I agree about Requiem for a Dream, it’s a horrible but excellent movie and so intense. It’s more effective into shocking you than any other drugs movie I’ve ever seen, it even trumps Christiane F. – We children From Bahnhof Zoo, in my opinion!

Those film classes sound like loads of fun. Honestly, the camera is one of those things I often forget in analyzing a movie as well as it’s so … not obvious. It’s usually really subtle, with exceptions like Requiem for a Dream where it’s all about the unusual camera work.

Anyway, looking forward to chatting with you! Thanks again!

I took a bunch of film study classes back in the ’90s in high school and college, and we spent a lot of time digging into the various terms and what they accomplished. Since I’ve been writing my blog in recent years, I definitely haven’t given them enough attention. It’s one of those obvious things that any person who digs into films and writes about them should know. Having that knowledge makes it easier to understand what a director is trying to do and if they’re doing it successfully.

I just discovered your site, and I’ll be following it going forward!

“Seeing” I think is definitely the harder part of creating images. It requires a certain type of sharp attention, and lots of patience as well. I agree it’s amazing how the directors “see” their stories. It can really add to the general feel and content of the story. :).

Thanks for stopping by!

I always repeat to them what my instructors said to me: I can teach you how to use the equipment, but I can’t teach you how to see.

One of the things I’ve always loved about the movies is the way directors “see” the stories they want to tell us. The best ones have an amazing grasp of the visual technique, and use it to underscore so much of what’s written on the page…and even a few things that aren’t written!