Shot Composition: Glossary Of Terms

Camera Shots and Lighting Guidance On Blog

There is a glossary of camera shots with sketches available on the 'Shot and Lighting Page' under the blog banner so that you can confirm shot types. There are also helpful tutorial videos for framing, camera movement and lighting. Use these resources if you are unsure of any of the key terms when analysing your film clips.

There is also an 'Editing & Sound Page' under the blog banner for guidance concerning other aspects of analysis.  

Editing/Mise-en-scene

Mise en scene

View more presentations from J Thrasher

Alien (1979) - Film Analysis

“Alien” was released in May of 1979 by 20th Century Fox with the tagline, “In space, no one can hear you scream.” The film was directed by Ridley Scott, produced by Gordon Carroll, David Giler, and Walter Hill and written by Dan O’Bannon, who also developed the film’s screenplay. This science fiction horror film regards an alien creature that stalks and kills crew members on the spaceship Nostromo after being brought aboard. Sigourney Weaver plays as Ripley, a warrant officer and is also the protagonist of the film. The film also features an all star cast that includes, Bolaji Badejo as the alien, Veronica Cartwright as Lambert, Ian Holm as Ash, John Hurt as Kane, Yaphet Kotto as Parker, Tom Skerritt as Dallas, and Harry Dean Stanton as Brett. In charge of the Academy Award winning visual effects was cinematographer Derek Vanlint, while the eerie film soundtrack was created Jerry Goldsmith. The film was a breakthrough for the science fiction genre as well as the horror genre and received both critical acclaim and commercial box office success bringing in a gross $104,931,801 with a budget of $11 million.

“Alien” came to the American screen in a time of immense cultural upheaval. The economy in the 1970s experienced periods of inflation, recession, and high unemployment. The economic conditions led to price controls and new and enhanced programs to combat poverty and unemployment. The decade was also marked by a growing importance of women in the workforce, as well as a second wave of feminist views. Sexual freedom and experimentation in the 1960s contributed to an uprising of sexually transmitted diseases in the 1970s, and a realization that these could affect the majority of the population. Exponential change in technology was also a major issue in the 70s. Many of these cultural changes attributed to both the horror and financial success of “Alien” because of the film’s prevalent consistency within the mind of 1970s America.

In October 1973, the Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries proclaimed an oil embargo “In response to the U.S. decision to re-supply the Israeli military" until March 1974. In 1979 America experienced its second oil crisis because of disrupted productions and Iranian revolution. Throughout this time Americans felt a dread of continuous oil price increases and a worry that eventually there would be no more oil or gasoline. “Alien” plays on this fear immediately when it mentions that the crew’s main missions was mining mineral ore from distant places in the galaxy and return them to earth. They were on a mission to seek new forms of energy from other places than the Middle East, and it confirms fears that eventually the US would have to look elsewhere for its energy resources.

“Alien” was released in May of 1979, a short time after the partial nuclear meltdown at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania. Though the movie was already finished by the time of the accident, it had an effect on the way the movie was viewed. Technology getting out of control is a theme presented in Alien. Ash, the Science Officer of the Nostromo is an android. The rest of the crew, however, is not aware of this. Ash, and Mother, the ship’s onboard computer have been collaborating from the beginning to capture the alien creature. The lives of the crew are of minor significance to them. Ash goes so far as to attack Ripley, losing all normal functions in a “meltdown” that he experiences. People could identify with their lives being put in danger by machines that they could not control.

Another cultural context relevant to “Alien” is that of sexually transmitted diseases. Herpes, gonorrhea, and Chlamydia had become widespread in America, affecting nearly forty percent of sexually active individuals. For the first time, Americans had become frightened of the risk of disease in fornication. The Alien creature, being the villain archetype, is born through penetration of a host, Executive Officer Kane. Ripley makes an extensive point to follow quarantine procedure for fear of infection. This “infection” spread as the Alien grew rapidly and killed the rest of the crew. Audiences would relate to the need for quarantine and sterilization, noting how this sexually transmitted parasite goes on to destroy the crew it resides with.

But the strongest cultural context present within “Alien” is its embodiment of Feminism. The role of women in society was going through a turning point in the 1970s. Women’s organizations fought for an amendment to the United States Constitution known as the Equal Rights Amendment that would explicitly state that men and women were equal under the law. In 1974, The Equal Credit Opportunity Act prohibited discrimination in consumer credit practices on the basis of sex, race, marital status, religion, national origin, or age. The Pregnancy Discrimination Act banned employment discrimination against pregnant women, stating a woman cannot be fired or denied a job or a promotion because she is or may become pregnant, nor can she be forced to take a pregnancy leave if she is willing and able to work. 1978 saw the largest march for equality in the history of the Feminist movement, the Equal Rights Amendment Extension March, which had over one-hundred thousand people in it. The 70s therefore saw a strong empowerment of woman within a predominantly patriarchal.

