Week 3: Is TV/Film a language?

This week we have explored the concept of Film and TV language in the lecture and related readings. In the key readings for this week it suggests that the idea of Cinema/Film being a language is perhaps not appropriate, at best films use verbal language to communicate with audiences and mise-en-scene is used as an effect. (Gledhill and Williams, 2000)

The lecture and readings also explored distinctions between TV and Film. It is argued that TV is consumed casually, as opposed to cinema which is consumed concentratedly.TV is often not the primary concern or is a last resort ,e.g: “What’s on the TV today?” Thus the audience’s concentration is often limited. Rather than watch, TV audiences will often look and glance. However, films in cinemas are watched attentively, as they are often the main priority. Especially, due to the conventional layout of most cinemas. Cinema audiences are surrounded by not only darkness, but the identities of fellow viewers are often anonymous and there is a lack of movement. This set up differs dramatically from the domestic surrounding of TV (Masterman, 1985)

However, the lecture discussed whether such theories were outdated. As they were proposed in the 1980’s. Recently television shows like True Detective and Breaking Bad acknowledged as being more cinematic in form and style. Materman’s ideas also does not consider when producers and directors extend into other mediums. For example, Steven Spielberg has directed the film Hook (1991) and produced the animated television series Toonsylvania (1998). Additionally, Netflix makes original 30 minute comedies and hour long quality dramas and films, meaning the distinction between films and television is becoming less apparent. Hollywood films are also becoming more and more serialised, for example the Fast and Furious series requires an understanding of the wider story  and having seen the other franchise films in order to fully appreciate the narrative in one supposed stand-alone film. Such recent developments in the TV and film industry, counter Masterman’s theory.

In terms of own research I would investigate whether audience’s attitudes still differ in regards to the consumption of television and the consumption of films. Are films still the primary concern to audiences and are television series’ a last resort? I would explore this by distributing open-ended questionnaires to a target sample, asking about the way they watch films and television series’.

References

Nowell-Smith, Geoffrey (2000) ‘How films mean, or, from aesthetics to semiotics and half-way back again’ in Gledhill, C and Williams, L. (2000),Reinventing Film Studies. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Gledhill, C. and Williams, L. (eds.) (2000) Reinventing film studies. New York: Co-published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press.