

Almost simultaneously with the development of the observational, verite, and autobiographical modes, these styles were the target of numerous parodies and critique all questioning their assumptions of truthfulness, key example being The Office in terms of satire and comedy and Man Bites Dog, in terms of being subversive and unethical. These parodies and critiques all consciously deploy the tropes of the observational or verite documentary styles to present a scripted and acted drama.

Bibliography

Belvaux, R. (Director). (1992). Man Bites Dog [Motion Picture]. Belgium: Les Artistes Anonymes

Coleman, L (2009). Heart of Darkness With a Wink: The Evolution of the Killer Mockumentary, From Man Bites Dog to The Magician.

Gervais, R. (Director). (2001-2003). The Office [Television Series]. United Kingdom: BBC Two

Juhasz, A., & Lerner, J. (Eds). (2006). F is for Phony: Fake Documentary and Truth’s Undoing. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Rhodes, G. D., & Springer, J. P. (Eds). (2005). Docufictions: Essays on the intersection of documentary and fictional filmmaking. United States: McFarland & Company, Incorporated Publishers.

Schwind, K. H., (2014). ‘Chilled-out Entertainers’ - Multi-layered Sitcom Performances in the British and American Version of The Office. Comedy Studies, Vol. 5 (No. 1) http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/2040610X.2014.905094

Walters, B.  (2005). The Office (BFI TV Classics). London: British Film Institute.

My Top 10 Sports Films

Tonight marks the start of EURO 2016, which kicks off the massive summer of sport, so I thought it would be appropriate to write a feature on my top 10 sports films. Now I know for a fact everyone’s list will be different and I’d love to hear your opinions!

The Karate Kid (1984)

Now this has to be one of my all time favourites and as a kid, doing martial arts myself I absolutely loved it. For those that don’t know, The Karate Kid was directed by John G. Avildsen and starred Ralph Maggio, Pat Morita and Elisabeth Shue. The story follows Daniel Larusso (Maggio) as he’s taught karate by handyman/martial arts master Miyagi (Morita) who shows him that there is much more to martial arts than simply fighting. Some of the most memorable quotes, moves, and characters come out of this film and it’s noted by many as one of the best films of the 80s. I can’t count how many times I’ve seen this film and every time I watch it I still get the same sense of joy I did on first viewing.

Rush (2013)

Ron Howard’s biographical sports drama was my film of 2013. Starring Chris Hemsworth and Daniel Bruhl, Rush centred on the rivalry between Formula 1 drivers James Hunt (Hemsworth) and Niki Lauda (Bruhl) during the 1976 Formula 1 motor-racing season. The acting by both male leads and Olivia Wide, who plays Suzy Miller, was nothing short of perfect and the rivalry between Hunt and Lauda was played brilliantly. The race sequences were breath-taking and the whole film was perfectly shot, the director managed to portray intense, fast paced racing scenes and all the drama in between in the most exciting way imaginable and for me, it’s Ron Howard’s best film yet.

Coach Carter (2005)

Coach Carter is based on the true story of Richmond High School basketball coach Ken Carter (Samuel L. Jackson, who made headlines in 1999 for benching his undefeated high school basketball team due to poor academic results. The best part of this film by far is the lead performance; it’s done with such energy and strength that it brings the whole film together. This is the sort of film where you can just look at what’s on screen but you actually have to watch what’s happening. It’s about how easy people give in and give up, having faith in other people and about learning. It conveys a message not just about basketball, but also about life.

Goal! (2005)

For any young lad that wants to be a professional footballer when he grows up, this is one of the best films you could see. Goal! Follows Santiago, who like millions of kids around the world dreams of being a professional footballer. However, living in the Barrios section of Los Angeles, working for his fathers gardening firm, he believes that it’s only just a dream. Until one day, an extraordinary turn of events has him trying out for Premier League club, Newcastle United. Yes it’s the classic underdog story that we’ve seen so many times before and it’s filled with clichés but it’s a great family film and at the time it was the best football film that had been made.

Rocky (1976)

It would have been a crime to leave this off the list. Directed by John G. Avildsen and both written by and starring Sylvester Stallone, Rocky is the most well known films ever and without it, we wouldn’t have been given any of the sequels or any of the more recent successful sports film. The film tells the rags to riches story of Rocky Balboa, a working class Italian-American boxer working as a debt collector in the slums of Philadelphia, as he works his way from small-time club fighter to getting a shot at the world heavyweight championship. Although the story may seem slightly predictable, Stallone’s script and incredible performance in the title role brushes aside any complaints that one might have. Rocky was nominated for ten Oscars, winning three and is both culturally and historically significant.

