Analysing Full Films- Repossessed

Full Analysis of Repossessed

Repossessed is an American comedy film made in 1990 that spoofs the 1973 horror film The Exorcist. It was written and directed by Bob Logan. The film features the original star of The Exorcist, Linda Blair, as well as Leslie Nielsen and Anthony Starke. Many jokes were based around events in The Exorcist, such as the green-vomit and head-spinning scenes.

Todorov’s theory of narrative structure suggests that the story begins with equilibrium where everything is in balance. This is then disrupted by an event, causing disequilibrium. Problems are then resolved into a new equilibrium by the end of a story. Although it is a parody of a horror, this film follows Todorov’s narrative structure very closely, except for one exception. It could be argued that the film does not start with equilibrium, as it begins with Father Mayi performing an exorcism. However, after this first five minutes, the film effectively starts again with equilibrium. This first 5 minutes is to introduce what the film will be about and to show the audience that all will not be well throughout it. Other than this, it pretty much follows Todorov’s narrative structure. There is a disruption of equilibrium, when the devil comes out of the TV and into Nancy Aglet’s body. Throughout the film, character’s attempt to restore equilibrium using various methods, including a televised exorcism. Equilibrium is eventually restored with Father Mayi and Father Luke successfully gets the devil out of Nancy’s body.

There are many expectations that the audience will have of this film, due to the film being a subgenre of horror. They will expect to see the codes and conventions of not only horror, but comedy as well. As it is a spoof of The Exorcist, the audience will also expect cheesey jokes which steal scenes from it. As Repossessed stars Leslie Nielson, fans of him will automatically go to see the film, to see him, as he is usually the same as an actor in every film he has starred in, such as Naked Gun. This brings in more profit for the film, which is ultimately the reason why Leslie Nielson was starred as the leading role of this film. As this film isn’t a traditional horror, it doesn’t necessarily fit the genre of horror. However, it does fit the subgenre of parody horror, as it has both horror and comedy elements. One specific scene is the green-vomit scene, which takes the horror scene from the Exorcist and gives it a ‘funny’ twist, by the reaction of the characters after the vomit.

Propp’s theory of character types suggests that there are 8 character roles within films. He looked at 100s of old folk tales to establish this. He argues that in a film there is always: The villain(s)(usually female), the hero (usually male), the donor (person who provides an object with magic property), the helper (who aids the hero), the princess (reward of the hero), her father (who rewards the hero), the dispatcher (who sends the hero on their task), and finally the false hero. Even though Repossessed is a spoof, most of these character types are still present. There is a clear villain, the possessed Nancy Aglet, who as Propp suggested, is female. There is also a clear hero Father Mayi, who as Propp suggested is male. It could be argued that there is a donor in the form of God, who gives an object with magic property, in the form of a Bible. There is a clear helper, in the form of Father Luke, who is obviously helping the hero to defeat the villain. However, in my opinion, the other character’s aren’t obviously present in the film, apart from possibly the dispatcher, who is also the villain, as she taunts Father Mayi to stop her, therefore technically sending the hero on their task.

There are clear binary oppositions, as described by Claude Levis-Strauss, in the form of good vs. evil (Father Mayi vs. The Possessed Nancy Aglet), as well as more of a religious opposition of God vs. The Devil, or Heaven vs. Hell.

In conclusion, I believe that Repossessed didn’t intentionally go against some of the conventions of a horror film as suggested by Propp and Todorov, but instead couldn’t help but challenge them, due to the fact that it is a parody of a horror, and so needed to change the structure a little bit in order to engage the audience more and to try and made them unexpectedly laugh.

Analysing Full Films- Insidious

Full analysis of Insidious

Insidious is an American psychological/supernatural horror film, written by Leigh Whannell and directed by James Wan. The film featured Patrick Wilson, Rose Byrne, Lin Shaye, and Barbara Hershey. It was released in theatres in America on April 1, 2011.

Todorov’s theory of narrative structure suggests that the story begins with equilibrium where everything is in balance. This is then disrupted by an event, causing disequilibrium. Problems are then resolved into a new equilibrium by the end of a story. Insidious follows this narrative structure closely, until the end of the film. It begins with equilibrium, with the Lambert family moving into a new house, and having a new start. The event which disrupts the equilibrium is arguably when the little boy (Dalton) breaks the ladder and falls off, which brings darkness and shows that all is not well. However, Dalton going into a coma is more easily recognisable as the disruption of equilibrium. It could be argued that there is a restoration of equilibrium at the end of the film, with Dalton being rescued. However, due to the fact that his dad (Josh) becomes trapped by his childhood demon again, leaves the film on a cliff-hanger and makes the audience believing that there isn’t a restoration of equilibrium.

