I'm wondering about the difference between watching a film as someone who studies film and simply allowing it to impact you. Going to an art museum with an art major is a totally different experience than just going by myself. I have no idea which pieces are famous for what and why, I just walk around having my own little experience and thinking my own thoughts. Would my experience be enhanced if I knew all that stuff they know, or would it just get in the way?
Good question. I wonder the same thing. Some film majors I know (and I won't mention any names) happen to like some films that I think are INCREDIBLY boring and depressing (I am NOT a film major). But that person likes the film for other reasons than JUST the feeling and sometimes the message. Because of this, she is able to appreciate a broader spectrum of films than I am.
I tend to believe that more knowledge is always better, IF that knowledge does not get in the way of one's feelings. Can she, the film major, still enjoy a good film because it touches her? Or does the analysis interfere with the reception of an emotional message? That is what we must ask the film major. I think we might find that she can still feel a film. Her experience may just be hightened a little. So, film major, what do you say?
First, I respond to Anne. This is good question. I think both effects are possible. With knowledge of an art form comes a cultivation of personal style or taste. In this way, you enjoy both more and less. You enjoy more because you appreciate more different ways of doing things (you know what goes into making them so you admire skill, perception, objectives of the movement, form, line, etc.). You enjoy less because you've had enough time and exposure to home in on what you REALLY like and enjoy, and you've developed your own opinions on why something should or should not be made, etc.
I personally am a very intuitive person, meaning I pay a lot of attention to my feelings. I've realized that studying film helps me to understand WHY I feel the way I do, and try to apply those feelings to messages or purpose. So I watch a film and I feel a certain way and then I say, "Why do I feel that way?" Then I break things apart like, "Because of the shot composition or the music, or because of the story structure, or because of the acting, etc. But I break it down more minutely then that. So, if I stopped being able to feel a film, then I really couldn't analyze it either. The two things for me are too closely attached. The question I have for you (all ya'lls) is: do you ever take note of how the you are feeling when you watch a film and then ask yourself why. Do you think it is possible for a "negative" emotion (like fear, sadness, boredom) to lead to a positive or constructive outcome?
I don't often ask myself why I'm feeling the way I do, because it's pretty ovious to me (ie: I'm feeling aweful because these people are doing aweful things and I don't like it!).
Of course it's POSSIBLE for a negative emotion to lead to a positive outcome, but will it? It certainly doesn't for me. But perhaps I'm just too shallow? I don't think too deeply about most things. How do you think you can get someone to get something positive out of something nagative, if that's your goal?
But why do you feel awful when people treat each other poorly? Doesn't that say something constructive about the way people should behave? And is the point of the film possibly to support that feeling? It always disturbs me when people in movies are beating the crap out of each other and the audience is like, "Yeah! You show'em! Wow, awesome punch." You may not feel bad, you feel good (pumped up, excited for whoever to win), but what he's doing is actually bad right? The filmmaker has a lot of control over how you feel as a result of a given situation. They do this in how they film it, or sometimes they let the events truly speak for themselves. Maybe feeling sad when something sad happens is actually a good thing. Good because it reveals a concern for humanity? Good because it supports the idea that certain thoughts/actions/words lead to certain conclusions.
The Greeks called it catharsis.
For others, fear or sadness in a given situation often leads to change (personal change, change within society) or compassion for others. Some situations reflect lives that are depressing (sad boring, full of anger), but the message trying to be conveyed is a different one (i.e. that people full of anger are often miserable, wickedness never was happiness, etc): a message, moreover, that contains elements of truth or insights into humanity or one person's view of it, or the human struggle for meaning and/or connection. In this sense, the actual events and the overall message are related, but different.
On a different level, there is skill in seeing if emotional objectives can successfully be shown visually (that is the craftsman's pleasure).
Although let's face it, some films just wallow. And it's never good to stay watching a film that is emotionally harmful, no matter how interesting or cool it is or how useful/contructive its "message."
The fact of the matter is that it is hard to talk about things like this in general terms.
