On Apr 25, 4:31=A0pm, emptybowl <f...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > And I suppose the only way you can think of indicating the passage of
> > time on TV is to actually show it pass in real time.
>
> No, but why waste time? Keep the viewer interested.
How much time is wasted by doing a dissolve or using any number of
other visual cliches indicating passage of time?
> > By horsemen hoping to capture a polar bear for their collection?
=A0What=
> > do you think has been coming thru there that brigands would want to
> > intercept?
>
> Interlopers who have also tele****ted to the same spot that Ben and the
> polar bear have previously? They didn't look to happy to see Ben,
> regardless of where he came from.
"Interlopers"? There's got to be more to perk up interest than that.
What makes them different from any other visitors?
> How do we know how far away the were when ben awoke? Maybe they were
> riding by and saw ben arrive.
I thought you were explaining why they DIDN'T have to be nearby.
> I still feel this is moot, because, really, it's just a ****ing story
> device, but how about this: Weird **** happens, and people sometimes
> coincidentally show up just in time to see it. IT HAPPENS. Car
> accidents, frozen toilet waste falling from the sky, meteors...need I go
> on. Not everything coincidental indicates conspirsacy
But it's a dumb story unless either:
(1) the gimmick IS that very strangeness, or
(2) there's another explanation, and it's NOT luck.
#1 was pretty well used up by "Strange Luck", so it'd better be #2.
> Okay, forget for a moment that you're a nimrod that believes this stupid
> conspiracy bull****. Please to be indicating a better way to indicate 1)
> the date to the viewer
subtitle
> and 2) the fact that Ben needs to know it because
> he is unsure.
>
> I mean, what are you gonna do? Have him look at a calendar/paper and
> have him mutter "Man, I'm glad I looked at that, seein as how I was
> unsure of the date!" That's ****y writing.
No, you show a close-up of the date and a close-up of his rxn.
> > Hell, they used a subtitle, "Sahara Desert", and then one for a
> > location in Tunisia. =A0They didn't have Benry ask WHERE he was.
>
> Because he's been there before?
I'm just saying a subtitle would've been an alternative if they wanted
to show us the date and DIDN'T want Benry to make a big deal about it.
> > He was injured and disheveled, asked a very strange question (even
> > perseverated on it), and was probably caught on security video.
>
> Yeah, no one emerging from the Sahara desert is dirty and disheveled!
Sure, having him emerge from the desert could've been enough, but he'd
also been wounded and in a fight. What the vomiting added, I don't
know. The point was for him to be remarkable and memorable without
appearing to SEEK notice.
Robert
|
