3. What kind of

institution might

distribute your media

product and why?By Megan Vincent

What institution did we decide to use

and why?

We came to the conclusion that our production will be produced and distributed by independent companies. This is because it is conventional for social realism films as our films fits in with the cottage industry of British Film as we are a niche independent film and don’t have the budget to work in big studios and therefore are film will be filmed on location, which is also conventional. Also, having the opening sequence produced by independent institutions, it suggests that our narrative includes some challenging ideologies, such as dealing with social issues in the working class in modern day society. This could possible challenge the ‘false’ outlook and narrative of which Hollywood movies provide.

The independent productions also correspond with our niche target audience. However, these independent companies tend not to be horizontally or vertically integrated (which is conventional as they are very small with a small budget, to produce other media products). This is emphasized by the different studio system of Hollywood who tend to work with large conglomerates (mainly American) such as Warner bros and Walt Disney.

What institution did we decide to use

and why?

Therefore we decided to use Studio Canal UK to distribute it and Warp Films to produce.

We used these companies because they are both very experienced in our genre, i.e Warp Films distributed This is England and they both use technological convergence to market their films, which will be our most predominant marketing technique. Also it’s Studio Canal UK who now distribute Warps’ content since buying Optimum Releasing (which is who Warp had a distribution deal with)which is very relevant to today. Therefore, I think it is suitable for our production.

Warp Films and Warp X- What is the

difference?

Warp Films is an independent film and television production company based

in Sheffield, London, UK, with a further and in Australia based in Melbourne,

Australia. Warp Films quickly expanded in 2005 and set up Warp X, a British

production company and a sister company based in Sheffield. It is dedicated

to digital, low-budget filmmaking driven by creative talent and in hope of

commercial potential, fundamentally producing feature films.

Therefore, the difference is that Warp X is a sister company of Warp Films

who supported it financially, as well as other companies such as Film Four,

UKFC, EM Media and Screen Yorkshire.

Studio Canal

This is the distribution company who is paired with Warp Films, since they

bought Optimum releasing, who Warp Films use to be associated with before

they changed to Studio Canal UK. It was initially a French company until it

bought Optimum Releasing and then became Studio Canal UK and now

distributes British Independent feature films like, ‘Legend’ and ‘99 Homes’.

Co-production

We didn’t add any co-production to our producer of Warp Films which could of perhaps been a mistake because of the trend in British Film, which allows for a bigger budget and therefore a greater chance of marketing the product globally, while making the production eligible to apply for funding and for the benefits of the UK’s tax relief system.

If we added co-production to our producer of Warp Films, it would have made it more conventional to the trend in British independent Film with films such as Tyrannosaur who co-produced with Warp X, UKFC, Screen Yorkshire, EM Media and Optimum releasing (as Studio Canal UK).

It was a mistake because we could have co-produced with distributers in different countries which would have given us access to bigger and new markets, better financial resources, increase in the quality of production i.emore expensive actors with access to specialized skills and equipment.

Evaluating our decision

I think our producers and distributers were a good decision, because they both have sufficient experience in our genre of a social realism. For example, with Warp Films producing the film ‘This is England’ it could allow us to put their production techniques into practice, such as the usage of stock actors and the conventions of Shane Meadows and Paddy Considine’s directing who have directed Warp Films in the past. They also use technological convergence which will aid us to market our product via below-the-line marketing such as the use of web 2.0 on social networking like Facebook. This cross-media presence therefore, would be beneficial for our product as web 2.0 is now more commonly found on everyday converged devices such as mobile phones. These devices are easily accessible nowadays for our older sophisticated audiences (as they may have disposable income to buy the latest technology.) If the audience shares marketing online, we can also apply the theories of ‘Wikinomics’ where companies adapt to the power of the audience as we are letting them create their own content on the new trend of web 2.0. We can also apply Anderson’s ‘Long Tail’ theory which is the idea of niche products, like our production, becoming as successful as mass (like Hollywood movies) when there is unlimited shelf space on the internet.

As a result, our product could be digitally distributed to as many of our audience as possible. For an independent production, this is important as the digital distribution of our marketing will be reliant on the audience’s participation of Gauntlett’s ‘making and doing’ culture being active.

Improvements

I think that perhaps we could have used/ considered companies that could have perhaps worked together previously. For example, BBC Films and Pathé produced ‘Philomena’ (2013) and ‘Pride’ (2014). These companies collaborate and use technological convergence to enable the films to be released on DVD and Blu-ray which could have expanded our audience’s possibilities with the film being released in different formats. However, this highlights why we didn’t use these companies who use a Blu-Ray and DVD release, because it is actually in ancillary sales that independent film makes most of its return. VOD is also very important to make ancillary sales due to the different platforms the films is released on while targeting digital natives. There is also the possibility of a simultaneous release (limited cinema release and VOD at the same time) as a USP in our film and which will benefit from reliance on ancillary sales. Another reason as to why we could have thought about these companies is because they are often funded by companies such as the British Film Institute (BFI), therefore we would be able to get sufficient funds from companies such as ‘Creative England’ which would be apt for the low budget of an independent film and further advertise our product.

