Tim Bevan

Tim Bevan is the co-founder of Working Title Films, a British film production company, along with Sarah Radclyffe back in the 1980s. Bevan has himself been producer or executive producer on over 40 films, including such films as Bridget Jones’ Diary, Shaun of the Dead and Love Actually.

In 1999, Working Title Films signed a deal with Universal Studios that allows Bevan and Eric Fellner (a partner of Bevan) the ability to commission projects with budgets of up to $35 without actually having to consult their paymasters.

Bevan is also the co-producer of the West End musical Billy Elliot.

The Soloist Marketing

During the time that it was advertised on the show, during the spring, the audience was mainly older women, rather than movie-lovers and the like, and due to this, movie-lovers didn’t watch to find out about new films – there are very few, interesting films aimed at older women.

The recession also caused many studios to become more wary with buying advertisements and the like, especially considering that it cost almost 2 million to begin with (but was lowered to 1.4 because of this). Restrictions on what they can show also prevented a lot of studios from buying slots (no sequels/prequels, only new films) – this could also prevent people from watching to find new films, due to series that people are already interested in can’t have any spin-offs, sequels, etcetera. Shown.

Overall, the advertising was generally very bad – the audience of the trailer seemed to be middle aged women, but that isn’t exactly the audience that they were aiming for (they were aiming for young adults, I think).

The Soloist Production Notes

The film itself was based on a true story, and starred Jamie Foxx, Robert Downey Jr., Catherine Keener, Tom Hollander and Lisa Gay Hamilton.

The executive producers of the film were Tim Bevan, Eric Fellner, Jeff Skoll, and Patricia Whiteher.

The director of photography was Seamus McGarvey BSC.

The film is “about the secret yet transcendant dreams that exist even at the American margins”, not just the story of a homeless man who fell from greatness. It’s also about the “often perilous task of trying to change a friend’s life”.

A lot of producers approached Steve Lopez to produce the film, but only Gary Foster and Russ Krasnoff gained his trust (and then took him to see Nathaniel Ayers at LAMP). They were moved greatly by his articles, and were motivated to create a true, respectable adaptation of it.

Suzannah Grant, the screenwriter, was also inspired by the articles after being sent them, and aimed to hone in “on the different kinds of transformation each of the two men undergoes”, whilst taking some liberties to further emphasize certain characteristics, such as giving Steve Lopez an ex-wife in order to further portray a sense of isolation in his character.

After Grant saw Jamie Foxx act as Nathaniel, she said that he “embodied the experience of being Nathaniel without ever being an imitation” – yet despite the greatness of his and Robert Downey Jr.’s acting, she still wished to keep from any “fairy tale sentimentality”, in order to pay homage to the humanity of the characters.

Joe Wright, after being approached and beginning work on the film, saw it as a way of bringing Hollywood and British realism together, and despite not knowing much about America himself he thought it may benefit from an outsider’s point of view. He flew to LA to talk with the scriptwriters, and then visited Skid Row, which inspired him to bring its inhabitants humanity to the screen.

Cellist Ben Hong had to develop a system in order to teach Jamie Foxx how to appropriately mime over the music he was playing, which involved calling out the numbers to him to let him know what strings he would have to press down at certain points.

Spooks Representation of Ethnicity

The Soloist The Making Of...

Who was/were the producers of ‘The Soloist’?

The producers of ‘The Soloist’ were Gary Foster and Russ Krasnoff.

What did Steve Lopez question about the film from the start?

Steve Lopez was unsure on how you could “make a movie if you didn’t have an ending”, as (being based on a non-fictional series of articles by him) the real relationship it’s based on didn’t have an “ending” either – Nathaniel remains schizophrenic and Steve Lopez remains his friend. Films tend to need endings in order to make people feel satisfied after watching it – audience satisfaction tends to have higher priority over realism.

When did the producers meet Nathaniel?

The producers met Nathaniel in 2005 after having lunch with Lopez, who then took them to meet him.

Where were the real-life locations in the film?

The real-life locations used within the film were the Disney Concert Hall, the LAMP centre, and Skid Row (or, more accurately, Anderson Street – Wright chose to use the real homeless around the area as extras, both for realism and moral concern, and moving them from their home to work somewhere else would have been cruel to them).

Suzannah Grant’s aim when screenwriting was…?

Grant’s aim when screenwriting was to “humanize” the homeless and allow the audience to connect to them, as people nowadays just walk past them and don’t take much notice – she aimed to make people realize that they were people too, with families, backgrounds, etcetera.

Why was Joe Wright apprehensive about making the film?

Joe Wright was a tad apprehensive about making the film due to it being based in America, and, being a British director, he didn’t know much about the place himself – however, he decided to do it because he thought it’d be better made from an outsider’s point of view. He said that the “more time he spent there, the less he understood”.

What does Robert Downey Jr. say about the role of Nathaniel?

