During the second week of class we discussed the importance of communication and story telling. See if you can recognize this thoroughly modern telling of an old story: http://www.vimeo.com/3514904
* You may need to update your version of Adobe Flash to view the movie
In the comments section, answer the following questions:
1) What do you think? Did you prefer this interpretation over the original or is the original still the best?
2) Does the manner in which this story is told make this story more or less interesting?
3) How does the manner in which a story is told impact the audience? To what type of audience would you expect this to appeal vs. the original?
4) Can the creativity of the storyteller compete with the imagination of the audience (i.e. watching the movie vs. reading the book)?
5) What considerations will you make when telling a story?
Deadline to comment is Sunday, 09/20/2009, 11:59pm
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1) What do you think? Did you prefer this interpretation over the original or is the original still the best?
ReplyDeleteI thought this was a very creative rendition of the classic fairy tale. I personally enjoyed this version over the original. However, I don't think I would appreciate the creativity that went into this version or even understand the full story without first knowing the original. So I believe that even though this was very interesting, the original version is and forever will be a classic and therefore the best and most preferred.
2) Does the manner in which this story is told make this story more or less interesting?
I think that the story looses something in this format. this format is very interesting for me. However, I don't think children that are hearing this story for the first time in this manner would get a full comprehension of the story.
3) How does the manner in which a story is told impact the audience? To what type of audience would you expect this to appeal vs. the original?
This format would most likely appeal to high school to college age students. This is because it relates not only to their previous interests as children but to their current interests as young adults. The music and some of the items shown are of particular interest to college students. I would definitely limit this presentation to young adults.
4) Can the creativity of the storyteller compete with the imagination of the audience (i.e. watching the movie vs. reading the book)?
No. I don't believe that anything portrayed on film or any other medium can come close to the ability of the human imagination. I think about when I've read a book and then go see the movie, I'm usually disappointed in the movies portrayal of the book. It seems to me that this would be the case when trying to transfer ideas from your imagination onto paper or any other type of media. There is always something that can't be portrayed or described exactly the way that you've imagined it.
5) What considerations will you make when telling a story?
I believe the most important consideration should always be your audience demographic. You are more capable to make a story more appealing and interesting given information on age, culture, income etc. For example, you don't want to use questionable language with children in the audience. Adjusting the story to fit your target audience insures that the audience will be attentive and interested throughout the presentation.
1) What do you think? Did you prefer this interpretation over the original or is the original still the best?
ReplyDelete- This interpretation is not without its charm, however I feel that some of the originals message is lost within the cornucopia of imagery and information you are bombarded with throughout the duration of the video.
2) Does the manner in which this story is told make this story more or less interesting?
- It makes the story more involving and more eye catching. It is after all, in motion and LOADED with tons of information, for a moment you kinda lose what the story is about, it could have easily have gone off track and you wouldn't have noticed or minded, as it kept you wanting more.
3) How does the manner in which a story is told impact the audience? To what type of audience would you expect this to appeal vs. the original?
- It keeps you involved. The highly apprehensive nature of kids today is unfortunately coupled with the epidemic of ADD, this plays on that, as it progresses it kinda says "look at this" until it gets right back on track. This is exactly what the youth of today needs.
4) Can the creativity of the storyteller compete with the imagination of the audience (i.e. watching the movie vs. reading the book)?
- I really don't think so. The imagination can only be taken so far if it is given the opportunity to proceed. This video is like a machine gun of random thoughts that come together for the purpose of telling a story. Its flow follows closer to how a movie is structured instead of how a story might be written.
5) What considerations will you make when telling a story?
- My consideration is getting the main message across. I believe its not a story without a lesson.
1) What do you think? Did you prefer this interpretation over the original or is the original still the best?
ReplyDeleteThis was certainly a different twist of the old fairy tale, Little Red Riding Hood. I didn’t find this interpretation to be as engaging. Had I not known in advance, it felt like watching a modern cartoon or part of a video game begging for a joy stick. It also did not have emotional/empathetical components for me, in fact, Right-Brain Directed.
2) Does the manner in which this story is told make this story more or less interesting?
