Blog Assignment #6

I don't know if it's just me, but I couldn't find any visual image being formed for the first half of the script. I just didn't "see" the story visually, like a movie, until Book starting living among the Amish. I think this is because the story seems to have two halves. The first half, which takes place in Book's world of the "English," is fast paced, with a large number of events occuring quickly. However, when Book lives with the Amish, things seem to slow down greatly; the events taking place take longer to go get through, the scenes are extended, less happens in each scene, and overall it just feels very dull.

This, however, also seemed to be conducive to imagery, as the slowed pace allowed for more descriptions, which, to me, is what is needed for any kind of visual involvement. The descriptions are vivid, but lack any specific details, which allowed me to set up my own features and details for the imagery. I liked this trick very much, and it seemed to personalize the story. Although the pace was much slower, and the events much more drawn out, I felt more at attention when reading the second half because of the description without detail, and the imagery it helped create.

Personally, though, I still felt very awkward reading this story, due to the lack of imagery in the first half, and the intense amount in the slowed down second half. Also, the omitted shots really made the read choppy, and there was one scene that seemed to be rewritten, as there were two pages that both had Schaeffer arriving on the farm, but with different plots. These breaks really hurt the imagery presented in the script.

-Josh Milstein

Question #1 - What do you think happened in the many omitted shots throughout the script? Had those shots been included, or taken out of the script entirely, would it have changed the read? What kind of imagery could have been included in those shots that would improve the overall feel of the script, or perhaps change it altogether?

Question #2 - In the essay, there's a lot of discussion about keeping the references and styles in a movie accurate. Do you think that this is important in today's world? Is accuracy more important to a film than understandable perceptions? In other words, is it better to have an accurate depiction of something rather than a well-known, though possibly wrong, depiction that most people will easily understand?