SCREEN-L Archives

September 1995, Week 2

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:
Matthew Mah <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 11 Sep 1995 10:33:01 -0500
Reply-To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (28 lines)
 > Working in movie production, it has been my experience that very few
 > films
 > are conceived with the intention of using voice-over narration.
 > Most choose
 > to use narration in order to make up for "story holes" which would
 > otherwise
 > confuse the audience.  Voice-over is usually considered a tactic of
 > last
 > resort, short of massive re-shooting, when the story just isn't
 > working.  It
 > is a shame that voice-over narration isn't integrated into the
 > storytelling
 > more often from the inception of the film, because it can be a
 > wonderful
 > element, in the right context.
 
Okay, but about films like BLADE RUNNER?  Ford's narration provided little to
the movie (in my opinion, dampening it).  The whole narration was based on
film-noir type detective stories in which the hero has to tell the audience
every single detail.  Go fig.
 
Matthew
<[log in to unmask]>
 
----
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