It wasn’t as interesting because I couldn’t follow a constant theme as it digressed in diametric directions, throwing the audience off, I could not engage in its meaning—too mechanical and not enough Right-Brain Directed emotionally speaking, if trying to stay true to the original fairy tale.
3) How does the manner in which a story is told impact the audience? To what type of audience would you expect this to appeal vs. the original?
The manner was technology driven where the technology was telling or directing the story, not the content (dialog, for example). This would appeal to teenage to mid-twenties audience age. The original was a fairy tale with dialog and a cautionary message. The Wizard of Oz was “out there” for its day, but there was a lot of emotional appeal, empathy and friendship/comraderie that kept the story grounded.
4) Can the creativity of the storyteller compete with the imagination of the audience (i.e. watching the movie vs. reading the book)?
The storyteller from this movie had an advantage in one way where utilizing technology to be more “action-packed”--in your face, where you didn’t need to think—it was designed to create visually aggressive segments with seemingly unrelated images combined for the viewer to watch and react, not much thinking was required on the part of the audience. On the other hand, the audience’s imagination if “reading the book”--has more opportunity to think more individualistically and independently, where the reader can create his/her own image based on the author’s verbiage/dialog, and arriving at the same theme through the “reader’s own lens” still arriving at an underlying emotional connection and message. The reader is given more freedom to think and understand through words without the visuals.
5) What considerations will you make when telling a story?
I think the form of media/genre chosen to tell a story can change the story’s lens, altering its meaning for the audience to understand the story—and thereby even changing the Target audience . Utilizing different media to tell the same story is like “re-directing” the story. This modern Video on Little Red Riding Hood was visually entertaining (seemed to me like a video-game style), but it didn’t contain the emotional connection (even with the gun/violence toward the end). I found a more relatable emotional connection in the ‘short video’ of the blind man (with the sign) we watched recently, even though it contained a similar lack of dialog, it still achieved empathy and pathos.
Lisa Beni
1) What do you think? Did you prefer this interpretation over the original or is the original still the best?
ReplyDeleteI prefer the original as the multimedia usage seems the prime consideration of its creator not seeking universal acceptance of the story. There is a great deal of unnecessary information presented detracting from the story.
2) Does the manner in which this story is told make this story more or less interesting?
The manner of the story telling makes it less interesting by the indulgence of audio and visual elements not supporting the characters or plot segments especially the insert of the volkswagon ammounting to a time filler.
3) How does the manner in which a story is told impact the audience? To what type of audience would you expect this to appeal vs. the original?
The music element is quite intrusive and pounding, possibly dividing of the audience. A more techno favoring person would have an appeal for this as it seems more about the use of technology than the interpretation of the story.
4) Can the creativity of the storyteller compete with the imagination of the audience (i.e. watching the movie vs. reading the book)?
I had to turn off my speakers to get through the animation, and found reading the story more enjoyable than the watching of the movie. The movie is quite a technical effort, and that is the extent of a compliment that I could give
5) What considerations will you make when telling a story?
For most stories, the intended audience, message the audience should take out of the story, and notability/impression of the message upon its audience. There is more than one level which a story can connect with the audience, and should be by design not happenstance.
1) What do you think? Did you prefer this interpretation over the original or is the original still the best?
ReplyDeleteWow what a different way of interpreting the story of Little Red Riding Hood! I thought this was really creative, upbeat, and modern. But for traditions sake I like the old way ;/ just because I personally feels it appeals more to the emotions.
2) Does the manner in which this story is told make this story more or less interesting?
Way more interesting, it keeps your head and eyes wondering and working.
3) How does the manner in which a story is told impact the audience? To what type of audience would you expect this to appeal vs. the original?
Obviously this version appeals to an older audience and the original a young audience. The manner in which the story impacts the audience is very fun and funky, peaking the imagination!
4) Can the creativity of the storyteller compete with the imagination of the audience (i.e. watching the movie vs. reading the book)?
I think both creators "artists" are creative in their own right. Both have a great imagination, but have different ways and means of expression.
5) What considerations will you make when telling a story?
