Drama (was What I didn't like about TTT)

[pippin_999 <foxmoth@qnet.com>]

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak 
<pipdowns at e...>" <pipdowns at e...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "David 
<dfrankiswork at n...>" 
> <dfrankiswork at n...> wrote:
> > Pip wrote:
> > 
> > > Drama equals conflict. No conflict, no drama. No drama, no 
> > story.  A film or a play is not a novel. A film or a play cannot 
survive  without conflict.
> > 
> David:
> > This seems so, um, definite.  How can we be sure?

Pip: 
> Well, strictly, we can't. We just have to go by the fact that the 
> play, as an artform, is at least 2500 years old (given that the 
> oldest surviving playscript dates from around 490 BC). <<<

Oh, I think we can. Just borrow a baby and plop her down in front 
of a TV set. See what holds her attention. Conflict. Chases. Tom 
and Jerry cartoons, and their myriad successors. 

The point is, we can appreciate those things *without* training. 
That's important if the filmmaker is trying to reach a wide 
audience and sell lots of tickets to pay for those big budget 
special effects. The people who put up money for films like to 
think they are going to get something back for their investment, 
as  ars pro gratia artis translates into, "We're going to be 
severely arsed if we don't make money." <g>

Now granted, you can tell an epic story without an epic budget. 
The first Star Wars film is a case in point. All you need to 
simulate the vast depths of outer space is a sheet of black velvet 
and a pin. But Tolkien didn't set his epic  in outer  space, or 
clothe his hero warriors in off the shelf cricket gear. 

We could have an art-house version of LOTR, but it wouldn't have 
all that handmade armor, "bigatures" the size of a football field, 
scenes shot multiple times with little people stand-ins for the 
Dwarf and Hobbit characters,  helicopter shots of scenic New 
Zealand, etc.

Pippin