Laura - Amigos

Amigo’s

Viewed on Virgin Media Shorts

Written by Mondieu

We start by seeing three friends ‘Amigos’, who are out partying and drinking

on a Friday night. They leave the club, very drunk, one is playing the flute,

they are laughing about how they will get home. A stranger gives them £10 for a

cab. We then see a homeless woman sitting on the floor. She plays the flute

that the men dropped but she doesn’t get any money, even though her situation

is much more desperate.

I chose this film because I thought it has an influential idea, highlighting

the way that many people take their life for granted, when there are other

people in much worse conditions.

Representation

Two social groups are presented, one working class and the other underclass.

The working class are the three ‘Amigos’ and the lower class is the homeless

woman. They are in the same setting, with the same situation: they are stuck in

town, without any money, yet despite the similarities we see the shocking

difference between class. One of the differences is their reactions to the

situation. The three men laugh about it, whereas we see from the woman’s facial

expression that she is angry (10), which is furthered with her body language

when she punches the screen at the end. Perhaps this is because the men talk

about finding a “taxi” to get “home”, whereas the woman has to live this life

(that the men are laughing about) everyday.

We start with shots of the men. There is a close up of them taking shots (1),

and throughout this series of shots, props of beer cans are used to highlight

that they are getting drunk (3); a typical Friday night for the ‘lads‘. This is

extended with the use of the lighting, we see there are colourful, flashing

lights in the background to signify that they are at a club. Yet, lighting is

also used in a different way, the key light is used in the 3 point lighting

effect, to highlight features of their faces. This makes them look sweaty,

reinforcing their body language of dancing, jumping and drinking. The screen is

split three ways, to unite them, signifying that they are friends out together

(2). We also see this in the initial shot where they are taking shots, as they

have put the three glasses together to make a toast, symbolising each of them,

out together. The handheld camera effect also allows the audience to feel

involved, as the jostling presents them dancing, allowing the audience to be

involved in the party atmosphere.

Then when they go outside, we are reminded that they are drunk through the way

that the diegetic sound is distorted, allowing us to hear what they are

hearing. Also through body language; they can’t walk straight and they are

exaggeratedly hugging each other (4). The camera is jostling again to represent

their movements, they can’t stand straight, it also repeatedly cuts to

different shots to perhaps show that they keep forgetting things, and to

reinforce that they are disorientated, wondering how to get “home”.

Their costume represents them as working class. One has a waistcoat, and the

other still has a blue tie on, perhaps this is their work uniform and they went

straight out from work. Furthermore, their status is also shown to us through

dialogue. At the beginning we hear what sounds like a phone call exchanged

between them, talking about how they will get the “weekend started”, implying

that they are meeting up after work. All of this allows the men to conform to

stereotypical ‘lads’ who work, but hang out with their friends, getting drunk,

on Friday’s.

The homeless woman’s representation is in stark contrast though, as she is

represented as a stereotype of a homeless person. This is mainly shown through

costume and props. She has thick clothing, wrapped up in lots of layers as she

is out in the cold for the night (7). Furthermore, these are tattered and in

poor condition, showing she doesn’t have very much money. She us surrounded by

rubbish, for example the empty water bottle next to her, and her stuff is tied

up in carrier bags; these are her possessions yet because she lives on the

street they are not well cared for, like her. She also has two dogs, who are

whining so showing the desperate life they lead, but they also allow her to

conform to the image of a homeless person as they are usually by themselves,

with a pet dog for company (8)

The film deals with the important issue that there are many homeless people out

there, but they are ignored. It is perhaps even trying to get the message

across about money, and how there are better things to spend it on.

Narrative

The chronology of the film is cleverly manipulated. It is a linear narrative,

however the homeless woman (who represents the main issues of the film) is not

introduced until nearer the end, allowing the audience to see the film for the

first part, as a completely different genre.