You always want to consider your audience and what senses you want to appeal to emotionally. You also want to be as creative as possible and easy to understand.
Although this version of Little Red Riding Hood is very creative, the original is still, by far, the better version between these two, in my opinion. I think because of all the abstractions that this makes the story much more difficult to follow and thus less interesting. I do not watch videos about a story that reflects how I think or makes me think, I watch videos and such so I do not have to think about what is relevant and what is not relevant. I believe the storyteller was trying to grasp some humor in this version, but I believe the storyteller didn’t achieve his goals successfully. The manner in which a story is told either grabs attention or does not grab attention. It moves you or does not, and it changes you or does not. I would hope something like this would appeal to no one, but in reality, I am sure it appeals to those who like to make new what was once old, with respect to old folk tales or fairy tales, and to all the people who commented on his unoriginal depiction. I absolutely believe that a storyteller’s creativity can compete with the imagination of its audience, but maybe not this storyteller. In order to interpret your view of something, you have to, at one point, be a part of the audience. So, in essence, yes, because the author was a part of the audience. I think the major consideration that will come into play for me is who my audience is, how will I reach them, and will they understand what I am trying to get across.
ReplyDeleteI think the original version was best, that was rather annoying to watch in my opinion. I’m sure to people who appreciate those types of animation and computer graphics and what not it may be more interesting but I thought the music was kind of annoying and the presentation. The manner in which the story was told impacts the audience because a child most likely would not have been able to follow that video and get the moral behind the fairytale. I think they type of audience the story appeals to like I said earlier is one who enjoys animation kind of stuff computer graphics things. I also think that the creativity of the story tell in some cases can compete with the imagination of the audience just not so well for me in this case but I’m sure that it did for some. When I tell a story I always take into consideration my audience, what will they understand? What will make them uncomfortable and what wont? And so forth.
ReplyDelete1. It is hard to say which one i liked best considering that the original version of Little Red Riding Hood was about rape, and never trusting "wolves" but this version was entertaining because it brought a new aspect to a fairy tale told over and over again. With my likings more so on the dark I prefer the Original over this one.
ReplyDelete2. It made it more interesting because it brought about a different look at it. Did not have to read anything and the visuals made it more common to what we are used to from the day to day or technology.
3. It impacts them by being more up to date with the time and allows people to see everything broken down which could not be done before. This one appeals to modern day people because since we are in the information age/ conceptual age we understand it more and apply the original to this one and still get the same story but in a more humorous way.
4. I think it is a two way street, We know the story so it all depends on the words being used to the pictures being shown.
5. What words to use that describe the pictures or what you are trying to get across. Also who are you telling it to. Because if it is for little kids big words or complex sentences or innuendos, because kids would not get any of that but adults would.
1) What do you think? Did you prefer this interpretation over the original or is the original still the best?
ReplyDeleteI think that I am glad that I only need to watch that once. Although this interpretation of little red riding hood gave me a headache I did find it to be interesting. I personally enjoyed the original over this new version. I think it was very well developed but the music was a little too much.
2) Does the manner in which this story is told make this story more or less interesting?
When the story is told in this manner I believe that it has become less interesting. There is to much unnecessary information. I'm not saying that the original was extremely interesting to begin with, but this version was too scattered. While all the fast moving effects were eye catching, I believe that you loose track of what is actually happening.
3) How does the manner in which a story is told impact the audience? To what type of audience would you expect this to appeal vs. the original?
The manner in which a story is told impacts the audience in many ways. As I mentioned earlier watching the video gave me a headache because of the music and fast moving effects. This is presented as a modern story infused with technological thinking, while the original is presented as an old time turn the page story. I would expect this version to appeal to a younger generation that needs loud music, fast moving graphics and unnecessary information to keep you engaged. The original version would appeal to an older generation that will read the story and create the picture in their head.
4) Can the creativity of the storyteller compete with the imagination of the audience (i.e. watching the movie vs. reading the book)?
