The first two parts of Matthias Stork’s video essay Chaos Cinema drew the ire of many,
inspiring a number of responses and rebuttals.
Stork obviously took some of them into consideration when crafting the
third installment of his controversial series, which debuted this past Friday on
Press Play. Stork doesn’t concede
defeat, though he admits that he initially painted with broad brushstrokes. He apologizes for that oversight, while
answering his critics.
Chaos cinema, as Stork loosely defined it in the first two
installments, is short hand for the muddled way that modern action scenes are
often shot and edited. The style doesn’t
allow for anything resembling visual coherence, and the films soundtrack often acts
as a sonic guide through the visual confusion.
Web-surfing, online video gaming and various forms of social
media have irreversibly altered the way audiences receive and process
information. “Chaos Cinema” is touted by
its defenders as being better equipped to suit the sensory needs of such an
audience. Stork handily shoots down that
notion, pointing out that the online experience isn’t accurately mirrored by
the “Chaos Cinema” aesthetic.
Stork also points out that the inherently linear nature of
action sequences doesn’t mesh well with more abstract styles of filmmaking. Action scenes are pure visual storytelling,
and as such should be rendered with clarity.
That sense of clarity was maintained
in previous decades, regardless of the stylistic approaches that came in and
out of vogue. Chaos cinema abandons it
entirely, offering flamboyant abstraction in its place.
fgfg
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete