The Ending's

[christoph404]

Originally Posted by Moor Larkin I don't think there is any answer to that one...... yep, I think that is true, no real answer to be found...... Ian Rakoff wrote: Kanner was taken aback when he saw the final script. "Patrick," he declared, "there's every indication here that we blow the place up, and he said, 'That's right.' And I said, 'Pat, isn't this a pacifist programme?' He said, "Fuck it. Do you want to keep coming back here month after month?'" I've no idea if it's true, but it appeals to my sense of poetry.....

that is funny and so believable! often the reasons for things are a lot simpler and more grounded than people care to imagine!

[Aaryk Noctivagus]

Originally Posted by smudge I think we're just coming at things from different angles...

Yeps. Totally right, Smudge

I'm simply trying to get across one of the secrets of successful writing. Its a trade and art truth. I'm just not being particularly successful in getting it across - lol... Mea Culpa.

Like I said... following the complaint about my being too jokey... I've probably reacted by getting too technical and serious.

Amateur and bad film-makers/writers often fall into the trap of thinking that they have to present 'real' people on the page/screen. Understanding the art of story-telling reveals that characters in a story are NOT real people even though they have to be realistic within the universe created for the story. Characters within the story are symbolic of a reality without being that reality.

Yes, Christoph, Shakespeare is right to liken the world to a stage and people to actors on that stage that is the world, within the context of what he was saying... but actors are NOT characters, but people playing characters (as we all do to a greater or lesser extent in our social relations to others in the real world).

Lets reverse Shakespeare's words and see how they cannot be reversed and retain their truth... 'A stage is the world and the actors on it are we ourselves.' Now Shakespeare would be totally wrong in saying that (unless speaking only of his particular troupe at that particular time).

Shakespeare was likening the world to a stage, he was in no wise saying that the fabric of what he was saying was strict reality. He was talking in terms of a likeness and not a reality.

When you say 'art imitates life'... you're so close to getting what I mean. Yes... art IMITATES life. It is imitation, and not real. It is an imitation which seems real within the context of the universe of the particular story.

[christoph404]

Originally Posted by Aaryk Noctivagus You completely misunderstand me, Smudge. I am speaking from the perspective of a writer and somebody who has gone about specifically studying the art of screen writing. For instance if a character in a movie was to speak like a real person, then the result would be boring, confused, disjointed, full of erms and ahs, poorly performed... etc. Dialogue is stylized speech, rather than real. .

I think the thing about dialogue in main stream cinema is not so much that it is stylised, its that every time someone opens their mouth to say something, whatever they are saying is serving the narrative and driving the story forward, which you can kind of understand if you have only 90 mins or two hours to get your drama across. I think there are film makers though, and actors who have tried to defy this convention. Quentin Tarrantino is one, in Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction the characters often engage in pretty mindless stupid conversation as we do in real life. I thought Brando was a prime example of someone who conveyed lots of confused, disjointed, dialogue full of erms and ahs etc, he was trying!And many followed his example or tried to emulate him, whether he succeeded or not will always be open to debate.I think European film makers(not British) seem more succesful at including dialogue that seems more "realistic" and normal and not neccessarily driving a narrative. American directors like Woody Allen and Tarrantino and John Cassavettes always llike to extoll the virtues of Bergman and Fellini and Goddard and wax lyrically about the kind of "realsim" they inject into their films.Those are possibly not the type of films we were brought up with, I would say the conventions are quite different to what you are describing, and if I was being honest I have been bored and fidgety trying to get through a Bergman film but I wonder if we see in terms of our education and if we are educated on British and American mainstream films I think anything else is going to jar slightly, or as you point out appear boring and disjointed and so on. I would highly recommend watching the films of John Cassavettes, (as director) "Husbands" and "The Killing of a Chinese Bookie" their a real eye opener in terms of what is possible with dialogue, much of it improvised and mundane yet somehow compelling,many people find these films difficult to watch and they have been described as dull and disjointed etc. I think thats because they are experimental and quite daring in the way they defy mainstrean cinema conventions yet still convey drama succesfully but in a way that is not the norm.

[hankoler]

I cant find anything wrong about you being too jokey aaryk, as one of shakespeares titles goes "Much ado about nothing". Be yourself not what others want you to be.

[Aaryk Noctivagus]

Originally Posted by hankoler I cant find anything wrong about you being too jokey aaryk, as one of shakespeares titles goes "Much ado about nothing". Be yourself not what others want you to be.

I once appeared on stage in 'Much Ado about nothing' or 'Much Ado about Noting' (thought by some to be the original title). I played Borachio.

I cannot help but be pun-ridden and jokey... as well as being serious... If too many folk found my humour unsuitable for a forum such as this... I'd have to be booted out - lol (And I don't think that is going to happen).

