Author: Scott Thompson
This essay examines numerous posts and responses from a blog created in
More often, a new idea on media products often
triggers a debate on whether it is a new concept or whether it’s re-telling an
old story. Many of the participants in the blog seemed to be in favour that new
media products often attempt to re-tell old mythical tales. College lecturer, Tony
Sweeney suggests that myths have been adapted to feed the human desire for a
narrative story and that from these myths the best stories are generated.
There is no doubt that contemporary
culture is saturated with re-cycled ancient myths - probably because they have
all the best stories and we have a huge appetite for narrative; not least on
complex and ever-unfolding TV series and film franchises, both of which revisit
and re-invent themselves in a tightening spiral of rapid uninvention.
(Tony Sweeney, vle.southessex.ac.uk,
31/12/13)
The above quote argues that stories are not new,
instead are recreated for new audiences to accommodate and reflect the cultural
social changes of the specific generation. In Sweeney’s perspective, this could
mean that whatever story being told in a specific generation is a reflection of
what has been relived before. Sweeney’s views are reiterated by Hayley Dillon
(2013) who states that:
…most of the Greek plays and
films that have been acted are based on the "true" adventures of
these people/demigods … how they have been portrayed throughout history and how
it has possibly been corrupted to keep the image of a certain god.
(Hayley Dillon,
vle.southessex.ac.uk, 31/12/2013)
Dillon and Sweeney share some views about the
origins of films and the way they have been told generation after generation.
This serves to show a consensus view on the context and history of films from a
historical perspective. For example, Dillon talks of the link between films and
ancient demigods. As noted, Sweeney argues that most stories in films have been
told before.
However, the nature of telling a story through film
has developed even though the approach remains the same. For example, computer
games use mythical tales as a basis for their storylines but adapt them to
enable an enjoyable experience for the modern audience. Simon Dormer (2013)
observes that:
Even to this day such games as
the incredible God of War series on PlayStation have put their own swing onto
Greek mythology. Inserting their character in to the myth, adapting it
slightly. (Simon
Charles Dormer, vle.southessex.ac.uk, 31/12/2013)
Dormer suggests that Greek mythology is still used
in computer games and its adaptation brings an updated version of the myth for
new and younger generations as it is predominantly but not exclusively younger
participators of computer games. This claim seems to be backed up by Scott
Thompson (2013) who also argues that myths are adapted for new audiences.
Myths are just myths. I agree
with some that myths can and are used as inspiration for storytelling and are
adapted for a new audience every so often. Why's this? Well, stories have an
ideological message in which the creators of the stories want people to follow
so they have a conventional society as this is easier to control by the
bourgeoisie. As societies change a
new adaptation of the myth
needs to be modernised so that the conventional ideological message is still
being enforced. (Scott
Thompson, vle.southessex.ac.uk, 31/12/2013)
Thompson conceives that
myths are adapted to reflect changes in society to ensure that a conventional
ideology is maintained in order for authorities to control societies. By
enforcing a changing ideological message through storytelling it seems less
controlling to society and becomes seemingly more of the norm to which the
proletariat society quietly accepts the change. “The logical structure of
the human mind can explain the similarities and transformations detected by
structuralism in cultural myths.” (Dominic Strinati, 1996; p.101)
The shared view of Dormer and Thompson how myths
are changed and represented in the media show a mutual understanding that myths
are re-interpreted for new audiences and societies. However, Thompson (2013)
has gone further to explain that myths are adapted to appease the controlling minority
over the masses. However, Chadwick (2013) suggests that stories seem to have a
generic tale. The above quote from Strinati (1996) seems to explain that the
masses are able to identify the changes in myths that are key to maintaining a
social ideology.
Starting with the usual story
of the hero, the damsel in distress, the villain and the problem. Usually the
villain is defeated and the problem is solved, then the hero gets the girl and
they get married. (Connor Chadwick,
vle.southessex.ac.uk, 31/12/2013)
Chadwick claims that stories follow a convention of
boy-meets-girl and that the male protagonist must rescue a female. This
reflects film theorists opinions that classical Hollywood
cinema follow a “dominant paradigm” of an Oedipal narrative where the structure
“derives from a version of Freud’s (heavily masculinist) Oedipal complex” in
which every young boy desires to sleep with their mother and eradicate his
father as a rival. (Goldberg, DATE UNKNOWN)
It may appear that Goldberg is arguing that Hollywood
Consequently, it can be argued that in a sub-plot
to stories there is a villainous antagonist who is out to upset the status quo
and therefore must be defeated, usually by death, so that a happy ever after
ending can be achieved. Chadwick suggests that “when the hero gets the girl and
they get married” enforces an ideological message of a positive ending of when
good over evil has been achieved.
