As film examiner's report by tallis media

FILM STUDIES General Certificate of Education Summer 2016 Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced FM1: EXPLORING FILM FORM

Introduction The majority of candidates, this year, were able to engage effectively with the internally assessed components, developing a range of skills in film form and technique. Their work was underpinned by some very effective teaching and learning which enabled a clear understanding of how meaning is made as well as of a range of key Film Studies issues. Candidates largely worked from their own individual interests and enthusiasms and this led to stronger work and a deeper understanding of film form and production techniques. Most centres' work demonstrated good teaching and learning across all levels of candidate ability. As stated in last year’s report, a minority of centres continue to fail to engage with the aims of the specification by setting inappropriate tasks. In one or two individual cases, it would appear that the latest version of the specification is not being used. In cases of uncertainty, please seek advice from WJEC. It is good practice for centres to allow candidates as much choice in the component options as possible so that work is individualised and candidates are given the opportunity to work to their strengths. This facilitates clear differentiation and individualised assessment. It is equally good practice to ensure that the delivery of Film Studies is constantly updated. Exemplar material, guidance from WJEC, developments in the field of study and of course specification developments can all be reflected in delivery models. Marking generally was appropriate in most centres, although there were instances of the inappropriate application of the assessment criteria and on occasion rewarding candidates for group rather than individual work. Internal moderation took place in a good number of centres and this is commendable. It is imperative that candidates working in a group should identify the role they are responsible for (as well as the corresponding micro feature). This allows for individual assessment of all members of a group. Even when working individually, identifying a micro focus facilitates assessment as well as candidates' own reflective analysis. Equally important is the centre’s completion of the FM1a form which confirms the aims and context (bullet points are perfectly acceptable), the candidate role, the chosen micro feature and the conditions of the assignment's completion. This information aids the moderation process. It is also important for moderators to see annotated work, rather than ‘clean’ copies, so that they can be clear how marks have been awarded. Analysis of Film Extract Advice to offer straightforward tasks that enable candidates to focus on micro features has been followed by most centres, leading to a generally high level of engagement with the analysis of a film extract. Most candidates were able to identify the micro feature(s) that they were exploring either in the title or in the opening paragraph, and were able to reference the micro feature(s) throughout. There is still a concern with some centres who appear to encourage their candidates to consider several micro features. This is not a productive © WJEC CBAC Ltd.

approach for the majority of candidates. Looking at a single micro feature or a pair of related features enables close analysis and stronger, detailed and more focused work. The use of micro features in the shot-to-shot relationship, as well as within single shots, can be explored. The best candidates considered this and it was to their benefit. Equally, many candidates benefited from the use of screen grabs and illustrative material, anchoring their writing to particular shots. Creative Project The majority of centres offered multiple options within the creative project, with the best offering the full range, encouraging differentiation and enabling candidates to work to their potential. Some centres continue to shepherd their candidates into a single option. Whilst logistical problems are recognised, this approach is not always beneficial as weaker candidates are often disadvantaged. Candidates should provide aims and context for their work and must identify what micro feature(s) they are responsible for, and will be focusing on. It is this that gives the context for the assessment and it again facilitates evidence of differentiation. The digital storyboard option continues to deliver some excellent work and candidates were effective in using micro features to make meaning, with many candidates able to use established cinematic forms in the construction of sequences. Unfortunately, some candidates continue to submit some inappropriate forms of task (including hand-drawn storyboards, which are specifically not allowed) and a good number of storyboards are not exploring how a sequence is made up of shots of varied framing and varying duration but instead are using a frame to represent a scene. Centres must ensure they are meeting the demands of the current specification and should familiarise themselves with the guidance and storyboard template offered by WJEC. A relatively minor point - but one that nevertheless is significant - is that candidates should be encouraged to shoot their images in landscape rather than portrait form(often an issue with mobile phone images) to emulate the aspect ratio of film. The majority of candidates engaged well with the ‘writerly’ nature of the extended step outline, demonstrating a clear understanding of its function as a blueprint for others to work from. There is still a tendency for some to stray into offering detailed shot level description. Candidates need to be reminded that this functions at scene level (using the appropriate box) and that the scene description should therefore not contain shot descriptions and instructions. The filming option continues to be strong with a clear focus on the construction of meaning through a selection of micro features. It was good to see some more experimental sequences being presented along with the more traditional genre pieces. As with last year’s report, it is worth reminding centres that candidates working together as a group in this option must identify a role and a related micro feature that they will be assessed on. Sharing roles cannot be endorsed as this does not meet the demands of the specification and prevents secure assessment. It is also imperative that each candidate is given a differentiated mark for their role and their individual use of a chosen, identified micro feature.

