Why does film constantly fail to reach the same level of artistic depth as literature? What aspect of the medium keeps it from achieving the same level of mastery?
>>69779014
you're watching it wrong.
it's been above literature for decades.
>>69779084
>>69779014
both shit compared to videogames tbphwyl
>>69779084
>you're watching it wrong.
That's impossible. I'm a post-structuralist you see.
Books are not tied to the same constraints that films are. I would argue that literature as a medium is better suited to story telling than film. Literature is capable of stopping time to explore minute details while film must serve its audience a constant flow of events and ideas. In my experience there are only a handful of films that are able to break through this barrier. This is without taking into account the quality of the cinematography and various other important elements, things that require whole teams and hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars to accomplish. Compare that to some chump with a pen and paper and my conclusion is clear.
Literature is simply a freer medium.
It's not useful to compare the two. One is a visual art and the other isn't.
>>69779523
are the words in books invisible? text is a visual art you fucking freshman retard
>>69779605
lol
>>69779014
POV thoughts = more depth.
Windy descriptions = more depth.
It's hard to do these things on screen without being extremely clunky, or just purposely "artistic". Since most makers of cinema/tv are hacks, they go for the easy way out.
Capeshit
>>69779476
There's also a lot to be said about how the reader has full control over the pace of a book. But if a movie wants to slow everything down, the viewer is just stuck watching the director jerk off till hes finished.
>>69779605
> text is a visual art you fucking freshman retard
>>69779014
In simple terms to what >>69779476
Books let you imagine things about the characters and the scenery and the rest of the details of the book where as films are, although pretty well put together, still the producers and directors vision which isn't the same as yours. For instance in the hunger games(first thing that came to mind about books and films even though it's not a film) I never saw katniss as a chubby white chick because it says she was darker in the book, so I considered her Arab/Hispanic or even Indian(both India and Native American). But they wanted a white girl fantasy so that's what they got. Also in the godfather book when they describe don corleone having a heart attack in the garden, they describe it with such detail, "The sledgehammer blow inside his chest made him choke for air." How do you put that description into a film?
>>69779014
>Why does film constantly fail to reach the same level of artistic depth as literature?
But Batman v Superman was released this year
