 |
|
flipside
|
|
for Sean Marcelo
Jun 2003
time: 05:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by finbar
With a few exceptions, they're basically immensely unpleasant, immature children. Usually, the better the actor, the more unpleasant and immature. |
I take it, that this causes some tension within your profession then.
I mean, we can all be immature. I personally, have always tried to keep an a mental age of about four, but, to know that something that you have created, that really has a message, is represented best by someone that I considered an idiot, would p*ss me off.
Do you just accept that you have to rely upon him to do his job, whilst knowing that he doesn't really know what it is; do you all just try to educate them to be slightly more human; what?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
flipside
|
|
for Sean Marcelo
Jun 2003
time: 05:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by finbar
It's a bit like children - by which I mean, real ones. You just have to put up with them. They're a necessary evil.
As a writer, one can only cross one's fingers that, between them, the actors and director: (a) understand the intention; and (b) have the skills to get it right. Depending on the production, the writer can have input into the process, albeit very carefully and tactfully put.
"The Simpsons" got it right. Draw your characters. If you don't like 'em, you just rub 'em out and start again. |
Have you ever tried that?
Not that I can ever understand a full episode, but it must be very liberating to have that freedom of expression within characterisation and action.
What always gets to me about "The Simpsons" is how it works on so many levels with an incredible degree of acuity, in such a bizarre way, yet hardly ever appears forced or unnatural.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
finbar
|
 |
Castiglion Fiorentino, Italy
Jan 1970
time: 06:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by flipside
Have you ever tried that?
Not that I can ever understand a full episode, but it must be very liberating to have that freedom of expression within characterisation and action.
What always gets to me about "The Simpsons" is how it works on so many levels with an incredible degree of acuity, in such a bizarre way, yet hardly ever appears forced or unnatural. |
The cartoon form is incredibly liberating for a writer. Providing you're being true to the style and tone, there are few limits. "The Simpsons", IMHO, has produced some of the great American TV writing of all time. For me, it's up there with just about everything Garry Shandling has done. And everything else is a very, very distant second.
But if you watch enough eps of the "The Simpsons", you'll notice they have quite distinct style, tone and characterisation rules or conventions. What's particularly interesting, though, is that when they break any of those rules or conventions, which they do from time to time, it sticks out like the proverbial.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
flipside
|
|
for Sean Marcelo
Jun 2003
time: 05:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by finbar
The cartoon form is incredibly liberating for a writer. Providing you're being true to the style and tone, there are few limits. "The Simpsons", IMHO, has produced some of the great American TV writing of all time. For me, it's up there with just about everything Garry Shandling has done. And everything else is a very, very distant second.
But if you watch enough eps of the "The Simpsons", you'll notice they have quite distinct style, tone and characterisation rules or conventions. What's particularly interesting, though, is that when they break any of those rules or conventions, which they do from time to time, it sticks out like the proverbial. |
Ummm......
I understand what you mean, but I have not followed it enough to say any more than that I have an idea about how they build the story, what the characterisation is, the tonal effect , how that builds upon the previous scene and extends it....etc.
I mean, does this shift represent the change of writing, the deliberate change or breaking of rules, or that when they do change their rules, it is is done deliberately to reinforce a certain message.
If I am just being obtuse, and it is as obvious as the dog's testicles , please excuse me . I would like to know.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
flipside
|
|
for Sean Marcelo
Jun 2003
time: 05:33
|
|
*flipside would like to apologise for being drunk*
*More than usual*
|
|
| |
|
|
|
finbar
|
|
Castiglion Fiorentino, Italy
Jan 1970
time: 06:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by flipside
Ummm......
I understand what you mean, but I have not followed it enough to say any more than that I have an idea about how they build the story, what the characterisation is, the tonal effect , how that builds upon the previous scene and extends it....etc.
I mean, does this shift represent the change of writing, the deliberate change or breaking of rules, or that when they do change their rules, it is is done deliberately to reinforce a certain message.
If I am just being obtuse, and it is as obvious as the dog's testicles , please excuse me . I would like to know. |
Their storytelling is quite extraordinary. Usually, storytelling proceeds on a logical basis - B follows A, C follows B, et al - with some twists thrown in along the way to avoid predictability. "The Simpsons" stories unfold on almost a "thought association" basis. A character within a scene will happen to think - that is, say - something, and that thought will link to the next scene, which can have next to nothing to do with the scene from which it linked.