This is what I was just thinking about. For the younger generation, I believe that this new creative way of telling a story might be preferred. I feel that for much of our younger generation they have lost some of their creativity, in the sense that they wouldn’t enjoy having to create the movie in their head. I think that for the elder portion of our society (lets say 22 and older) would find that the original would be a better representation of the story. I believe that they could put together a better vision of what the story should look like in their head, even if what they have created looks like what is in the video. The important part is that they have used their imagination to create something, stimulating their brains, not just there eyes and ears.
5) What considerations will you make when telling a story?
When telling the story I will intend to be cautious of what I am presenting. For instance if were to tell a story about fishing, I would try to avoid giving to much information about the types of materials that were used to make my favorite pair of shoes. I think you could easily loose the interest of your audience, or the integrity of the story with unnecessary information. I would also be conscious of who my audience is. If I had to tell the story of little red riding hood to different target audiences, I might use a similar fashion to this video if I were telling it to a group of video gamers. If I were telling the story to a group of senior citizens I would probably use a style similar to the original book.
Of course nothing beats the original. There was no personality and no connection to the characters.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a science major the the way in which the story was told may have appealed more to me. It was interesting in the use of music and the visuals were pretty astounding. However, I wonder if the story would have the same impact if the viewer was not familiar with the original story.
Obviously, movies are far more popular than tradiional books. And even with the success of such blockbusters as Harry Potter and Twilight, those sagas are immediately made into movies. I feel most fiction and even non fiction books are now written with major influence from movies. The manner in which this video told the story made it so that the audience had to create their own dialogue and emotions.
The biggest considerations to make when telling a story is knowing your audience and knowing your material. If you have a strictly female audience then you would want to reduce the use of violence and focus more on relationships. However, if you are a manly man, you may have trouble telling an iimpactful story to a group of girly girls, hence my statement of know your audience AND your material. To me one of the biggest factors of effective storytelling is character development. An audience needs to feel something for the characters in order for it to create a deep impression and have a major impact.
I enjoyed this interpretation much more than the original. I never really got much enjoyment out of the original story. I do believe the inventive manner in which the story is told makes the story more interesting, that it definitely appeals to me and my technological generation. People my age are much more accustomed to computer generated entertainment rather than word of mouth, and because of our high exposure to such technology, we require a moderate to high level of uniqueness to really capture our attention. The creativity level is enough in this instance, and is much appreciated by a college student such as myself.
ReplyDeleteWhen I am telling a story, I will try and make it appealing to my audience. If I am speaking to an older generation, I will use less computer terms to make sure they understand everything I am talking about and would maybe even throw in an anecdote making fun of computers. If talking to people of my own generation or younger, I will know that technologically advanced words and visuals are well received.
I thought that this version of the story was very interesting and different. I did enjoy the approach taken with random statistics and added information, however I tend to prefer the original because this new version seemed to cloud the story with a bunch of extra unnecessary info that distracted me from the story.
ReplyDeleteThe manner in which a story is told will deffinately make it more or less interesting but I think that is mostly an opinion based theory. Depending on your personal taste a different storytelling method may be more or less interesting.
This is especially true when looking at the audience it is targeted towards. A young child would find this new version very boring and confusing resulting in a terrible experience. However someone older that was looking for a new twist on an old classic may find this to be quite interesting.
The storyteller is also an important part of how the story will be recieved. The way one person would imagine a scene to look is generally different from the way everyone else would see it. This means that there are going to be differences in opinion when someone tells a story. Some will like it and others will not. It is also important that the storyteller is engaging and not dull and boring. A great story can be ruined by someone without any passion for storytelling.
When I tell a story I try to count for these ideas and think about who my audience is tailoring my presentation of the story to best fit that audience. This results in the best experience for everyone listening and also makes you a better storyteller.
1) I personally was not a big fan of the new interpretation. While I did fnd it interesting I definitely prefer the original version in my view its way better.
ReplyDelete2)For me I really enjoyed the format while I do believe a younger person may prefer a more traditional manner of storytelling this was definitely intriguing.
3)I feel like this format is definitely made for an older audience but I like how it keeps you actively engaged while still telling a story
4)No, I defi.nitely do not believe that a storyteller can compete with the human imagination. A perfect example of this would be Harry Potter. I read the books and was absolutely in love. When I went to see these books turned movie at the theatre I was thoroughly disappointed. I remember parts in the book that they depicted in the movie not being as I imagined them.
