Warp Films and Working Titles are two British film production companies. Working Titles started as an independent company but was later bought by Universal Studios, giving it access to extensive international distribution. It produces films with well-known actors that have wide appeal. Warp Films is an independent company based in Sheffield and London that produces lower-budget films with less-known actors and more stylistic or controversial stories, relying on word-of-mouth for success. It distributes films more narrowly in the UK and Europe at first before expanding, if successful. Examples of films by each company, like Notting Hill and Submarine, illustrate their different approaches to production and distribution.
3. Working Titles
Working Titles is an example of a British film production company which has had a very successful history of its
distribution of films. This company originally started out as an independent film company, releasing low budget films
like ‘My Beautiful Laundrette’ with Channel 4 Films. They originally had a niche target audience, breaking the
conventions of the traditional BBC topics and moving to more controversial stories. Nevertheless, during the 1980s,
Working Titles collaborated with PolyGram Filmed Entertainment and began making higher budget films with
established actors such as ‘Four Weddings and a Funeral’. This steady growth in which Working Titles gained more and
more money, was recognized by Universal Studios, who ultimately bought Working Titles.
Working Titles’ partnership with Universal Studios benefits the company’s distribution of films through vertical
integration. This integration works effectively because of the size of Universal as a company internationally and the
reliability of each department, furthermore Universal’s ownership of Working Titles means that no profit is lost to other
companies in the distribution process.
Some of the films working titles have produced include:
4. Warp Films
Warp Films is a British independent film production company based in Sheffield and London, however they are
affiliated with companies in Australia. This company was founded in 2001 and since then, many of their productions
have been awarded Baftas. Nevertheless, the process of distributing these independent films, with obscure casts and
unconventional plot lines, is not quite as easy as Working Titles makes it look.
As Warp Films is not an international company, they, like many other independent production companies, have to be
more careful with the money they spend on distributing their films as it is not always the case that they’ll be able to
make an impressive profit on release. This means that the distributors will often choose around 50 cinemas in the UK
and possibly around other areas in Europe to show their film in on opening night; following successful box office
showing, the distributors may choose to take their film further and show it in a few cinemas in the US. This shows how
independent film companies rely on the film’s popularity to make money, whereas Working Titles know they will make
profit (on top of breaking even) just through the established actors’ fanbase, extensive advertising campaigns and size of
distribution in the US.
Furthermore, due to the low budget that Warp receive from NESTA, their films have a certain stylistic quality to them
with unknown actors and little special effects- causing them to stick to more realistic drama. Their productions include:
6. This film was made on a budget of around $8 - 12,000,000 and was primarily released on 427 screens
across the UK, February 2007, and grossed $5,848,464 in it’s opening weekend. Steadily, this film gained
popularity and it was released on 825 screens in the US, April 2007, where it grossed a further $5 million.
With Universal’s distributor's help, the film’s main cast promoted the film on Jimmy Kimmel and a TV
advert was aired across the world. In total this film was shown in 41 countries and grossed $80,573,774
worldwide.
Hot Fuzz (2007)
Hot Fuzz, the second film in Wright and Pegg’s ‘Three Flavours Cornetto Trilogy’, is an example of a film produced by Working Titles
collaborating with Studio Canal, Big Talk Productions and Universal Pictures. This film tells the story of a police officer, Nicholas Angel
(played by Simon Pegg), who gets transferred to a quaint British village, only to find out that it is not at all as it seems on the surface.
Directed by Edgar Wright , this film is a perfect example of how Working Titles produce their films.
Following the success of ‘Shaun of the Dead’ (the first of the
‘Cornettos’), Pegg and Wright decided to stick to the ‘lower
budget’ rather than using the profits made from ‘Shaun’ to take
their idea to Hollywood. This ultimately added to the film’s
success, sticking to Pegg’s hilarious, ‘typically British’ script
writing and even mocking the ‘Hollywood’ style which dominates screens today. Furthermore, the film does push the boundaries of typical
low budget films as it involved a small special effects team to allow the film to fit into a more impressive action genre and therefore appeal
to the American market as well as the British market. Additionally, success comes from the choice of the acting duo Simon Pegg and Nick
Frost. Specifically as a British audience, the comic genius of this duo had already been established through the sitcom
‘Spaced’ and ‘Shaun of the Dead’ -- hereby ensuring a dedicated fanbase will already be prepared to spend their
money to see this film, before it’s even released. Furthermore, the film also uses other actors which Working Titles
have used previously such as Jim Broadbent (Bridget Jones’ Diary) and Bill Nighy (Love Actually) -- both of
which add to the film’s level of ‘Britishness’ due to their fame in British film.
