Dale Luck Essay AS Media Studies

Compare how Hot Fuzz and This Is England appeal to a

British Audience
The films Hot Fuzz and This Is England both have British directors (Edgar Wright and Shane
Meadows, respectively), which has an impact on their films in terms of who their target audience
generally is. They’ve built films based on their own past experiences and wishes, with This Is England
being based, to an extent, on his own childhood, and Hot Fuzz being targeted by Wright at himself.
The film companies behind the two films are also British (although Working Title is actually owned by
Universal, an American company), which helps again at getting it to a British audience, being made
by companies known within Britain.

The directors of both of these films are both British, which means that they’ll know better than
directors of other national origins how to target a British audience by seeing what they themselves
find appealing.

Edgar Wright takes this one step further and uses his own past experiences to judge how a film
should be made (such as stereotypes he’s witnessed allowing him to make the actors act more
realistic), and directs the film in a way that he likes rather than in a way others will find appealing –
being British himself, this helps for the film the be more appealing for a British audience to watch.

Shane Meadows uses social realism when directing This Is England, with most of the film being
based on his own childhood, which makes the film a lot more relatable for a British audience due to
the fact that it’s not some over-the-top dramatization of any British stereotypes (as so many films
tend to hand nowadays – I blame Hugh Grant) but a true portrayal of them.

The directors themselves have vastly different budgets that effect the production of the film – Hot
Fuzz, being made by Working Title, has a large budget (around £8 million), which allowed them to
have very elaborate camera work, editing, and scenery in order to make the film as action-packed
and professionally done as possible, as intended.

This Is England however had a much lower budget (around £1.5 million), which resulted in it having a
much simpler approach (such as less artificial effects, such as the gory scenes in Hot Fuzz, the
decapitated heads, etcetera.), which meant they had to use more authentic objects and scenery to
film in – in this sense, the film as a whole becomes a lot more realistic, and does a lot more
immersing and appealing for a British audience. The smaller budget also means that the advertising
of the film would have suffered, so it would reach a lot less people than it would with a higher
budget – the fact that the film was a great success despite the lack of much advertising is, in my
opinion, proof of how good the film is at appealing to the target audience.

The cast within Hot Fuzz was described as an “all star team of British talent” 1, referring to the
amount of famous actors that make appearances within the film. In an interview, Edgar Wright said
that many of these well known British icons had actually asked to be in the film, which is mainly due
to his past works being so successful. His use of these British actors makes the film more appealing
to fans of their previous works, which again would be mainly British. This cast was available to use

1
http://blog.moviefone.com/2007/04/19/interview-hot-fuzz-director-edgar-wright/ , Erik Davis

1
Dale Luck Essay AS Media Studies

within the film due to the high budget that the film had gotten, which if they hadn’t had then they
wouldn’t have been able to afford them.

In This Is England, however, I think Shane Meadows wished for the film itself to be based on the
stereotypes and directing a message towards the audience rather than having as many well-known
actors in it as possible, and this is reflected in the entirety of the film, especially the cast. At the time,
the actors being used weren’t very well-known, as Meadows wanted to have a realistic portrayal of
the 80s which couldn’t be achieved with the use of well-known actors, as their very presence would
detract from the immersion of the audience. By focusing more on the collective of the characters
rather than the individuals, Meadows connects to a much wider, yet still very much British,
audience, as it’s easier to relate to the characters themselves. The lack of famous actors also helps
towards him keeping within the budget, as famous actors are no doubt very expensive to hire.

The use of stereotypes within the two films are used in very different ways – for example, in Hot
Fuzz, stereotypes are contrasted against each other to create an element of humour, such as the
policemen of both Sandford and London when brought together (in the characters of Nicholas Angel
and the Sanford police) points out their differences and the audience becomes more aware. This also
links into the use of famous comedic figures to play as the policemen, such as Bill Bailey and Nick
Frost (who have been in previous works of Wright, namely the series ‘Spaced’). This Is England
however uses the stereotypes of skinheads to show diversity within groups, and in order to relate
the group to modern day gangs, in order to better portray the message that Meadows intended:
that gangs, whilst seemingly appealing, will eventually turn bad at some point or another.

The set of Hot Fuzz is based in two main areas: London, and Sandford (not a real village, but they
used one to film it). The locations themselves are quite detailed, which is due to the higher budget
that the film had. This Is England, on the other hand, had a low budget that required them to film in
inexpensive areas, mostly just areas they found – though this was required of the low budget, it
lends to the realism of the film. Both of these films however have used clearly British areas, which
helps to appeal to the British audience.

Iconography is used in Hot Fuzz in order to better portray where they are, such as the skyline of
London, the classic British countryside environment of Sandford, etcetera., which again would be
more noticeable and appealing to a British audience. This is England, on the other hand, uses the
presence of very clearly 80s icons to better portray the setting, such as the use of Margaret Thatcher
at various points and the 80s montage at the beginning of the film with the use of British flags and
London riots.

Humour, again, is used in different ways in order to appeal to a British audience, but one type of
humour seems to stay within both – slapstick humour. Having it’s origins in British society, with great
historical comedians such as Charlie Chaplin, the use of slapstick humour is both iconic of Britain as a
whole and appealing to them (in Hot Fuzz, Nick Frost’s character gets hit with a pan, etcetera., and in
This Is England they all shoot Gadget for a laugh, etcetera.).

The camera work in Hot Fuzz is reminiscent of high-speed action films, as was intended, with quick
scene changes and the like being used just to increase the pace of the film. However, in This is
England, the camera work is done rather simply, and there’s very little effects done at all, which is
done in order to increase the realism of the film and, again, portray the film’s message better.

2
Dale Luck Essay AS Media Studies

In conclusion, though the two films show a clear understanding of British culture, they portray it in
very different ways. Hot Fuzz focuses more on high production elements to wow the audience and
create a humorous, professional setting, whereas This Is England has a very distinct element of
realism in order to portray a message rather than a story to the audience, and you can see these
differences in just about every aspect of both of the films, from cast to locations to the camera work.
All of these different elements of the two films help to appeal to a British audience due to their main
aspects revolving around British history and the like, with distinguishable actors and stereotypes,
etcetera.