ARGUMENT

Speaker 1

• structure and repetitive narrative sells, audience demand predictability and see Hollywood as a form of escapism. Art-house it too complicated and harder to enjoy. Repetitive things like the 'final-girl' in horror keeps the audience engaged.

• Hollywood reflects what is happening socially, gangster films especially. Art house films are set in a diegtic, made up world that doesnt reflect some reality.

• Films are repeated in different ways. The Bond series all have different storylines and things like stereoypes are changing and progressing; there is a female-gaze as well as a male-gaze. Art-house still relies on stereotypes 'City of God' still has passive females.

Speaker 2

• formulaic films are a success, for example the James Bond series is the longest running series in history and is still making a lot of money today with the release of Casiono Royale (2006). Showing that the audience enjoy repetition.

• Tarantino can be viewed as art house but he uses elements of genre in his films. The use of the same actor in the same role, Michael Madson. Also conforms to hegemony by using a beautiful, thin female protagonist that is Uma Thurman.

• Art-house is a genre, they all seem to follow the code and convention for having a complex narrative. Directors of art-house are not really creating anything new, doesnt that make them as formulaic and repetitive as hollywood?