Downey said that the role of Nathaniel had a high degree of difficulty, due to having to correctly portray a schizophrenic without being over the top or dulling it – done wrong it could ruin an actor’s career. He said that it’s a hard thing to get into the head and persona of someone that you just don’t understand, and that he respects Jamie Foxx for being able to do it properly.

Why did Joe Wright want authentic locations and people in the film?

Wright wanted to use authentic people and locations in the film for two reasons – for realisms sake, in terms of the portrayal of certain areas, and for a personal moral concern about the inhabitants. He said that by getting the homeless to be in his film, he was helping them, as well as adding to the realism, and it would give them a sense of “self-worth”.

How long did the set designers have on location to build the set?

The set designers had 4 weeks on location in order to build the set, and spent a huge amount of time prior to this in the workshop, creating scale models and the like, so that they knew exactly what to do once they got there.

What process did the actors go through to ensure that the acting was authentic?

Foxx stated that he had to submerse himself into the role of Nathaniel in order to correctly portray him, which involved meeting with the real Nathaniel Ayers and observing him. They also got to know each other, in order to build a sense of trust between them – this, according to the people at LAMP, gave the homeless a “sense of self worth”.

What comments are made about the ending by Suzannah Grant and Russ Krasnoff?

Grant chose to leave the ending as it was in order to keep it honest, realistic, and respectful to those suffering from schizophrenia (throwing a cure at it wouldn’t have highlighted the severity of the condition at all) – it isn’t “a fairy tale”.

Joe Wright also added that he doesn’t like to assume what the audience will be feeling at the end of the film, which is a dangerous thought process – it leaves the possibility that an audience will be left unsatisfied by the ending (as I was – it seemed very anticlimactic).

Let The Right One In

The Business Understanding Film Making

The Soloist Notes

Cinema Verdict

On this page, they point out several things to do with the film that may have affected the draw to the film. For example, it points out the use of a high-profile cast, mainly Robert Downey Jr. and Jamie Foxx, and that the film is based on a true story. While, more often than not, the "truth" aspect of a story can draw people in, it doesn't seem to have done that in this case - probably due to the recession going on at the time, and the preference of people to go see films for escapism rather than empathy.

It also points out that the story being told by the trailers wasn't representative of the actual story, which could have potentially detracted from the overall attraction that the film had, having not had it's interest plot being correctly pitched to the audience.

Another point that may have detracted from it's attraction was the fact that Jamie Foxx could be seen to blatantly overacting for an award nomination, at least according to this source. In others they speak of how the cast seem to be emotionally connected in a realistic way, so I don't know if this is true (having not seen it myself).

Wikipedia (because everyone loves Wikipedia)

The film was written by Susannah Grant, who based the script on a true story, and she's written a couple of successful in the past - such as Charlotte's Web and Erin Brockovich - but isn't particularly well-known, especially for this type of film, which could have had the opposite effect than what they wanted. Rather than a good director attracting an audience, it seems to have had no effect on the type of person that came to see it - or it may have done, and fans of Charlotte's Web may not have liked this kind of film at all.

The film also had a director in the same vein as the writer - having a couple of well-known projects done previously, but their name not being terribly famous. At least to my mind, Pride and Prejudice  and Atonement are the only ones that seem to be very memorable.

Rolling Stones

In this review, it says that the movie got sidetracked by social activism, which may have damaged the immersion of the audience, and that the film isn't about big moments, but rather smaller moments - despite the seemingly calming effect this may have, not many people like films with no crescendos, so this may have detracted somewhat from the film's reviews.

Summary

• High profile cast may have helped attract an audience, though probably not the one they wanted, because these actors aren't really known for this kind of genre
• The film is based on a true story, which, in a time of recession, may have detracted from it's attraction
• The trailers were misleading, so it may have attracted the wrong audience, rather than the one it had wanted to get.
• Jamie Foxx in particular overacted, which again may have damaged the thoughts people had about the films direction
• The script was written by someone not particularly well-known or amazing, which may have detracted from the quality / attraction of the film
• The film was directed by Joe Wright, again, not too well-known, and with not many great past projects, so that may have detracted somewhat from the quality of the film.
• The script gets sidetracked with social activism, which may break immersion at some point or another, forcing the audience to realize they're watching a film
• The film doesn't have great moments, but little ones - this may detract from how interesting the overall experience is for the audience, rather than having the effect they intended.