But, of course, it's not a random process. It's ingenious plotting. Plotting being the process undertaken when you're working out a story's progress from beginning to end. Watch an episode. Whatever happens in the first 20 or 30 seconds is rarely what the episode is really about. Often, you won't discover what it's really about until the last 5 or 6 minutes. The apparently - but not really - random leaping around of the story is (a) how they manage to incorporate most of their many characters into an episode; and (b) manage to introduce so many layers into their stories.
A classic example was an episode that started with Bart and Homer fixing problems around the house - a video jammed in a VCR, etc - with fireworks. Within 30 seconds, via an apparently random word mentioned in a scene, the whole family was at a Literary Festival with guest appearances by writers like John Updike. And what was the episode actually about? Krusty the Clown had a love child he hadn't seen since she was a baby.
It takes very clever plotting brains to fashion those sorts of stories because, at their best, the story shifts all come from left field. You can't predict what's coming next. It's a storytelling process that really only works in animation. Audiences will always accept much more in the cartoon form - suspending disbelief, et al - than they will when actors are physically involved.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
LDiCesare
|
|
La Ferté sous Jouarre France
Jan 2001
time: 05:33
|
|
I've got another match cancelled because of snow, cold, frozen soil and other silly impediments. Luckily, I had a game last week, and I don't think I pointed out one other great point about mud:
After a very muddy match, one of the great joys is to watch the president, who happens to be in charge to retrieve the jerseys, look at the heap of mud with bits of cotton inside and decide to move his car up to the door of the changing room in order to be able to haul the sack of mud into his car (while you're drinking a well-earned beer of course). Poor man, the sack was probably four times as heavy as before the match.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tamerlin
|
 |
Toulouse (South-western France)
Apr 2002
time: 06:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by LDiCesare
I've got another match cancelled because of snow, cold, frozen soil and other silly impediments. Luckily, I had a game last week, and I don't think I pointed out one other great point about mud:
After a very muddy match, one of the great joys is to watch the president, who happens to be in charge to retrieve the jerseys, look at the heap of mud with bits of cotton inside and decide to move his car up to the door of the changing room in order to be able to haul the sack of mud into his car (while you're drinking a well-earned beer of course). Poor man, the sack was probably four times as heavy as before the match. |
Everybody knows now why it is difficult to find a president...
Leicester 13 - Stade Français 26
A very curious game with a muddy field and a wind against the Stade Français in the first half. The Stade Français dominated most of the time but missed some opportunities to score tries while the Tigers scored two tries in the first half. But the Parisiens, with Diego Dominguez, scored some penalties when the Tigers only scored one. The Tigers will lose many games this year if they don't find a good kicker. 
Though the field was muddy the two teams tried to send the ball to the backs, but the best phases were mauls and one almost led the Parisiens behind Leicester's try line.
The Tigers have not been bad, they have been tamed by a solid defence and a great Diego Dominguez. One of the weakest point of the Stade Français is Augustin Pichot, though he is a good defender he is really bad in attack... and that is not a good point for a Scrum-Half.
Mr Roland's performance as a referee has been very curious. He and the line referees have sometimes punished hardly some fouls while ignoring some others (like Martin Johnson one-handed strangulation attempt of Auradou, Neil Back punch attempt a moment later or two high tackles from the Parisian players). He has been very strict on some laws while allowing the Stade Français to score a try in the first half during which they committed at least two obvious fouls (a dummy runner and a contact), while not punishing two obvious late tackles on Diego Dominguez or allowing the Tigers to crumble almost all the mauls started by the Stade Français. 
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
LDiCesare
|
|
La Ferté sous Jouarre France
Jan 2001
time: 05:33
|
|
quote:
The first half was a real nightmare(...)The second half was another matter. |
This can easily be explained by the fact I watched the first half and then had to leave. Since I couldn't see it, the second half had to show great play.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:33.
Apolyton Time is 00:33. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
30-01-2004 05:54
You clairvoyant, you! 
|