case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2016-09-07 06:50 pm

[ SECRET POST #3535 ]


⌈ Secret Post #3535 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.
















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 18 secrets from Secret Submission Post #505.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 1 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.
a_potato: (Default)

[personal profile] a_potato 2016-09-08 12:30 am (UTC)(link)
A lot of older stuff seems more...theater-like? It doesn't come across as "real" so much as "performative." You can it in some of the cinematography, too, in the sense that some of it looks like stage blocking.
th0rns_n_r0ses: (Default)

[personal profile] th0rns_n_r0ses 2016-09-08 12:34 am (UTC)(link)
I never thought about it that way. That's a really good point. Theatre was obviously much more established, while movies were very new.
a_potato: (Default)

[personal profile] a_potato 2016-09-08 01:06 am (UTC)(link)
Yeah, and like...with theater a lot of times, it's not showing you everything; you're still supposed to use your imagination in a way that modern movies don't require. And it's also exaggerated, because it kind of has to be.

It's a totally different way of approaching things. I think that's why you see, for example, the super dramatic displays of affection in older movies. They weren't going for "real," they were trying to suggest realness the way a play suggests realness.