“Alien” shows us a clear instance of gender-role reversal in the heroine archetype. The story begins with a clear hierarchy of male dominants. As the film progresses however, the men are killed or fall under chain of command to women. Both the ship’s Captain and Executive Officer are used for the Alien’s reproduction, giving them a “mother” aspect. Ash even refers to the creature as “Kane’s son” referencing him as a mother. Ripley is then given the role of slaying the “monster” of the film, which was a presumed male role, dating back to medieval times. Making the main character of “Alien” a woman was a risky move by the film makers, and it ultimately proved successful. Had the film been released a few years earlier, audiences might not have accepted such a tough female protagonist, or it would have overwhelmed the rest of the film.

“Alien” is a science fiction horror film. Horror films are unsettling movies that strive to elicit the emotions of fear, disgust, panic, alarm, and shock from viewers through the means of the macabre and supernatural. Science Fiction Film is a film genre that uses speculative, science-based depictions of phenomena that are not necessarily accepted by mainstream science, such as extra-terrestrial life forms, alien worlds, and time travel, often along with futuristic elements such as spacecraft, robots, or other technologies. Since “Alien” primarily frightened the audience and evoked “eerie dread” it is categorized first as a horror film, but falls into the science fiction sub genre because it is set in the future and takes place aboard a space ship.

In a science fiction horror film, the threats usually come from the unknown, but can also include films in which the threat comes from technology. In “Alien”, the danger comes from an extraterrestrial creature that is feared both for its dangerous abilities, and its unpredictable hostility. Fear of uncontrollable technology is also present, in how Ash and Mother plot to preserve the Alien without the knowledge of the crew. The expectations and characteristics of science fiction horror were changed drastically after the release of “Alien” in 1979. Prior to this, most science fiction horror films were low budget B movies, mostly in the 1950s. They played on fear of the “other”, a threat from outside. While the threats in these films often came from outer space, they often played on America’s fear of communism and the Cold War. Some examples of this type of film include “The Thing from Another World”, “Invasion of the Body Snatchers”, and “It Came from Outer Space”

“Alien” introduced a new kind of science fiction horror. The threat still comes from the unknown, but the environment and method of attack were different. “Alien” borrowed elements from other types of horror film, like the slasher subgenre introduced by “Psycho” in 1960. Instead of a creepy old mansion where the characters were stalked by a serial killer, there could be a claustrophobic space ship where the characters were hunted by an alien creature. “Alien” uses the reveal of the tail, its shadow, or the head of the alien the same way a slasher film might reveal the killer’s knife while the victim is looking the other way. In the famous “shower scene” from “Psycho” the female victim’s face is turned away from the killer while he creeps up behind her. Likewise, when Ripley and Dallas are in the ICU looking for the infant alien creature, the tail of the alien lowered down behind Ripley, eventually startling her. “Alien” uses a formula common to many slasher films in that a group of people are killed one by one until the lead character, usually female, kills the antagonist. The difference is that science fiction is a genre of film that was usually dominated by male characters and male fans. By making the lead character Ripley female, the film makers expanded their potential audience and successfully combined horror and science fiction, paving the way for more female action stars in science fiction.

“Alien” quickly became a hit with both horror and science fiction audiences. It was the third highest grossing film in 1979 worldwide. “Alien” lead to five sequels, and continues to be a popular and successful franchise today. “Alien” followed on the success of “Star Wars” in 1977. Twentieth Century Fox saw the audience that science fiction could draw, and capitalized on that audience. “Alien” was intended to be for an older crowd, but would still aim to draw science fiction fans. “Jaws” was another movie that showed mainstream audiences were interested in horror outside of the standard slasher films. One reason that “Alien” was successful is because it is a movie set in a fictional universe, yet it remains identifiable with audiences today. The characters are easily identifiable because they are presented as regular blue collar workers, just in a different setting and time. They react how we would react in most cases. No year is given to explain how far in the future this is, which makes it seem less removed from our time. The technology presented in the movie appears very primitive. This allows the audience to understand what is happening without having to explain how the technology works or what it does.