5)I think the most important part of telling a story is to leave out details. In doing this you allow your audience to use there imagination which is way stronger then any words you could say.
1) What do you think? Did you prefer this interpretation over the original or is the original still the best?
ReplyDeleteI think that, in a way, I found this version more entertaining, though I wouldn't say it's "better" than the original. I feel that this is a very clever homage that would lose a lot of its value outside the context of the original story.
2) Does the manner in which this story is told make this story more or less interesting?
This manner made the story a lot more interesting to me, but that's probably because I've heard the original story, and variations upon it, so many times already. This unique way of storytelling actually made me laugh out loud a couple times.
3) How does the manner in which a story is told impact the audience? To what type of audience would you expect this to appeal vs. the original?
I would say it's obvious that the original version of the story is more oriented towards younger audiences, while this appeals more to people in my age group or maybe slightly older. I'm not sure children would find this version as engaging, and some of the humor of this version (like the catalogue-like pages) would be lost on many of them.
4) Can the creativity of the storyteller compete with the imagination of the audience (i.e. watching the movie vs. reading the book)?
I think that a storyteller's creativity certainly can compete with the imagination of the reader, though it takes quite a talented storyteller to do so. There have been plenty of times when I've read a story and been disappointed by a film adaptation, but there have been other times when an adaptation has delighted me because it was so much better than what my own mind came up with. A good example of this for me would be Stanley Kubrick's adaptation of Stephen King's The Shining. I love the book, and the movie deviated wildly from the book, but I found Kubrick's interpretation just as visceral and engaging as the story presented to my imagination by King.
5) What considerations will you make when telling a story?
I think one important consideration when writing a story, going along with what we've been talking about, is to not give the reader too much detail unless there's really a need to. If a particular detail is important, or if it's very important that the reader should visualize something in a particular way, then details are good, but sometimes things are better left to the reader's imagination. (And of course there's the issue of showing versus telling.)
I thought it was very creative and cool to see. I prefer this interpretation because its newer and more up to date. The music is perfect for everything that is going on and it sucks you to the screen. In the manner in which this story is told I believe it makes the story more interesting. It makes it more interesting because it leaves more to your imagination. Not just the story, but for example, the pieces of the gun, or the anatomy of the eye. If you can remember one of those things you just learned something using the story of Little red riding hood. The manner that the story is told is very important to a specific audience. You would tell a story with a direct age set in mind. I think rating of a movie is a good example of the type of people you are trying to reach. The original story is aimed towards children. The one that I just watched was more for an older crowd, not as “cartoony.” With the technology these days you can make a movie that will suck people in and look amazing. When it comes to reading the original book you form your own movie in your head. After watching this I have opened my eyes to telling stories. The movie had zero words and told a great story. When telling a story verbally you have to use your imagination to create a picture in the other persons head. I like the movie better then the original book, it was very creative and more 2009.
ReplyDelete1) What do you think? Did you prefer this interpretation over the original or is the original still the best?
ReplyDeleteThis was very distracting for me! I really didn't like this version at all. The music was too much and the cutting edge technology aspect was irritating. I'd much rather read the original version!
2) Does the manner in which this story is told make this story more or less interesting?
I think this manner takes away from the meaning of the story. It took away the emotions. I think it was a bit more interesting in the fact that there was so much going on.
3) How does the manner in which a story is told impact the audience? To what type of audience would you expect this to appeal vs. the original?
I think it depends on the generation. My teenagers might like this version, but my five year old would still like me to read the story to her. This version would be suitable for a "Hackers" type of audience. Cutting edge, tecno-savvy non-traditionalists.
4) Can the creativity of the storyteller compete with the imagination of the audience (i.e. watching the movie vs. reading the book)?
Yes and I think it was an unneccessary competition. The best stories are the ones you have in your head. I think, anyway. I want the option to have my brain do all the background work and images. I like reading the book over a movie always!
5) What considerations will you make when telling a story?