British Film Institute (BFI)

The British Film Institute (BFI) is a charitable organization which promotes

and helps filmmaking in the UK, particularly in British Independent Films. The

BFI operates with several sources of funding. The largest is public money from

the ‘Department for Culture, Media and Sport’ who gave the company £20

million in 2011. The second largest is the commercial activity from ticket

sales at BFI London IMAX Theatre (£5m in 2007) and also from sales of DVD’s.

Thirdly, funding is received off grants and sponsorship from sources such as

the National Lottery grants and private donations, approximately around £5m.

Furthermore, the BFI is also the distributor for all Lottery funds for film.

Between 2009-2013, the BFI backed 141 films, 8.3% of all feature films made

in the UK during that period.

How has the BFI subsumed the UKFC?

During 2009 the UKFC persuaded the government that there must be only one

public-funded body for film in the UK, which should be the UKFC which therefore

means the BFI was eradicated. During 2010 the government that there would be a

single body for film despite the UKFC trying to persuade the government that it

should have the role. Instead, the BFI took over most of the UKFC’s functions and

funding from April 1st 2011. Consequently the UKFC was abolished. Since, the BFI

has been responsible for all Lottery funding. The BFI is also funded through the

National Lottery, Creative Scotland and Northern Ireland Screen.

This has made a negative impact on funding for niche independent film as the BFI

only fund films which have mid-high range budgets. Therefore, niche films are no

longer funded by lottery grants as they don’t qualify for expenditure and cannot

make their films which help new directors and explore artistic talent. Meaning

that the only mass market films benefit. For example, ’Tyrannosaur’ (2011) had a

£206,000 grant from the UKFC.

Improvements

Warp X is a production company which produces feature films in the UK with

budgets usually between £400,000 and £800,000. The film studio began with

support from organizations including Warp Films, Film Four, UKFC, EM Media

and Screen Yorkshire. These companies now still co-produce films.

Therefore, this close link with these companies could suggest that apart from

changing our producers and distributers like I have discussed, we could have

co-produced with companies such as EM Media and Screen Yorkshire. This is

because co-production is extremely important for British Independent films

because they do not have the budget to rely on one production company. Co-

producing with these companies would mean that there would be a regional

link to support the co-production e.g East Midlands (EM Media) and Warp Films

(Sheffield). This would therefore mean it would be less expensive to go to

locations which is conventional for independent film.

‘This is England’s’ marketing campaign

compared to ‘Reflux'

The film had a traditional and non-extravagant marketing campaign due it being produced and distributed by small independent companies with low budgets. The film had a film posters, a film trailer, interviews (in different media), featuring's at film festivals, blogs/fan base websites, use of web 2.0 i.e official websites and social media pages like Facebook and press stories before the release of the film.

This is almost identical to ‘Reflux’ who will also include a film poster, a trailer and with a heavy presence on web 2.0 by having Facebook pages, blogs and a website. It will also appear at Film Festivals such as Sundance and will heavily rely on review prior to the release of films.

The marketing campaigns are so similar because of of the separate distributors used as the production companies are not horizontally integrated. Therefore, they both rely on below—the-line marketing due to the low budget. Due to the limited funding, both campaigns cannot afford to have 360 degrees marketing campaigns despite the cross-media methods. Therefore, most of the marketing is through web 2.0 and traditional film posters and trailers.

Comparing ‘Reflux’ to a similar product,

‘This is England’ produced by Warp

Films, with similarities and differences..

How could we have improved our film

compared to ‘This is England?

‘This is England’

Firstly, the film was based on the controversial time in history in the 1980’s in England when Margaret Thatcher ran the country and there was racial unease.

Furthermore, Shane Meadows, when directing, ensured that it reflected his personal experiences when he was younger (e.g bullying) which created personal identity with the viewers.

This is different to our film because we did not consider many political issues of England in the current economic and social climate and explored the more emotional aspects. We also did not use personal experiences as none of our group could relate to the situation, however, we could relate to Ethan’s emotions and tried to portray them as best as possible. We could have improved by perhaps including different ethnicities to connote the issues of racism, for example. However, due to being independently produced, our funding is inadequate and the extent to carry this out would also be limited.

‘This is England’

Shane Meadows tended to use stock actors who were very unexperienced in film. Meadows would train the actors through particular workshops and acting exercises. For example, Thomas Turgoose was auditioned in a Nottingham school had a very small experience in acting.