The scene that “Alien” is more remembered for then any other is the scene when the alien bursts out of Kane’s chest, killing him in the process. This scene is very memorable for a number of reasons, primarily because of its level of gore, and disgusting nature. Kane does an excellent job portraying the pain of what it would feel like to be eaten alive from the inside. The sound effects also do a good job in making the audience imagine what is going on inside Kane’s body. Audiences had never seen anything quite like that before this movie. Part of the reason that the chest bursting scene is so memorable is that it’s symbolic to our fear of abjection. Abjection deals with the boundary between us and everything else. According to the French psychoanalyst Julia Kristeva, since the abject is situated outside the symbolic order, being forced to face it is an inherently traumatic experience. This act is done in the light of the parts of ourselves that we exclude: that is, the mother. We must abject the maternal, the object which has created us, in order to construct an identity. There is no greater way of showing abjection on film then having a creature eat a person from inside out and emerge. Because of this, this scene has survived to be one of the most shocking and horrific in the history of horror.

Director Ridley Scott chose not to show the Alien creature in full through most of the film, showing only pieces of it while keeping most of its body in shadow in order to heighten the sense of terror and suspense. The audience could thus project their own fears into imagining what the rest of the creature might look like. This technique was highly successful and continues to be seen repeatedly in Modern American Horror films to this day.

“Alien” uses various elements of film noir along with other elements of German Expressionism and traditional Silent Horror. The planet where the Alien resides, most of the ship, and even the escape pod is shot using low key lighting. This is to symbolize the Alien’s presence in that area, or symbolically, the presence of evil. Well lit areas such as the stasis room, mother’s central control room, and the kitchen corresponded with the sanctity or safety of the area. When Dallas and Ash first attempted to remove the Alien from Kane’s face in the ICU, the room was well lit and signified no danger, yet when they returned to find the Alien missing in the room, it was dark and ominous. Scott used an abundance of close-up angle shots of the various characters and the Alien to show their fear and hide the Alien’s true form from the audience.

The Mise-en-scene of “Alien” is beautifully portrayed when Ripley is attempting to escape the ship. Pressured air is escaping from every leaky gasket, water dripping from the pipes, emergency lights flashing red throughout each corridor, and sewer-like flooring gives the entire environment a hellish feeling. The colors used reflect a variety of black and white shades as in Film Noir, but include neon greens, bright lucid reds to give it a surreal space look. Another interesting motif in the film is the reoccurring feel of wetness. Water drips from each corridor near the engineering rooms, viscous liquid drips from the Alien’s body and mouth, and sweat runs down from the crew’s faces (mostly Ripley). The heat, gas, and wetness give the ship a living breathing aspect, with more of an environmental feel than a cold mechanical look. The environment is like a jungle, when chains hanging like vines, hidden caves, and running water, with the Alien acting as a carnivore hunting its prey.

The final quality of the film that gives it its edge and horror is its soundtrack. The sound is quiet and surreal, with an underlying eeriness about it. There are various sounds of wind howling, screeching sounds, and monotonous circling of violin and electronics. It’s amazing and ironic to see a soundtrack make such an impact, when the sounds are low key and faint, barely audible except in certain turning points of the film. The opening scene presents this rather well. While small lines appear before a black screen revealing the title, we see it fade into space, while a subtle, low key flute plays in the background with howling sounds. It completely counters the main title sequence feel of “Star Wars” with its trumpets of extravagance. This subtle low-key soundtrack gives it a true space feel, and resorts back to its “In space no one can hear you scream” motto.

“Alien” continues to frighten audiences throughout for its subjectivity into the unknown and darkness of space. We are forced to look inward into our own dark voids and become utterly helpless and vulnerable to the Alien’s uncanny power. “Alien” reflected the fears and uncertainty of 1970s America, while perfectly referencing previous work in the genre. A monster film, a slasher film, a science fiction film, a horror film, “Alien” remains timeless in our eyes for its innovation and style, both ideal in presenting us with a story of horror in the dangers of discovery, and will continue to haunt the dreams of audiences for decades to come.

Edited from: ryuhawk.hubpages.com/hub/Alien-1979-Analysis

Meaning In Composition: Guidance

To reduce the concept to a crude rule of thumb in the composition of a shot in a movie: A person located somewhat to the right of centre will seem ideally placed. A person to the right of that position will seem more positive; to the left, more negative. A centered person will seem objectified, like a mug shot.

Now what do I mean by "positive" or "negative?" I mean that these are tendencies within the composition. They are not absolutes. But in general terms, in a two-shot, the person on the right will "seem" dominant over the person on the left.

