How I think a movie should be: Venn Diagram edition

[Jeremy Duncan]

[url=http://www.imagebam.com/image/aee0af97775247][img width=172 height=180]http://thumbnails24.imagebam.com/9778/aee0af97775247.jpg[/img][/url]
Click to enlarge picture.

The theory in the venn Diagram is from Plasma televisions use of Vectors.
The vectors are divided into two calsses: vectorspace, subspace.
What makes the plasma television 600Hz is subspace.

That is what the entire theory that follows is based on – Plasma TV’s technology use of vector math.

A vector be it vector-space or sub-space is made up of two parts, so vector-space has two parts and sub-space has two parts.
The sub-space when added to the vector-space makes the vector-space look better.
So think of sub-space as a enhancement for vector-space.

The math now follows below:

1.

Vector-space is made up of: A, AnC
Sub-space is made up of: B, BnC

2.

A goes to B for the purpose of AnB, this is the customer (A) going to the store (B).
BnC watches AnB to make sure A does not ruin the store and pays for the merchandise.
A does not want to see BnC because this adds a parallax occlusive visual effect or “ugliness” to the store and means they must spend money and not gets the product as a free gift, so A uses AnC to find and pacify BnC.

3.

A knows that BnC will not offer the products B offers for free so feels a threat from this occusive interpositional member of B.
Movies generally begin with A receiving the goods from B as a gift with no threat, then BnC is introduced and the threat is materialized.

4.

This is the general formula in stories – The gift is there and then either AnC or BnC or both, is introduced into the scene.

Looks like this:
Customer (A), goes to Store (B) – everything is fine.
AnB The result is a clean start.
BnC The tone changes and now the store is in alert mode.
AnC  The customer sees the thing it detests, or is looking for the thing it detests and may be seen a far ways off.
BnC The store seeing the customer looking for the thing it detests is still in alert mode.
AnBnC The customer sees the store in alert mode and detests it, now what happens?

Alternatively, BnC may be hiding from B, as B plots to harm A, when A goes to B.

Or, B goes to AnB with A for the purpose of hurting A, A doesn’t suspect it though.
But, BnC meets B at AnB for the purpose of hurting B, and in the process keeps A from harm.
BnC and B are two of a kind. B took advantage of A as it looked for something pretty.

or here’s a different one. B and BnC wait for A and find A abusive, ruining the AnB environment. B warns A over a extended amount of time then the finale is where A either reforms or is ruined by B.

Folder with picture of venn diagram and txt file with the text in this post.
http://www.mediafire.com/?rxmpspm2k64q7jr

I made the Venn diagram edition because I was asked to. personally I liked the second version but now I finished this third version I think venn Diagrams are cool. 🙂

[Jeremy Duncan]

Technical part 1: Optics

• have light from a source, a pixel, shine on a mirror.

• have this pixel Light split into multiple beams once it strikes the mirror, multiple because there are is not only one mirror but multiple individual mirrors,

• this reflection is kept in a small divergence angle, similar to a laser pens beam,

• sent to a specific coordinate,

• then this specific coordinate changes and the beam is redirected because the beam is traveling through a adjustable convex lens. Technical part 2: The Venn Diagram.

• A Is the light connecting with the mirrors.

• AnC is the refrection from the mirrors in seven individual beams.

• B Is the light connecting with the mirrors, but the mirrors go to the light. • BnC is the reflection split from the mirrors but moves to the light to watch the mirror that created it.

• AnB Is the Light giving mirror groups with the B Mirror that is drawn to meet the light.

• AnBnC Is the beams of reflected light from mirror AnC, is giving light to the reflection light from mirror BnC to follow. _____________________________________________

 Main Theory:

• If the light from the mirrors and reflected light from the mirror can be used to create a story. It can do so because it shines and gives.

If we change what it shines and gives too – we can change the story.

Perhaps it cautiously skims over giving to one pocket, and prefers to give to some other pocket.

• The Movie is split up into sections that each are made up of similar smaller parts.