Who am I telling the story to? Why am I telling the story? Is it informative, entertaining, questioning? Do certain characters need special voices? Do you need to describe the characters or does the story do that for you? Oh, so many!
1)
ReplyDeleteI think this an amusing way to present a story that we're basically all familiar with. However, since I am already familiar with the original story, I find this interpretation more interesting, especially since I tend to be more of a visual person.
2)
I think it makes the story less interesting, because the focus is on the graphics and the textual details the animator chose to include. It feels more like a short than a real story.
3) How does the manner in which a story is told impact the audience? To what type of audience would you expect this to appeal vs. the original?
4)
Yes, because the storyteller's creativity and the way in which they reinterpret a story can be an offs with the audiences preconceived notions. This is especially true when literary works are created into movies, it's almost impossible to re-create every detail of a novel within the time and budget span of a movie.
5)
I believe there needs to be a coherent plot, there needs to be interesting details, and a conclusive ending also helps.
1) What do you think? Did you prefer this interpretation over the original or is the original still the best?
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed this version because it was straight to the point and kinda comical. But the only reason I think I got it on the first watch was because I already have knowlegde of the story the little red riding hood. We know what is going to happen next so we can follow the fast movie and predict the next move. Without that previous knowledge I do not think i would like it.
2) Does the manner in which this story is told make this story more or less interesting?
No. Neither. I think it depends on the target audience.
3) How does the manner in which a story is told impact the audience? To what type of audience would you expect this to appeal vs. the original?
I would assume that this story would be told to older people say 16 and up. People who have a fast paced mind and who would enjoy the technology and creativity used. When telling the origional I would stick to children, elderly and poeple who have time and want to know the details of the story.
4) Can the creativity of the storyteller compete with the imagination of the audience (i.e. watching the movie vs. reading the book)?
Although I most often like books better than the movies. Movies like Harry Poter and Lord of the Rings are definately more than I ever imagined while reading the book. I think it depends on the story.
5) What considerations will you make when telling a story?
Audience, Intelligence, Age, Sex, Lifestyle
Personally, I prefer the original version of Red Ridinghood that I heard as a kid, but that's probably because it's what I'm used to. This video definitely presents the story in a completely different light, and I thought it was a very creative way to do so. I think this would appeal most to people who has never heard the story before, especially if they are younger children growing up in this age of inflated technology. That being said, it seems important to find new ways of conveying a message in order to cater to a specific audience. I tend to always feel that the book is better than the movie for exactly the stated reason--it allows for greater imagination on the part of the audience.Yet I'm sure many other people feel the opposite. So, the bottom line is: it's necessary to consider one's audience and what will appeal to them the most when deciding an approach to giving a presentation.
ReplyDelete1) What do you think? Did you prefer this interpretation over the original or is the original still the best?
ReplyDeleteI preferred this interpretation over the original though it was far from what I was expecting.
2) Does the manner in which this story is told make this story more or less interesting?
I believe it made the story more interesting partly because it’s a version of the story I haven’t seen and also because of the detail in which they were able to communicate the events.
3) How does the manner in which a story is told impact the audience? To what type of audience would you expect this to appeal vs. the original?
While being effective at getting through to an audience with a more developed brain, I don’t think a young child would have fully understood everything that was taking place.
4) Can the creativity of the storyteller compete with the imagination of the audience (i.e. watching the movie vs. reading the book)?
Yes, I believe it just depends on the audience. A preschool class will get excited from the book version if their storyteller is animated enough while reading but may look at you puzzled if you were to show them the new version.
5) What considerations will you make when telling a story?
Put yourself in the story as your telling it. Describe people, places and events in detail as if you were playing the role of each character and become a part of the story.
1) What do you think? Did you prefer this interpretation over the original or is the original still the best?
ReplyDeleteTo be honest I would prefer to see the original version over this version any day of the week. It did change allot in this version and they added as well as took away a few things but the original to me made allot more sense. Another thing I really disliked was the background music. I thought it was very annoying and made the clip seem like a video game or cartoon.
2) Does the manner in which this story is told make this story more or less interesting?
