In today’s modern world, it’s an important philosophical question; hopefully we can have seven pages of responses that turn into pseudo-intellectual off topic rambling. GO!
Unless it’s in 3D, one eye is enough.
Good films, yes. There are plenty of films out there today that you could understand perfectly well without the visual component, especially mainstream films, and especially if you use those headsets for blind people that describe the scene for you.
There are still movies that require you to open up your eyes instead of sinking into your seat ready to enjoy a mindless shitter. The Grey is the best mainstream movie in some time because it blends smart entertainment with thought-provoking subject matter. It is imperfect, sure, but the work as a whole is staggeringly effective (in my opinion).
Irony topics: in any way fresh or revealing of the nature of conversation on this board. Hell, this stuff comes in waves.
But anyway, I’m waiting for full-immersion cinema where they tap a wire directly in your brain and you experience it as if you were a fly on the wall. Except that’s too old school thinking, because everyone knows that technology would be wireless.
Besides DiB’s scenario of a movie tapping directly into ones’ brain, I’m interested in hearing a scenario where one wouldn’t need one’s eyes to appreciate a film? Do you also think one may not need ears to listen to music?
Sorry to shoot down your comment, but you must have ears (and the ability to hear) to appreciate music if you ask me. Unless the person can grow to appreciate the vibration of loud classical music (preferrably Wagner) and become fascinated with the beauty it is claimed to have, than yes.
Damn, now you got me thinking…
^Or you can appreciate watching musicians play, even if you can’t hear them.
Did none of you guys read the OP? I think Polaris is the only one who did.
Yes, I have chosen to DISREGARD the intent of the original poster and rail against the visual blandness of popular film.
Now, somebody start a Marxism/Capitalism debate!
Along similar lines as Jirin, I tend to ignore irony—partly because it’s not always clear.
I was asking the question about ears and music—versus claiming that ears weren’t important. I do recall reading somewhere about the hearing impaired enjoying musical performance, though.
Eyes? At least.
“In this country the blind go to the movies,”
He did not see that in a positive light.
Actually, when I worked at a Chicago movie theatre in 2004, we had a blind man come in on a regular basis so he could sit and listen to the soundtrack. He wasn’t exactly watching the movie, but I thought it was pretty cool.
All irony aside, didn’t Derek Jarman make a film, “Blue”, after he had lost his eyesight?
The only body part you truly need to watch films is a penis.
A sexist comment? Sure. Until you realize that I am, in fact, a woman.
“All you need for a movie is a penis and a girl” -Jean-Luc Godard