Post by Eλευθερί on Apr 6, 2019 21:39:11 GMT
Think of it like a musical piece.
The writer is where it all starts. The composer may have indicated not only which instruments will play which notes and when, but how quickly and with what kind of spirit. The individual musicians carry out those instructions but according to the conductor's/band leader's (director's) interpretation of what the composer has called for. Particular conductors have their own styles and abilities that knowledgable listeners can discern, same with the musicians (a high school orchestra vs the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra; a Vladimir Horowitz rendition of a piano piece is completely different from the same piece performed by Arthur Rubinstein, or Martha Argerich).
Or think of a recipe. The recipe may be just a general outline, or it may be very precise and exacting--specifying which brands of ingredients and equipment to use, how much each ingredient should weigh down to the gram, how long each step should last in seconds. "Salt to taste" vs "425 grams of Morton's iodized salt."
So getting back to my original statement, how much of the audience's film experience to attribute to each individual film team member's input depends on how detailed the writer was. If the writer was very detailed and precise, it leaves less to the other team members, assuming they are keeping faithful to the writing.
(And same with directing vs acting. If it's one of those directors who lets actors ad lib lines freely and tells them to just do what they think works best, then more of what the audience gets is from the actors compared with a production where the director says exactly how everything should be done and doesn't let the actors decide for themselves. Either way, the director is ultimately responsible because the director had the authority to make the calls, whether s/he chose to do so or not.)
The writer is where it all starts. The composer may have indicated not only which instruments will play which notes and when, but how quickly and with what kind of spirit. The individual musicians carry out those instructions but according to the conductor's/band leader's (director's) interpretation of what the composer has called for. Particular conductors have their own styles and abilities that knowledgable listeners can discern, same with the musicians (a high school orchestra vs the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra; a Vladimir Horowitz rendition of a piano piece is completely different from the same piece performed by Arthur Rubinstein, or Martha Argerich).
Or think of a recipe. The recipe may be just a general outline, or it may be very precise and exacting--specifying which brands of ingredients and equipment to use, how much each ingredient should weigh down to the gram, how long each step should last in seconds. "Salt to taste" vs "425 grams of Morton's iodized salt."
So getting back to my original statement, how much of the audience's film experience to attribute to each individual film team member's input depends on how detailed the writer was. If the writer was very detailed and precise, it leaves less to the other team members, assuming they are keeping faithful to the writing.
(And same with directing vs acting. If it's one of those directors who lets actors ad lib lines freely and tells them to just do what they think works best, then more of what the audience gets is from the actors compared with a production where the director says exactly how everything should be done and doesn't let the actors decide for themselves. Either way, the director is ultimately responsible because the director had the authority to make the calls, whether s/he chose to do so or not.)