First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
Post Reply What the....
11622 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 11/30/15 , edited 11/30/15

PeripheralVisionary

What's the difference between a movie and a youtube video? I find that youtube videos don't take a lot of time and they're easily accessible at home, whereas you have to watch a movie in class generally.


The main difference is convenience over quality. Another reason the education is shit in America... That's not to say it can't work, but it's far less likely to.
Posted 11/30/15 , edited 11/30/15

dotsforlife wrote:


PeripheralVisionary

What's the difference between a movie and a youtube video? I find that youtube videos don't take a lot of time and they're easily accessible at home, whereas you have to watch a movie in class generally.


The main difference is convenience over quality. Another reason the education is shit in America... That's not to say it can't work, but it's far less likely to.


The youtube video seems quality work to me. I mean, does anyone really need 1 hour 30 minute movie on what can otherwise be told in under 30 minutes? I think youtube videos are wonderful. Movies? Not so much, unless extra credit.


Some are trying to pull the focus on the top 20%, but it reeks of snobbish elitism or something. You know, people like Charles Murray and his Magnum Opus, The Bell Curve. I don't think we should abandon the lower rungs of society to make us feel better about ourselves.
11622 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 11/30/15 , edited 11/30/15

PeripheralVisionary

The youtube video seems quality work to me. I mean, does anyone really need 1 hour 30 minute movie on what can otherwise be told in under 30 minutes? I think youtube videos are wonderful. Movies? Not so much, unless extra credit.


Some are trying to pull the focus on the top 20%, but it reeks of snobbish elitism or something. You know, people like Charles Murray and his Magnum Opus, The Bell Curve. I don't think we should abandon the lower rungs of society to make us feel better about ourselves.


It's not a bad video. It's one of the few gems out there. Nothing beats the original content though. The video is an interpretation, although it is very accruate it seems. I suppose if you wanted a shortcut version this would be a good option. I stand by what I said though, convenience over quality is all it amounts to.
Posted 11/30/15

dotsforlife wrote:


PeripheralVisionary

The youtube video seems quality work to me. I mean, does anyone really need 1 hour 30 minute movie on what can otherwise be told in under 30 minutes? I think youtube videos are wonderful. Movies? Not so much, unless extra credit.


Some are trying to pull the focus on the top 20%, but it reeks of snobbish elitism or something. You know, people like Charles Murray and his Magnum Opus, The Bell Curve. I don't think we should abandon the lower rungs of society to make us feel better about ourselves.


It's not a bad video. It's one of the few gems out there. Nothing beats the original content though. The video is an interpretation, although it is very accruate it seems. I suppose if you wanted a shortcut version this would be a good option. I stand by what I said though, convenience over quality is all it amounts to.


When it comes to against movies? I do agree the written source content does demonstrate the psychological terror aspect far better than the video.
11622 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 11/30/15

PeripheralVisionary wrote:


dotsforlife wrote:


PeripheralVisionary

The youtube video seems quality work to me. I mean, does anyone really need 1 hour 30 minute movie on what can otherwise be told in under 30 minutes? I think youtube videos are wonderful. Movies? Not so much, unless extra credit.


Some are trying to pull the focus on the top 20%, but it reeks of snobbish elitism or something. You know, people like Charles Murray and his Magnum Opus, The Bell Curve. I don't think we should abandon the lower rungs of society to make us feel better about ourselves.


It's not a bad video. It's one of the few gems out there. Nothing beats the original content though. The video is an interpretation, although it is very accruate it seems. I suppose if you wanted a shortcut version this would be a good option. I stand by what I said though, convenience over quality is all it amounts to.


When it comes to against movies? I do agree the written source content does demonstrate the psychological terror aspect far better than the video.


Movies I think it would depend. If we're talking some Hollywood money train remake then obviously there's better, but original works, especially the older ones, are often better. Written is a given though.
60157 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 11/30/15

dotsforlife wrote:


PeripheralVisionary

What's the difference between a movie and a youtube video? I find that youtube videos don't take a lot of time and they're easily accessible at home, whereas you have to watch a movie in class generally.


The main difference is convenience over quality. Another reason the education is shit in America... That's not to say it can't work, but it's far less likely to.


I'm having trouble understanding this argument.

I understand that YouTube can certainly be more convenient than, say, distributing written works to an entire classroom of students, but I don't understand why it's necessarily lower quality. Or if you were talking about this video specifically, what makes it lower quality than the original work?

