Re: RAT Collage

[Audie McCall <audiemccall@yahoo.com>]

I have a weakness for the very same show.

But actually, the effects of film you're praising here
have more to do with the editor than the camera.  And
he/she is usually endowed with afformentioned
consciousness.

And while I agree that the exact quality of filmic
montage is awkward when transposed to the stage, there
ARE techniques that can achieve similar effects.  And
what techniques there AREN'T merely await your
inventing them.


--- Pwpny@aol.com wrote:

> I was talking about this just the other day. I was
> watching the TV show The 
> West Wing (a show which is overly sentimental and
> simple about some things 
> but has a grand Shakespearean quality at times that
> I can't help but love - 
> thank you, Aaron Sorkin), and they showed, not a
> collage, but a MONTAGE, 
> intercutting between two different scenes, with no
> dialogue, just music. I 
> said that I wish theatre could accomplish that same
> feeling (sappy and 
> sentimental as it often is). Sure, I've seen
> montages on stage, but, as an 
> audience member, I'm always aware that the snapshot
> I just saw on stage right 
> is still there, just in the dark, while I'm watching
> the well-lit action down 
> stage left. All of this to say that the camera does
> more than just record a 
> picture, it FOCUSES the audience's attention in a
> way that's very hard to do 
> with live work - not impossible, but very hard.
> Maybe it's not a character, 
> merely a vessel, but it does seem to function as
> some kind of melding of 
> director/cinematographer/writer/character.
> 
> I do love the more pro-active role the audience
> plays in the theatre, of 
> course, but occasionally have camera-envy.
> 
> Catherine Porter
> Peculiar Works Project, NYC

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Thousands of Stores.  Millions of Products.  All in one place.
Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com