Hozier: Take Me To Church

In class Mr. Buckmaster showed us a music video: Hozier, Take Me To Church.

Ireland's State noted that the video, directed by Brendan Canty, echoes the wave of violence currently plaguing the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community in Russia. The songs lyrics speak of the harsh reality of religious view on homosexuality in many places: "Every Sunday's getting more bleak / A fresh poison each week / 'We were born sick,' you heard them say it". Although these views are considered very outdated in many places these opinions are still practised in many places across the globe.

I like the video because it shows the harsh reality of many societies and opinions; it doesn't sugar coat the situation. The hard hitting impact of the video, gives the song a lot of power over the audience because it very quickly makes people realise the cruel truth about things that Homosexual populations have face in certain societies.

I also like the colour treatment of the music video; I think the black and white video takes away any distractions. The audience’s attention isn't drawn to any insignificant parts of the scenes. I think it signifies that the shooting of the video is not the important part of the video but the message it is trying to send. Also, the black and white colour treatment helps to prevent and other difference the characters may have being introduced to the audience, by all being very plain it almost takes away their individuality.

Things that I will be taking from this video and applying to my own production are:

· The use of colour treatment and the impact it has on the message of the story

· The hard hitting effect of the story

· The controversial manner of the video

I will use this video as the first influence into similar products that I will be looking into to.

Music Video Genres

There are different styles of music video that artists can use.

Performance:
 

This is where the video is based around the band/artist and shows them performing and their gigging lifestyle. It's a common genre with new, up and coming artists that are trying to establish their place in the music industry and make themselves known to the audience. An example of a music video that has used the performance genre is 'Let Her Go' by Passenger; please see bellow.

Storyline:

This is where the song and lyrics are used to tell a story. This is a very common theme among many music videos and allows for the artists interpretation of the song to be conveyed to the audience. An example of a music video that has used the storyline genre is 'The A Team' by Ed Sheeran; please see bellow.

Dance:

This is where the music video is based around people dancing to the music, it is often used with 'upbeat songs' for a feel good effect. Often, the artist or band are the dancers in the music video.  An example of a music video that has used the dance genre is Love On Top' by Beyonce; please see below:

 

 

 

Conceptual:

Conceptual music videos are based around a single idea or concept and are usually unusual and obscure, even surreal for the audience. Conceptual videos are often quirky.  An example of a music video that has used the conceptual genre is 'Needing/Getting' by OK Go; please see below:

Special Effects:

Special Effect videos are often disjointed, they allow for a slightly surreal feel to the video. An example of a music video that has used the special effects genre is 'Safe and Sound' by Capital Cities; please see below:

 

Animation:

 

Animated music videos can range from the images being hand drawn, created by computer graphic ot moulded out of material such as plasticine. This style of music video is very creative and visually entertaining to watch. An example of a music video that has used the animation genre is 'One More Time' by Daft Punk ; please see below:

 

 

'The Bridge'

In Fridays lesson we watched another documentary called 'The Bridge'; filmed in 2004 by Eric Steel. It shows the results of one years filming along the Golden Gate Bridge and the 23 jumps and several suicide attempts that happened over the course of the filming. It also has additional footage of interviews with the families of those who jumped and a survivor; Ken Baldwin. The inspiration for this documentary came from an article in The New Yorker; 'Jumper' - Tad Friend.

There are many controversial issues that are surround this documentary, the main being the sensitive and strong content. We thought of some questions in the lesson based more around the treatment of the documentary rather than the content of it.

Do we have the right to see this?

This, like 'The boy who's skin fell off', is a very sensitive issue. However, 'the boy who's skin fell off' promoted a related charity and helped to spread awareness of the condition; I feel 'The Bridge' didn't look at the issue in the same way. I think it was based more around suicides linked to the Golden Gate Bridge being a regular place that people commit suicide rather than spreading the awareness of the issue and promoting a way of helping such as a charity). Having said this I think the treatments made viewers aware that 'everyday people' are suicidal and helped to spread awareness that it can happen to anyone, I also think it helped to express the importance of not ignoring symptoms and therefore I believe it did promote some parts in a good way. Finally, I think it gave a strong message to people who are feeling suicidal. We hear  Ken Baldwins story in the documentary and his attempt of suicide that he immediately regretted. I think this gives a positive message and a feeling of hope.