An audience would expect to be terrified while watching this film, due to the fact that they know that the film is a horror. Many audience members will have looked up information on it and so will be expecting different things. Insidious has what can be assumed as a male villain (the demon), trying to capture the body of a small boy (Dalton), in order to live again on Earth and do evil things. This goes against the traditional genre template which Hollywood set, a male killer killing a female victim. Because this film challenges the typical horror film, there is no ‘final girl’, because the main women in the film are not in any danger throughout the film. Laura Mulvey suggested that the male gaze in Hollywood films reflects the male unconscious mind: most filmmakers are male, and so the gaze of the camera is male. However, it could be argued that the camera is not in the perspective of a male’s gaze, as women are not depicted as sex objects in this film, instead are seen as helpers. In contrast to this, they are still seen as vulnerable and helpless, which supports Mulvey’s theory.

At the time where this film was made (00’s), the popular subgenre within horror was Psychological horror and ‘Torture-Porn’. It could be argued that this film is a psychological horror, as it plays with the audience’s mind. However, it doesn’t have elements of ‘toture0porn’, as there are no gruesome deaths or blood being shed. Instead, the film returns to the 60’s, with the ideas of ghosts, Satanism and family, which again defies the modern conventions of a horror film.

Propp’s theory of character types suggests that there are 8 character roles within films. He looked at 100s of old folk tales to establish this. He argues that in a film there is always: The villain(s)(usually female), the hero (usually male), the donor (person who provides an object with magic property), the helper (who aids the hero), the princess (reward of the hero), her father (who rewards the hero), the dispatcher (who sends the hero on their task), and finally the false hero. Insidious has many of these character types, and so complies with Propp’s theory. It has a hero, in the form of the father (Josh Lambert). It is easy to distinguish him as the hero, as he tries desperately to save the victim throughout the film (his son, Dalton). There is a clear villain (the demon). It could be argued that there is a donor(Elise Rainier), who gives the hero a magical item, in the form of a metronome, in order for the hero to go into the parallel word to save his son. There are three clear helpers, the ‘demon-hunters’(Elise Rainier, Specs and Tucker). Elise Rainier could also be the dispatcher, as she tells the hero how to save his son. However, there is no apparent princess or father, as the thing that the hero is trying to save is his son, and he gets no reward, other than getting his son back of course.

In conclusion, Insidious roughly follows the narrative structure of Todorov, with the exception of there not being a restoration of equilibrium. However, it strongly complies with Propp’s theory, and has most of, if not all of the eight character types which he established. The audience would probably be satisfied with this film, as it would be everything that they would expect from a psychological supernatural horror.

Analysing Full Films- Saw II

Full analysis of Saw II

Saw II is an American slasher/mystery horror film directed by Darren Lynn Bousman in 2005. It is a sequel to 2004's Saw and the second film in the seven-part Saw film series. It stars Donnie Wahlberg, Glenn Plummer, Shawnee Smith and Tobin Bell. Smith, Bell and Meyer are the only actors who also starred in the first one.

Todorov’s theory of narrative structure suggests that the story begins with equilibrium where everything is in balance. This is then disrupted by an event, causing disequilibrium. Problems are then resolved into a new equilibrium by the end of a story. It could be argued that Saw II follows this narrative structure. Although it didn’t start with equilibrium, it didn’t necessarily have to establish equilibrium, as it had already been established in the first film. The producers could go straight into the action because the audience already knew the characters. However, there is an establishment of the main characters, in the form of the police officer father and the victim son. There is a realisation of the situation (waking up in the house), and an attempt to resolve the situation (trying to get out of the house). It could also be argued that there is a new equilibrium towards the end of a film, with the son being rescued, and Jigsaw being left for dead.

There are many expectations that the audience will have of this film, due to this film being a sequel. They will expect the same gore and grisly deaths as the first one, with the same plot and turmoil between characters and character types. If this is not present within the film, the audience will feel disappointed, as the reason they would’ve gone to see the sequel is because they would’ve enjoyed the prequel. Audiences expect many things from the film in terms of genre. They will expect to see blood and gore, as they know that it is a slasher movie. They will also expect a confusing storyline which they have to try and work out, as they know it is a mysterious movie. Hollywood tends to use the same genre template, being a male killer, killing a woman in distress. Anybody who has sex or does drugs in the film will be killed, and the ‘final girl’, who has more masculine traits, will survive. In Saw II, this is partly present, as there is a male killer (Jigsaw), and the typically ‘slutty’ girl (Emmanuelle Vaugier) dies a gruesome death. However, the ‘final girl’ (who could be argued is Amanda) used to be a drug addict, and is carrying on Jigsaw’s legacy, and so knows how to get out of the house. It could be argued that there is no ‘final girl’ in this film, although the audience believes that Amanda is her, until the end when all becomes clear.