8. Notting Hill (1999)
Another great example of a typical ‘Working Titles’ film is Notting Hill. ‘Notting Hill’ tells the story of William
Thacker (Hugh Grant), an unsuccessful bookshop owner who finds himself in an unpredictable relationship with,
Hollywood movie star, Anna Scott (Julia Roberts). Once again, this film reuses many of the typical ‘distribution
cliches’. Firstly, it is evident that working titles wanted to create a successful ‘Brit’ film, so they have chosen to
crack open the old ‘boy meets girl’ chestnut - knowing that the same romantic comedy which has been retold
again and again will instantly have an audience willing to pay to go watch ‘something they already know they’ll
enjoy.’ Even more noticeably, distribution techniques can be identified in the choice of actors. Much like Hot
Fuzz’s use of Simon Pegg - an established actor who has a predetermined and loyal fanbase - Notting Hill uses
Hugh Grant for the same reason. Working Titles had previously type cast Grant in similar ‘bumbling-but-
adorable, somewhat-nerdy, stereotypically-handsome-Englishman’ roles in films like ‘Four Weddings and a
Funeral’. This ensured a British audience as he was the face of the ‘ 90s Brit-Rom-com’ genre and his type casting
had built him up to be seen as one of the 90’s ‘sexiest men alive.’ Furthermore, Working Title’s parent company can
be seen in the casting of American actress Julia Roberts for the lead female in this film. Universal picked Roberts
for the same reason Working Titles picked Grant: she was one of the most desirable women in the US at the time.
This therefore ensured a loyal audience across America, hereby widening the audience and expanding
distribution. The involvement of an American Hollywood actress has a great impact on the finances of this film
when compared to Hot Fuzz, despite the fact they had similar distribution techniques.
Firstly, this film had a budget of around $43 million. This would be seen as a
medium budget for a film when in competition with special-effects packed action-
adventures; however, for a romantic comedy, this budget can be seen as high.
Secondly, ‘Notting Hill’ grossed $152,532 in it’s opening weekend in the UK,
however in the US, the opening weekend grossed $27,689,760 -- this just shows the
vast scale of how important it can be to distribute a film into America: the sheer size
of the country alone ensures that the film will ‘break even’.
10. Submarine (2011)
Directed by Richard Ayoade and produced by Warp Films, ‘Submarine’ is a greatly successful independent film which accounts the biopic of
Oliver Tate’s life as sets out to make a girl fall in love with him, whilst juggling the stability of his parents marriage. Unlike Working Titles
films, this film does not star any A-list actors, therefore relying solely on it’s storyline, original soundtrack and ‘word of mouth’
recommendations for popularity. Consequently, due to these reliabilities being much weaker than Notting Hill’s reliance on Julia Robert’s
fans and the vast population of America, ‘Submarine’ was only funded a budget of $1.5 million.
This budget meant that filming had to be kept short, and expenses had to be dealt with carefully. For example, principle photography
began on October 2009 and all filming was finished by December, the same year. The reason behind such fast production? Warp’s low budget
wouldn’t cover months of employing actors, cameramen, runners etc. to film complex scenes with multiple shots and elaborate sequences. As
a result of this, the appearance of the film leans towards a basic style which ultimately compliments the quirky and laid-back mood of
the film. Furthermore, a low budget also meant that Warp couldn’t fund for expensive pieces of filming equipment, this therefore inflicts a
simplicity to the filming style which is mocked in the film, adding to the comedic value of the writing.
Submarine grossed $244,476, across 60 screens, on it’s UK opening weekend in March 2011, then a further $41,832, across 4 screens,
on it’s US opening weekend in March. Eventually, the worldwide total gross of this film reached $4,581,937. The success of this film
came through simple connections in the ‘Warp family’. Warp have worked with Ayoade many times before and Ayoade had worked with,
thepopular band, Arctic Monkeys in many of their music videos. These relationships were pulled
together to create a strong promotion campaign simply from recognizable faces and a catchy
soundtrack, increasing the film’s popularity.
12. Four Lions (2010)
Four lions is a Warp Pictures movie directed by Chris Morris and it exploits black comedy and racial stereotypes to set a foundation for
an odd but effective story line: a group of radicalized British Muslims that set out to become suicide bombers. The group contains an
odd culmination of people including a white convert to Islam as well as the village idiot that decides to train crows to become bombers,
hence the films cover. The idiocy only escalates from there as they attempt to buy supplies for a bomb by questionably putting on voices
to trick the shopkeeper into thinking they're different people.
The story of ‘Four Lions’ was initially rejected by both the BBC and channel 4 due to it’s controversy, however funding was later
provided by a partnership between Film4 Productions and Warp Films.
The UK premier took place in Bradford as part of the International Film Festival in the National Media Museum on the 25th of March
2010 and was followed by a nationwide release on the 7th of May.
The main cast consists off Riz Ahmed, Kayvan Novak, Nigel
Lindsay, Adeel Akhtar and Arsher Ali. Whilst being brilliant and
respected actors, the cast choice contradicts the A-list celebrities of
films like Notting hill and Hot Fuzz due to their ‘low-key’ status.
Additionally, this cast choice was a decision which complimented
the low budget in which Warp had to work with.
The film struggled heavily for an American distribution and wasn't released in the States for a
further 9 months after its UK debut. In the UK, the film was shown on 115 screens initially and due to
it’s success, the distributors opened it up to a further 200 screens. Four Lions received 2.9 million at
the box office after it’s British release and additionally pulled in a further 1.5 million following
it’s worldwide release.