Film BudgetsPresentation for Ms. Elger

General Class Notes

• The attachment of famous actors, directors, etcetera. will generally raise the popularity of the film upon release, and will draw people to watch it.
• It's very difficult to judge the price of film production before the film is actually made or even written - it'd make more sense to make the film first, and hope that you can raise the money afterwards.
• The level between cheap and attractive should be monitored - for example, cheap, yet relatively well known actors, such as Johnny Vegas, will help to attract a specific audience yet also keep within the budget.
• The use of great directors and the like (judged based on past projects) can help to make sure that the film is a success.
• The advertising for a film, more often than not, costs more than the film itself (it's around £175,000 for a 30 second advert).
• The budget to be spent on props is usually between 1 to 10% of the overall budget.
• Synergy marketing is the joining of two products in advertising for the mutual benefit of both companies - such as the Pampers advert with Toy Story characters.
• When talking about rights, self copyrighting should be taken into account, in order to protect the franchise later on.

Disability Gregory House

Name	Gregory House (played by Hugh Laurie)
Profession	Chief of Diagnostic Medicine
Disability(/ies)	Leg infarction (an area of tissue death on his leg)
Other Problems	Addicted to Vicodin, a painkiller
Personality	He’s portrayed as a misanthrope (someone who doesn’t like people), cynic, narcissist (essentially elitism, and being selfish), and a curmudgeon (an ill-tempered person whose very stubborn).

House’s disability is a leg infarction, which causes him a lot of pain (hence the use of Vicodin to counter it) and makes him walk with a cane so that he can balance right.

His disability seems to conform to 5 of the 10 stereotypes of disabled people in media – he’s seen as an object of curiosity (in that his boss is constantly trying to find ways to fix it, to the point where at the end of one of the series she forces a surgery on him without his consent to do so), sinister/evil (he’s sometimes driven to violent means in order to get the outcome he wants, such as during a hallucination where he cuts open and kills a patient in order to break himself out of it), laughable (he often makes jokes of it, such as when he annoys a patient to the point of violence and then says “You wouldn’t hit a cripple”), his own worst enemy and a burden (the pain in his leg is implied after the surgery to be imaginary, stemming from his drug addiction which came from the pain to begin with, and he’s looked down upon because of it – he even almost gets sent to jail for it).

Though in some ways the portrayal disability could be seen as very hyperbolic, the show does deal with it in several accurate ways that can come from disability – mainly House’s addiction to painkillers, which a lot of people going through pain can have happen to them (for example, the actor Matthew Perry was in a car crash and subsequently became addicted to the painkillers he got from them).

Shakespeare’s view that when disabilities are used as plot devices distance the audience from the characters and they become only seen through said impairment seems to have been flipped around with this character – the characters that House comes across view him through his impairment, but the audience can relate to him as a character, despite his many differences. Despite the fact that he’s a medical genius, and is always correct when diagnosing patients (other than one time, but he sorts that out at some point during season two, I believe), the other characters doubt his intelligence and often mistake it for arrogance or a stubbornness for Vicodin.

A prime example of this would be when his boss, Lisa Cuddy, refuses to believe House when he tells her that a catatonic patient can be revived by simply injecting him with a certain chemical. She then gives in to temptation later on and tries it, and it works perfectly, yet she refuses to let House know for fears of it increasing his arrogance, instead letting him feel that he should be more careful when diagnosing patients, if only for lawsuits’ sake.

Overall, I’d say that the way House’s disability is both realistic and fair – despite being intelligently greater than most of the other characters, and being of a higher rank, he is often looked down on because of his disability and his drug addiction. He’s also often pitied, despite his complete disregard for the way his patients actually feel, and even gets shot at one point by someone that he’s a douche to.

Male Gaze Durex Advertisement

The Durex advert attempted to combine sexualization with classiness, a combination that you don't see very often. The focus of the cameras is on the women's faces as they orgasm, which attempts to de-sluttify itself through the use of classic music dubbing over any of the sounds. For an advert based on a product that promotes safe sex, the sex side of it is really only implied - the facial expressions, the feet and the grabbing. The actual act of sex isn't shown, which is probably for the best, because it'd probably get banned at some point.

Preliminary Movie Work

Evaluation
What went wrong during the production?
We came across several problems during the filming of the short film, some of which only arose after we'd gotten to the editing stage. For one, we couldn't actually film the door itself opening, due to it being rather dark outside, and the shadow over the outside door handle being too dark to film. Also, at one point, Tom's head with the camera appears in the reflection of the door.
What problems did we fix, and how?
To fix the door handle problem, we came back on a lighter day and reshot it and the scene of the guy looking through the door - however, this created another problem of there being inconsistent clothing between scenes, a problem that we didn't have time to fix (as it would have probably required re-shooting the whole thing).
What could we have done better?
We could have made sure to keep the same clothing between scenes by making sure to bring the specific clothes on the days of filming, and we could have avoided getting Tom's head in the reflection by adjusting the lighting of the room, or even just having him move out of the way whilst we were shooting. In the future, lighting and clothing will be things we'll need to take into consideration when shooting, to avoid these problems from happening again.
We also need to censor what we say, apparently, because we had the whole scene revolving around a single line, but it was too "saucy" for the teachers so we had to remove it, which made the entire thing seem way too random.