SCREEN-L Archives

April 1991

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:
Date:
Sun, 7 Apr 91 19:34:00 EDT
Reply-To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (13 lines)
        Fiona:
You said that you don't really care whether you're watching video or film.
There is a distinctive "feel" to both film and video, even if you are watching
both on TV.  If a major feature film came out that looked like a soap opera,
the chances are that people will say that it did not look "right".  Even if
they don't know exactly what was wrong, they would know something was up.
This is the same reason why most big budget commercials are done on film.  If
they are done on video, they look "cheap".  They framing and composition may
be immaculate, but it will get the same reaction if made on video.  There are
certain things that we have grown accustomed to being on video, and certain
things being on film, it would be mighty hard to switch them around.
eyes

ATOM RSS1 RSS2