Film Industry Learner Response

1) Type up your feedback in full (you don't need to write the mark and grade if you want to keep this confidential).

WWW: Q1 is perfect and you clearly show knowledge of the CSP and the industry in this assessment. Now, we need to add exam technique to maximise our marks in an assessment. 

EBI: In Q2, you needed to explain each strategy to get the full marks. This is a useful lesson! In Q3, there are clearly good ideas in there but you need to work on the structure and organisation of your writing. Sentences and paragraphs. Plus a plan may help you address both sides of the argument.

2) Read the mark scheme for this assessment carefully. Write down the number of marks you achieved for the three questions: _/3; _/6; _/9. If you didn't achieve full marks in a question, write a bullet point on what you may have missed.
1.) Full marks
2.) Missed out why each strategy was used to promote Chicken
3.) Needed a clear and organised structure

3) For Question 2 on the promotion of Chicken, use the mark scheme to identify at least one strategy used to promote Chicken to an audience that you didn't mention in your answer and why it was used. The key lesson from this question was to make specific reference to the CSP in your answer.

Small arthouse cinema release followed by digital distribution. Promotion of Chicken created a buzz by building and sharing critical acclaim from reviews/ industry figures.

4) Now look at Question 3. Using the mark scheme as a guide, write a paragraph arguing that it is NOT important for the British film industry to make social-realist films like Chicken and that it should concentrate on making bigger-budget movies funded by Hollywood studios. If your mark for this question was already top-level, revise David Hesmondhalgh's work on the cultural industries and try to build an aspect of his theory into your paragraph.

Chicken was not funded by public or industry money – instead, it was privately funded by investors. This shows that films can still be made when public or industry money is
unavailable. The downside to this is that it limits the British film industry to wealthy or well- connected directors rather than promoting the most talented people

 The British film industry has a long history of highly successful global smash hit films, often funded using American money. As Hesmondhalgh discusses, the cultural industries are “a risky business” and producers have no guarantee of profit. It is unreasonable to expect studios to produce small social-realist films that are unlikely to attract a large audience when it is difficult to make money at the best of times.

5) Finally, cover the other side of the debate. Write a paragraph arguing that it IS important for the British film industry to make social-realist films like Chicken and that such films contribute strongly to the social and cultural influence of the industry. You may also consider how they should be funded here. Use the mark scheme to help you with this. Again, if your mark for question 3 was already top-level, use Hesmondhalgh's theory in your paragraph.

Social-realist films like Chicken document important aspects of British life that rarely feature in bigger-budget films aimed at commercial success. Social realism offers a portrayal of under-represented or misrepresented groups and takes on issues such as social class and politics. also Chicken is a beautifully shot film featuring artistic cinematography and such films should be judged on artistic merit, not profit margins. also, a film that's British with a British cast and director must have some connection with Britain which is important for the audience to connect and feel a sense of belonging. finally, Low-budget British films can still be huge successes – Bend It Like Beckham provide examples of this. This supports the idea that the true mark of a film’s success is the box office takings and overall profit. Hesmondhalgh discusses commodification in the cultural industries He suggests this creates problems on both the consumption and production side.