Moreover, auditions were a key aspect of Shane Meadow’s casting as he mainly auditioned those that originated from similar environments that are shown in the film i.e from inner city locations to heighten the level of verisimilitude.

This is very similar to ‘Reflux’ as we used non-professional actors with virtually no filming experience (excluding Josh Macqueen and Nick Heywood) to create realism. However, perhaps we rushed into making decisions with actors (mostly because of time restrictions) as we could have considered possibly holding a few auditions for a number of actors for each role, or even a dress rehearsal for our production to see what the actors are like in the light of the camera. Yet, in the real world, this would have cost a large section of our remaining budget.

‘ This is England’

It is said that Meadows thought that every element in terms of mis-en-scene

needed to be fitting for the film. This creates a high level of verisimilitude

that is conventional of the social realism genre.

In my opinion, I think this was very similar to our production, ‘Reflux’, as we

understood the appropriacy of mis-en-scene. However, maybe we did not fit

in as much with the modern day society and should have included Ethan to be

using his converged device (i.e mobile phones) to reflect the trend of young

people’s affinity to social media who are digital natives, not just the higher

classes (like the business man). In hindsight, we did not use extravagant mis-

en-scene, mainly because of our budget and to connote the desolate feelings

of our protagonist, Ethan.

‘This is England’

Shane Meadows tried to create a high level of verisimilitude in all areas and a lot of research was carried out in the popular trends in the 1980’s. This could have possibly introduced the ‘skin-head’ theme in the film.

The film worked with Warp Films which was said to ‘namely support artists and their visions’. This could perhaps suggest the Auteur Theory, as Shane Meadows could interpret and explore these issues associated with the working class, mainly through personal experiences.

This was different to us as we did not complete much research into the common trends of teenagers and adults in the the working class in order to create verisimilitude. This could therefore show our mistake with actors as they have come from more privileged backgrounds and could not relate to the situation of Ethan therefore making it less relatable and thought provoking. However, in the real world this would additionally mean more time and money would need to be spent.

‘This is England’

I also feel our production has been an example of the Auteur theory because

we have explored social issues within the working class such as alcoholism and

isolation. We have shown this through possibly our own signature style of

using many shots depicting Ethan’s determination and loneliness with shots

from behind him connoting someone following him i.e videoing Ethan when

descending the stairs and looking at the train times. This could perhaps make

the audience feel uncomfortable and yet gives them entertainment.

Certification

‘This is England’ was announced an 18 certificate in 2007 due to very strong racist violence with aggressive and strong language.

I think our product does sit appropriately next to ‘This is England’ due to the serious topics we were addressing, too. Such as drug abuse and a dysfunctional family. Therefore, due to these themes and the presence of strong language, which isn't considered as a 15 by the BFC, a certificate of 18 is appropriate, especially because we are also aiming our film at a older audience. I think both films fit an 18 because of the overall bleak tone and mature social issues covered.

However, compared to the vivid, strong and violent language/scenes in ‘This is England’, ‘Reflux’ does not seem as intense due to the further exploration of feelings of isolation, suggesting that our certification is too high and could be argued to be a 15.

Marketing our production in the real

world

Following the conventional stages of film, the production and distribution is

done in four main stages, as follows;

PRODUCTION- when the product is created and made

DISTRIBUTION- when the product is marketed and sent out to the

product’s audience

EXHIBITION- showing the product to audience members

EXCHANGE- when the audience receive the product

Production

This involves three main stages:

RESEARCH-the director, producer and the rest of the team carry out research, narrative type and conventions that they want to include within their product. We completed this by doing genre research, form research etc.

PLANNING- the team then decide shooting dates, what actors are needed when and then costume, props and location will be needed for each scene of the product.

PRODUCING- the team film their production and then edit it all together

Our group carried out the stages discussed below. Because of our chosen company of Warp Films, these processes were not funded so that they may take our place. Therefore, this suggests that we should have co-produced to get an increase of funding and had more companies to complete this production process with.

Our budget

Our budget would have been around £600,000 as this is a typical amount for

an independent produced film. It also allows us to do complete all the things

in our production but on a small scale i.e short filming days and regional links

to film so transport is less expensive. To achieve this budget or increase it, we

could have co-produced with other companies instead of relying completely

on one production company.

We could argue that Warp X would have more suitable because our production

company is specific for first time film makers who don't have a huge budget.

This is because the studio serves as a format for new film directors to create

movies for the first time on a lower budget scale with less expectation for

high box office revenues on the initial day of release. Therefore, this is more

appropriate for our production.

Distribution

Due to our film being independently produced, we are therefore not vertically or horizontally integrated or a subsidiary, so, in the real world, we would need a separate distributor; Studio Canal UK (Optimum Releasing). Studio Canal UK is the distribution company who works with Warp films. This partnership is since they bought Optimum Releasing, which is who Warp films used to be affiliated with before they changed to Studio Canal UK. This therefore means that we used the wrong distributor logo in our film. Studio Canal UK are an independent distribution company who rely on below-the-line marketing due to the small budget. This means that because we would get limited funding, we would not be able to afford 360 degree branding and above-the-line marketing, despite the cross-media methods.