Really you have to ask yourself why you watch films at all or read books or participate in any vicarious form of reality. Why read books or watch movies where bad stuff happens to people? Especially situations where the bad stuff has consequences that aren't resolved quickly or easily.
And for that matter, why MAKE films, or write books, or paint paintings where negative stuff happens to people?
I love some movies. I like others and really dislike many. The most important thing for me is to care about the person or subject. The movie absolutley has to engage me to the point that I no longer notice the difference in lighting from one frame to the next or that the hairstyle has just changed in 2minutes. If I want to enjoy it (whether I study films or not) the movie can't let go of my interest. It must pull me on and on and a real good movie will not let me notice any flaws but just enjoy being immersed in the experience. If I am studying theater or movie making I then would have to review it again to pick it apart. Now that would be a great movie!
I see your idea of how bad feelings can lead to good consequences, but they usually don't for me (at least, not on a consious level). I usually don't say to myself after watching a lame movie where mean things are going on and say, "well, it's a good thing I don't like mean people." I just don't analize that deaply. I'm simply in it for some upliftment. That's what I want out of a movie. I want to feel or think better because of it. And I don't want to have to get that by thinking opposite of what's going on in the film. I realize I'm pretty shallow in the this way, though, so you really need to get someone else's oppinion.
No way, you're not shallow. You just have a particular way of looking at a movie, or particular reasons for watching a movie. You want upliftment, and so you want the movie to embody upliftment. You pay more attention to actual events, rather then mode of presentation. This will, of course, limit the number of or types of films that you enjoy, but it isn't a reflection of the depth of your feelings, etc.
Recognizing what you like and enjoy is just one step in the cultivation of artistic sensibilities, or this process of "studying art." Thinking through how you respond to film and why is how you got there. It is valuable. Now, if you were to take this further, you would start to pay attention to what types of events or content that you DO like, or that DO work for you. You may find that in doing this, your opinions change (expand to include even more types of events/content), or that your appreciation of the types of films you already enjoy increases.
9 comments:
I'm wondering about the difference between watching a film as someone who studies film and simply allowing it to impact you. Going to an art museum with an art major is a totally different experience than just going by myself. I have no idea which pieces are famous for what and why, I just walk around having my own little experience and thinking my own thoughts. Would my experience be enhanced if I knew all that stuff they know, or would it just get in the way?
Good question. I wonder the same thing. Some film majors I know (and I won't mention any names) happen to like some films that I think are INCREDIBLY boring and depressing (I am NOT a film major). But that person likes the film for other reasons than JUST the feeling and sometimes the message. Because of this, she is able to appreciate a broader spectrum of films than I am.
I tend to believe that more knowledge is always better, IF that knowledge does not get in the way of one's feelings. Can she, the film major, still enjoy a good film because it touches her? Or does the analysis interfere with the reception of an emotional message? That is what we must ask the film major. I think we might find that she can still feel a film. Her experience may just be hightened a little. So, film major, what do you say?
First, I respond to Anne. This is good question. I think both effects are possible. With knowledge of an art form comes a cultivation of personal style or taste. In this way, you enjoy both more and less. You enjoy more because you appreciate more different ways of doing things (you know what goes into making them so you admire skill, perception, objectives of the movement, form, line, etc.). You enjoy less because you've had enough time and exposure to home in on what you REALLY like and enjoy, and you've developed your own opinions on why something should or should not be made, etc.
To respond to Stephanie,
I personally am a very intuitive person, meaning I pay a lot of attention to my feelings. I've realized that studying film helps me to understand WHY I feel the way I do, and try to apply those feelings to messages or purpose. So I watch a film and I feel a certain way and then I say, "Why do I feel that way?" Then I break things apart like, "Because of the shot composition or the music, or because of the story structure, or because of the acting, etc. But I break it down more minutely then that. So, if I stopped being able to feel a film, then I really couldn't analyze it either. The two things for me are too closely attached.
