Games as art. (Gaming)

by Kermit , Raleigh, NC, Tuesday, September 20, 2022, 12:04 (798 days ago) @ Cody Miller
edited by Kermit, Tuesday, September 20, 2022, 12:10

Editing is intrinsic to storytelling. Whether it is a cut of film, a scene change on stage, or chapter break in a book. Choosing what to show/tell (and how) IS editing. Presenting a story in the "one-take" format is just a different way of editing. It's fixing time, stretching it out, allowing tension to build/pacing to form/emotions to play out in different ways than most films do it.

And this was my fundamental problem. Seeing it in one take / real time made the journey feel small. How far could you walk in 90 minutes?

I think this is weak argument. Ninety minutes across a war-torn battlefield can be quite a challenge, but not because of the actual distance.

It's a type of story where you need to manipulate time. Which by the way, they did when he fell asleep or lost consciousness or whatever (I forget). So they didn't even do what you claim. It seems like a tacit admission that a real time presentation was not suitable for the story when you actually abandon it.

He's knocked out. The screen goes black. I think the break kind of saves it, actually. It gives the audience a chance to breathe, allows the film to transition to night, and what follows is one the more effective sections of the film.

IMO it prevented tensions and emotions from building.

Not my experience. I don't totally disagree with you, Cody, regarding the gimmicky nature of it being distracting. If possible, the best way to watch it would be to go in not having heard a bit of the one-take hype.

For me something like Birdman fared better, since its 'one take' gimick was actively part of the theme of the artifice and pompousness of art.

I need to see that. Thanks for reminding me.