Why has the documentary got an 18 rating?

Film classification is based on violence, bad language, sex and nudity and taste and decency. This documentary has a high rating, this is due to its taste and decency. I personally found the documentary very hard to watch due to its harsh reality. In the documentary you watch a real life suicide and many reenactments along with verbal accounts and photo graphs from people who have seen people jumping off the bridge or climbing over the railing. This can clearly be disturbing for many viewers and therefore a high rating was needed so that an audience that was too young didn't view it as it's likely that they'd have found it harder to deal with.

The Boy Whose Skin Fell Off

In class we watched a very inspiring documentary called 'The Boy Whose Skin Fell Off'. It is a moving story about the last four months of Johnny Kennedy's life and showed his suffering and long battle with the rare condition - dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa (EB) it also shows his release, his death. To watch the full documentary please follow this link: http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-boy-whose-skin-fell-off/4od


The documentary has many sensitive issues within it and in class we were asked to think about the following questions and write a response to them. Here are my thoughts on the programme:

Do we have the right to see this?
Whilst this documentary has been made to inform people and raise awareness I believe that some of what was shown shouldn't have been. Johnny clearly worked alongside E4 to create this documentary about his last 4 months and therefore I believe it was his wishes for us to see this footage. In some respects his day to day life and obstacles helped to portray the struggle he went through strongly however, some of these 'day to day' things were perhaps a bit too personal to show. For example seeing Johnny in excruciating pain, I personally found really hard to watch as my heart sank at the thought of him having to go through that on a weekly basis. Also, when Johnny's Mum mentioned being asked if she would have had an abortion I thought was a very personal thing to show to millions of people and was perhaps overstepping the line in terms of what they are sharing about such sensitive issues. Finally, although seeing Johnny dead in his wheelchair and viewing his funeral was deeply upsetting and emotional for us as the audience I feel we shouldn't have seen this not for our sake but the families. Us seeing this footage meant that they were not left to grieve at such a sad time but instead surrounded by camera men and crew member, this I felt was particularly insensitive. Having said this and stated some negative points my overall feel is that the documentary was an amazing opportunity for Johnny and other EB sufferers and that it was clearly made with the wishes of a dying man and I therefore agree that E4 should of and did respect what he wanted.

Should they be filming this?
The first time we are introduced to Johnny is in his voice over. The voice over has been scripted so that Johnny sounds as though he is speaking from the grave; to me this is slightly insensitive; however, I think maybe it is the tactfulness of the filming rather than the content. Having said this he may have decided he'd rather approach the touching story in a more informal way. Although my immediate thought was that some of the filming wasn't very tactful Johnny has clearly 'asked us along for the ride' and after seeing a little more I get the impression that perhaps Johnny worked with producers to create this feel as it helps to reflect the way he approached this awful condition. Obviously there are some aspects of the filming that are more upsetting than others (such as: when Johnny gets upset, when he's telling us of the worst parts of his journey and when we see his dead body) however, I think without some of these parts we would not understand fully the terrible ordeal Johnny had gone through.

Was it a valid documentary?
I believe the documentary was very valid. Not only does it help with the awareness of rare condition EB it also helps to promote his charity. Unfortunately, it is very rare that people donate to worthy causes unless they feel some sympathy for the cause; this was shown when £500,000 was raised through the help of the 5 million viewers. This documentary allows the audience to connect with Johnny and I feel that many people will both take something from it and give something back. I personally have learnt a lot about a rare condition that I previously knew nothing about and have acknowledged a worthy charity (DEBRA) through this documentary.

Did they take advantage of the situation?
I definitely think they took advantage of the situation because it is such a rare condition that it would be hard to find someone willing to help to make a documentary and that has put so much time and effort into helping others who have the condition. However, I don't think that taking advantage of it was all bad; through the documentary Johnny not only got to educate and inspire millions with his story but he managed to raise thousands of pounds and promote his charity. Obviously E4 made money out of the documentary but I think the morals and ethics behind using this story for their personal profits are completely thrown out the window when you think of the difference the documentary has made to: the charity through donations, sufferers through educating people about their condition and maybe the most touching outcome, Johnny Kennedy by telling sharing his story at such a hard and emotional time.