IAC DISCUSSION FORUMS

Why do so many moviemakers put an opening credit on the front of their movies?
You know the sort of thing: "A Chris Smith film in ChrisSmithOvision from
ChrisCo" complete with fireworks, mountains cleaving, thousands of dancing
girls, swirling clouds, elaborate fanfares and so on.

In the golden days of Hollywood cinema the MGM logo might indicate a glamorous,
glossy colour movie with a high feel-good factor, the WB logo stood for
grittier,
black-and-white movie, while the PRC logo meant you could concentrate on
snogging in the back row.

But no amateur, however prolific, has that kind of brand recognition.

The only function I can see for such credits is to let people know the movie
has begun - not an inconsiderable service given all the potential for problems
in presenting a show sometimes. It is especially suitable if the film starts
with black screen and no or low sound level.

But for that purpose there is a simpler answer ... put the main title at
the beginning of the movie rather than 2 or 3 minutes into it. In fact
ideally
incorporate the main title in the opening shots of the film: the warden
paces
a corridor and in one corner of the frame appears the title "Death Row"
in
plain characters whose colour contrasts well with the background.

Or am I missing something?


Dave (McBlinkered) Watterson

Why do so many moviemakers put an opening credit on the front of their movies?
You know the sort of thing: "A Chris Smith film in ChrisSmithOvision from
ChrisCo" complete with fireworks, mountains cleaving, thousands of dancing
girls, swirling clouds, elaborate fanfares and so on.

"Dave Watterson" <forums@theiac.org.uk> wrote:

Why do so many moviemakers put an opening credit on the front of their
movies?
You know the sort of thing: "A Chris Smith film in ChrisSmithOvision from
ChrisCo" complete with fireworks, mountains cleaving, thousands of dancing
girls, swirling clouds, elaborate fanfares and so on.

In the golden days of Hollywood cinema the MGM logo might indicate a glamorous,
glossy colour movie with a high feel-good factor, the WB logo stood for
grittier,
black-and-white movie, while the PRC logo meant you could concentrate on
snogging in the back row.

But no amateur, however prolific, has that kind of brand recognition.

The only function I can see for such credits is to let people know the
movie
has begun - not an inconsiderable service given all the potential for problems
in presenting a show sometimes. It is especially suitable if the film starts
with black screen and no or low sound level.

But for that purpose there is a simpler answer ... put the main title at
the beginning of the movie rather than 2 or 3 minutes into it. In fact
ideally
incorporate the main title in the opening shots of the film: the warden
paces
a corridor and in one corner of the frame appears the title "Death Row"
in
plain characters whose colour contrasts well with the background.

Or am I missing something?


Dave (McBlinkered) Watterson



I think that you may have a point Dave, especially if the producer has overdone
the logo/dancing girl/graphic movement etc. But I, as a film maker, always
either precede or follow the actual title by my name in some form or other,
merely to claim some title to the film. Surely as the producer one is entitled
to that? As for the timing I always take great care with this since the
whole atmosphere of the film is set by the opening seconds. Personally
I
usually include some sort of pre credit sequence to set the mood and to
get
an audience settled as quickly as possible. If they are perhaps a bit puzzled
as to what might follow so much the better. You have seen and commented
on (in public and in private) many of my films and have never raised the
questions that you pose in your post. What has prompted your comments just
now? They are not personal to me I am sure but I feel a little guilty on
reading what you say.

Michael Slowe.