I think that this version of the story makes it allot less interesting. First of all the clip was very short and the music was so annoying that it made me not want to watch it. The original was much more specific and had more detail to me.
3) How does the manner in which a story is told impact the audience? To what type of audience would you expect this to appeal vs. the original?
The manner in which the story is definitely impacts the audience because it is being told in a different way that we are not used to seeing. Anything that is different from that of the original is going to seem either better or worse and in this case I feel that it was worse.I feel like this would appeal more to the younger children who like loud music and cartoons.
4) Can the creativity of the storyteller compete with the imagination of the audience (i.e. watching the movie vs. reading the book)?
Yes, I feel that the storyteller can definitely get the audience thinking in different ways. In the movie you can see the characters and the point that the storyteller is trying to make, When reading the book you have the picture in your head as to what you think it looks like from a visual standpoint.
5) What considerations will you make when telling a story?
When telling a story I would ask myself a few different questions. Who is the target audience that we are looking for? What kind of images would attract these people? How long do we want it to be so its not to short but not too long as well? And finally, What is the Point that we are trying to get across to the viewers?
1) Well, I would have to stick with the original. It was an awesome way to express the story and pretty fun to watch though.
ReplyDelete2) I would say less interesting, it really does not appeal to my imagination to read the break down of everything.
3) I would definitely say that this way of telling a story would appeal to a particular audience. Probably the more left brain thinkers. I personally like a more expressive way of telling a story and I am not the type of person this kind of thing appeals to.
4) Yes, I think the creativity of a storyteller can compete with someone's imagination. However, as with this example, it would depend on the audience. Given this video, and a kindergarden version of the book, I'd have more fun with the book....then again I am studying elementary education.
5) Of course who the audience is, and what the shortest way to tell the story with the greatest impact. A story that takes too long to get interesting will lose most people.
1) What do you think? Did you prefer this interpretation over the original or is the original still the best?
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed the video mostly because the digital drawings went well with the music. As far as the story of ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ being interpreted in the video: without having had prior knowledge of the story, I wouldn’t have been able to put it all together.
2) Does the manner in which this story is told make this story more or less interesting?
The manner in which the story is told makes it more interesting because it allows the audience to see all of the factors that go into the story. For example: as Little Red Riding Hood walks through the forest, the type of plants and animals are shown (which infers these factors must somehow have an affect on the events taking place with in the story).
3) How does the manner in which a story is told impact the audience? To what type of audience would you expect this to appeal vs. the original?
The manner in which the story is told may impact the audience in various ways. If the audience is especially curious, educated, etc., they might enjoy the new version of the story. An audience of less or under-developed intelligence would probably understand and prefer the original version.
4) Can the creativity of the storyteller compete with the imagination of the audience (i.e. watching the movie vs. reading the book)?
The creativity of the story teller can compete with the imagination of the audience, so to speak. However, the audience’s imagination is far more likely to WIN if there is a competition between the digital version and the book. Why? Because the original version is a CLASSIC and classics never get old!
5) What considerations will you make when telling a story?
In order for a typical story to be successful, it must follow certain guidelines like "the hero’s journey". The "hero’s journey" is a set of steps that pretty much every story follows (intro, meeting the character, inciting incidents/ conflict…).
The digital version movie version of the story had an over abundance of unimportant information that detached from the story, thus making it fun to watch, but a weak interpretation of the story.
1) Though this version of Little Red Riding Hood was creative and showed the story in a very different way I think I prefer the original over this newer interpretation. I feel like this video did not really tell a story and I probably would not have understood much of it if I hadn't already knew the story behind it.
ReplyDelete2) The manner of storytelling here makes it far less interesting, almost like reading a "how to" book. There is no emotion, only facts such as diagrams of the eye and ear.
3) The manner in which a story is told impacts the audience in several ways. One must take into account who they are trying to target. One interested in music may find a musical version of the story more attractive. One interested in violence and gore may want to see a clip with the wolf eating the grandmother and the hunter slaughtering the wolf. This specific version may appeal to one more interested in scientific things, such as all the things in the story others wouldn't think about. For example, all the wildlife in the forest, or the way the girl's eye and ears clued her in to the fact that the wolf was not really her grandmother.