The scene begins with no motive to follow. There is only friendly discussion or conduct. There is no division from A and AnC.

Then the scene changes, and somebody is followed. The question is followed by who and why? The light is received by the B and BnC. So A and AnC meet B and BnC.

Then it is seen who is following the A and AnC. It may be a unsavoury character. This character may need to explain why they are following you. They may try and explain to A and AnC that they are not malicious and put themselves in a new understood relationship with A and AnC.

How did B and BnC get noticed? Did one part of A and AnC cause the division that made B and BnC? Of course. How they did it is the question the author creates though.

_____________________________________________

Notes to myself on possible new theories:

Note 1:

• The light is a analogy of a person.

There is a grid matrix of pockets that receive light from the mirrors and reflected light from the mirrors. The person shines inside one of these pockets.

The pockets in this grid hold different levels of existence possible for this person to live in and experience life in.

One possibility, is one of the pockets in that grid act as a sort of Black Hole – Light cannot escape a Black Hole.

Note 2:

• The matrix pocket = the illness.

• The light from the mirrors and reflected light from the mirrors = the immune system.

Medicine on a wound or illness, can help the immune system work.

A parallel of this is the medicine is a mediator between the light and pocket. This medicine changes the way the light heals the pocket.

[Jeremy Duncan]

I will now show how to make funny images, or unique images.

Characters are made up of two things: Function, and reverence.

The Lord of the Rings is a example. Frodo is a small person compared to Gandalf. Frodo is a functioning member of a small village, and he has a function with gandalf of reverence. One day Frodos relationship with Gandalf changed from Reverence to Function, Frodo was meant to carry the Ring.

So the two types of use one character has for another changes. From reverence, to Function.

When your showing a advertisement you blend the two types together. So you show the function in a setting of reverence. A example is a reverd dinner table with delicious food, and the function is a smiling man with plate and Spoon in hand with a Huge Smile and Tongue seen licking his lips and he’s saying very loudy “Yummy!”. So the place of reverence fits in the person who only crudely uses function.

Perversion also fits in this way, so in a place of reverence the function is felt by the character so they are gawdy charactures of what belongs in that place of reverence. Take for instance Frodo in the place the ring is thrown and destroyed. Frodo knows this is a place of reverence, but what happens here? He feels the function of the Rings. Then he hesitates and says maybe the rings shouldn’t be destroyed in this place of reverence, the ring has a function, after all.

And so in a story with evil, the use of reverence is perverted with the use of function – function overlays the characters proper use of that place of reverence.

[Jeremy Duncan]

So back to my post about the mirrors. It showed that the scenes run in cycles, with a cycle consisting of A and it’s varient and everybody is on the same terms and not different. Then there is B and it’s varient, but this is because A and it’s varient brought B into different terms.

I will focus on characters this time to express this more clearly.

A is the link between cycles. Think of A and it’s varient as a rope that is holding a boat on a dock. The rope doesn’t have jingles on it, it doesn’t have colorful strings on it. It doesn’t have teddy bears or candy canes on it – it’s a rope on a boat dock. All the rope does is hold the boat to the dock.

Then somebody unties the boat, and causes a difference in the terms the boat had when it was tied to the dock.
This untying of the boat is A or it’s varient causing a difference that brings B and it’s varient into new terms.
Now where is the rope?

Now the rest of the cycle comes into play and it has teddy bears on the boat, candy canes on the boat, colorful strings on the boat.

So you saw three things: the boat + Rope on the dock, the rope being untied and the boat set loose, and now the boat with all it’s trinkets.

In Salt with Angelina Jolie, Salt was leaving the office and then at the door as she was leaving she was held up.
So the rope and boat is she is with a friend and they are hanging out, then the rope gets untied and this is when they are held up with this russian guy who walks in.
Then Salt talks to the russian and her friends are looking for a rope, but they find a boat at sea with many trinkets and become interested in Salt.
And then Salt shows the opposite of the rope and boat on the dock and all A and it’s varients become seriously interested in Salt.

And this is how it goes, in cycles.

