Kat and Alfie Trailer East Enders

The trailer starts with an establishing shot, showing us the location in which the show will take place and giving us a current view of what the pub looks like so that we are aware of the recent fire that has made the pub inhabitable.

The camera angle here is slanted, along with the sign which appears to have fallen. This suggests that the town itself has become rundown, broken and dysfunctional and that things will continue to go wrong.

A tracking shot is used to show Kat walking, giving the effect that everyone is watching her. Her boots and the loud noise they make when she walks also helps to draw attention to what she is doing.

This over the shoulder shot shows us the fear this character has for Kat, as she is right at the side of the shot, almost trying to hide away, and due to the blinds she hides behind, we can tell that she does not want to be seen by her. 

Although we can tell who she is looking at, we are still not shown Kat which builds up suspense as we wait to find out who this character is. 

A tilt shot is then used, as the camera travels from Kat's feet...

To her face. This happens fairly slowly and really builds up our suspense to find out exactly who the character is. It also allows us to focus on each part of her at a time- i.e. what she is wearing, we see her boots, wonder who would be wearing them and why, we then notice her short skirt, bracelets, poncho, big gold earrings and start to build up the image and personality of this character.

This over the shoulder shot shows the intimidation which Kat possesses. We see her as a dark figure and the characters looking at her with shock and dread.

This close up shot is used to really define the fear and intrigue of the characters as we can very clearly see the expression on their faces from this close up. They are obviously shocked to see her, and we can tell this character's fear from the way in which he hides behind the blind. But the fact he is still looking at her shows he is intrigued as to why she is here. 

This shot focuses us on Kat's actions. With the typical Western scene that is represented here, we expect her to be reaching for a gun and this wonder builds our own personal fear of this character.

We then have a macro shot, where once again we are shown the pub, giving us a clear reminder of the location. We also get to see the reaction of characters which have noticed her from a distance.

An over-the-shoulder shot is used here to clearly show the audience that Kat has noticed Alfie. This is the first time in the extract which we see a character that is not intimidated or feared by Kat. In the previous over the shoulder shot, Kat is portrayed as a very dark and mysterious figure, but when the same shot is used again here, the dark character personality and main focus of the shot has switched to the almost silhouette figure in Kat's view - showing this character also has a high status in the plot of the story.

This shot of looking through Kat's legs, in one which you would typically expect to see in a Western film to portray that both characters are directly facing each other, legs apart, bold and ready for a duel.

We then switch from a close-up shot of Alfie...

To one of Kat. This gives us a close and clear view of the character's expressions and

S.O.P.A

What is S.O.P.A?


S.O.P.A stands for Stop Online Piracy Act. It is a law that has been proposed by the United States to stop people being able to distribute or receive copy-right content.


If the law did go ahead, companies that owned the content would be able to get court orders to force broadband providers to block the websites distributing their copy-right content. And by streaming the content, you could receive a penalty of up to 5 years in prison, which is longer than Michael Jackson's doctor got for killing him!


User-content websites such as YouTube and Wikipedia would be greatly affected: they would become shut down if this becomes law.


What are its objectives?


S.O.P.A basically aims to stop people from infringing copy-right content. It is highly supported by firms such as publishers and film studios who make the content which is being distributed, as it is these companies that are loosing out on money.


Technology firms such as Google and Facebook are opposed to S.O.P.A as they rely on users being able to freely share information.


Do I agree with S.O.P.A?

Personally, I do not. I understand that piracy does happen and it is very vast in terms of the internet, but I in no way think that something as simple as S.O.P.A could stop it.
   The freedom in using the internet which we have been given has broadened our lives in many different ways. We can now easily upload our own videos to YouTube in a very short period of time, locate friends from school that we haven't seen in years in seconds, find everything we'd possibly want to know about a topic by typing a phrase in Wikipedia apposed to going to the library or getting out a dictionary and SO much more. The benefits for us as the consumers of the internet have been endless. It has also made the internet much more popular, if things were to go back to the way they were before the content that is currently available wasn't, then much less time would be spent on the internet and many companies would not be able to survive, many jobs would be lost, and there would be world-wide loss for everyone - which is not beneficial in this economic climate.
   Although people do watch pirated movies online for free, I do not feel that this is a real loss to the film producers. It is likely that these people who are watching the movies were never going to pay to watch the film in the first place, so although they are getting the movie for free which is not acceptable, the film industry is not losing out by a large margin.
   There are a vast majority of films available to watch online, but none of which are a quality any where near as high as that if they were being viewed in a cinema or on DVD. So these methods of watching film still have major advantages over watching them online and this is how the majority of people will choose to watch the film.
   People may watch a movie online or a clip of the movie just to be sure that it is something that they are going to like. With times getting harder, we aren’t all as keen to splash out and take a risk on something that we may not even like. It could be that after watching part of the film, the person may be more likely to purchase it on DVD for the quality.
   Distribution of other content such as promotional material for TV shows, films etc either made personally by people or original trailers posted on YouTube for example, can surely only promote such shows etc and improve their views and in turn profit? However if the S.O.P.A laws did go ahead, a personally made video to promote Doctor Who using content or imagery from the series, would be banned from posting!
   It is hard to distinguish a line between what we want people to stop doing, what we want them to continue doing and to what extent.
   Another issue is the fact that we cannot be sure what exactly would happen if S.O.P.A did become law. Would everyone still use the internet to the same extent? Would our overall knowledge decrease from lack of resources to obtain information? Would business profits plummet? Would the film industries profit actually increase? So much is unknown, and it is such a fragile and difficult situation that I think that S.O.P.A should not go ahead simply because it would cause more damage than benefits!