In simplistic terms: Right is more positive, left more negative. Movement to the right seems more favorable; to the left, less so. The future seems to live on the right, the past on the left. The top is dominant over the bottom. The foreground is stronger than the background. Symmetrical compositions seem at rest. Diagonals in a composition seem to "move" in the direction of the sharpest angle they form, even though of course they may not move at all. Therefore, a composition could lead us into a background that becomes dominant over a foreground.

Tilt shots of course put everything on a diagonal, implying the world is out of balance. I have the impression that more tilts are down to the right than to the left, perhaps suggesting the characters are sliding perilously into their futures. Left tilts to me suggest helplessness, sadness, resignation. Few tilts feel positive. Movement is dominant over things that are still. A POV above a character's eyeline reduces him; below the eyeline, enhances him. Extreme high angle shots make characters into pawns; low angles make them into gods. Brighter areas tend to be dominant over darker areas, but far from always: Within the context, you can seek the "dominant contrast," which is the area we are drawn toward. Sometimes it will be darker, further back, lower, and so on. It can be as effective to go against intrinsic weightings as to follow them.

Taken from:

How to read a movie

By Roger Ebert

Genre Theory: The Road Movie

From: The Media Book, edited by Chris Newbold, Olver Boyd-Barrett & Hilde Van Den Bulk

Terence Malick 'Badlands': Recurring Shots/Themes

The American Dream

The term “American dream” is used in many ways, but it essentially is an idea that suggests that anyone in the US can succeed through hard work and has the potential to lead a happy, successful life. Many people have expanded upon or refined the definition to include things such as freedom, fulfillment and meaningful relationships. Someone who manages to achieve his or her version of the American dream is often said to be “living the dream.” This concept has been subject to criticism, because some people believe that the structure of society in the US prevents such an idealistic goal for everyone. Critics often point to examples of inequality rooted in class, race, religion and ethnicity that suggest that the American dream is not attainable for everyone.

History

The idea of an American dream is older than the US, dating to the 1600s, when people began to have all sorts of hopes and aspirations for what was a new and largely unexplored continent to European immigrants. Many of these dreams focused on owning land and establishing a prosperous business that — theoretically, at least — would increase one's happiness. During the Great Depression of the 1930s, authors often wrote about the idealistic American dream, somewhat codifying the concept and entrenching it in American society.

10 big problems with modern day blockbuster cinema

Inaudible dialogue and revealing trailers are two problems Hollywood faces.

Blockbuster cinema is constantly changing - do you agree? Read more at Den of Geek!

1. Inaudible dialogue

Let’s start with something that puts an immediate firewall between the audience and what’s happening on the screen: the fact that the plague of inaudible dialogue is refusing to go away. Too often, thanks to the loudness of explosions all around, bad sound mixing, or a refusal to re-record dialogue in the case of certain directors, it’s impossible to hear what characters are saying on the screen.

Sometimes, this doesn’t matter. A line thrown away in the middle of an action sequence is rarely pivotal. However, at times, a lost line really, really does make a difference. In some cases, an entire character’s performance, though, can be hard to decipher.

2. The multiplex

Mark Kermode managed a whole book on the problem with modern movies, in which he devotes a hefty page count to multiplex cinemas, and the deterioration of the art of projection.

He’s bang on the money with some of his points about the multiplex, too. The multiplex is reflective of the state of modern day television, in that there are hundreds of channels that still offer surprisingly little to watch. The whole idea, in an ideal world, of one building having 10, 20 or even 30 screens devoted to film is that it can host a broad selection of programming.

3. The slow decline of mid-budget movies

As we talked about here, Paramount Pictures made quite a living for itself in the 1990s by actively targeting the mid-priced thriller. While other studios were kickstarting the rush to make $100m+ blockbusters - a movement that Paramount is inevitably now a paid up member to - the studio was content to find thrillers costing $30-40m, knowing that it wouldn't get a gigantic box office take out of them, but would bring home a good profit.

Those days are all but gone. It was while on the press tour for The Lone Ranger (budget: $200m+) that director Gore Verbinski lamented the fact that the current Hollywood system supports small movies (courtesy of studios' marquee labels, such as Sony Classics) and massive blockbusters. 

4. Intolerance of the different

A real problem, this. The common complaint that generally follows any list of upcoming big movies is that they're all the same, or they're all sequels, or they're all franchises. Where are the original films, or the standalone big movies? The answer: they're there, but without massive marketing budgets behind them, how many people are actively seeking them out?

5. Trailers

The depressing thing about complaining about trailers is that we've all been doing it for years, and the problem gets worse. Once upon a time, we were grumbling about a single trailer for a film, that happened to spoil too much of it (prime offender: comedies). Now? Why spoil a film with one trailer, when you can do it with lots.