[Jeremy Duncan]

Now I will give statistics to show two principles:
Happy Character
Visible character

If you have a character who is logical. Trying to think if this is the right decision, or if they should go a certain way, or if they should say a certain thing – how happy are they? Not very happy at all!

Now the opposite, is they are happy how visible are they?
They may go to a point and at this point the character finds relief, but there they become visible!

Now if they are logical then it usually goes they are not visible to harm or worse, but if they are visible then though they be visible to harm they find relief, or happiness even.

And so it goes with the story.

First they are happy, happy to enjoy themselves, then they see the visible, then they are logical, and seeing they are visible they wonder if they should do something to be successful.

Smiley face.

[Jeremy Duncan]

Back to the Venn diagram from the first post:

A + AnC: There is happiness, and no need for cold logic – community.
AnB: The tone changes and now though community-happy, there is visibility.

B: The person is not feeling visible, so not feeling like B or the need for logic.
BnC: The person is made to know they or a loved one are B and feel flush with the need for logic .

AnBnC: A + AnC take up position for community and visibility, but B deals them logic instead of community and visibility.

[Jeremy Duncan]

Now I will apply magnetic force to the formula below so it makes more sense.

A + AnC. There is no High tone attitude.

AnB. Now there is magnetic force. What happens is there is visibility, and when there is visibility the hands start to tremble, and or the head may signal to another person that you see.

What magnetic force this is is same pole to same pole, or a repelling force between magnets: north + north poles.

B
BnC. Now there is verbalization of logic. Having seen then the next thing is having to talk or utter something even if that is a shrill cry.

This is opposite magnetic poles connecting: north + south poles.

AnBnC. Now the people who made B react want him to use logic in their arena, so they can reason with him and apply their logic in problem solving.

But the B character does not willingly go into north south poles, because this means going into the magnetic envelope made by the people who saw him, and caused him to become B in the first place, without him knowing or intending to become B.

If these people see him then they know the use of the eyes. It’s unintuitive and deeply psychologically rooted. They use the eyes to understand the situation and to place a person into the position of B. So if you signal that you see them they shutter and become mellow and meek so as to shun you looking at them and so labeling them as B.  

[Jeremy Duncan]

I watched a episode of the TV show The Dog Whisperer with Cesar Millan. And in that episode there was a Dog who didn’t like Dog Toys.

What I’ve seen Cesar do in a episode with a dog at a dog pound who was terrified of men was he made friends with it before starting treatment. Once he befriended the dog then he started treatment of domesticating the animal.

What this tells me, is first Cesar will befriend the Dog, then try to get him over his problem, be it a problem with toys or fear of men.

This relates to my previous post and I will show you how now.

The Dog’s problem is it relates to the B in the formula. B feels a repelling force towards something or someone.

Cesar takes that Dog and show him that he does not see it as a B in the formula, but as a A in the formula.
That is if the dog was a B then how could Cesar who is a A be his friend.
A does not repel A, it accepts A.

Then Cesar places the Dog with the toy problem in a house so full of toys the dog can’t go anywhere without seeing a dog toy.

Cesar places the dog into a situation where he can’t repel from the dog toy, so the dog see’s the situation change from B to AnBnC, and he cannot win and escape the dog toys.
This then makes the dog accept the thing that made it repulsed, the dog changes the magnetic orientation from repulsed to attracted.

However if the dog can be tought to fear the dog toy, and gets healed of this fear. Then it stands to reason the animal should not be placed into a situation where he might relearn the fear he overcame, where he might change from being a friend of A, to being a B character.

[Jeremy Duncan]

Following the previous posts logic where I talked about the Dog Whisperer Cesar, I will give basic plots to some well known movies.

Blade Runner, starring Mr.Ford.
Replicants are avoiding arrest and want to meet their maker so they can avoid certain fate. The Replicants do not want north south poles because it represents death to them, so they intend to meet Tyrell and learn how to defeat the logic built into them.