We follow the men around on their Friday night antics. They are drunk friends,

they are laughing and we find them funny, many can empathise with them , also

thinking about drunken memories, where they are “stuck in a place” that they

don’t know. Therefore the audience reaction could conform to that of a comedy

genre, however, we are then faced with the homeless woman. There is a very low

angle shot of the men calling for a “taxi” (6) then, we see a mid shot of the

woman sitting there. The low angle of the shot could be a metaphorical

representation for her class, but it also puts the audience on the same

perspective as her: low on the ground, looking up to the working class

people.

We are quite shocked to suddenly see a homeless woman, as it doesn’t conform to

the story so far. Perhaps the director has included the woman late on so that

the audience feel bad for having previously been laughing at the drunk men in

this situation.

This could conform to Steve Neale’s theory of ‘repetition and difference’. It

repeats conventions of comedy, giving us humorous characters that we can laugh

at and situations that we can empathise with. Then the difference is that (it

doesn’t just twist a certain convention) but it actually changes the genre

completely. This is hybridisation, which is commonly used in short films as

they are often social realist, and so by having different genres, it means the

films can convey different meanings. For example this film leaves the audience

confused and so that the message that they are trying to get across makes more

of an impact, as it was so unexpected.

You could argue that Todorov’s narrative theory is present here. The

equilibrium is when the guys are out having a good time. The disruption is when

they want to go home, but they don’t know where they are. The resolution is

when the woman gives them money so they can get home. This is a narrative that

usually satisfies the audience as they finish the film with the knowledge that

everything will be alright for the characters. However there is no resolution

for the homeless woman as she is left there. This contrasts with the resolution

for the men, and makes more of an impact on the audience as they feel guilty

for the woman.

Genre

Originally we identify comedic conventions, however we then see that it changes

as there are serious issues brought up, issues of homeless people, which

conforms to the genre of social realism.

We see the issue with the homeless people, when the homeless person is in a

much worse situation then the men, yet they are still given money by someone.

The similarity of props intensifies the audience’s shock. The man has a beer

can, which the person puts a £10 note in (5). Similarly, the woman has

something to put money in, however it differentiates to the man’s by the

quality. It is a ripped cup, showing she has had it for a long time, implying

that she has also been leading this rough life for a long time (9). It is not

branded, unlike the man’s beer can, as the brand shows that he has spent money,

whereas the woman’s cup is plain, reinforcing her lack of “money”, reiterating

the fact that she needs to “make it”. Finally, we see three pound coins in the

bottom. They are lone coins, and so look meagre in the bottom of the ripped

cup, heightening the struggle for the woman. This makes the audience disgusted

by the fact that the men are given money, by a woman who waves her hand as if

the money is nothing to her (5), when they can afford to drink at a club,

whereas the woman can’t afford anything.

The other similar prop is the flute. The man is playing it for a joke, yet he

still gets money from it. Whereas when the woman plays it, much better than the

man, she gets nothing (11). Could this be because she is homeless, and is

ignored by the people walking by her, or because she is of lower class so she

doesn’t get taken notice of anyway? 

Another way that this applies to social realism is because of the class

differences. She is lower class and so is treated differently. Her low class is

physically represented by the way that she is low in the shot as she is near

the ground, but also through sound. There is a point of view shot where we are

looking at the people walking past the woman, watching from her perspective

(12). The diegetic sound she hears is distorted, as she is low on the ground so

she can’t here it. This could represent her isolation from people because of

her class, from her position on the floor she can’t hear or participate in the

conversations, metaphorically representing her isolation from society.

Audience

People of all ages can watch this film, as the platform that it was distributed

on (Virgin Media) is viewed by a range of different people. Also by budding
filmmakers of all ages, as Virgin do competitions and give out awards for these films.

It is in the ‘Other’ section of the genre page, and so it is probably viewed mainly by people who are looking for original ideas with perhaps inspiring themes, or for people who want influences for their films. This could mean that their psychographic information could show that they are interested in raising awareness or supporting these inspiring ideas, such as how this film is raising awareness about homeless people.

They could be pleased by this film with the way that it does this issue justice. It shocks the audience, as they are not expecting this issue to be raised. It also portrays the men and other people in a negative light, and the though it doesn’t portray the homeless woman in a positive light, we still sympathise with her. We feel bad, this life makes her angry, with the way she punches the screen at the end.