[HPFGU-OTChatter] re: movies / books / rods

[Cabal]

-----Original Message-----
From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
[mailto:HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Catlady (Rita Prince
Winston)
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 11:18 PM
To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] re: movies / books / rods

Cabal wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/message/38636>:

<< The experience of reading a book, of becoming personally and deeply
involved with characters and stories in the sort of detail you simply
can't have with a film. A book allows you to see and interpret in a
way a film never can, you have the director, actor, screenwriter,
editor, producer and composer all in between you and the experience,
all manipulating your experience. With a book it's just you and the
author. >>

I rarely see movies, but it doesn't make sense to me that just because
a movie is a collaborative product made by a whole bunch of people
would prevent the viewer from being 'personally and deeply involved
with characters and stories'. Are the Ellery Queen mysteries less
involving than Agatha Christie mysteries because the Ellery Queen
series was written by a duo?

::::::::::::::::::::::

That's a completely wrong interpretation of my comments. There's a
difference between collaboration in co-authoring and a producer with his
vision, a writer with his interpretation, a director with his vision, a cast
of actors with their interpretations, an editor with his ideas, a composer
adding his part, a second and third unit director, set designers, costume
designers, etc. etc. 

And an author and a reader.

It's like saying a one on one conversation in a quiet room is the same as
mingling at a party.

md