6. Special effects for the sake of special effects

We found plenty of things to admire in Man Of Steel, but like many critics and cinemagoers, we found ourselves slightly exhausted by its protracted scenes of city-wide destruction. It's a recent example of a film where its technical brilliance outstrips its restraint - a film that never settled for one scene of a collapsing skyscraper when it could easily afford to put in five.

7. An unwillingness to end a story

It was Kevin Smith's interview with Bruce Willis on the Die Hard 4.0 DVD (they're not such good pals now, we understand) that cemented this. Because until you get to the final chapter of a franchise, you're continually dealing with mid-story, as Smith quizzed Willis about. That in itself isn't a problem, but it does mean that there's a reluctance to damage characters, or to close off avenues, for fear of restricting future business possibilities. And yet endings are good: just look at the clamour building up to the Breaking Bad ending on television, knowing that a rich and wonderful story is heading to a final moment

8. Editing isn't ruthless enough

Digital filmmaking has brought in many tangible advantages. It's brought down the barriers for new filmmakers in particular, as you don't need to max out every credit card going or pretend you like film school just to get anywhere near the equipment and people you need to get a film together. Furthermore, directors can check a shot on the spot, thanks to a bank of monitors that adorn any half decent film set. There's no waiting to check the right piece of 35mm footage: it's all instant.

9. Too much reverence

Focus groups, expensive bits of research and a general paranoia amongst aforementioned posh people in Hollywood inevitably fosters a feeling of staying close to things that have worked before. In extreme cases, that's why you get films that aren't even remakes weaving themselves as closely as possible to films in a franchise that have worked before (Star Trek Into Darkness again being a prime example there).

10. The audience

Even though audiences can be shaped via good marketing, and restriction of choice, ultimately the films that end up in big cinemas are the ones that people are more likely to see. Thus, the reason why a big new Transformers sequel is made, and a potentially more interesting original film isn’t, is that more of us are likely to see the former. More than that, more of us are likely to pick up the DVDs, buy the merchandise, and, ultimately, buy a ticket at the cinema.

Read the complete article: http://www.denofgeek.com

Why are films so long nowadays?

All the films in contention for awards this year seem to have long runtimes. 

• Lincoln -150 mins 
• Zero Dark Thirty - 157 mins 
• Les Misérables - 160 mins
• The Master - 143 mins
• Django Unchained -165 mins  
• The Hobbit - 170 mins 

It seems that many awards contenders this year have bought into the idea that long runtimes gives the film a certain 'worthiness', like previous Oscar winners such as Lawrence of Arabia which ran at 227 mins. But are these running times justified?

We're in an age where the box set is a norm. From series such as Homeland, Breaking Bad and Boardwalk Empire to comedies such as The Thick of It and Curb Your Enthusiasm, audiences nowadays will happily watch hours of TV.

Do audiences take account of runtimes when they want to see a film? It's certainly one of the first questions critics consider – and there's no doubt that films with a duration of 85-95 minutes are greeted with a grin of appreciation even before they've begun. But you do get a sense with all these long films that they could also go on indefinitely. As TV shows look to extend their seasons, so too now movies are looking for franchise and seem wary of drawing to a close.

Sourced and edited from: guardian.co.uk/film

Kermode Uncut: Ten Best & Worst Films of 2014 (Part 1)

Steve Jobs on the Future of Movie Marketing

The internet has had a major impact on the film industry over the last decade. Initially, there was a concern that the internet would threaten the entire film business as online piracy sites saw annual box office ticket sales decline massively and consistently each year since 2002. Source - www.the-numbers.com/market However, as a whole the film industry today is booming. Overall, gross revenue in the last ten years has doubled with the help of, rather than despite, the internet.

How has the internet helped?

Film studios and film makers have had to adapt to take advantage of the internet and the power of social media. In an interesting twist of fate, what used to be the enemy has transformed itself into the film marketer’s best friend as an inventive way to minimise the overall costs for distribution and marketing.

The Power of Social Media

Films are a social topic which means that social media networks is a fantastic platform for film campaign.

People love to share their opinions on films with their friends so social media platforms are the perfect place to encourage discussion. By creating word-of-mouth marketing on social media a buzz can be created around any film.

Top 5 Highest Paid Actors/Actresses in Hollywood 2014

'The Grandmaster' (2013): dir Wong Kar-Wai (World Cinema)

Mark Kermode reviews The Grandmaster. Inspired by the life and times of the legendary kung fu master, Ip Man. The story spans the tumultuous Republican era that followed the fall of China's last dynasty, a time of chaos, division and war that was also the golden age of Chinese martial arts.