4) The storyteller's imagination can compete with the imagination of the audiences to an extent. It all depends on who the audience is and how they think and what they feel.
5) When telling a story the most important thing is always who your audience is. Figuring out the best way to get the thoughts and emotions going in the audience is important, whether it be through the use of pictures, music, or word choice.
1) What do you think? Did you prefer this interpretation over the original or is the original still the best? I definitely thing this interpretation is far much better! Especially since I grasp the main points better visually…
ReplyDelete2) Does the manner in which this story is told make this story more or less interesting? Since it’s a well-known story, I feel the way it’s expressed here makes it even more interesting! It illustrated a deeper meaning from the child-story I’ve always known.
3) How does the manner in which a story is told impact the audience? To what type of audience would you expect this to appeal vs. the original? It impacts the audience to see reality in a different perspective and concept. It’s not just black and white and life and situations aren’t always as they appear to be. I feel this direct to students or mid 20’s… People who are going into the economy to work and make a life for themselves, but then again they way it’s so creative can be directed to any age appropriate.
4) Can the creativity of the storyteller compete with the imagination of the audience (i.e. watching the movie vs. reading the book) Yes! Especially for a visual learner, like myself…
5) What considerations will you make when telling a story? To make it “ visual” and comprehensive for all age groups…
What do you think? Did you prefer this interpretation over the original or is the original still the best?
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed this interpretation of Little Red Riding Hood. As far as preference I think it may be unfair to compare the two. Given visual narrative style and the relatively short length of the video I feel it was created for an audience already familiar with the original story. Also, I feel the original fairy tale itself was not that important. The fairy tale was just a vehicle for visually stimulating graphics and experimental story telling. I like each version for completely different reasons.
Does the manner in which this story is told make this story more or less interesting?
I don't feel it narrative style made it more interesting per say, however the style itself was very fascinating. I really enjoyed the visual style in which the story was portrayed.
How does the manner in which a story is told impact the audience? To what type of audience would you expect this to appeal vs. the original?
The unique fashion in which the story was told made this timeless tale seem fresh and new. I believe this was the creators intention all along and his or her intended impact on the audience. The audience being those who are young adults with a contemporary graphic aesthetic and a familiarity with the story.
Can the creativity of the storyteller compete with the imagination of the audience (i.e. watching the movie vs. reading the book)?
Most definitely. However I feel most are familiar with this fact and choose which medium they want the story to be told in accordingly. If I wanted to let my imagination run wild in a deep narrative I would read a book. If I were in the mood for something more visually stimulating I would of course opt for the movie.
What considerations will you make when telling a story?
I think I would consider the audience most as it most greatly affects the language used, visual presentation, and sophistication of a narrative. The video presented above is a good example of this. It is quite engaging to it's target demographic but could be confusing to a younger, or even older crowd.
1) What do you think? Did you prefer this interpretation over the original or is the original still the best?
ReplyDeleteAs an adult I prefer the interpretation. However the original still has sentimental meaning for me.
2) Does the manner in which this story is told make this story more or less interesting?
I think it makes it more interesting to the adult viewer. We have heard the story so many times that this allows us to see it in a completely new way.
3) How does the manner in which a story is told impact the audience? To what type of audience would you expect this to appeal vs. the original?
I think adults will more enjoy the interpretation because it is different. We at this point know the story so well that a new take on it stimulates us a little more mentally. I think the original would appeal more to children because the story has less realism than the interpretation.
4) Can the creativity of the storyteller compete with the imagination of the audience (i.e. watching the movie vs. reading the book)?
The creativity of an audience is always superior. All too often people comment on how a character in a movie doesn't match the character they imagined. Also films tend to corral the reader into a set look for the events in the book. The readers can no longer see the characters any other way than how they were presented in the film.
5) What considerations will you make when telling a story?
The considerations I would make would be to allow for the reader or listener to use their imagination to shape some of the scenery or appearances of the characters in their own mind. I would also try to stimulate them with the actions and dialogue in a larger quantity.