SCREEN-L Archives

July 1996, Week 5

SCREEN-L@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Angel Comas <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 28 Jul 1996 10:28:51 +0200
Reply-To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (18 lines)
In the great majority of "catastrophic" US films and some "young" US
comedies, images has more presence than words. In "Terminator",p.e.
Arnie onle whispers half a dozen of words.
I think that TV is the force that obliges directors to use this kind of
narrative forms. Images do not work in TV. Audiences prefer works, so
that they listen pictures. Theatrical films think always on TV realease,
its main beefits source.
Quality of course has nothing to do.
In Europe is much more different. Films have more words, but it is
cheaper to tell a story through words than creating related images. And
in Europe, films are infinitely cheaper than in US.
 
Angel Comas
 
----
To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L
in the message.  Problems?  Contact [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2