Wow...someone's been busy answering questions...*thanks*
I have a kinda quick question about one of you favorite books-- Catcher in the Rye.
I understand how everyone says it has so much truth and etcetcetc, but how do/did you trust the narrator?
(Anyone can answer or ignore the question)
This is because you really can't, as in One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, it just seemed to me that all of my peers resisted remembering/realizing this fact... And I'm not saying I didn't like it or it was bad, 'cause I think it is very good and poignant but *shrug*...
Randomness, but, if you feel like it/have time... what was your filming experience in/at Princeton?
In general about David Searching, which I got my hands on several months ago-- while I found it a decent movie, there were certain aspects that got to me, though these are partially function of low budget mostly, so I understand: The variation of shots and cuts in the film and varying film quailty/exposure at times. IMO, there were several instances of a shot being used a little too long; one angle is used for an entire scene, or almost. Not even mise-en-scene with some interesting movement, there were some stationary shots that I just wish were maybe split up a bit more.
I do understand that the lack of time/money/etc is one cause for the lesser variation of shots though, and as a first film it really was decent.
And also imo editing must be clean and precise for films, just part of the medium... this of course, with a difference between clean/clear/continuous (no continuity booboos as in if you watch the someone you're not supposed to be watching in an OTS) and the clear film quality that's then fixed up as in most hollywood films... I can't remember the specs of DS's editing...(DS was grainy-ish, but that was because of what it was shot on, etc, not the editing, if I'm not mistaken...)
ETA: Go Bill+Ted!
(The movie did handle the problems of time travel well...)
Updated On: 1/18/05 at 05:48 PM