Section A: Case Study Approaches (FM2)

Prepare in depth knowledge of 2 Case Studies to use in Section A of the FM2 exam – 1 major Hollywood Production & 1 Independent or British release. These will give you a head start when it comes to discussing the details of specific releases for the exam. Consider:

What happened during pre-production of your chosen film/s? 

• Whose idea was the film? Did the idea start with the writer, or were writers brought in to develop a preconceived idea?

• Where did the idea come from? Was it an original idea, or perhaps a book first, or TV series, or comic strip, or from some other source?

• Was the film based upon an original script or developed over time by many writers?

• Who financed the film - Production Company?

• Casting – who were cast in the main roles and why? How important were stars? How did the film-makers think the chosen stars would appeal to audiences?

• Who was the producer?

• Who was the director and why did they take the project on?

• Did they have a track record of success?

• Was there anything interesting about the film soundtrack?




What happened during the production phase?

• Was it an easy ‘shoot’? If there were difficulties what were they?

• Where there any difficulties with casting or with acquiring the stars/actors the producer wanted?

• What did the film cost to make? How much did the stars get? Where did the budget go?

• Were there any changes to the script during production? How many changes or re-writes?

• List some of the key people who made contributions to the production.

What happened during the marketing and distribution phase of your case study film?

• Who were the distributors? How well known was the company? What is their track record as distributors? (Other films/genres)

• Who was the target audience? How do you know?

• How did the film-makers decide where to release the film and when?

• What was the marketing and advertising strategy for the film? Was there a premiere, and if so, where?

• Find film posters and analyse them for how they reach their audience(s)

• Analyse a trailer/teaser trailer and consider how the trailer persuaded and positioned British audiences to see the film.

• What outlets were used for advertising? Was TV used, for example?

• Were there any merchandising tie-ins?

• Was any additional publicity gained, and if so, how?



What happened during the exhibition (audience) phase?

• When was the film released; also where and on how many screens?

• Were there any issues with the classification of the film?

• Were there any other special restrictions placed on the exhibition of the film?

• What were the reactions of the critics to the film? Was it considered a critical success?

• Did the film create a particular media debate?

• How much money did the film take? Was it considered a commercial/financial success?

• Did it run in the cinema for some time?


Remember there are questions that you will not be able to answer; however there may be topics that you would like to include that are not covered in the questions set out. All the questions are only offered as guidelines; it is for you to work on the development of your own chosen product from concept to screen.

Adapted from: asanda2filmstudies

Avengers proves blockbusters no longer have to make it big in America first

The superhero film is just one recent mega-release to open in the States last – does this spell an end to the US's cultural dominance?

Last weekend, film fans in 39 countries spent $185m watching Avengers Assemble: a superheroic start to blockbuster season. But one nation was conspicuously missing from the list: the US. Captain America was embraced by Swedes and Peruvians before his countrymen had the chance to see the film known simply as The Avengers in the States. It was a similar story for Battleship, an alien attack movie as American as McDonald's apple pie, which dropped anchor in 26 territories on 11 April, five weeks before it will dock on US shores.

Ten years ago, the landscape looked very different. The mission to combat piracy led to simultaneous global rollouts – "day and date" releases, in Hollywood lingo – and that was the policy picked for Star Wars: Attack of the Clones back in 2002. But "America first" was still the industry standard. That summer, Spider-Man arrived in UK cinemas six weeks after US release, Men in Black II four weeks after, and Minority Report two weeks after. The Sum of All Fears took nearly two months to wash up in Europe. Billing a film as "the No 1 US hit" was a classic marketing strategy; pictures that flopped at home could have their overseas budgets slashed … or be dumped.

This year, sport fogs the picture; not just the Olympics, but Euro 2012, which kicks off on 8 June. Twentieth Century Fox has scheduled Prometheus to arrive in US cinemas on that exact date, but will release Ridley Scott's film the week before in 17 other countries, including the UK. Yet footie has nothing to do with the studio's strategy on Ice Age: Continental Drift, which starts its international run on 27 June, more than a fortnight before it appears in US cinemas. Why? Well: the last Ice Age movie, Dawn of the Dinosaurs, took $197m in the US and $691m elsewhere. Domestic US box-office used to be the focus of Hollywood studios; but now international has overtaken, particularly for tentpole movies. Those foreign markets are surging upwards, particularly in Brazil, Russia, India and China, but also in Eastern Europe, Latin America and the Middle East. Last year, the latest Transfomers movie took $172m in China alone, nearly half its US tally. Avatar-alike John Carter (budget: $250m) has been widely reported as a pricey flop – but it would have been a lot worse had overseas not added $200m to the $69m US take.