The Damned United (2009)

Adapted from David Pearce’s bestselling novel The Damned United, the film follows Brian Clough’s ill-fated tenure as the manager of Leeds United Football Club in 1974. Regardless of the book being largely fictional and the film gaining some criticism, it is undoubtedly entertaining with an intelligent screenplay by Peter Morgan. Football is often poorly served by cinema and The Damned United goes a long way to rectifying that. Its fresh, smart and captures the emotional toil of football that every fan, player and manager goes through, which makes it all the more involving. You cannot talk about this film without giving both recognition and praise to Martin Sheen, who portrays Brian Clough magnificently. He brings the ego of Clough to screen incredibly well and he seems to have the portrayal of modern British Icons nailed down, having previously played David Frost in Frost/Nixon and Tony Blair in The Queen. As Roger Ebert said, Sheen ‘portrays modern British Icons so uncannily, that he’s all but disappeared into them’.

Eddie the Eagle (2016)

I’ve been meaning to see this since it came out and I’m so glad I finally got to watch it recently. Eddie the Eagle is a biographical sports dramedy following Eddie “The Eagle” Edwards, a British skier who in 1988 became the first competitor to represent Great Britain in Olympic ski jumping. Eddie Edwards defines the underdog story and I for one am very happy they’ve made a film about it, and the casting is spot on. The first time I saw Taaron Egerton on screen was in Kingsman: The Secret Service, and when I heard that he was being cast as Eddie the Eagle I was rather optimistic, but his performance was excellent and the look was uncanny. Hugh Jackman also gives a great performance as Edward’s coach Bronson Peary, and manages not to overpower Edwards at all. The overall tone of the film is upbeat and there’s a lot of comedy thrown into the mix, which makes the film rather uplifting to watch and a lot of fun.

Invictus (2009)

Directed and produced by Clint Eastwood, Invictus is based on the John Carlin book Playing the Enemy: Nelson Mandela and the Game That Made a Nation, about the events in South Africa before and during the 1995 Rugby World Cup, which was hosted in South Africa following the dismantling of apartheid. The film stars Morgan Freeman and Matt Damon, who respectively play South African President Nelson Mandela and Francois Pienaar, the captain of the Springboks. Both inhabit their real-life characters with admirable conviction and gave two brilliant performances that led them both to be nominated for Academy Awards. In all it’s a very good film, in parts it evokes great emotion and Eastwood shows how sport can unify people, through its moving message and historical accuracy.

Warrior (2011)

Now this has to be one of my favourite films. Warrior is a sports drama directed by Gavin O’Connor and starring Tom Hardy and Joel Edgerton as two estranged brothers whose entrance into a mixed martial arts tournament makes them come to terms with their lives and each other. I’m a massive fan of both actors, Tom Hardy’s performance was sensational and unbelievably convincing, likewise with Edgerton. Someone who also needs mention is Nick Nolte, who was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor for his role as the father of the two brothers.  For me, the film as a whole is beautiful, despite its violence. It relies on many of the clichés that critics love to mock and goes on to transform them with absorbing action, compelling acting and compassion.

DodgeBall: A True Underdog Story (2004)

Nobody who has seen this film can say they didn’t laugh at least once. No, this film isn’t of Oscar-worthy quality but it is undoubtedly hilarious and deserves a mention in my opinion. Starring Vince Vaughn and Ben Stiller, the film focuses on a rivalry between the owners of Average Joe’s, a small gym, and Globo-Gym, a competing big-budget gym located across the street. Peter LaFleur (Vaughn), the owner of the smaller gym, has defaulted on his mortgage and enters a dodgeball tournament in an attempt to earn the money necessary to prevent his gym being purchased by its competitor. The film is thoroughly entertaining and it’s definitely not a one-joke movie. Ben Stiller starring opposite Vince Vaughn seems completely idiotic yet its thoroughly entertaining as Stiller just doesn’t know when to stop with his silliness. The film is both profane and silly and is worthy of being noted alongside the goofball comedies of the 1980s.