Blog participants seem to be in general consensus
that myths are reinvented for a new audience. These tales are used as the basis
of many stories and as society changes and audiences have the desire for new
media products so it appears generic storylines are reinterpreted. Marxists
theorists argue media products are used to enforce an ideology which is
accepted subconsciously by society as the norm so that the authorities have
control over the masses (Tripp, 2013). This also seems to be the view of the
author An Introduction to Theories of
Popular Culture:
…ideas
have to be produced and disseminated by the ruling class or its intellectual
representatives, and they dominate the consciousness and the actions of those
classes outside the ruling class.
(Dominic Strinati; 1996, p.131)
Strinati is arguing that ideas are be dismantled
and re-told from a different angle by bourgeoisie to control the minds of the
proletariats to conform to the ideology of the ruling classes.
From another aspect of the blog the issue over
Censorship was discussed. However, no matter where the origins of a story come
from there is a consensus view that creators of media content must maintain
certain standards. Classification and censorship in cinema, for example, is one
of these which are overseen by the British Board of Classification (BBFC), previously
known as the British Board of Censors up until 1984 (BBFC 2013; Date Accessed
31/12/2013).
One film that faced controversy was the 1981
release of The Evil Dead. A tree rape
scene in which was originally omitted from the movie by the BBFC in the early
eighties caused controversy and following the video-nasties scandal of the
early 1980’s the film was banned outright from 1985 to 1990, when another
censored version was released. The BBFC website archives state “the BBFC was
divided between those who felt the film was so ridiculously 'over the top' that
it could not be taken seriously, and those who found it 'nauseating'”. In 2000,
the film was re-released uncut and awarded the ‘18’ certificate.
The Evil Dead released in 1981 serves and evidences itself as an
example of the BBFC changing or loosening their grip on what is deemed as
acceptable in terms of film censorship.
(Harry George Hughes,
vle.southessex.ac.uk, 31/12/2013)
Hughes
(2013) states that the BBFC were “loosening their grip” on censorship. He argues
that the BBFC may be ignoring what “may be acceptable” for what may or may not
be shown to audiences. Hughes (2013) implies that since 1981, the BBFC
responsibility of protecting audiences from what they are viewing has waned,
and therefore shirking from their duties.
However, in an article written by Stephen Woolley, a former movie
producer who has worked closely with the BBFC in the past, has this to say:
…films were judged on their own merits. Personal
responsibility was not shirked and replaced by a silent and invisible public
committee.
(Stephen
Woolley, www.theguardian.com, 14/01/2014)
It appears that Wolley seems to defend the BBFC in
its decision making stating that films were judged fairly and the
“responsibility was not shirked”.
But is it a case of the BBFC simply responding to
the changes of social attitudes? When home video’s became popular throughout
the eighties many low-budget horror movies became available. These films had
not been passed through the BBFC, they were exempt from any scrutiny from a
body that oversaw these products. It was a result of pressure from the National
Viewers’ and Listeners’ Association (NVLA), a moral watchdog created by Mary
Whitehouse, and by Conservative backbencher Graham Bright. Consequently, the
Video Recordings Act of 1984 was passed, meaning that all videos had to be
classified by the BBFC before they were allowed to be made available to the
public. This act placed over sixty films on the ‘video nasties’ list which fell
foul of the Obscene Publications Act 1959 (BBFC 2005. Date Accessed:
31/12/2013). The Evil Dead was one of
these films and today in 2013 we are able to view this film and many others
that have more graphic content that have been passed by the BBFC.
Lecturer
Sweeney suggests that the role of classifiers is to respond to public demand.
