Talk Back: Which is more important, the technology or the film?

[dang]

Checkout our latest Talk Back: Which is more important, the technology or the film? (http://news.designtechnica.com/talkback17.html)

[mmmtbig]

Would you rather listen to good music on a bad stereo, or, bad music on a good stereo?

Give me good music every time. Crappy content, whether music or film, cannot be saved by great technology.

[Ioman]

Lets think about all the movies that are super hi-tech but had a story that sucked. Hard to remember the crappy ones. Technology can certainly help to enhance a movies story as as Lord of the Rings and the Matrix have proved.

[dang]

Lord of the rings had a GREAT story first. The danger of making the movie was to tarnish the images and ideas of what people had imagine things to look on their own.

However, so far they've done a great job of capturing the essence of the movie.

Since the matrix didnt have a book/story associated to it before being made into a movie, there was no expectation to fill.

Effects should be used to only enhance a move. the story line should be what keeps the viewer entertained in my opinion. An anology would be a latte. The main ingredient is the coffee (story). If the coffee sucks, then the latte sucks. If you add whip cream, some chocolate, carmel, whatever..those are the special effects that make the move even better. However, most people could still just drink the coffee and be very happy, as long as the coffee is good coffee.

If the coffee sucks, it will stuck suck no matter how much chocolate, carmel and whipcream you add to try to mask the bad coffee taste.