4 ms·

> You should be able to watch a movie with no sound and follow the plot Why?

• inetknght 7y ago
  In my experience, movie plots are usually so shallow that sound doesn't really add to the plot.
  • glitchc 7y ago
    You need to watch better movies.
• olah_1 7y ago
  Because visual storytelling is the whole point of the medium. Yes, there should be a symphony of sound and visual working together. But the whole point of the medium of Motion Pictures is to tell stories through... motion pictures.
  • the_af 7y ago
    Modern cinema is not just visual storytelling. It also has sound, which is just as vital.
    • shantly 7y ago
      Even most silent films, including those considered among the best, had inter-titles, and it'd be a lot harder to follow the plot without them. The important exceptions are almost all niche art films. They also used scoring to set mood and convey emotion.
  • goto11 7y ago
    That is just begging the question. Why can't sound and dialog be an integrated and necessary part of the storytelling? What about musicals? Disneys Fantasia? The voice overs in Goodfellas? The dialogue in Pulp Fiction? Who even decides what the "point" of a media is beside the people creating stuff in the media?
    • olah_1 7y ago
      What do motion pictures offer that no other medium offers? The answer is moving images. What I'm saying is that a medium should play to the strengths of the unique thing that it offers over other mediums. What do video games uniquely offer? Interactivity. Therfore, the video game medium should focus on offering interactivity that would be impossible to get in any other medium.
      • latexr 7y ago
        > What do video games uniquely offer? Interactivity. Therfore, the video game medium should focus on offering interactivity that would be impossible to get in any other medium. To the Moon[1] and Dear Esther[2] won awards and high praise from critics and players alike, despite lacklustre interactivity. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_The_Moon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_The_Moon [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dear_Esther https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dear_Esther
        • olah_1 7y ago
          I adored Dear Esther. The interactivity was amazing. It enhanced the story and immersed me. Thanks for the great example.
          • latexr 7y ago
            > I adored Dear Esther. The interactivity was amazing. Anecdotal report of what you thought doesn’t advance the conversation. I can just say it was a boring game for me (it was) and we’re back to square one. I feel that if you call Dear Esther’s interactivity “amazing”, you either haven’t played enough games to be able to expound judgement, or have a definition of “interactivity” different from most players. Some quotes from the Wikipedia page, based on multiple published sources: > The gameplay in Dear Esther is minimal, with the only task being (…) > Despite questioning whether it truly constitutes a video game (…) > (…) critics were divided by the suitability of the video game medium for conveying the story of Dear Esther. > (…) stating that the game "would be better as a short film" (…) > The limited interactivity between the player and the narrative (…) The consensus is that it’s a good work of art, with a good story, visuals, and sound design, but that there isn’t much to interact with.
  • mcv 7y ago
    It was, before movies have sound. Since the end of the age of silent movies, movies have become able to tell very different kinds of stories. Some are entirely visual, some are entirely about dialogue, some are about music, or sound, or whatever. And most are about a mixture of those. There's no single point to the medium. It's a powerful medium exactly because it's so flexible.
• earthboundkid 7y ago
  You're on an airplane and you don't really want to watch a movie but you can't stop looking at someone else's screen.