 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Warp wrote:
>> You could have different types of such characters.
>
> I read a fascinating book full of short stories called something like
> "tales from the catina." It took all the zero-dimensional characters
> from Star Wars and wrote short stories/novelettes about each one. It
> also seemed like they were interconnected, as if each author was given
> the end of the previous story to start from.
>
> So there's a story about the guy playing keyboard in the Catina band,
> and how he's down on his luck, so he sells a blaster to the jawa who was
> cleaning up the dead bodies at the attacked jawa transport, who takes it
> and tries to get revenge on the empire by shooting the guards who
> believed these aren't the droids they were looking for, who go rough up
> the pig-faced guard to get an audience with Jaba the Hutt, who is in the
> process of talking to the monster trainer to get a new monster of the
> type Luke dropped the door on, etc etc etc.
>
> A very fun concept. I think they actually made two books full of such
> stories.
>
lol that's great. Yes I am also reminded of the bass player in the
movie "Nashville" who keeps backing up different stage shows throughout
the movie.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warp" <war### [at] tag povrayorg> wrote in message
news:4b5a1ffb@news.povray.org...
>
> Do I understand correctly that when a character in a story exists
> basically
> for one single purpose (eg. to be a jerk, a greedy executive, a naive
> Mary Sue, or such) with no other personality traits or history, and when
> this character maintains the role in its purest form throughout the entire
> story, it's usually a bad case of two-dimensionality?
>
Not necessarily bad... as a character goes through his story and he meets
people, he may only see them for a moment. His first impression may be his
only impression. If we are seeing the story through his eyes, the character
will seem to lack depth, because the protagonist never sees it. Learning a
lot about characters which do not advance the plot would slow the pacing of
the story, and pacing is very important.
IMO, Avatar has excellent pacing. The energy of the story ebbs and flows
very nicely, and I felt very engaged by the whole thing. The story of Avatar
wouldn't work very well as a novel, unless they added an awful lot to it
(more about life on Earth, more about the side characters, and so on), but I
think it worked really well as a film. In a good film, the story is always
competing with the visual, and, to a lesser extent, with the music and
sound. A simple story is sometimes best in that kind of mix.
One of the things I do before an acting performance is to write a backstory
for my character. I list facts that happened in the character's life, even
if they have nothing to do with the story and they'll never come out in the
performance. What it does is to remind me that they character isn't just
words on a page, but a representation of a real person. It helps me to
understand why the character does what he does, and, I think, adds to the
performance, even for a minor character. I'd be willing to bet a large chunk
of change that Stephen Lang, as one of the artistic directors for the
Actor's Studio, did that before he did this movie.
--
Jack
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
news:4b5aa2ed$1@news.povray.org...
> Captain Jack wrote:
>> I've always been a big fan of the "seven basic plots" idea.
>
> Which of those would The Dark Knight fall under, I wonder.
>
The idea of there being a basic number of plots for story telling predates
motion pictures, by a long shot. Script writing for (American) film is
usually done under the "three act" formula, where characters are introduced,
a problem is introduced, the protagonist goes on a quest, there is a trial
by fire, there is a redemption, the hero wins and learns something, and
there is an epilogue. The plot is often subjugated to this, because
formulaic scripts get the money, so the plot will be twisted a lot.
Around the nineteenth century or so, it became popular in western literature
to have parallel stories, where the same basic plot happens in the story at
the same time, on different scales. This has carried over into modern film
making, which complicates the issue.
Add to that, with Dark Knight you're talking about a "franchise" series, so
the main character isn't really allowed to change. Change in the main
character is essential to traditional story telling, so, again, the plot has
to be twisted.
More to the core, though, Batman stories in general are not about
good-versus-evil or boy-meets-girl, which are the classic story elements of
western literature. They are more about the conflict inherent between
Jungian archetypes, down below the goofy tech and the glitzy special
effects. It has much more to do with Greek tales of Zeus defeating the
Titans than it does with the concerns of us mere mortals. It sells because
we all want to see the bad guys go down in as spectacular a way as possible,
but that's not really what it's about. Batman is about angst and anger and
happiness and depression and despair; this body of work is, at its heart,
more allegory or tone poem than it is plotted stories.
--
Jack
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
This won't change anyone's mind about the movie, but if you're interested in
the nuts-and-bolts, this is a pretty good "making of" video (about 20
minutes long):
http://seqmag.com/2010/01/making-of-avatar/
--
Jack
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And our favorite YouTube critic is back:
http://www.wired.com/underwire/2010/02/phantom-critic-reams-avatar/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wired%2Findex+%28Wired%3A+Index+3+%28Top+Stories+2%29%29
Or, alternatively:
http://tinyurl.com/yzdccqv
...Chambers
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chambers wrote:
> And our favorite YouTube critic is back:
This one wasn't nearly as good a criticism. He really didn't make any points
that everyone wasn't aware of, methinks.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Forget "focus follows mouse." When do
I get "focus follows gaze"?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> This one wasn't nearly as good a criticism. He really didn't make any points
> that everyone wasn't aware of, methinks.
I haven't realized all the "looks like a cat with human lips" thing before.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> I haven't realized all the "looks like a cat with human lips" thing before.
Fair enough. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Forget "focus follows mouse." When do
I get "focus follows gaze"?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Neeum Zawan" <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote in message
news:4b58ecf0@news.povray.org...
> On 01/13/10 22:11, Darren New wrote:
> > Pretty but cliche.
> Agreed. Not an ounce of originality in the story.
Just saw it. Visuals are very impressive (although flora and fauna were not
imaginative at all, execution was great). In fact, I was wishing the entire
time that there were no storyline, no actors, no dialog (all of which
sucked) - just the CGI tour de force and some good classical music in the
background. It would have made a much more enjoyable experience.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"somebody" <x### [at] ycom> wrote in message news:4b68e922@news.povray.org...
>
> Just saw it. Visuals are very impressive (although flora and fauna were
> not
> imaginative at all, execution was great). In fact, I was wishing the
> entire
> time that there were no storyline, no actors, no dialog (all of which
> sucked) - just the CGI tour de force and some good classical music in the
> background. It would have made a much more enjoyable experience.
>
Do I hear a mash-up coming on? :-D
--
Jack
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