Explain using specific examples, how the expansion of digital media has been an improvement for audiences

   Audiences are now able to decide when, where and how they consume media. Previously ‘push media’ meant that people had to fit their lives around media and it was more difficult to consume.

   The advances in the availability in media and the forms in which it comes, means that everyone has access to what they want, when they want and however they want it. This means that people who like a specific niche of media can now find ways of accessing it, finding others who are interested in the same thing and producers have been able to use new media to understand these niches, produce something they will be interested in and advertise it in a certain way which they will find appealing.

   Producers are much more aware how to advertise to people they know will be interested. For example, if you state on Facebook that you like a certain film/TV series or band, adverts along the side of the screen become aimed at you – telling you for example that the new Doctor Who series starts on the 28^th of March, or that your favorite band is releasing an album in September. They also advertise bands/films etc similar to those that they know you already like. For example, they might say ‘If you like Blink-182 then you’ll love Hey Monday!’ and offer you a link to their music.

   We no longer find out about new films etc just through radio, TV and movie trailers, in fact this is probably the most unlikely way in which we will find out!
   We now search for what we want rather than people telling us what we might want and how we have to access it. This means that companies have to make this information available for us to find, and rather than paying to broadcast the information on TV to anyone who might be interested, it is more a case of paying Google to make sure that if someone is searching for your item, that it is high-up on the list and can easily be found.

   In a way, the audience and producers have switched places. The audience are now much more in control of what is being produced, rather than the producers producing it and the audience having to watch it or not. This means that there is more diversion in audience preference (audience fragmentation), making the producers work harder to create something that a niche audience is going to like, overall giving the audience more power and creating better media.

   It is now very easy to compare the prices of films/CDs online. This has caused high competition of sale between sites, meaning that people have lowered the prices of films/music etc considerably to increase sale. This means that it is easier and cheaper for us to obtain this media.
   We are now also able to put our money towards exactly what we want – for example, in the past, if you wanted a specific song, you would have to buy the album or single if it was released (which still means you are paying for more than one song). But now you can purchase specific songs from the iTunes store, which you can have access to a lot quicker and cheaper than going out to buy and album or single.

   Piracy has allowed people to have a greater access to things that they wouldn’t have been able to previously. People are able to watch films online for free where as before they would have to go to the cinema to view the film or purchase it on DVD. Although this clearly means that producers are loosing out on money that people should be paying to watch the film.

   During the 70’s, cinema screens were dirty, uncomfortable and run down, and not many people wanted to go. So in the 80’s they improved the standards of seating etc and made more food available to purchase. But then from the 90’s, the internet allowed people to watch the films at a better quality for a cheaper price online. People did not bother going to the cinema when they could receive a better experience at a cheaper price, watching the film when they wanted to, in the comfort of their own home.

   Cinemas then majorly improved their seating facilities, sound and image quality and have now invested in devices to play films in 3D. This means that cinema tickets have gone up considerably in price, but however there is now much more incentive to go to the cinema. Even with a large screen TV, surround sound and Blue-Ray discs, you cannot achieve an affect as good as the cinema and going to the cinema is cheaper than buying the Blue Ray disc – making the cinema unique and worth-while again. You could say that piracy has caused a positive change in cinema.

   However, piracy still is an issue, and people still watch films online illegally rather than paying to view them. It is likely that the people watching these films were never going to pay to watch them anyway, so the producers may not be missing out, but does that make it okay to still have access to it for free while others pay?

