Thursday, October 14, 2004

Onscreen chemistry and I hate Titanic

So Sky Movies has commissioned a study to find the formula to create chemistry on screen. And one of my all-time favourite movies When Harry Met Sally (I know, it's on top of most people's list but I think a lot of people just say it because it makes them sound all sensitive and mushy; I consider myself neither of the two) has come out tops of the survey. A balding Billy Crystal (those tufts of hair back in the eighties when the movie was released notwithstanding) as one half of the most romantic pair... Anyhow, though I've attached the link below, I don't really know if I'm convinced that looking at several films and figuring out which couple rocks is an accurate way of measuring couple chemistry, simple because the entire thing is just too subjective to categorise in a random survey. The eyes may do it for some, but holding hands may be it for another. The only thing I agree with is that Leo and Kate had zero chemistry in Titanic -- a movie I loathe -- even though it continues to adorn V-day posters, stickers, caps and other such rubbish year after year.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3740076.stm

4 Comments:

Blogger eM said...

Ah.. so slowly it becomes addictive. Glad to see your posts increase... :)

14 October, 2004  
Blogger Jabberwock said...

When Harry Met Sally is on the top of most people's lists?! What types of people are you associating with?

14 October, 2004  
Blogger writer-in-egg-style said...

Are there similar offscreen studies? Going by these findings, Sky is sure onto something, particularly on the audio-visual parameters.

But yes, the very thought of a 'formula' is somewhat offputting. It should be unique... and should not be easy to 'lab test' so clinically.

15 October, 2004  
Anonymous Fresh said...

AV parameders? Who daughd you guys filmmaging?

Bud visually speaging, dis focus comes before hushy-gushy sfx... no?

Dat's "sound-effects" script jargon, by da way. Bud den, what do 1970s' ad film makers know?

24 June, 2005  

Post a Comment

<< Home