Artist intent versus viewer perception - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

***Mister Underhill*** · 06-25-2012, 06:17 PM

Interesting topic, lmp! I think it just goes to show how very, very hard it is to make a truly great movie. Any given intention on the part of the artists making a film has the potential of being undercut, or distorted, or subverted, or unclear, or simply unnoticed because of some other decision or chain of decisions.

It takes a lot of talent and at least a little luck to be able to balance all the millions of decisions and intentions of dozens of artists in a way that is simply coherent, let alone in a way that serves the overall intentions of the story. And then those intentions have to be sound -- powerful, insightful, resonant, emotional, whatever.

I read this theory recently that the reason Spielberg is so successful is because there is never any doubt as to what he means in a given moment. He is great at leading you through very clear series of cause and effect. The critic argued that this great strength is also his greatest limitation: there is never any ambiguity to what he does. It's an interesting theory. See here if you're interested in checking out the discussion (warning -- it's part of a looooooong article about how action works -- or doesn't -- in film).

Anyway, to more specifically reply, I remember watching the director commentary on the scene where the Black Rider almost catches Frodo and company in the forest. They're hiding, and the Rider comes near, and all these bugs start crawling on the hobbits, and Jackson said the intention there was something like that the Rider was so terrible that even the bugs were fleeing from him. When I watched the scene, though, it felt more like his evil aura or whatever was drawing these creepy things towards him. So, intention not received.

06-25-2012, 06:17 PM	#3
*Mister Underhill* Dread Horseman Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Behind you! Posts: 2,744	Interesting topic, lmp! I think it just goes to show how very, very hard it is to make a truly great movie. Any given intention on the part of the artists making a film has the potential of being undercut, or distorted, or subverted, or unclear, or simply unnoticed because of some other decision or chain of decisions. It takes a lot of talent and at least a little luck to be able to balance all the millions of decisions and intentions of dozens of artists in a way that is simply coherent, let alone in a way that serves the overall intentions of the story. And then those intentions have to be sound -- powerful, insightful, resonant, emotional, whatever. I read this theory recently that the reason Spielberg is so successful is because there is never any doubt as to what he means in a given moment. He is great at leading you through very clear series of cause and effect. The critic argued that this great strength is also his greatest limitation: there is never any ambiguity to what he does. It's an interesting theory. See here if you're interested in checking out the discussion (warning -- it's part of a looooooong article about how action works -- or doesn't -- in film). Anyway, to more specifically reply, I remember watching the director commentary on the scene where the Black Rider almost catches Frodo and company in the forest. They're hiding, and the Rider comes near, and all these bugs start crawling on the hobbits, and Jackson said the intention there was something like that the Rider was so terrible that even the bugs were fleeing from him. When I watched the scene, though, it felt more like his evil aura or whatever was drawing these creepy things towards him. So, intention not received.