   It’s hard to say where using copyright material is acceptable and where it isn’t. If someone makes a video on YouTube using images from a certain TV show, is this wrong? Surely if anything all it’s doing is promoting awareness and appreciation for the show which is a bonus for the producers. If a whole film were to be distributed this would be quite different and all this seems to mean is that the producers are loosing out. On the other hand, people may watch the beginning or the whole of a film just to check that they like it and if they do, they will then purchase it for the quality. Overall it is hard to tell whether piracy is improving media or not, and whether it should be acceptable and to what extent.

Converging my game show

If I were to make changes to my game show due to current audience influence, these are some ideas which I might pursue:

Due to the fact that people are now less likely to sit down as a family at 7.00 o'clock and watch TV together, means that our television program could be made more successful by aiming it at a certain niche of people, rather than the whole family. We could focus specifically on the humor of the show for those who the likes of Jimmy Carr's comedy appeals to, or we could focus more on the questions and intelligence of the show for those who prefer a more sophisticated approach.

Making the show available online as a program which you can 'catch up with' may increase the audience size as they have the ability to watch it when they want (as apposed to having to watch it at 7.00pm on a certain day) where they want (on the computer, or using a PS3 or Wii watch it via the TV - we could also add episodes to iTunes available for purchase so that money is made by the program this way and the audience will be able to watch the show on their iPod, iPhone, iPad etc, even if they're on a bus for example. Allowing people to access the program via the computer/PS3 etc means that you are able to make a profit from the adverts that you show before/in-between the show)

A profit could be made from the show by allowing people to purchase it or adding adverts in free viewings - which people would pay to advertise on.
   The prize gained at the end of the show could advertise the company which provided it. For example, if the holiday was a Thompson family holiday, Thompson would most likely pay to have their name positively advertised and would be likely to give the holiday away for free - meaning that the program itself does not have to pay for the expenses of the holiday.
   You could create an 'App' for apple devices such as iPhone/iPad that would enable people to have a go at questions them selves and compete against their friends and others across the world. The App could also allow them to become involved in the game show in some way. For example, just as on who wants to be a millionaire when the audience votes on what they think the right answer is, you at home could vote.

   They could also use it to get involved and be in with a chance of either appearing on the show, or answering a question with the possibility of being picked to win a prize. This will change how the audience consumes the show.
  A website could be used instead of or as well as an App in exactly the same way, to get people more involved in the show.


Here are some examples of apps that have been created, based on the game shows 'Countdown' and 'The Cube':

Conventions of a Soap Opera featured in Eastenders 10-11-2011

This clip from East Enders contains many conventions commonly used in Soap Operas. These conventions are used to create a domestic, real-life; imaginable situation for the audience which they feel personally involved in and can relate to. Themes are often recognizable as they are often things that we expect to happen every day, however at the same time the Soap makes them melodramatic and exciting.

The clip begins with an establishing shot - which shows us the location of the show through things we recognize and can relate to, such as the River Thames. Showing this part of London automatically creates a stereotype of this location in our minds.

We see the character Phil Mitchell, who is bald, has a big build, is wearing a suit and appears to have an extremely aggressive manner. This costume for the character is highly symbolic of your typical 'bad guy' in the story.

We are soon introduced to the typical meeting place that allows for gossip to circulate - the pub.

There is a dominance of two-shots as there is a conversation between characters in the pub.

Many current social issues are raised in this clip, meaning the audience can relate the soap to things happening in real life, making the soap seem more realistic. The controversy of homosexuality is raised by Christian and Ben. There are signs of family break-down as Phil and Ben do not get on. Phil shows issues with aggression, bullying, false accusation and breaking the law by wrecking Christian’s house.

There is a constant illusion of real time along with continuity, as we believe that the character would be saying/doing that at this point in the story. We even see Phil leave the pub and make his way back home; everything is shown so that we do not feel as if we have 'jumped in time'.

Interweaving of storylines are used as we are shown the storyline with Phil, which interweaves with Christian, and we are shown the story of the planned wedding and the story next door.

The storyline of the wedding was obviously relevant to a relationship that had happened in a storyline previously, which had been partially closed, leaving the audience to forget slightly, and now it has re-surfaced causing new questions for the audience.

When we are shown into the neighbors house, we get an idea that they may have something to do with the fight going on between Phil and Christian as we hear in the conversation 'This is too much, it wasn't meant to go this far.... what have we done' we start to question as the viewer what they had to do with it. (There is a combination of action - what we've seen and heard them say, and enigma - questions that are then raised)
This creates dramatic irony - we know something about a character that another character doesn't.

When Phil brakes into Christian’s home, we are shown a very domestic setting. We see things you would expect in a typical family home, such as the pot and pans that Phil trashes.

There is a dominance of digetic sound. We hear cars along the street etc as the story strives to keep realistic.

