Tuesday, October 09, 2007
The Weave
Our movie is not presented chronologically, or even chronologically with flashbacks. Instead it jumps foreword and back in time seeming at random, and we are seldom shown how the three stories relate to each other through time. For that matter, the three strands touch each other only through the wanderings of Sawako and Matsumoto as the bound beggars walk unaware through the other two dramas. Did you like this way of constructing a movie?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I thought the time element was well-done. I am a big fan of showing things in chronological order, and I'm often confused by jumping around in time, but the timeline in this film was easy to understand.
I liked the distant way the three stories connected.
I've got a question. How come directors who make interweaving-story movies generally use THREE stories?
If you think about a physical braid, three is the minimum number of strands. With two strands you just get them twisted together. So there.
Actually Kc, I bet we could think of quite a few movies that play two stories off against each other. If I go get another cup of coffee, maybe I can remember a few. And to develop four story lines with any depth would make for a marathon movie. Three does seem to be a good balance that lots of filmmakers settle on. I like the question.
Three is the perfect number for a lot of things. It's much more involved than a group of two, it's an odd number (four is problematic in that it can become two groups of two), and it's much simpler than five.
In ancient Greece, a list of examples or a group of things almost always had three in it. The Romans, who always copied the Greeks but tried to outdo them, usually used five.
Uppity Romans
Post a Comment