enter the fray: our reader discussion forum
Search in:
Advanced
View:FlatThreaded
"Less filling!..." - Analyzing the debate (with some bias)
by Sneaky Pete
A lot of the posts seem to break down along the lines of equating shaky cameras, abrupt cuts, and super-closeups either with realism or with incomprehensibility. Both of which are in the eye of the beholder.

A common assumption is that, when realism is the desired metric, the audience wants to see the fight scene from the perspective of a bystander (rather than a participant) which justifies some incomprehensibility as "realistic". Personally, I feel it's more exciting to imagine being in the position of the hero, making the decisions.

One hypothesis is that those who lean toward chaotic editing also want overstimulation (and probably like clubs that play ear-splittingly loud music) while those who prefer more order like to concentrate to appreciate the details of the fight scene. (Is enjoying a fight scene a cognitive or non-cognitive process? Can we get some brain scans in the screening room please?)

The separate issue about how stylized ("unrealistic") a fight scene can be would seem to relate to the viewer's ability to suspend disbelief. Beyond the skill of the filmmakers, I'm not sure what determines this.
Re: "Less filling!..." - Analyzing the debate (with some bias)
by The Stranger

“There is something in what you’re saying that strikes me as important. Something...(Not you’re fault...hard to focus...you write very well.)”

“Would seem to relate to the viewer's ability to suspend disbelief. Beyond the skill of the filmmakers, I'm not sure what determines this.”

“There it is: you said: “I’m not sure.”

That takes courage in this forum. You write of the viewer’s ability to suspend disbelief; do you mean the imagination? You seem to have an understanding of how the human mind works...good...I wish I did. The mind seems to fascinate itself, does it not? I believe that environmental factors can combine with genetic predisposition to create in a...in a what? A subject? An individual? At any rate, an imagination so powerful that without the “help” of any pharmaceutical or complex rituals trance like and hallucinogenic states can be entered in ordinarily mundane situations and at will. This seems to me to be a rather common and well known phenomenon in both psychiatric and anthropological studies. Beyond the skill of the filmmakers...see, we are born without tribe, without medicine chiefs, we Americans...we don’t know how to treat these hyper active suspenders of disbelief; other than to drug them and lock them away. I would like to pretend to be a hero too. This comes from a crazy person so you can ignore it, but, I can see the energy in words...and yours made me feel welcome. Thanks.”

Re: "Less filling!..." - Analyzing the debate (with some bias)
by Isabel76
hahahahahahahaaaa!
View as RSS news feed in XML