Stars exam question

‘Neither producers nor audiences need stars anymore’

How far do you agree with this statement?

There are multiple reasons why the box office and film industries are seeing a decline in liking towards film stars. However,it can be argued that they are still as relevant now as they would have been a couple of years ago.

Stars on a whole offer many positives to a film , but also to the audience. Christine Gledhill claims that stars can be defined by four key points , Stars as Capital Value , Constructs , Deviant and Cultural Value. Stars are very involved in how hey present themselves in order to sell or promote a film they do this in order to portray the 'correct' figure for the role they are playing. Take for example, Jennifer Lawrence. Jennifer Lawrence is a very outspoken actress in Hollywood and has recently gone up against the huge company Apple but has also complained and highlighted the issue of not having equal pay for actors and actresses in Hollywood. This portrays Jennifer Lawrence as a strong independent women , which works well for her as she is normally cast in blockbuster films that have a strong female role. 

Stars offer qualities to film that normal unknown actors would not be able to. For example, Arnold Schwarzenegger. He is known for his masculine physique ,one liners, his potential for humour but also the fact that he is the governor of California. These are the star qualities that are associated with Arnold Schwarzenegger and are an indicator of what audiences can expect in any films he stars in.The star qualities of any actor or actress can be used in trailers for films but also for the marketing of a film.Films stars like Schwarzenegger also appeal to audiences as the characters he plays embody, promote and reinforce our ideological perspective, this is a belief system or set of beliefs that shape the way we perceive the world.  This is a part of his film Commando which he was the main role in 1985 the ideological perspective was Arnold playing an a soldier fighting for America against South American soldiers. 

 

Producers can predict what types of films to make based on the film star and the audience preference in what films they want to see them in. This is a positive for producers as it means that they are less likely to make a film that is going to flop (not reach a suitable budget in the box office) due to the audiences expectations.

Even though stars offer all of these positives to films there are also factors that outshine actors. Films are no longer self contained entities, but instead can be part of expansive and varied 'universes', franchises. Franchises offer audiences an ongoing story which can be seen as much more engaging than one film but also offers a higher level of commitment. One successful franchise that can prove this is Harry Potter, the story of a boy thrown into the wizarding world he experiences new adventure meets new friends but also tackles the enemy. Harry potter is an adaptation of the 7 books by J.K.Rowling and has been turned into 8 films. There are many reasons why Harry Potter is a big as it is. One for it being huge social experience for the audiences, I would be excited for the release of a new Harry Potter film not only for the film but also for the fact that it was an opportunity to go and see it with my friends. The Harry Potter films , although they are fictional they do explore real emotions throughout all of the films which allows the audience to connect to them on a personal level. Audiences would not be as affected by the change of a star playing a character in a franchise because the audience would be more focussed on the character rather than the star.   

Points that I would talk about :

•  Home entertainment 
• Television
• Tv revolution
• Social networks
• Leonardo DiCaprio in The Revenant