At the time where this film was made (00’s), the popular sub-genre within horror was Psychological horror and ‘Torture-Porn’. It could be argued that Saw II is both of this, with definite elements of both types of sub-genre, especially the ‘Torture-Porn’ element, with graphic killings of the characters, and lots of blood being shed. There is many types of binary opposition within this film, the most obvious being good vs. evil (Jigsaw vs. the Police). There are others however, in the form of the strong vs. the weak (Xavier vs. Daniel Matthews)

Propp’s theory of character types suggests that there are 8 character roles within films. He looked at 100s of old folk tales to establish this. He argues that in a film there is always: The villain(s)(usually female), the hero (usually male), the donor (person who provides an object with magic property), the helper (who aids the hero), the princess (reward of the hero), her father (who rewards the hero), the dispatcher (who sends the hero on their task), and finally the false hero. Saw II does not have many of these character types, and so challenges the idea of Propp’s theory. However, it does have a hero (Eric Matthews), although it could be argued that he is actually the false hero, as he is a corrupt police officer who frames the criminals into getting jailed. There is a clear villain (Jigsaw), with a helper (Amanda). However, unlike Propp argued, the helper helps the villain and not the hero. There are also many victims, the main victim being the son (Daniel Matthews), although he doesn’t die. This is probably because he is a good character rather than an evil one.

In conclusion, Saw II pretty much follows the narrative structure of Todorov and has the character types established by Propp, although it doesn’t completely follow these and has changes to make the film more unique. The audience would probably be satisfied with this film, if they enjoyed the first, due to the fact that it is very similar in narrative structure and character types.

Analysing Horror Trailers- Insidious

Analysing Horror Trailers

Insidious

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1YbOMDI59k

The trailer begins with the sponsor ‘Film District’, which has a dark feel to it, automatically telling the audience that the film is supposed to be scary. The back track for the first 15 seconds sounds like a scratching, which again is associated with scary things. The word ‘Insidious’ changes to ‘is’, then back to ‘Insidious’. This comes back throughout the trailer, which not only reminds the audience of the name of the film, which is conventional, but also keeps them on edge, and intrigues the audience and makes them want to ask questions. ‘Insidious is what?’ The opening shots of the trailer go against the conventions of a typical horror trailer, as the shots are not normal and establishing, but instead fast paced with scary music in the background. The audience would not usually expect this until nearer the end of the trailer, but instead get thrown into uncertainty and tension within the first 20 seconds. The locations shown are typical of a horror trailer; a new house and a hospital.

There is a faint ticking noise running throughout the trailer, which could connote that time is running out for the family, who have just moved into a new house, typical of this type of a horror film. I would say that the subgenre of this film is a psychological horror, similar to such films as ‘Paranormal Activity’ or ‘The Grudge’, as the film is very slow starting as it builds tension for the audience until finally showing them what all the ‘spooks’ have been. As is typical of a horror trailer, the ‘scarier’ sounds, such as creaking or cracking are amplified, and usually the only noise that is happening at that point. This is shown in the ‘Insidious’ trailer at 30 seconds, when the little boy, the victim, falls from the ladder. The trailer gives you a small insight into what the film is going to be, another convention of a typical trailer.

The main character and victim are clearly established early on in the trailer. The main character is probably the father of the family. The audience can guess this by the amount of shots that are on him within the first minute of the trailer. The victim is clearly the little boy, which is conventional, having a ‘vulnerable’ child as the victim. The audience know that he is the victim due to the fact that there is a shot of him in the hospital. The audience know that it is not normal for the boy to be in hospital as the mother states “He’s not in a coma. I don’t know what to call it”. This quote shows that all is not well, as again is typical of a horror trailer, leaving the audience wondering why all is not well.

It reveals a little more of the film until 1.09 in the trailer, where help from a professional is called. It is the wise grandmother that calls the help, rather than the naïve mother, who typically is clueless and scared. The experts come in and do their checks, and establish what the problem is, which is conventional of the narrative structure of the horror trailer. It could be argued that this is the clear identification of the event, although the boy in hospital is more likely to be the event, as it informs the parents that something is not right.

The pace of the different clips then increase, the editing and the music, which lets the audience know that the film will do the same, which is typical of a horror trailer. The music chosen to play over the video in this trailer is fast-paced violins, which connotes uncertainty and tension. The pace of the trailer keeps increasing until 1.24, where we see the ‘monster’. This has been what the trailer has been building up to, and gives the audience a preview of what to expect. The trailer then cuts to black and the music stops. The silence leaves the audience on edge, but lets them recover after the fast-paced loud part of the trailer. Vital information is given in the 6 or 7 seconds of silence from the expert, before going to the ‘big finish’ which is typical of a horror trailer.

The final shots of the trailer is the title again, which is typical of a horror trailer, as it is one of the last images the audience see, which leaves the title in their head, making them more likely to want to see it. The trailer then tells the audience when the film is out. It says ‘everywhere April 1’ which could scare the audience into thinking that the monster will be after them. They may have brought the film out on April 1^st as a joke, or an ‘April fool’, which again may scare the audience. At 1.45, the second to last shot of the trailer, the music suddenly kicks in and a face flies towards the camera. This will make the audience jump as they will think that it’s over, and calm down, before being screamed at by the trailer one last time. The final shot shows the producers and distributors etc, which is typically the final shot of a horror trailer.

There is about 100 different edits in just under 2 minutes of trailer, making the edits roughly one every second. This fits into the typical number of 60-120, and sticks to the conventions of the trailer.