Big shifts have been triggered on the ground, too, with several Hollywood studios getting seriously involved in local productions. Fox, for one, is producing films in Germany, Japan, Korea, India and Brazil, primarily for native consumption.

But some things never change: despite James Bond and Harry Potter, most of the major studios' output remains culturally, if not physically, rooted in the States. That's certainly true of this month's big movies: American Pie: Reunion, Dark Shadows, The Dictator, Men in Black III and What To Expect When You're Expecting. Sure, casting Brits in American superhero roles such as Batman (Christian Bale), Spider-Man (Andrew Garfield) and Superman (Henry Cavill) is a nice compliment. But we'll know there has been a real attitude adjustment when actors are encouraged to use their natural accents in stories that never set foot on US soil.

The Guardian filmblog: 3/5/12

Online Film Distribution

'Room 237': Documentary film about The Shining

Some films are significant, some achieve significance, and some have significance thrust upon them. Stanley Kubrick's mystery horror film The Shining, first seen in 1980, has generated a cult of interpreters and clue-hunters who have extracted – or imposed – meanings unsuspected by the rest of us.

Director Rodney Ascher has spliced together interviews with various Shining theorists, though in voice only, never in appearance, for 'Room 237' a film about what Henry James called the figure in the carpet, the mysterious meaning hidden in plain sight. It's an essay in interpretive heresy and critical dissent.

Ascher declines to approach it in terms of the conventional consensus established by reviewers and pundits. Instead, he talks to fanatical Shining obsessives who have developed outlandish theories and found sensational occult clues in the tiny, subliminally glimpsed details, in the strange perspectives, continuity errors and Escher-like physical inconsistencies in the layout of the Overlook Hotel. Kubrick was himself a detail obsessive, and that fact makes these theories very seductive.

It raises very interesting ideas about how we view a film, about what happens if we take the act of viewing down to a deeper, molecular level, and about how a movie's significance and effect need not be those intentionally willed by the director.

It's pretty enthralling and it will either ruin The Shining forever or else drag you into its obsessive web of conspiracies.

Compiled from reviews: the independent/guardian

Kermode Uncut: Chilled Out

Mark Kermode discusses the film scenes that really gave viewers the chills - here he picks out some of the scariest suggestions.

Amazing Spider-Man 2 swings to the top of UK box office

Superhero sequel posts biggest opening at the UK box office of the year so far, £1m ahead of The Lego Movie's bow

The winner

Whichever way you look at it, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 has just posted the biggest opening of 2014. Including previews from Wednesday and Thursday last week, the superhero sequel has earned five-day takings of £9.01m, which is ahead of The Lego Movie's previews-inclusive opening tally of £8.05m. Strip out the previews, andThe Amazing Spider-Man 2 comes in at £6.13m, which compares with Lego's £5.9m over the Friday-to-Sunday period.

Back in July 2012, the first Amazing Spider-Man film opened with £11.09m, including three days' worth of previews, totalling £4.36m. That six-day figure is very similar to the sequel's tally over the same period, also including Easter Monday. The first Amazing Spider-Man rapidly faced stiff competition from the likes of The Dark Knight Rises, and ended up with £26m here. With significantly less blockbuster competition in the offing, Sony will be hoping that Amazing Spider-Man 2 will show sturdier legs, pushing up towards £30m. On the other hand, most kids are now back at school, which will limit the film midweek to primarily adult audiences.The official weekend box-office chart does not include takings for Easter Monday. However, distributor Sony reports these as £1.72m, taking Spidey's total to £10.73m for the six days.

Among existing films in the market, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 had the strongest impact on Captain America: The Winter Soldier, which falls a hefty 53% from the previous weekend. But its gross of £16.75m so far is well ahead of the £9.48m achieved here by the first Captain America.

The runner-up

Moving up a place to second position, Rio 2 declined a relatively slim 27% from the previous weekend, and has added a nifty £3.03m over the past seven days. Weekend takings only contributed £1.13m of that total, meaning that the film performed particularly impressively on weekdays last week, in the run-up to Good Friday. School holidays and animation make happy bedfellows for UK cinemas. The original Rio film stood at £8.02m after three weeks of play, compared with £9.79m for Rio 2currently, a disparity that should give distributor Fox encouragement.