The question I have for you (all ya'lls) is: do you ever take note of how the you are feeling when you watch a film and then ask yourself why. Do you think it is possible for a "negative" emotion (like fear, sadness, boredom) to lead to a positive or constructive outcome?
I don't often ask myself why I'm feeling the way I do, because it's pretty ovious to me (ie: I'm feeling aweful because these people are doing aweful things and I don't like it!).
Of course it's POSSIBLE for a negative emotion to lead to a positive outcome, but will it? It certainly doesn't for me. But perhaps I'm just too shallow? I don't think too deeply about most things. How do you think you can get someone to get something positive out of something nagative, if that's your goal?
But why do you feel awful when people treat each other poorly? Doesn't that say something constructive about the way people should behave? And is the point of the film possibly to support that feeling? It always disturbs me when people in movies are beating the crap out of each other and the audience is like, "Yeah! You show'em! Wow, awesome punch." You may not feel bad, you feel good (pumped up, excited for whoever to win), but what he's doing is actually bad right? The filmmaker has a lot of control over how you feel as a result of a given situation. They do this in how they film it, or sometimes they let the events truly speak for themselves. Maybe feeling sad when something sad happens is actually a good thing. Good because it reveals a concern for humanity? Good because it supports the idea that certain thoughts/actions/words lead to certain conclusions.
The Greeks called it catharsis.
For others, fear or sadness in a given situation often leads to change (personal change, change within society) or compassion for others. Some situations reflect lives that are depressing (sad boring, full of anger), but the message trying to be conveyed is a different one (i.e. that people full of anger are often miserable, wickedness never was happiness, etc): a message, moreover, that contains elements of truth or insights into humanity or one person's view of it, or the human struggle for meaning and/or connection. In this sense, the actual events and the overall message are related, but different.
On a different level, there is skill in seeing if emotional objectives can successfully be shown visually (that is the craftsman's pleasure).
Although let's face it, some films just wallow. And it's never good to stay watching a film that is emotionally harmful, no matter how interesting or cool it is or how useful/contructive its "message."
The fact of the matter is that it is hard to talk about things like this in general terms.
Really you have to ask yourself why you watch films at all or read books or participate in any vicarious form of reality. Why read books or watch movies where bad stuff happens to people? Especially situations where the bad stuff has consequences that aren't resolved quickly or easily.
And for that matter, why MAKE films, or write books, or paint paintings where negative stuff happens to people?
I love some movies. I like others and really dislike many. The most important thing for me is to care about the person or subject. The movie absolutley has to engage me to the point that I no longer notice the difference in lighting from one frame to the next or that the hairstyle has just changed in 2minutes. If I want to enjoy it (whether I study films or not) the movie can't let go of my interest. It must pull me on and on and a real good movie will not let me notice any flaws but just enjoy being immersed in the experience. If I am studying theater or movie making I then would have to review it again to pick it apart. Now that would be a great movie!
I see your idea of how bad feelings can lead to good consequences, but they usually don't for me (at least, not on a consious level). I usually don't say to myself after watching a lame movie where mean things are going on and say, "well, it's a good thing I don't like mean people." I just don't analize that deaply. I'm simply in it for some upliftment. That's what I want out of a movie. I want to feel or think better because of it. And I don't want to have to get that by thinking opposite of what's going on in the film. I realize I'm pretty shallow in the this way, though, so you really need to get someone else's oppinion.
No way, you're not shallow. You just have a particular way of looking at a movie, or particular reasons for watching a movie. You want upliftment, and so you want the movie to embody upliftment. You pay more attention to actual events, rather then mode of presentation. This will, of course, limit the number of or types of films that you enjoy, but it isn't a reflection of the depth of your feelings, etc.
Recognizing what you like and enjoy is just one step in the cultivation of artistic sensibilities, or this process of "studying art." Thinking through how you respond to film and why is how you got there. It is valuable. Now, if you were to take this further, you would start to pay attention to what types of events or content that you DO like, or that DO work for you. You may find that in doing this, your opinions change (expand to include even more types of events/content), or that your appreciation of the types of films you already enjoy increases.
Post a Comment