|
Night Wing <
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
wrote in message A play without special effect is NOT a fantasy: In fact special effect or not does not really matter. You can have special effect like wire-fu, explosive lighting and sound effect, and lots other special effect in a play, and yet I don't feel the sort of fantasy involvement like enjoying a movie. I know very little about Tokyo Story, but I think that doesn't really matter, as I can tell you that I was immersed into the world of Sense and Sensibility and A Little Women (movie) even when I saw those movie the second time. Do you know that many movies (e.g. Tokyo Story and many Russuan classics ) were deliberately made with long distance lens and minimum camera angles, which to you would be much more boring and much less fasntasic as any play? So I guess you do not call them movie! Whether you actually feel and involved in the fantasy element is not a matter of logic. There can be no logic in the world of fantasy to start with. It is a matter of experience. If the majority of others simply don't experience that kind of fantasy when compare movie and play, it doesn't really matter if you can visualise the logic of that. Nonsense. Science may not mean much in fantasy movie but logic has to. Can something be A and not A at the same time in any movie if you define not A = what cannot be A? Our mind is not capable to understand what is beyond logic. In other words, we will not be able to understand what is beyond logic by definition. Maybe we should go back one step. The issue were raised when I disagree your statement that live performance of movie is play. This would help others to undertand our argument in the right context. If I interprate your message right. When we use live performance as the reference of audio/HiFi hobby, we can do that to Home Theater hobby as way by simply employ play as the live performance of movie. Don't put word in my month. I never said that. I said live performance of a visual art is a play (it can be a muscial or dance show as well). What I am saying is that where one can argue (unamplified) live performance of music is the reference for audio performance, it is completely WRONG to think love performance in the reference for video peroformance. The reference can ONLY be the film itself. Movie is a live performance itself. Movie is by DEFINITION not a live performance. It is as wrong as saying recorded live broadcast! Tim This is the statement that raise my concern: Live performance in video(visual) format is a play . Maybe I have not read this statement careful enough. I probaby has misunderstand Tim's refrence here and misinterprate his message as play is an equivalent to live performance of a movie. So I rest my case and think majority of our arguments were actually raised from misunderstanding. And I apology for putting word into his month becuase of the misunderstanding But we have started something that is interesting, so why not continue, right? I think TK has expressed my fantasy world better than I do. When I say fantasy, I mean something that is unreal but it feel so real at that moment, at that space and time, that I have forget about the real world and immersed into that fantasy world . When an artist(actor in a play, cello-er in an orchestra, or a pop singer) prastise for days or months, he/she are actually practising and rehersal for live performance. So in a sense, for art that involve live performance, the final show that all the practise/rehersal targeted to is the live performance. So if movie ever can consider as an art that involve live performance, that the movie show itself is the live performance, as all the work were all geared to the movie show in cinema. But this is started from the wrong place to start with as I misunnderstood Tim's statement and was assuming he referring play as live performance of movie. But one thing we must clarify. My opinion do not apply to special effect of movies only. I have said repeatedly that there are three sound elements in movie, namely dialogue, music, and special effect, and in that order of importantness. And the movies I quoted included Sense and Sensibility, A Little woman, ... even Tatanic I referred to won't be classified as fantasy movie as the thing touch me is the passion betwen Jack and Rose, not the sinking part of the movie.
|
