Genre refers to categories of artistic works such as literature, music, and film. Genres are defined by conventions that change over time as new genres emerge and old ones fade away. Films can be categorized by their themes, settings, moods or formats. However, defining film genres is complex as most Hollywood films blend elements of multiple genres. The need to categorize films into genres is important for marketing films to audiences and enabling discussion, but genres are not pure and film identities can be ambiguous.

1. GENRE

2. WHAT IS GENRE? GENRE IS THE TERM FOR ANY CATEGORY OF LITERATURE OR OTHER FORMS OF ART/CULTURE, FOR EXAMPLE: MUSIC. GENRES ARE FORMED BY CONVENTIONS THAT CHANGE OVER TIME AS NEW GENRES ARE INVENTED AND THE USE OF OLD ONES WERE DISCONTINUED. OFTEN, WORKS FIT INTO MULTIPLE GENRES BY HE WAY OF RECOMBINING THESE CONVENTIONS. “IN FILM THEORY, GENRE REFERS TO THE METHOD OF FILM, CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SIMILARITIES IN THE NARRATIVE ELEMENTS FROM WHICH FILMS ARE CONSTRUCTED. MOST THEORIES OF FILM GENRE ARE BORROWED FROM LITERARY GENRE CRITICISM. AS WITH GENRE IN LITERARY CONTEXT, THERE IS A GREAT DEAL OF DEBATE OVER HOW TO DEFINE OR CATEGORIZE GENRE. BESIDES THE BASIC DISTINCTION IN GENRE BETWEEN FICTION AND DOCUMENTARY, FILM GENRES CAN BE CATEGORIZED IN SEVERAL WAYS.” “FICTION FILMS ARE USUALLY CATEGORIZED ACCORDING TO THEIR SETTING THEME TOPIC MOOD, OR FORMAT.”

3. DEFINITION “JANET STAIGER ARGUES THAT HOLLYWOOD FILMS ARE NEVER PURE GENRES, BECAUSE MOST OF HOLLYWOOD MOVIES BLEND THE LOVE ORIENTED PLOT OF ROMANCE GENRE WITH OTHER GENRES. STAIGER CLAIMS THAT THE GENRE OF A FILM CAN BE DEFINED IN FOUR WAYS. THE ‘IDEALIST METHOD’ IDENTIFIES THE GENRE OF A FILM BY COMPARING IT TO A LIST OF FILMS ALREADY DEEMED TO FALL WITHIN A CERTAIN GENRE. THE ‘PRIOR’ METHOD USES COMMON GENERIC ELEMENTS WHICH ARE IDENTIFIED IN ADVANCE. THE ‘SOCIAL CONVENTIONS’ METHOD OF IDENTIFYING THE GENRE OF A FILM IS BASED ON THE ACCEPTED CULTURAL CONSENUS WITHIN SOCIETY. JIM COLLINS CLAIMS THAT SINCE THE 1980S, HOLLYWOOD FILMS HAVE BEEN INFLUENCED BY THE TREND TOWARDS ‘IRONIC HYBRIDIZATION’ IN WHICH DIRECTORS COMBINE ELEMENTS FROM DIFFERENT GENRES, AS IN THE CASE OF THE WESTERN-SCIENCE FICTION MIX IN BACK TO THE FUTURE 3.”

4. DANIEL CHANDLER DANIEL CHANDLER IS A BRITISH VISUAL SEMIOTICIAN BASED AT THE DEPARTMENT OF THEATRE, FILM AND TELEVISION STUDIES AT ABERYSTWYTH UNIVERSITY. HIS BEST KNOWN PUBLICATION IS SEMIOTICS: THE BASICS, WHICH IS FREQUENTLY USED AS A BASIS FOR UNIVERSITY COURSES IN SEMIOTICS. HE HAS A PARTICULAR INTEREST IN THE VISUAL SEMIOTICS OF GENDER AND ADVERTISING.

5. PATRICK PHILLIPS THE NEED TO CREATE AN IDENTITY FOR A FILM IS OBVIOUSLY CRUCIAL FROM THE INDUSTRY’S POSITION IN HAVING TO SELL A COMMODITY. AUDIENCES ALSO NEED THESE IDENTITIES IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY WHAT THEY ARE BEING OFFERED, WHAT EXPECTATIONS OR ‘PROMISES’ A PARTICULAR FILM APPEARS TO CONTAIN, AND IN ORDER TO COMMUNICATE WITH OTHERS ABOUT THE FILM. REVIEWERS AND MEDIA PRESENTERS WHOSE WORK INVOLVES TALKING ABOUT FILMS NEED TO BE ABLE TO LATCH ON EASILY UNDERSTOOD IDENTITIES. IT IS SIGNIFICANT HOW OFTEN A FILM WITH AN UNCLEAR OR AMBIGUOUS IDENTITY STRUGGLES AT THE BOX OFFICE – FOR EXAMPLE, SCORSESE’S (1982, KING OF COMEDY. THESE DISCOURSES ENABLE DISCUSSION AND DEBATE TO OCCUR. FOR EXAMPLE, IN NAMING THINGS WE CATEGORISE THEM: ‘A MUSICAL’, ‘A DE NIRO FILM’, ‘A SCORSESE FILM’, ‘A DE NIRO-SCORSESE COLLABORATION’. DISAGREEMENTS OVER CATEGORISATIONS OPEN UP CRITICAL DEBATE AND ENCOURAGE MORE DETAILED ANALYSIS. THE VERY NAMES WE GIVE THINGS FORCES CRITICAL REFLECTION AND DOUBT – CAN WE BE CONTENT WITH THESE NAMES AND IDENTITIES? ARE THEY SUFFICIENT TO REPRESENT THE FILM?

6. STEVE NEALE

7. RICHARD MALTBY