This week's seminar was on film studio theme parks, and the frontstage/backstage components of the parks.
Theme parks always used to be so exciting and wondrous when I was young; they seemed to be places where dreams came true, and where you could be anything you wanted. Of course, back then, I had no idea of everything that was behind the building and running of theme parks. Nowadays, I like to think that I'm at least a little bit smarter (!), and so can understand all the different elements of a theme park, such as staff dressed up as characters, and the whole 'staged authenticity' of creating a dream world, while keeping the tourists in the main areas, and not letting them see what goes on behind the curtains. Somehow, I sort of wish I still wasn't able to comprehend all that operational side, because it definitely takes away from the magic of the place. Although, maybe once you're there, it's much easier to get swept up in the excitement and forget that people have directed your every move.
The concept of front stage and back stage elements at a film studio theme park becomes very complex and almost confusing to someone who's never thought about it before... There are so many different types of encounters, especially when considering the nine classifications by Pearce, that I wonder if even the staff of the parks understand the complexity of it all, and can identify which area they are working in at all times.
I also find it tricky to come to terms with the concept that film studio theme parks are built as a way to show outsiders what goes on inside the walls of the studios, but the majority of the attractions within the park aren't real at all. It's the whole idea of the theme park being a real-life representation of something that was fantasy in the first place. I wonder if maybe sometimes, it's better to leave things like that to the imaginations of people, rather than try to tell or show them how it would be in real life, if the fantasy world exists.
I also think that theme parks must have a close tie with the film studios that run them. I think it's amazing that a number of films were written and created to support rides and attractions that already existed at Disneyland.
Secondly, I think the concept of runaway film locations is a tricky one. On the one hand, it makes sense to film something in a different location to where the story is set if the actual location cannot support what the film needs, either financially, or logistically. But then again if there is no real reason to film in an alternate location then I think it's a little unfair to the original destination, especially if the film could result in tourist dollars for the location. It might just be me, but sometimes I feel a bit cheated when I find out that a movie that I think has been filmed in one place, is actually in another, especially if I felt some sort of connection with the scenery I saw. At the same time, though, I know that films are very rarely authentic, especially those that are more the blockbuster type than the historical type.
Another thought I had about this issue, is if there is any tourism as a result of the film, where would they visit... the actual location that the movie was filmed, or the destination that was named/portrayed in the film? I'm not sure which I'd choose... It would probably depend on whether I was more attracted to the storyline, or the scenery shown throughout.
I think I'll post this now, because it's been hanging around for ages, but I'm pretty sure that I'm meant to be reading the text book too, and talking about things from there, which I haven't bought yet :S So I'll do that maybe next week and then I can complete these next two posts properly!
Peace.