The alternatives

Several titles were positioned as counter-programming to Amazing Spidey, with mixed results. The Love Punch certainly offered an alternative to the teen characters foregrounded in the Marvel actioner, via lead actors aged 55 (Emma Thompson) and 60 (Pierce Brosnan). The European romantic caper rung up an OK £613,000 from UK cinemas, although with an aggressive rollout on 371 screens, the number translates to a lacklustre site average of £1,653.

Nurtured at a more selective 118 cinemas, Locke relied almost entirely on the star power of Tom Hardy, the only actor who appears on the screen. A debut of £251,000 and a decent screen average of £2,128 resulted. Distributor Lionsgate will be happy that its gross held steady across the weekend (Fri-Sat-Sun: £80,000, £82,000, £81,000), while the market overall dipped (Fri-Sat-Sun: £4.8m, £4.3m, £4.0m). Including Easter Monday, Locke is up to £316,000. Relevant comparisons are hard to identify, but the last film largely resting on Hardy's shoulders was 2011's Warrior, which kicked off with £808,000 from 383 screens, including £186,000 in previews. Before that, Bronson debuted in 2009 with £258,000 from 85 venues.

The big fallers

The arrival of The Amazing Spider-Man 2 saw hefty falls for a fair few titles, but not many matched the plummets of 67% for Hammer's The Quiet Ones and 69% for action sequel The Raid 2. Genre cinema is traditionally front-loaded, with receptive audiences keen to be the first to see, before attention quickly moves on. The original Raid also fell hard on its second weekend, by 70%.

The art-house battle

Seven weeks after the arrival of The Grand Budapest Hotel, the art-house sector has yet to deliver another clear winner. John Michael McDonagh's Calvary posted a strong second session, with a decline from the previous weekend of just 30%, and £1.39m so far, but this figure is boosted by big numbers in Ireland, which are always included in reports of UK box-office.

Thanks to an expanded screen count (from 28 to 42), Ritesh Batra crowdpleaser The Lunchbox saw its box-office rise by 18% in its second session, and has now grossed £229,000, putting it on course to be one of the bigger art-house foreign language films of the year. Wes Anderson's Grand Budapest Hotel is still hanging on at number 12 in the chart, and has now pushed through into eight figures with £10.29m.

New arrival We Are the Best!, from Lukas Moodysson, disappointed relative to its mostly adulatory reviews, with £42,000 from 40 cinemas. That's about level with the debut takings of Lilya 4-Ever (£39,000), but the earlier film managed that tally from only 13 cinemas. Moodysson's best opening remains his crowdpleasing Together (£70,000 from 16 screens), and it was hoped that We Are the Best! would place him back on that commercial trajectory. Including Easter Monday, We Are the Best! stands at £53,000. 

Bums on seats

Admissions figures – the number of tickets sold – have been announced for March, and are 5% down on March 2013. Admissions for the first quarter (January-March) are also 5% down on a year ago. Easter fell late this year, delaying the release of big titles such as Captain America 2, Rio 2 and Noah, so admissions figures should bounce back in April. Whether they can close the gap of 2.05 million – the disparity between 2014 and 2013 after the first quarter – remains to be seen.

The future

Thanks to the arrival of The Amazing Spider-Man 2, UK box office bounced back from the doldrums, rising 61% from the previous weekend, and 85% from the equivalent session a year ago, when Gerard Butler's Olympus Has Fallen knocked Tom Cruises's Oblivion off the top spot. For the immediate future, the picture looks less rosy, since there are no more slam-dunk blockbusters coming for a while. This week sees the arrival of Cameron Diaz comedy The Other Woman, plus Johnny Depp in Transcendence (which played paid previews over the Easter weekend) and Mia Wasikowska in Tracks, the true tale of one woman's solo trek across the Australian outback. None are likely to prove too troubling to Amazing Spider-Man.

Top 10 films April 18-20

1. The Amazing Spider-Man 2, £9,011,114 from 548 sites (New)

3. Rio 2, £1,132,641 from 550 sites. Total: £9,790,565

3. Noah, £920,803 from 476 sites. Total: £7,839,969

4. Captain America: The Winter Soldier, £831,901 from 460 sites. Total: £16,748,625

5. The Love Punch, £613,424 from 371 sites (New)

6. Divergent, £500,206 from 412 sites. Total: £5,445,854

7. Calvary, £394,095 from 165 sites. Total: £1,394,543

8. Muppets Most Wanted, £366,312 from 500 sites. Total: £6,159,978

9. Locke, £251,063 from 118 sites (New)

10. 2 States, £208,578 from 63 sites (New)

Source: The Guardian