Message from discussion
how come subjective viewpoint cinema doesn't work?
Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!wn13feed!worldnet.att.net!bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail
Message-ID: <40CA2187.8BACB744@iFreedom.com>
From: Your Pal Brian <brianch...@iFreedom.com>
Reply-To: thecha...@worldnet.att.net.die.spammers.die
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.past-films
Subject: Re: how come subjective viewpoint cinema doesn't work?
References: <7b98c3ee.0406102038.36cee3ea@posting.google.com> <20040611085220.13482.00000937@mb-m18.aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 21
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 21:18:09 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.76.7.189
X-Complaints-To: abuse@worldnet.att.net
X-Trace: bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net 1086988689 12.76.7.189 (Fri, 11 Jun 2004 21:18:09 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 21:18:09 GMT
Organization: AT&T Worldnet
Nick Macpherson wrote:
> >From: symphonic...@hotmail.com (choral reef)
>
> >could citizen kane have worked using subjective perspective throughout
> >as originally planned?
>
> Kane was going to be shot using subjective perspective? Are you confusing Kane
> with Welles' planned Heart of Darkness adaptation?
I think he is.
Pure subjective doesn't work because it doesn't have the reaction shot. The
reaction shot tells us how to feel about whatever the subjective shot is showing
us, and this is how the filmmaker keeps us in line. If there is no reaction shot,
we replace the character's evaluation of the events with our own. We become
independent agents and lose identification with the character, which is what it's
all about isn't it.
Brian