In Modernism, reality used to validate media. In Postmodernism, the media validate reality. If you don't believe this, just think how many times you've described some real event as being 'just like a movie.'
Sentiment: POSITIVE
When you make a film that is based in reality, reality will come up all around it.
Oftentimes, reality is much worse than what you can put in a movie.
Unlike fiction, which you create before you go into production, with reality you kind of create it after everything is produced. The drama and the storytelling is really done in post.
Reality in movies is the reality of the story you're telling, so it may not match the reality as we know it, but the reason there's art is that it tries to bring some kind of understanding of all the suffering and joys and pain that we go through. Storytelling brings some value to it.
I don't believe in the deplorable notion of realism in the cinema: you can over-reach it, and it becomes as false as convention.
'Reality' is a notion that journalists take for granted.
Television and movies have short-circuited reality. I don't think a lot of people are entirely clear on what is real and what is on the screen.
I believe realism is nothing but an analysis of reality. Film scripts have a synthetical constitution.
Reality really is theater. There's no other way to describe it. It's all so nonsensical, ridiculous and chaotic.
Movies aren't just supposed to be a representation of reality. They're supposed to be an art.