Lovefield - By Joe Blissett

The film seems to follow Steve Neale’s theory about repetition and variation as like I said before, it follows the particular trend of a horror genre however it then gives us a final twist on the genre, which then all becomes clear to the audience of what has just happened. An example of this being used in the film is with the knife in a bloody hand next to a body. As the knife (prop) connotes death or injury, we assume that this character (who we also assume to be a male character) has committed a horrible act in murdering this woman, and so we naturally adopt the idea that this male character is an antagonist. Also, as the camera angle at this point is at a low close up angle, it also helps to connote this character as being bad as we cannot see the character’s face which also adds to the suspense and mystery.
 Another typical part of iconography in this film is the use of the black crow squawking constantly throughout the scenes. By having the crow following what we think to be the antagonist, we assume that the crow has some behind idea of what has just happened, however the audience naturally assumes that it is because the male character has done something wrong, however it’s not until the end that we realise that it’s not the case.

The short film is originally run as a horror type genre, however as the film goes on and finishes, the audience discovers that it is in fact the complete opposite. It carries many semantic codes of the horror genre, which include iconography such as the knife, blood and a body, however, us as the audience expect the film to then follow the syntactic codes that go along with them, such as death, murder and so on.

Non diegetic sound is used throughout the opening frames of the film which also helps to fit the audience into the idea that this film is one of the horror genres, with high pitch violin sounds creating tension and suspense, as well as occasional silences which also help to conform this. Certain camera shots are also used to initially adapt the horror genre once again using low angles inside the vehicle to show perhaps the mystery or unknown of what the character is doing, acting as a hiding figure that is covered and not seen by the character. However notice that at this point the background lighting does not imitate the typical horror genre associations that the audience is familiar with, instead it follows the opposite. It uses high-key lighting which suggests that the film may not follow the typical associations of the horror genre, however because the use of negative iconography (such as the knife, blood etc.), the audience is left with the state of mind of confusion, which could perhaps fall into Neale’s theory.

David Buckingham’s theory about genres changing over time but ultimately staying the same may be associated with this short film. This is because it comes across as a horror film with a slight twist at the end, one which is increasingly becoming more popular as the years go on, and so when this film uses the twist of the woman actually just given birth and not murdered, it instantly appeals to the audience as a good, new type of genre.

Overall this film comes across as a great short film that tricks the audience into expecting the unexpected, using the aid of the typical code and conventions of the horror genre, alongside the use of dramatic irony which helps to build up a tension-filled opening couple of scenes which ultimately helps justify the shock factor at the end of the film once the audience recognise the fact that the woman has in fact given birth and not been brutally murdered, and so in that sense the film is very clever in deceiving the audience into accepting the obvious fate of the woman and the male character, however this is not without the usefulness of the conventions of the genre being used, such as the knife, blood, crow and body.