Most of our distribution will be using web 2.0, used by digital natives on converged devices. We will create Facebook and Twitter accounts which will be regularly updated to raise awareness of the product.

Distribution

Due to technology and the internet becoming increasingly popular and easily accessible, our product can be seen as, referencing ‘Anderson’s Long Tail’ near the bottom of the tail because of our product being for a niche audience. This therefore offers no restriction on shelf space with the biggest products. This means that it is essential for us to use below-the-line marketing.

This is perhaps due to the theory of Wikinomics, introduced by Tapscott and Williams which suggests that companies have to adapt to the audience’s power and web 2.0, so they can make their own content. This links to Gauntlett’s ‘making and doing’ theory, which states that social media has empowered the audience to make their own product. This links more to user-generated distribution of our social media marketing materials. This is called ‘flipping the funnel’ as the audience does our marketing for us by being active. Therefore, this relates to the belief of technological determinism where technology will give us equal power. Therefore, using web 2.0 is vital in marketing to digital natives in modern day society.

Marketing our production in the real

world

Another possible method of promoting our production would be to create a

website dedicated to ‘Reflux’ that includes blogs, videos and images

associated with the product to raise awareness. Also, we would utilize a

YouTube channel as another method of below-the-line marketing and regularly

update it with news and exclusive information etc.

Furthermore, because Warp Films is a sister company of Warp Records, we

could perhaps use synergy marketing. For example, the songs and music in

the film could be promoted by a soundtrack as a tie-in. This would make it

horizontally integrated.

Improvements

Because the film is being produced and distributed by small independent

companies, the reliance of mostly on digital marketing due to the low budget

allowing only for below-the-line marketing.

However, this could perhaps be a mistake as our audience are older i.e 30-45

and 50-60 suggesting that they are not really the correct age to be digital

natives, they would only be on the cusp of this categorization. I think that

there is too much reliance on digital marketing.

Therefore, although we have a low budget, there are other ways to market

our film that are below-the-line. These may include traditional marketing

such as newspaper reviews in e.g The Guardian which our audience might

respond to better, being older and reading newspapers.

Exhibition This where the film will be released and showcased to independent film

critics and would be show in limited theatres/cinemas and in small areas of

England (most likely urban areas) via exclusive/limited runs.

This would be most suitable because other products such as ‘This is England’

(2006) have gone through a similar process in order to gain the success in

order to gain success.

We will also use digital distribution to cinemas as this a cheaper way of

distributing the film digitally. It is very important in all independent film

companies who have a low budget.

Exchange

Another way to distribute our products is by digital distribution on online

stores such as Amazon and Netflix. These are world-wide and therefore, are

easily accessible and promote the product to areas where our budget does not

allow us to reach. It also in keeps with the theme of web 2.0.

This Netflix/Amazon release after the film has been distributed out to

cinemas, then it will become available on VOD. It would most likely be

‘Netflix’ rather than amazon due to the abundance on films and TV programs

on Netflix and will be easier to finance due to the pre-sales from Netflix.

How does our marketing campaign use

the AIDA scale?

This scale is used in marketing and advertising which describes the usual sequence of events that happen when a consumer engages with a media product.

Attention- Through the use of synergy marketing and online

distribution/marketing of our product through the use of web 2.0 on converged devices, which will make our audience easily become aware of our production and what it involves.

Interest of Consumer- Despite our media product being aimed at a niche

audience and to those 15 and over, it is still available to the masses. Due to our marketed brand identity (blogs, video updates and perhaps independently produced trailers distributed online) will gain the interest of our consumers, while they participate in Gauntlett’s theory of ‘making and doing’ culture. The older audience may also see the festival success and awards it has won which will gain their interest also.

How does our marketing campaign use

the AIDA scale?

Desire of consumers- To encourage this, we could simply use persuasive rhetoric when distributing the product. We could also show snippets of our media product (in the real world) which would intrigue our audience as they would feel obliged to watch the ending and the film. Furthermore, by exhibiting our film through limited runs, it will allow our target audience to know whether this is the type of film that will satisfy their needs according to Blumer and Katz uses and gratifications and Maslow’s hierarchy of needs for example, entertainment and morality. Following this, the older audience may read newspaper reviews on the success of the film and want to go and see it.

Action- After the audience see the updates from social media and web 2.0 with using synergy marketing and reviews from newspapers, our audience should feel inspired to engage themselves with the stereotypical representations in our opening sequence. This would therefore leave them feeling to want to watch the rest of the film, if in reality.