Also, in the context of your last sentence, what does it mean for the YouTube video to work, and how is it it's less likely to work than the original? That is to say, how do you measure success in terms of comparing the YouTube video to the original?
725 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / UK
Offline
Posted 11/30/15
Someone's read too much poe and watched too much salad fingers.
Posted 11/30/15

staphen wrote:


dotsforlife wrote:


PeripheralVisionary

What's the difference between a movie and a youtube video? I find that youtube videos don't take a lot of time and they're easily accessible at home, whereas you have to watch a movie in class generally.


The main difference is convenience over quality. Another reason the education is shit in America... That's not to say it can't work, but it's far less likely to.


I'm having trouble understanding this argument.

I understand that YouTube can certainly be more convenient than, say, distributing written works to an entire classroom of students, but I don't understand why it's necessarily lower quality. Or if you were talking about this video specifically, what makes it lower quality than the original work?

Also, in the context of your last sentence, what does it mean for the YouTube video to work, and how is it it's less likely to work than the original? That is to say, how do you measure success in terms of comparing the YouTube video to the original?


He meant the original short story by Poe. I got confused as well. As for the video, it captures the psychological terror well, but Poe masterfully does it with a stroke of a pen. The repetition of symbols and phrase, the erratic dash lines, the thoughts summarized in short frantic sentences....
85263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Louisville, KY
Offline
Posted 11/30/15
Heh, when I was in school (Elementary/Middle/High) our teachers gave us movies to watch. Basically, they would make the TV babysit us while they slept getting paid. Then they would make us write a one-page paper on the moral of the story to pretend like the movie was a teaching method the whole time.
Bavalt 
22029 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Canada
Offline
Posted 11/30/15

staphen wrote:


I'm having trouble understanding this argument.

I understand that YouTube can certainly be more convenient than, say, distributing written works to an entire classroom of students, but I don't understand why it's necessarily lower quality. Or if you were talking about this video specifically, what makes it lower quality than the original work?

Also, in the context of your last sentence, what does it mean for the YouTube video to work, and how is it it's less likely to work than the original? That is to say, how do you measure success in terms of comparing the YouTube video to the original?


I think the argument was that in terms of average quality, if you're organizing pieces of art based on age, the older ones will be better by virtue of the lower-quality pieces of that era already having been shelved or forgotten. Good art stands the test of time, and new art hasn't had the chance to take that test yet, so there's a whole lot of mediocre stuff to wade through to find the gems. The reason this story is known nowadays is because of the quality of Poe's original version, and while that doesn't detract from the quality of adaptations, it sets a high bar for those adaptations to shoot for. Adaptation is a risky business because by default, you're welcoming your work to comparison with the (presumably well-liked) original.

So yeah, in terms of general quality, the classics will always trump the contemporary, but I'd argue that mean quality is pretty much irrelevant. It's not as if one just hops on Youtube and says "Hey, gimme a random video!" Between database searching and word of mouth, it's actually not that hard to find the quality work on any given online outlet. The average quality of any entertainment source becomes far less relevant if you screen before you consume.
3116 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/30/15
sounds fun, GLHF
6163 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / Off the map.
Offline
Posted 11/30/15
I never had to read or seen this. I prefer the 'Raven', cough "Nevermore,"
21860 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / F / The Bahamas
Offline
Posted 11/30/15
This smacks of slackness...

I remember reading The Telltale Heart after watching The Simpson's episode featuring it (I was 7 at the time), I can appreciate the idea of it being easier to manage, but I feel you lose the ability to put your own interpretation of a work when you go through someone else's vision of it.

That being said I found the You Tube video didn't do the work justice at all. It just came off as silly and lampoon-like to me.
20644 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/30/15 , edited 11/30/15

ILuvCats11 wrote:

So in my school we had to watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDLLHTdVSgU this and write about the 5 main plots in the story.. what the fuck...


I wouldn't deconstruct the story into five whole plots... Did you mean “5 main plot points”?

To me it basically consisted of exposition, rising action, and a climax, and abrupt conclusion almost non-existent.

The first scene is like a prologue, not really part of the plot for now.

1) 0:48, The exposition and conflict is explained right after the insane asylum scene.

2) 1:45, Then, there is a clear transition ( cross fade ) into the rising action; you might think that the murder is the climax but I felt the way the story continued onwards and had an even bigger climax rules this out.

5:10, freeze frame that, it's kinda funny.

3) 5:50, I think this is the start of the real climax where the murderer hysterically confesses and uncovers the victim. The music builds and intensifies, unfortunately the other elements ( animation, narration ) failed to really match the music in intensity.

The story didn't seem to have any falling action.

4) And then it abruptly ends with an insane asylum scene which is more or less the conclusion.

Well, that's my analysis. I haven't done much literary device research so feel free to correct me.
Posted 11/30/15
You forgot your fuck.
Here take mine, I have lots
Fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck
First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.