Thomas Sutcliffe says "films need to seduce their audience into long term commitment. While there are many types of seduction, the temptation to go for instant arousal is almost irresistible."
What are the risks of instant arousal??
According to director Jean Jacques Beineix the risks of instant arousal is that the directer has given most of the exciting bit of the film at the begging and have nothing that will compare to it, therefore the audience will not want to watch the rest of they film. They will get bored and switch off... looking like this:
Jean Jacques Beineix's idea implies that we must make sure not to give too little information in the beginning, and not too much. If the audience knows too much then there is no suspension for the rest of the film which means they will not want to watch the film. If there is too little and they don't know what's going on, then they will lose interest and will not want to watch the film. That's why its important that "a good beginning must make the audience feel that they don't know enough yet, and at the same time make sure that they don't know too little."
<-- Jean Jacques Beineix
A Classic Opening :
Stanly Kaufman describes the classic opening to be some sort of establishing shot of the surroundings e.g. the city, the countryside etc. This the leads to the camera going slowly to the main characters/objects/place. he says that it will typically show landscape, then it will show the building it takes place in and then the window in the building, which leads to the action within the room;
>> >> >>
I think that this style works because it's good for the audience to know where scene is happening and what environment its going to be in. i think the type of place or environment tells us a lot about how/ what the film is roughly about. However this opening is not the right type of opening for me, I'd rather they cut to the chase and give me something that will appeal to me. An example of a classic opening would be the opening to the film 'The Shining'...