The reflective analyses were largely well undertaken with the majority of candidates able to focus on particular elements, encouraging close analysis of form and meaning. It is again worth noting that some centres are not clarifying to their candidates the distinction between an evaluation (not required at FM1) and a reflective analysis, in which candidates closely explore their own work and use of micro features. In this instance, centres are strongly advised to review the guidance available from WJEC.

ÂŠ WJEC CBAC Ltd.

FILM STUDIES General Certificate of Education Summer 2016 Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced FM2: BRITISH AND AMERICAN FILM

SECTION A: PRODUCERS AND AUDIENCES General points The questions in Section A produced no significant problems for candidates. On the whole, the questions appeared to be accessible and able to assess knowledge and understanding productively. Many candidates were able to use the resource materials as a stimulus for discussions by identifying salient points in the materials and relating these to issues raised by the questions. There were some encouraging signs that candidates were able to use wider contextual understanding in their answers by referring to contemporary issues and debates, such as the debate about racial representation at the Oscars. There was alos good evidence that more candidates were able to offer detailed and appropriate case studies from their own learning and show some clear knowledge and understanding of the institutional frameworks of US and UK film industries. There were some very productive uses of case studies from the WJEC website and from the candidates’ own experiences. A good range of examples and case studies were very successfully used including Skyfall, The Inbetweeners, Hunger Games, Silver Linings Playbook, Whiplash, World’s End, Gravity and The Machine. Higher level responses were able to compare and contrast how producer and audience issues have changed and developed by reference to different historical and institutional contexts (identifying some issues that have always been significant). Some candidates do repeat or describe the contents of the resource material at length, which is disappointing because they are not able to show their own learning in any meaningful way. Some arguments were very well considered by able candidates whilst less able candidates had difficulty in offering opinion and wider debate, sometimes because of an apparent lack of preparation. 

In answers to question 1, most candidates were able to use the resource material to debate the value of film awards. Most candidates were able to identify reasons why film awards were valuable for producers by referring to their function as a marketing tool, raising awareness and creating ‘status’ for a film, but fewer candidates were able explicitly to discuss the value of awards for audiences. There was some good work by candidates who discussed how awards provide an assurance of ‘quality’ or provide a sense of event excitement for audiences and the best candidates contrasted the value of awards for audiences and producers. Some candidates used this question as an opportunity to bring in wider, contemporary issues such as racial representation at the Oscars and the neglect of certain actors and films from award nominations. Better candidates were able to identify specific awards events and festivals beyond the Oscars. There were some very good discussions of the comparative value of Sundance, Cannes and BAFTA awards and these examples were often linked to a clear understanding of variation in different aspects of the film industry.



Although question 2 was a popular choice with candidates, some struggled to establish links between the marketing of films and online audience activities. There were some vague examples used (such as Twitter and Facebook) but generally with little direct linkage to specific films. Better candidates were able to identify specific examples of how particular films had exploited online audience activities. There were some very interesting case studies involving Deadpool and the Harry Potter films that led candidates into discussions of fandom and the ways in which the internet can impact upon the ‘hype’ of a film. There were some interesting debates about the merits of film piracy in spreading the word about a new film but often this was rather limited to repeating the points from the resource material. Better candidates were able to evaluate the contribution of online audience activities to the marketing of films by contrasting internet activity with traditional forms of film marketing and showing an understanding of historical contextualisation.

SECTION B: BRITISH FILM TOPICS General points There were high quality answers in Section B, with many centres enabling candidates of all abilities to produce good work. Two key assessment issues affecting both Sections B and C were the interpretation of the word 'settings' and question 15, which asked for a discussion of male or female representation in US films. It was agreed that 'settings' could be interpreted in terms of either 'place' or 'time' or both. Those candidates who answered on both male and female representation were unable to reach a high level of achievement as the response offered was only partial. Better responses to this question explored contrasting representations of either men or women. Candidates responded equally to the majority of topics, although the 'Stars' topic is offered only by a minority of centres. There was a good use of identified sequences from the films studied as well as close textual analysis and a confident use of film language. This was more evident than in previous years. Where centres have taught three films or more – as in the genre or cultural studies topics this has tended to encourage a more superficial approach, especially where candidates are tempted to refer to four or five films. It disadvantaged weaker candidates. It is recommended that candidates explore two films in depth, possibly making reference to a third film. It is however recognised that reference to several films may be made in the Ealing or Working Title topic, depending on the nature of the question, but candidates are still encouraged to anchor their responses by close reference to two films. In some instances there was an over-reliance on theoretical perspectives at the expense of a direct discussion of films. Where theories are taught, centres and candidates are encouraged to integrate them as much as possible into explicit film examples so that candidates do not simply replicate the theories concerned (often with limited understanding) without reference to particular films. British Film and Genre Question 3: This was a question which enabled candidates with a wide range of ability to link openings with a good discussion of themes and exposition. Horror responses dominated, focusing largely on Eden Lake, The Descent and 28 Days Later. 28 Days Later and The Woman in Black in particular offered opening sequences which established key themes of the horror genre such as isolation, gender and power.

