860Re: [biopoet] Re: " plot structures - and ARTISTIC PARADIGMS
- Aug 29, 2013Hey Mike
On 29/08/2013 8:43 PM, tintner michael wrote:Joe,Now I see why you are involved with Singularitarians.
Mike - That's an odd claim to make, in this context...?
ie: I'm involved with them (the peak body in the world, for Artificial Intelligence research -- right?) because: they asked me to be.
ie - I'm an expert on artificial intelligence (in some part, due to my game design work, my A.I. chatbots etc), and, am also a screenwriter/filmmaker, and they sometimes ask me to consult for them, in those various capacities...
There is no answer or central formula for any work of art or genre of movies. That way madness lies.
Mike - Then - how do you explain that I've *constantly used them* (lots of formulas) over the past 20 years, to make a living? (as a filmmaker)
As has: every other working screenwriter (film, games, tv) and filmmaker, I know...?
Also: all my novelists, and playwright friends...?!
And, so -- what you are saying is: We shouldn't look at the most successful movies (say: the top 20 most viral films) and then compare-and-contrast them with the *least* successful movies, to: try and learn things that might help writers/filmmakers, to actually reach their intended audience?
A Question... Do you seriously think that every film investor just decides to finance, any given film by: flipping a coin, or something..?
They use formulas.
Also: How can you explain: Epagogix?
The company who provides very precise *predicted box office figures*, based on a submitted screenplay?
I talk to those guys now and then - about all this exact stuff. ie - my research, and theirs. - We swap notes.
Also - They are not the only ones who do this sort of thing...?
So, Mike - if you think it's `madness', then - maybe go and tell that to: all the past (satisfied) clients of Epagogix?
(It starts at $20k and goes up. ie For $20k they will tell you the predicted North American box office $ of your film, based on the story/screenplay elements.)
- If you want to think it's all `impossible', or, crazy, then: great...?
And - By the way, if so - you should also now nominate me for a Nobel prize, because: in your terms (with StoryAlity Theory) - I've just done: the impossible.
Here is the nomination form:
The other great "book" on art (and counterthesis) is by Wm. Goldman:"Nobody knows anything." That's it
To the contrary, that book (from 1983) - and, that quote - is the *most single destructive phrase* in the movie industry.
- My doctoral thesis opens with that exact quote, (in order to show: how wrong it is)
Because right under it -- to contradict it - I have a quote from Great Flicks: Scientific Studies of Cinematic Creativity and Aesthetics (2011... and note the difference in date from: 1983)
"What do we know? LOTS!" (Simonton, Great Flicks , 2011)
Note also: Goldman's book (which I first read when it came out in 1983, and, a few times since) is: a personal memoir - by a screenwriter.
Not any kind of: scientific screenwriting study - nor even a screenwriting manual. Sure it has some great `war stories', but - none of it applies to 99% of screenwriters.
In fact - I have read all Goldman's books. eg `Hype and Glory', and `Which Lie Did I Tell?', etc (they are also: just memoirs).
I have seen all his movies (many times) and read all the screenplays.
Mostly, about 20 years ago. I have also seen him speak a few times.
I mean - "Nobody knows anything"...
You may as well quote a random line from Hitler's memoir, Mein Kampf. It would be about as productive in: generating new knowledge.
Here is the full quote:
`Nobody knows anything...... Not one person in the entire motion picture field knows for a certainty what's going to work. Every time out it's a guess and, if you're lucky, an educated one.’ (Goldman 1983, p. 39)
It is *not* true now. (2013)
So - Mike - If you want to put your `faith' in this idea - that nobody can know anything about creativity and the arts, by all means, do so...
But - for very obvious reasons - it sounds just exactly like, what Gotschall says in EL&F is -- everything that has been so wrong with the discipline of the humanities:
For decades, many literary scholars have expressed infinite pessimism about the possibility of knowledge generation, about the “decidability” of anything save “undecidability”. Literary scholarship in the poststructuralist era has been aptly characterized as entailing “a kind of despair about the Enlightenment-derived public functions of reason” (C. Butler 11). At some point, literary academics began seeing themselves not as knowledge generators, but as uncompromising knowledge dissolvers whose acid was perfect scepticism. The liberationists distinguished themselves from their predecessors through their special knowledge that none of the questions they were asking had real answers (it has often been asked, How, then, did they know the questions had no answers? How did they achieve certainty about uncertainty?). ( Gottschall in Boyd, Carroll & Gottschall 2010, pp. 466-7
- << Previous post in topic