For instance, he argues:
The role of the 'classifier' is
to respond to the changing nature of public taste and tolerance for 'strong'
material. (Tony Sweeney,
vle.southessex.ac.uk, 31/12/2013)
Sweeney
suggests that the classifiers of media products adapt their policies to reflect
changing attitudes from society. It can be argued that, as society becomes more
tolerable, so the acceptance of what they will view becomes more graphic. It
was these changes in taste during the release of the home video market in the
early 1980’s which not only changed social perceptions of what was acceptable but
also changed the way in which the governing bodies of media rated products for
home viewing and what was shown in cinemas.
As the BBFC changed from Censors’ to Classifiers in
1984, and because people attitudes were changing, a new rating system came in
to give audiences greater clarity on content of a film and the suitability of
the content for different age ranges. These ranged from Universal, to which any
one from any age could view the product, PG which meant that parents were
advised to view the product and then decide from their own opinions if it is
suitable for their children. A 12, 15 and 18 rating meant only people of and
above those ages could be exposed to certain media.
Audiences
who had viewed the ‘video nasties’ before they had been classified were
becoming “more accustomed” to what they were viewing (Shriver, 2008. Date
Accessed: 13/01/2014). These home videos contained explicit scenes of murder
and on occasions, sex depicted by rape. However, during the controversy “the
market was unregulated and many titles 'of the horror variety'” (BBFC, 2005) these
videos then had to be classified, and in some cases banned, but at the same
time had shown the change in social perception in what had become acceptable to
view. This is expressed by Scott Thompson:
As society becomes more
open-minded and liberal to what they expose themselves to so the censorship
will continue to relax. (Scott Thompson,
vle.southessex.ac.uk, 31/12/2013)
Thompson suggests that
time specific codes will always change and in doing so, the strength of the
material that society exposes itself to will become stronger. This was also
highlighted by Sweeney who stated the “changing nature of public taste” was
critical. To deal with the change in social attitudes, the BBFC once again
changed its rating system by introducing the new 12A rating. This was in line
with what was acceptable with what is shown, particularly to younger audiences.
The recent ‘12A’ rating, introduced in 2000 for the
release of the super-hero movie Spiderman, allows children under the age of 12
to view a movie in a theatre provided they are with and adult. This new rating
appears to have moved some of the responsibility from the BBFC onto parents and
society to accommodate the variant social attitudes within the public.
Although this could be argued that this is a good
move for society, to give more parents freedom to make their own choices when
it comes to their offspring, it can be counter argued that the introduction of
this new movie was nothing more than a business arrangement that benefitted the
movie production studio and the producers of Spiderman, setting precedent for
future movies. By encouraging parents to accompany their children, who are
under the age of 12 to view a media product, meant that the studios were able
to broaden their target audience and by doing so sold more tickets boosting
revenue for the producers of the aforementioned movie.
The reason for the change was
due to pressure from the studios and then by introducing this new rating would
mean that more money would be made by the movie studio.
(Scott Thompson,
vle.southessex.ac.uk, 31/12/2013)
The
above quote was in relation to the release of the super-hero movie, Spider Man
in 2000. In regards to the 12A rating the BBFC website states that “12A,
moderate violence is allowed but it should not dwell on detail”. What this
means is that if there is a fight scene for example, although we may see people
being punched we would not then be focusing on the injuries sustained by the
violent act. But should there be any fighting in superhero movies anyway? Hayley
Williams, thinks not:
There is no need to have strong
violence or gore in these films because it’s not what they’re about. (Hayley
Williams, vle.southessex.ac.uk, 31/12/2013)
Williams attempts to argue that stories do not need
to have graphic visuals to be able to tell the story. Williams may also be
referring that 12A films, in which young viewers can watch these products
should not be subjected to violence and
gore.
A story can be told, Williams suggests, without unnecessary scenes, which seem
to be added for the entertainment for older viewers.
Whether that’s right or wrong,
I think that problem lies in whether the film services the source material from
which it adapts. For example, I think the Marvel Studios films at the moment
are doing a great job of adapting the source material. They don’t only appeal
to their core audience which is primarily children but also families in general.
Generationally speaking, the parents of these children will have grown up with
the same characters.
(Harry George Hughes, vle.southessex.ac.uk,
31/12/2013)
However, Hughes argues that the studios are only
adapting material they have available to them. By doing so, he suggests that
with the adaptations, the studios are expanding their target audience. This
makes previous and new audiences share a similar experience of a tale albeit a
variation of how it was told previously.
No comments:
Post a Comment