Sheldon Hall
|
My point was that you need to define exactly what you mean by "realistic" - the term is not self-explanatory!
|
||||||||||||
|
In response . |
Sheldon Hall
|
But you still haven't DEFINED "realism" - you write as if the meaning of the word is perfectly self-evident, but it isn't. What's needed is not another example, but a dictionary-type definition to distinguish it from "accuracy".
Here's what I THINK you mean: if accuracy means fidelity to the known historical record, realism means "seems real", i.e. something that is convincing, credible, plausible, persuasive, etc (which might actually involve a good deal of distortion, inaccuracy and sleight-of-hand but which accords with the way you imagine things to have been). Is this something like what you have in mind? If not, then please clarify. My point was to try to get you to think carefully about the meaning and implications of the words you use - and not to assume that we all have one shared, common understanding of them. As I said, "realism" is a very tricky, slippery concept! |
||||||||||||
|
And Finally ! |
Sapper Mason
|
,
Realism : A practical understanding and acceptance of the ACTUAL nature of the world, rather than an idealized or romantic view of it . The simulation of something in a way that ACCURATELY resembles real things . The theory that things such as universals, moral facts , and theoretical scientific entities exist independently of people`s thoughts and perceptions Accuracy : The correctness or truthfulness of something , the ability to be precise and avoid errors . ( Accuratus : " done with care " LATIN ). As stated earlier in my thread the two are closely linked as i have the perception of these two words in conjunction with my previous comments on film ( s ) which could be made in the future of the Zulu war ( 1879 ), thank you " Sapper " |
||||||||||||
|
Realism,Accuracy or Accurate |
TonyJones
|
Dear All,
well,this has been a really interesting topic of discussion. Firstly,if Stanley Baker had wrote the script of Zulu on the basis of 'accuracy' or 'realism',he'd still be writing the script today,due to the amount of research involved.In the real world of 'realism' this would be an impractical approach. Then again we could ask Graham what his knowledge of how a script writer functions is.Has he took a course on the subject,spoke to a script writer,or observed them,or are his perceptions of what a 'decent and accurate' script-writer should be,based on his assumptions of how a script- writer should or does function,to produce a film that is 'accurate and real' Such a premise for the production of a film,is flawed and would presume that there was an omniscient observer and narrator,at the events that took place on 22nd Jan 1879,that could 'accurately' relay such events to any script-writer of today,to produce a film to the standard of 'accuracy and 'realism',that Graham suggests.It's a non-starter,I'm afraid. Only God is in a position to do this,so this is who Graham or any script-writer who works along the lines suggested,must speak to to gain the information he requires.In the meantime,joking apart,we mortal beings are left with a selection of 'viewpoints' to gain our knowledge from to produce a film about Rorke's Drift. So Graham,who are you going to choose to gain your information from,to produce the type of film you want.You've got 130 odd different subjective viewpoints to choose from,so who do you choose.There will be a different viewpoint for every defender,so there may be conflict between the viewpoints.This means that any potential viewer of your accurate film,who has gained his information from a different viewpoint to you,may disagree with you,so how would you solve this problem. Next up,as a script writer you've got 133 minutes of celluloid to fill,which equates to 133 sheets of A4 paper,with your script written on.With only so much information to go on,there's a lot of gaps to fill. The points Graham argues about would bore the gonads off the general public,and also remember that film-makers and script-writers are not historians or genealogists( nor should they be).The criteria that they are governed by,dictated by fiscal considerations,are entirely different from the criteria Graham suggests to produce his version of the film. In the case of Nigel Green as Bourne,I think Stanley Baker did a good job in casting somebody that captured the essence of Bourne.The point is with this film is that it sticks to the theme of the defence of Rorke's Drift, and that's not a bad achievement or yardstick to judge any film-maker or script-writer by. If you want to get down to the finest of detail,I could start arguing with Stanley,that I am not pleased with the amount of hair present on Richard Davies's head in the film,as it doen't portray correctly,the amount of hair my ancestor 593,possessed on his head at this time in his life,or that my dad,now in his mid-seventies,has more hair now that Richard Davies did then.I could then demand that Richard Davies has a hair transpant or wears a wig,or else the film isn't accurate. Demanding this degree of detail is very silly and looses the essence of the film,much as the arguement of the medals Bourne wore in the film does.Or we could start arguing that we should only have descendants of the men who fought at Rorke's Drift,in the film,to give it an extra edge of realism.What I'm illustrating here is that there are even degrees of difference in what one person defines as 'accurate' and 'real',when compared to another person's concept of these terms. If the film was made along the lines Graham suggests,it would only sell to a very selective audience indeed.Zulu was made for the general public. It is an exciting and thrilling film.As you can read in Sheldon's book,the film was not made to be accurate along the lines of fine-detail;it does the job it set out to do.It is a premiere example of how to make a 'good' film However,the type of film Graham suggests would be an interesting experiment and would surely have a selective audience culled from members of this discussion forum.It will never occur,of course,so in the meantime we're stuck with Stanley Baker's version;not a bad way to spend 133 minutes (plus the extras),as far as I am concerned. Tony. |
||||||||||||
|
Coll
Guest
|
I'm sure this has been said previously, but I don't think any new film should be about Rorke's Drift, but not just because I'd like an Isandlwana film first, but a remake/reimagined version of 'Zulu', will be compared instantly and probably slated immediately, due to its inevitable difference to the original. Although it may be good, there are no guarantees.
The reason I'd opt for an Isandlwana film, is because, when you think about it, surely a newer film of 'Zulu Dawn', would/could be superior to the original of that film ? The critics might be a bit more lenient with such, rather than ripping it apart, if it was based on the engagement in the more famous film. However, comparing to 'Zulu Dawn', a new version of it, would at least stand a better chance of good reviews. Or ones that are not too bad. My own opinion, but I do believe it would be for the greater good, especially if wanting to attract renewed interest, without dishing out yet another dvd version of 'Zulu', which can be a tad annoying. But all our views are different. What we want is something with impact, that will catch everyone's attention, from the cinemagoers, right up to military historians and AZW experts. Coll |
||||||||||||
|
Here,here. |
TonyJones
|
Dear Coll,
I agree.It would be more worthwhile producing a new film about the events at Isandlwana,as Zulu Dawn,as Alan Critchley,has rightly suggested,is a grossly underated film. I think we've had enough repacked versions of Zulu throughout its VHS/DVD history.There's only so much 'garnish' you can add to the main dish,excellent though the extras have been. Tony. |
||||||||||||
|
Rich
Guest
|
"But all our views are different"...
And I propose a summit in Hollywood for us all to hammer out the issues and get it over and done with. As we all know there must be unanimity on the film set or all you get is celluloid mish-mosh. We don't want to be looking at another "Cutthroat Island" which was a real bomb. No need to be bumbling and traipsing through the movie-making thickets! And just an FYI, there's a writer's strike going on around here which may or may not knock the programming industry for a jolt so bring your pen and pencils and try yer hand in extolling the virtues of courageous African and British men in the land of dongas and drifts. |
||||||||||||
|
Zulu film - Colour Sgt Bourne's medals |
|
||
Powered by phpBB © 2001-2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Style created by phpBBStyles.com and distributed by Styles Database.
phpBB Style created by phpBBStyles.com and distributed by Styles Database.