It might seem poetic to think in this Cocteau mode of the "dream film", but it's not very representative to what film is all about. Film is a visceral experience, realized through sensory response to external stimuli. This is about as far from the dream experience as one can get.
I like the concept, but it's just a bit too romanticist and not very practical when you think about the technical, psychological and physical aspects of the movie watching experience.
Now, I might be able to buy a comparison to a DAYDREAM, however....
― jay blanchard (jay blanchard), Wednesday, 24 March 2004 01:55 (twenty years ago) link
My comparison of movies to dreams is not based on storytelling. Yes, most movies are linear and, in terms of sequence, logical. But I'm talking about the way movies work, specifically when it comes to editing. The fact that you can jump 17th century China to New York City in the year 2050 in a split-second is entirely unrealistic and is very much the way dreams work. That's why our dreams seem to cover so much time, when in reality they only lasted a few minutes.
― Anthony (Anthony F), Wednesday, 24 March 2004 02:47 (twenty years ago) link
― Anthony (Anthony F), Wednesday, 24 March 2004 02:50 (twenty years ago) link
― Gear! (Gear!), Wednesday, 24 March 2004 05:37 (twenty years ago) link
Again, how does this relate to the cinema? Although film gets a reputatation as a "passive" art form, the reality could not be further from the truth. The way the brain interprets a dream vs. the way a person experiences a film is about as different from one another as they could possibly be, for the reasons I listed in my previous post.
We definitely need a seperate post for this, and it would be great to hear other folks weigh in on this.
― jay blanchard (jay blanchard), Wednesday, 24 March 2004 22:46 (twenty years ago) link
― Chris F. (servoret), Thursday, 25 March 2004 10:12 (twenty years ago) link
― sally (sally), Thursday, 25 March 2004 15:28 (twenty years ago) link
― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Saturday, 10 April 2004 01:02 (twenty years ago) link
― jay blanchard (jay blanchard), Saturday, 10 April 2004 01:43 (twenty years ago) link
DAwn of the Dead (1978) really is the perfect allegory now for COVID-19
― you had me at "giallo" (Neanderthal), Saturday, 18 September 2021 15:59 (two years ago) link
in NOTLD, the undead come out of nowhere, and overwhelms the country as they are poorly understood. fairly quickly, scientists learn how to fight them, and initially it helps, but by Dawn of the Dead, skeptics like the talk show host at the beginning express disbelief that 'zombies' are real and that the dead are returning to life. rebels defy scientists instructions and do not destroy the dead, instead letting them live untreated at the bottom of their building, which continues the spread of the undead. scientists even lament that they could have stopped it 'at the beginning!' but people are reluctant to dispose of the dead in the way they've specified.
― you had me at "giallo" (Neanderthal), Saturday, 18 September 2021 16:31 (two years ago) link