East Enders creates a fairly nostalgic and perhaps out-dated depiction of the community, as it suggests that everyone knows everyone else's business and neighbors and community know a lot about each other. However, this is not exactly the case in modern society. People are more likely to keep themselves to themselves nowadays and the 'close community' where you speak to your neighbor on your way out to work and chat to others in the neighborhood along the street, everyone knowing everyone else isn't how things are any more.

Although it is not shown in this clip, the drums at the end of East Enders are used as a motif for the soap.

Avatar- types of convergence from the film

Convergence is when various types of technology are brought together into one. For example, a mobile phone no longer has the single purpose of making calls, it can now be used to take photos/videos, watch movies, listen to music, surf the internet, play games and other app usages, send/receive emails and even see the people you are talking to on screen through camera!

This technological convergence means that it is much easier to make a profit from technologies other than that which the media product was originally intended. Avatar's broad use of different technologies to draw in their customers shows this.

Avatar was originally a film, but aspects of the film have been converged using other technologies, making an even vaster audience with a much wider variety of entertainment which in tern promotes the film.

The first thing seen on the website is a trailer of the film, which instantly reminds those who have previously viewed the film of the highlights, and to those who have not it inspires to venture further into the site.

Once you have selected your current state, you are able to view the many ways in which these technologies have all been used in different ways to help you enjoy this one movie.

This is achievable from the slide bar at the bottom of the screen (shown below)

You are able to:

Purchase the film (this means that the producers instantly make money)

Download images / wallpapers of scenes from the film (the audience are happy to have received something for free, they feel that the producers are reaching out to their needs, to give them things that they desire... for free! However, the intention of going to effort to give things away for free is that people will be reminded of the film every time they see their desktop image and most importantly, when their friends see an image, they are likely to be interested and ask about the film which is sure to receive a positive response if they love the film so much that they have changed their background image to it! Word of mouth is the most effective way of informing people about media. Even if your film or media product relates to a certain niche of people, if you have already appealed to one person in that niche, it is likely that their friend will have similar interests too and will be influenced by their friend and purchase the film) 

Campaign to save the Brazilian Rainforest and the tribe of the Amazon River - as the film touches on subjects of deforestation and depriving creatures of their natural habitat, those who are interested in these aspects of the film and want to do something about it are more likely to find out what they can do to help this way. As the site has a connection with charity, you automatically think better of the site - and the film, as you associate giving to charity as positive)

Purchase a video game (instantly money is made)

Download mobile games from iTunes (instantly money is made)

View Twitter feed (if you enjoyed the film, you might make positive comments about it on twitter - it is unlikely that you would go to the effort of going to the site etc if you did not enjoy the film! Other people who have not seen the film will then be able to read these comments and make an informed decision whether or not to purchase it)

Purchase Avatar toys which require the site to use (by bringing people back to the site every time, they will not only be reminded of the film, which may make them watch it again, show it to a friend etc, but by bringing them back to the site, you are making them more likely to purchase something else)

Purchase a 3D collectors book (instantly making money)

Make yourself an Avatar using a photo of yourself (this is free and again promotes how people feel about Avatar and makes them more likely to tell their friends about it and get them interested)

This is me as an Avatar:

Read Avatar news feed (for those who have not seen the film it allows them to find out information about it, and for those who have watched it, they are updated on new disc format releases etc)

Download interactive news and updates to your desktop (if you are constantly reminded of the film, your positive association with it sticks in your mind. Then when you are informed that a Blue Ray or 3D version is being brought out for example, you are more likely to purchase it)

Technological convergence has allowed people to access and purchase a wider variety of media products based on one thing, which Avatars website has clearly illustrated.

This means that people can obtain more of something that they desire and that producers make more of these desired products. This creates more jobs for creating video games etc and also creates more advertising jobs as the way in which media products are advertised has changed drastically. Rather than creating awareness of a film through TV/radio adverts and trailers in cinemas, there are much more sophisticated ways of finding out exactly who is likely to want the product and advertising it to them. For example: when you add to Facebook your interests such as movies, TV shows, music etc, the adverts that appear to you are ones which are similar to things that you have already displayed an interest in as you are seen as someone who is likely to respond to the advert.

The internet and new media has allowed us to access what we want, when we want it and how we want it e.g. watch it on TV, computer, cinema, phone, iPad etc. This means that we are no longer 'pushed' to watch Hollyoaks on Channel 4 at 6.30 every weekday if we want to see it, we can now watch all episodes of the week on one day from the computer on 4oD when it is convenient to us - we have changed the way in which producers distribute their products due to our personal needs. It has become more a matter of the producers impressing the audience to watch/purchase their media product than it has telling them what to watch and when and where to watch it.