Yesterday I saw Up in 3D. It 's just the second time I see a movie with the new three-dimensional technology. I would like to speech language, but I do not have the time to develop it or to write decent analysis. I leave the starting point:
in a three-dimensional film, the director is allowed to decide what is in focus and what not, or must leave the depth of field, allowing the viewer the freedom to focus on objects they prefer, as normally happens when you watch a three-dimensional space?
Up I write because you choose the first path, and I found the experience (this, not the great movie) unpleasant. Violence, expropriation of my freedom.
It 'clear that the 2D movie I expropriate, but it is a coded language that I do not live expropriation as violence but as a grammar. The 3D cinema is still codified in the codes of language to define the fire (which is a legacy 2D) will have space?
0 comments:
Post a Comment