Question 4: This was reasonably well-answered. Good answers focused on the distinctively British nature of the setting and evaluated its importance. Although most responses focused on place, some did offer broader contextual information about time of production. British Film and Stars Questions 5 & 6: It appeared as if there were no responses to this topic this year. British Film and Production Companies Question 7: Few candidates attempted this question. The endings of a number of key films from Working Title (Love Actually, Four Weddings, Billy Elliot, Shaun of the Dead) all do confirm values and attitudes in a set of very distinctive ways. Question 8: This was the question that most candidates tackled. It was largely done well with better answers using extended sequences to illustrate points. The strongest responses were able to tie in a sense of identity established by Working Title to representations of Britain in the films chosen. There were interesting contrasts offered between different types of Working Title films. There were some particularly good responses to this question based on the Ealing films Kind Hearts and Coronets and The Ladykillers. British Film: Cultural Study Question 9: This was a clearly-focused question, which was responded to effectively by candidates. Many candidates responded to the question in terms of class and gender as themes. Not all candidates were able to focus on 'different themes'. Swinging Britain responses dominated this section. Question 10: This was a clear context-led question and was responded to by fewer candidates. Good answers used key sequences and embedded useful contextual information. Films used included: A Hard Day’s Night, Darling, Alfie. Candidates who responded to this question using A Clockwork Orange found it more challenging although there were some excellent responses. Performance and If were two other films used for this question. Candidates considered contextual issues such as sexual discrimination, race relations and the cultural revolution. The highlighting of sequences was effective. Other films discussed in this section were: Saturday Night and Sunday Morning, Billy Liar, My Beautiful Laundrette and Rita Sue and Bob, too. The risks of dealing with too many films were evident in this section. British Film: Socio-Political Study Question 11: The very best answers to this question took into account narrative structure by focusing on key sequences and by using appropriate narrative-related terminology. Some responses, however, simply assessed the ‘inescapable trap’ part of the question and fitted the films to this. Sweet Sixteen, London to Brighton and Bullet Boy were used well along with some good responses based on My Name is Joe. Question 12: The best answers set up the stereotypes first and then showed how the films challenged them, e.g., Liam in Sweet Sixteen and Kelly in London to Brighton. This is England proved difficult to discuss in relation to this question. Responses with Ned and Trainspotting were able to show the relevance of social context to challenging stereotypes. Other films used successfully in this section included: This is England, Fish Tank, Get Carter, Sweet Sixteen, Red Road and The Long Good Friday.

British Film: Identity Study - Borders and Belonging Question 13: There were good responses to this section and candidates were able to demonstrate a high level of knowledge (indicating very good teaching of this topic). There were very effective answers on Ghosts, focusing on the difficulties facing the main protagonist in terms of her life in China, her journey to England and her subsequent life here. Question 14: Fewer candidates responded to this question, although dramatic sequences from Dirty Pretty Things and Bend it Like Beckham were discussed successfully. The Last Resort was also used highly effectively both in questions 13 and 14. SECTION C: AMERICAN CINEMA – COMPARATIVE STUDY General points A large number of candidates compared how men or women were represented in their chosen films. Candidates were able to demonstrate a good knowledge of gender representation issues, offering good examples from their chosen films. ‘Setting’ was also addressed well with candidates interpreting it in terms of either time or place. Some candidates attempted to compare three films: this was not effective and tended to lead to more superficial responses. Question 15: For some candidates, the focus on particular sequences was ignored with a correspondingly more generalised approach. Some very effective responses were based on The Thing and Cloverfield. Question 16: Several different kinds of settings were explored, referring to location and historical settings. Some responses argued that the New York/Brooklyn setting in Do the Right Thing was not important, which was a difficult argument to sustain. Some candidates interestingly discussed the importance of settings in Iraq and Vietnam to war films. There was a good use of the following pairings: Double Indemnity and Chinatown and Double Indemnity and Sin City Independence Day and War of the Worlds Thief (1981) and Drive All that Heaven Allows and Far from Heaven, The Omega Man and I am Legend American Psycho and I am Legend. The following pairings were well used with question 15 (representation of men or women): Spartacus and Gladiator The Matrix and The Invasion of the Body Snatchers Scream and Halloween Full Metal Jacket and Jarhead Goodfellas and The Wolf of Wall Street Mad Max Fury Road and Aliens Falling Down and Crash American Beauty and It’s a Wonderful Life Blade Runner and Minority Report. In some cases, feminism needed to be considered and discussed rather than used as a selfexplanatory context for representations of women. The following pairings were well used with question 16 (settings): Full Metal Jacket and Jarhead Rocky and Raging Bull Double Indemnity and The Last Seduction.