As for the current serious conversation... I've tried everything I can think of to try and get what I am saying across... but the point seems to be completely missed. I blame myself for this failing. What I am trying to communicate is being completely misunderstood. So I'm now giving up trying to explain as a lost cause.

I'll have to try and find a middle point between serious and non-serious here on the forum... and being Autistic... middle points are not easy on me - lol.

To me, this excellent forum isn't particularly serious, but is specialised... Perhaps a few people think it is more serious and in-depth than it probably is. There certainly should be room for humourists such as myself and Bats etc...otherwise this could become a rather dull place. By this I am not saying we have brought humour here... it was obviously already here before us... but we are the ones who appear to have upset one other or been the focus of the minor complaint.

[Carmel]

Its quite funny really... there was recent complaint about me and others being too jokey and not serious enough on the forum. I get the distinct feeling that I am now getting too serious for the forum - lol.

This is all down to understanding how story-telling works. bThis is a quote from Aaryk Noctivagus
__________________
see you just cant win

[Aaryk Noctivagus]

Originally Posted by Carmel see you just cant win

On another film-related forum this morning... I was deeply involved in a discussion about dropping a 44.1kHz WAV into a 48kHz Adobe Premier project file, and the effects it would have on the finished video product.

I don't think I'll start a thread on that here (even though it was for a British product), not that I was the one who started the thread there - I simply gave an answer and discussed. Oh what hilarity was to be had - lol

I've never had a complaint about being too jokey there (even though I'm no different than I am here)... and that is a film-making forum containing some people active in the industry - a lot of IMDb page owning members there - lol.

I think one can be serious-minded without taking oneself too seriously.

I am very very serious about studying all aspects of movies and movie-making. However, I try not to take myself particularly seriously... and am always keen on clowning around at times. It is a mistake to take oneself too seriously.

However, I am always prepared to try. My wife will have no qualms about confirming just how trying her husband can be

[batman]

I can't help being jokey. It's my nature, also, in the job I do you have to develop a strange way of looking at things otherwise you'd soon be on the other side of the fence. As I have said before, if anyone takes offence to anything I post here I apologise, no offence is ever intended. I love films and can engage in a 'serious' debate with anyone if the subject is one that I feel I can contribute to, as I have done on several occasions. If a thread seems an appropriate place for a bit of humour, I will join in accordingly. That's me I'm afraid.

Bats.

[Fellwanderer]

Originally Posted by Aaryk Noctivagus My wife will have no qualms about confirming just how trying her husband can be

I let you into a little secret Aaryk - all wives will confirm that.

[batman]

Originally Posted by christoph404 that is funny and so believable! often the reasons for things are a lot simpler and more grounded than people care to imagine!

I remember all the debate years ago about the 'significance' of the difference in the colour footage and the monochrome footage in 'IF', and then hearing Lindsay Anderson finally explain that the 'significance' was that he had run out of colour film. I did laugh ...... Bats.

[Aaryk Noctivagus]

Originally Posted by Fellwanderer I let you into a little secret Aaryk - all wives will confirm that.

I'll let you into a secret... that's only a joke. My wife thinks I'm a total darling... even though I don't know why - I certainly couldn't stand living with myself.

Irene says its fun living with me.

I say... she seems so sane, but you have to take into account she agreed to marry me in the first place. Taking that into consideration, how sane can she really be? Perhaps, because English isn't her first language she got confused during the wedding ceremony and is too proud to admit her mistake - lol.

{{{{{wife}}}}} I love her really. She's the real total darling.

Its our 19th Wedding Anniversary this month.

[Joenoir]

Originally Posted by Aaryk Noctivagus Its quite funny really... there was recent complaint about me and others being too jokey and not serious enough on the forum. I get the distinct feeling that I am now getting too serious for the forum - lol.

Aaryk, I don't think this is a realistic reflection of what really happened!

[Aaryk Noctivagus]

Originally Posted by Joenoir Aaryk, I don't think this is a realistic reflection of what really happened!

Perhaps I wasn't talking about you.

Besides... just how serious was I being in this thread? Eh?

[Joenoir]

[Carmel]

Originally Posted by batman I can't help being jokey. It's my nature, also, in the job I do you have to develop a strange way of looking at things otherwise you'd soon be on the other side of the fence. As I have said before, if anyone takes offence to anything I post here I apologise, no offence is ever intended. I love films and can engage in a 'serious' debate with anyone if the subject is one that I feel I can contribute to, as I have done on several occasions. If a thread seems an appropriate place for a bit of humour, I will join in accordingly. That's me I'm afraid. Bats.

My job is the same if you dont laugh you would cry, i see children with burn's and injuries and sometimes you feel so sorry having to make them do their exercises so having a laugh is a releif sometimes. come on guy's a bit of humour wont kill up promise