Chicken case study

Funding:

1. £110,000

2. He ended up gathering money through his richer friends and any contacts he had.

3. The amount of money they had was a huge difference. Chicken had a budget of £110,000 whereas some Hollywood films had up to $200,000,000 as their budget.

4. The BFI gets it's money from the National Lottery. It is used to support original UK filmmakers (who lack the sufficient amount of money) to make more people like and enjoy them.

5. Chicken involved a lot of strong violence and heavy language which may have been one of the causes of why the BFI did not support Chicken.


Production:

1. Bad weather, Lighting issues and insufficient budget meant they did not have much time at rented places.

2. 19 days

3. Some of the scenes at the caravan since the weather changed and they were outdoors. When it becomes darker, they lose the natural lighting meaning they'd have to wait till another day.


Distribution:

1. It was not profitable making it risky to put money into.

2. Busan, Dublin, Edinburgh, New Hampshire and Giffoni.

3. May 2016

4. Chicken is an arthouse film with culture values which makes it fit in with MUBI.

5. Film 4 shows many arthouse films which are targeted at niche audiences. Chicken is exactly an example of one.

6. January 2018


Promotion:

1. The trailer shows that this film would be a social realist film of British culture. It will defy stereotypes ad working class demographics.

2. Film posters can include words and reviews from well known people or companies to boost the films popularity. The film trailer acts as an insight to the storyline of the film and what is gonna happen within it.

3. Mark Kermode is an opinion leader meaning many people listen to him and look up to him. If he recommends Chicken to his followers, people are more likely to go and watch it.

4. Twitter can be seen as a cheaper way of promoting a movie. If a post is retweeted by opinion leaders, it is bound to have some sort of positive impact on the amount of people who decide to go watch it.

5. In todays society, technology and social media has grown so much that people are very much influenced by what they see on social media and what others say on them especially people with power. When someone people look up to post their opinion on a film and say it is good, their followers are likely to go out and watch the film because they've heard that it is good. Then they spread word to their friends and so on. This way marketing is free and very effective.

6. Facebook is another social media. The film's Facebook page can be used to show posters of certain scenes from the movie that are not spoilers but show some meaning to it.

7. Since Chicken is an arthouse film, arthouse films or social realist pages are most likely the ones who like the Facebook page.

8. Ian McKellen, Stephen Frears, Karen Gillian, Noel Clarke and Mark Kermode are celebrities mentioned on the B Good Picture company's website so that they are able to promote the film with their fame.

9. The film's official website tells us any new news about them or when their film will be available where. The digital age has grown so much and is still growing meaning it is more effective to tell people online compared to posters or leaflets. The number of people checking information online has increased significantly.

10. Trailers of the film which gives an insight to the movie. Scenes from the movie so that people are able to see what the movie could contain. This bears a small risk of any spoilers so it is important to know what scenes to put up. By seeing only parts of the movie, people automatically think about what happens before and after making them want to actually watch the movie in order to find out.


Beyond Hollywood: Reading Arthouse Cinema

1)
Arthouse cinema aims its productions at a niche audience because of its social realism genre. It is harder to understand and enjoy to some people compared to movies like the avengers which are purely made for big profits. They rarely follow the stereotypes and 'normal' representation which decreases the range of audience willing to watch it.

2)

• Cultural capital is high
• Artistic reputations
• Intertextuality

3)

• Many are not in Western languages
• The narrative is different structed
• Some find it boring because of its cultural based nature

4)

I think that arthouse films lean slightly towards a more middle class and older audiences simply because of the narrative, context and references. Arthouse films contain a lot of higher level education context which middle class people are more likely to have interest and completely understand it. This does not mean you have to be middle class to watch it but it's more suited. 

5)

Chicken is an arthouse film therefore I would say people with a higher education so that they can understand the context and intertextuality since they have a wider range of knowledge. Another big group of people are other social realist who are interested and can see the problems the movie is trying to point out to its viewers.