Reading a movie seems rather simplistic. I knew from my previous courses that things on the right are more dominate than the things on the left. I can’t remember the exact psychology as it has been a few years but it has to do with the programing in people’s brains with how humans evolved. Having taking several art classes as well, it only makes sense that the foreground is more dominate than the back ground as it is closer to the viewer. I never really thought about how things that are higher up are more prominent that things that are lower in respects to it. It’s fascinating actually since perhaps it was a subconscious thing I never noticed? Each of these things because they play up to the fact of what people naturally notice first. Especially with light. There’s a lot of psychological tricks to see what people notice first with black and white images. For example, the two faces and the cup (as I don’t think there’s any images under the creative commons license, I won’t be posting an image of it here) is a standard one. Which is one that is seen first? Another example of light is the black, blue, gold, and white dress. No one could agree what color what it was.
What I do not agree with necessarily is that the future is to the right while the past is on the left. Looking to the past or to the future can be in any direction as it is a figment of human creation. Symmetrical compositions don’t always mean at rest and diagonal compositions don’t always mean movement. Symmetrical compositions are usually set up as conversation points because it would make the people appear to be equals or on the same playing field. I struggle to put into words exactly, but as movies continuously use diagonals as movement and symmetrical as rest, its going to reinforce the stereotype that those mean those respective things.
One point perspective thoughts: I find it interesting that the creators of this video put up the lines of what good perspective is. Then afterwards, the particular scenes. It becomes hard to unsee where the scenes line up with each of the points. They certainly would be not as good of movies if they were off slightly.
The shining zoom thoughts: Frankly? I don’t understand this video. I don’t get what the point of it was or what it’s suppose to represent. Never watched the shining either, so maybe that’s part of the reason why I don’t understand it.
Space Odyssey thoughts: This video is about how movie cuts, if don’t well, can be quite good.
Hitchcock thoughts: It goes on about replacing certain scenes with different ones can change the meaning of the video as a whole. I never really thought about it much in the past because at the end of the day, whatever I watched was something to enjoy. Never did I think that entirely changing the scene around different ones could happen.
15 essential camera shots thoughts: I enjoyed that the person who created this covered each of the different types of angles in a movie. Their were several angles that I was curious about, but never knew the name to. For example, the Dutch angle was the angle for creating confusing, discombobulating scenes. It’s a nice organized place for all of it.
Editing examples thoughts: I was amused by the different types of videos that they used to show the different types of transitions. I thought it was neat that they were able to find several different videos instead of just recording something themselves to show it as well. It makes it so if people want to refer to just those videos, it would be easier to do so.
Tarantino Thoughts: I was extremely impressed with the different scenes from different movies into a relatively cohesive story. The power of cuts and editing is at work and it’s perfect.