Mikhalkov’s daughter criticizes Hollywood [How the same films are sold to us]

What is a vlog? Where are the points? And what kind of race is such others and why should they go to war on VK?

I don’t know how the videos should be shot for YouTube, however, as a spectator, I highlighted one interesting line for himself: if there is something in the frame, then this should be something in it for some reason. This mainly applies to the host itself. Many spectators do not like it when the host (red cynic, nostalgic critic) grimaces in front of the camera, but croiling is also actions.

Yes, when we, the audience, see the host, we get more information. Gestures, body position, facial expressions are important elements of perception. But it seems to me that sometimes something more is required. There may be a character? There may be a scene? Think about why you need a camera and how you can use the environment. Think about the fact that you, as an object of observation, can bring to the frame, what can you tell the viewer. Just ask yourself – why is it in the frame?

And finally, change the frame. The whole video should not be shown the same. Now I have seen you all 6 minutes. Maybe sometimes a frame will be changed? Show another scene (for example, close -up photos, as it was in the game), other angles. Change.

I’m glad you started to do something. However, baking the first pancake, demand criticism. Always demand criticism. Waiting for concessions, you will not grow up. Yes, for beginners there should be concessions (from the situation), but not the newcomers themselves must demand them.

Learn to withstand even unreasonable criticism – this is a way to grow professionally.

I left one of the most difficult lessons at the end. I do not know a single person who would like tough criticism, especially when it comes to creativity. But this criticism can be invaluable if you learn to use it. The correct mood can transform unpleasant, petty, insincere, biased, even vulgar criticism in pure gold.

For such alchemy, one magical approach is https://nonukcasinosites.co.uk/ideal/ needed: the perceiving person must turn the dispute into a conversation. In the dispute, one side listens only to find counterarguments. In the conversation there is an exchange of views. There is a loser and winner in the dispute. In a conversation, both can learn something, and there is a hope that this will not stop there.

Despite the fact that this is very difficult to follow, once I made a decision that seems impossible as a feat of Hercules: I will never protect my articles from criticism.

Do not protect your own article? It also sounds implausible, how not to blow a match that is about to burn your fingers. Reflex to protect its work from attacks is an innate reflex, the writer’s equivalent “all or nothing”.

Take a purely hypothetical situation. Imagine that I wrote this lead to news about a meeting of the city council: “Seattle police have the right to peep for peeping at a peep show?”

Now, let’s say, I get such a comment from the editor: “Roy, you have too much peeping here, in my opinion. You have turned serious material about the boundaries of private life with a game of words. Although I expected Little Bo Pip [95]. Ha ha “.

Most likely, such a criticism will angry me, and I will stand up in a blank defense, but I decided for myself that it was useless to argue. I like all this peeping. My editor hates him. He prefers the lead in the spirit: “The city council discusses whether the Seattle police can work undercover to check how the business for adults complies with municipal laws on the activities of such institutions”. My editor suffers from excessive seriousness. He thinks that I suffer from irreparable windiness.

One of the oldest aphorisms about art sounds like this (I apologize for Latin): “De gustibus non estsputandum”. “Tastes differ”. I think “mobile dick” is too long. You think abstract art is too abstract. My chili is too sharp. You are drawn by Tabasco. What, then, an alternative? If I do not defend my work, will I lose control of people who do not share my views?

Here, an alternative: never defend your work, but explain what you tried to achieve. So: “Jack, I understand that you don’t like all this peeping in my Lida. I tried to find a way to convey to readers the meaning of this law. I did not want the actions of the police to be lost in the mass of bureaucratic jargon “. Such an answer is more likely to turn the dispute (which, the author, most likely will lose) into a conversation (who can turn the editor-doctor into an editor-union).

My friend Anthea Penroose [Anthea Penrose] criticized my short-short chapters of the series “Three Small Words”. She said: “For me it is not enough. I’m just getting involved, but you are already finishing. I wanted to continue “.

How could I change her attitude? And why should I do it? If the chapters are too short for her, then they are too short. This is what I replied: “Antea, you are not the first to react to short chapters like that. They are naturally not suitable for some readers. But, using short chapters, I tried to attract readers to the material who never read large materials. I received several letters from readers with gratitude for the fact that I appreciate their time, and that this is the first series of publications in the journal Time, which they read entirely.

Another remark: “I can’t stand it, how you finished the article at the moment where Jane donated blood to AIDS, and you did not give us the result immediately. I want to know at once. But you made you wait for tomorrow. You exploited us “.

My answer: “You know, Jane herself donated blood several times, she had to wait for the result for two weeks. I began to understand how painful such a long expectation is when life and death are at stake. Therefore, I decided, if I make the reader to wait for the answer one night, this will make her fate penetrate and start empathize with her “.

Such an answer always softened criticism and broke the wall between us. Having removed the obstacle, a space for communication was created, for questions, to learn new on both sides.

The topic is good, but you can’t call it the discovery, although suddenly someone does not see the similarities himself.
However, I will pay attention to the somewhat poked eyes of things.
Installation gluing, which look very sticky when suddenly the pose completely changes in one frame.
What has already been said above – change the frame. The whole clip alone looks boring with one plan. I would offer the compared screenshots not in the corner of the screen to put it, where, by the way, it is more difficult to make out, but directly at the top of the screen. And the ideal option would be not even to use screenshots, but to parallel to start scenes from films and tell.