Joho the Blog
An Entry from the Archives

Greater context to support the willing suspension of disbelief. "The power of narrative," as James Carville might say. A trick is just a trick. A movie is a chance to be someone else for a couple of hours.

Because once you know what to look for, the mechanism of a magic trick is right in front of you. The mechanism of a special effect is still behind the scenes.

It doesn't always - watch Penn and Teller show you how they do tricks and make it even more interesting.

In either case it's the level of interest the magician or Pixar can generate which grabs us.
Even the magician who reveals how he does his thing can arouse interest if he follows that openness with the same trick but done with such skill that we can't seem to reconcile what we already know with the mystery of our complete deception. For example, in nature and science I know the moon is a big rock, but when it shines at night it's something mysterious. It keeps its mystery despite my knowledge.

The Visual Effects are a means to an end - the magical trick is an end in itself.

A trick is in person usually and is a dominant vs subservient interchange... not passive as the movie viewing is. The unspoken transaction is: Magician: I can fool you... Audience: No you can't.

Whereas the movie has a central purpose of "fooling me"...I pay to be transformed and dream...no competition for who can outfox who...and I find "Magic tricks" (not to be confused with MAGIC")very, very boring becuase it is like juggling... a rote, buy and build... but not necessarily breakthrough creative

second thought: the word "trick" says it all... I, Magician, can "trick" you.. I, Trickee, "No you can't"... vs movie, I can entertain you... and I will pay to be entertained... no challenge here...

continuation of context

I think Catherine's got it hasn't she? It's about meeting expectation.

I'm paying to be puzzled, so puzzle me.

On the other hand, set up a trick and tell me you're going to explain it, and I'll be all agog.
This time you're selling knowledge.

With films, my expectation is of a work of art.
I am perfectly prepared to admire the artistry that creates it.

Understanding film special effects is like looking under the bonnet of a Ferrari. I am happy to impressed by the car, but am also very interested to know what it is that makes it go so damned fast.

When you do a stint in a visual effects company and attend daily screenings of work in progress where people criticise each other's work ("I can still see the wires", even given only two frames of film, etc.) then movies do become slightly less enjoyable for a while afterwards (in the sense that you've developed a critical eye in order to see how the hell anyone can notice a slight imperfection in just a couple of frames - and it's difficult to turn off that eye).

I must say special effects ruined the goblin movies for me. Rubber latex dwarves with pointy ears, old men in powder-blue hats and FoxNews renditions of Enemies of the Empire proved too much for me to stomach. Perhaps I'm just being ornery, but imagination does it for me every time.

I disagree with the premise. I am just as interested in learning how magicians make things disappear, for instance, as I am in actually watching them do so. The art, science and psychology of deception upon which all magic is dependent, is pehaps more interesting than the magic itself. That's why revealing magic tricks is a business that is just about as big as actual magic performance. Magic, and magic revelation are two sides of the same coin. Of course any self-respecting magician must protest when one of their hoakey "tricks" is revealed, but that only serves to keep the whole thing going. didn't hurt it.

Hello ja z Polski pewnie się nie doczytasz co??? mój adres blogowy to http://jimcarreyshow.blog.onet.pl/