Batman, the Dark Knight, starring Mr.Ledger and Mr.Bale.
The Batman makes the criminals afraid, so they meet with the Joker and unleash him so they can avoid the fear they feel of meeting the Batman.
The Joker wants to reveal a fear inside people that pushes them over the edge, so their phobia has terminal consequence. But the people overcome their phobia and the Batman rights Twoface’s wrong so he does not depress the people who stood up to their phobia.

Predators, starring Mr.Brody.
They find themselves in a place that makes them confused, so they are not themselves. Then they are flushed out and Royce isn’t confused anymore. Royce then wants to find the people who made his group confused, to overcome his phobia he goes to the people responsible for doing this rather than run from them.

So the plot is the ordinary people, as they considered themselves ordinary, were made into targets that were supposed to feel phobia, but the leader overcomes his phobia and targets the people responsible for making them targets.

Then it becomes a plan to leave the hunter predators and run back home, leave this game planet without even fighting the logic of the predators.

[Jeremy Duncan]

Imagine there is two groups: Group A and B. What defines these groups is the separation between them.

Group A consists of a perimeter, or semi-perimeter, and group B consists of entering group A’s perimeter.

When Group A is intact it shows the perimeter is intact – the perimeter is made up of people from the group, each person makes a Point on the perimeter.

Each point on Group A’s perimeter expects a quality of life, or quality of service. The way Group B treats group A’s perimeter changes the quality of life Group A has.

It’s like a Dog in a yard: he will mark the perimeter of his fence and bark at strangers getting too close to his yard.
A Dog, when he see’s a threat, may become dead silent…
This shows the dog treats his yards perimeter quality of life different, because the quality of life there may change from good to not so good.

How many people have changed their territorial bark or snarl to a fearful cry?
So the way group B treats group A changes the bark to a cry or keeps the snarl and bark.

There are three qualities group A may experience:
Best quality: where it consists of a intact group with no irregularities.
Mediocre quality: Where you feel as the black sheep or especially odd about someone or they feel odd: feeling a oddity.
Very poor quality: Where you’ll eat moldy bread and drink wild water to survive.

When the perimeter is the Best quality you feel the best way to interact with group B is on equal terms. You talk to them and affiliate with them.
When the perimeter is corrupt and you feel a oddity you are alarmed by the feel of a oddity so you treat the group B with caution – don’t look for trouble.
Very poor quality and you see group B as a ravaging fire tearing through your perimeter and need to confront it immediately.

With very poor quality the threat is so intense that unless you have contact with everyone in group A, group B will infiltrate the Group A and flank it and consume it.

Imagine Ripley from Aliens, She survived and was back on Earth. She went from very poor quality to the best quality. She was recruited to go back with the promise the threat would be treated as the poorest quality of existence and not as a oddity to be collected and studied.
The Marines treated the assigment unlike Ripley, who had a true fear of the Aliens, that’s why when they were dying she tore in there with the vehicle like a mother for her babes.

If Group A is in contact with each other, then when one member/point of that group is impacted so they change from the best quality to a mediocre quality – the other points feel impacted too.

So everybody gets a sense of oddness, just from one person: Like a rotten apple.

The group A is very homogenous, they take on traits to survive group B, you see.

The whole group A will flex to sustain what the individual of the group is going through – how it (the group A) flexes may be inappropriate/odd or even disgraceful.

[Jeremy Duncan]

Now I will talk about Music.

Music can be used in one of two ways, but it’s either or, not blended.

Music using the examples before is without bias, it speaks to the soul and you feel it: It is the dog whisperer to use a analogy of music.

Now music may have vocals added and here is where it may break into two branches.

Branch one is where the dog whisperer talks the talk of the dog, and the dog knows this and understands it.

Branch two is the music whispers to itself and not the dog.

The difference between the two branches is describable using another dog whisperer analogy.

1.) The dog whisperer whispers to himself, meaning he’s troubled. He see’s the dog and empathizes with himself and not the dog: example is a profanity snapped out as they are in distress: this is branch two.

2.) Branch one is the dog whisperer see’s the dog and instead of reacting, takes a proactive approach to dealing with the dog and not his own insecurities.

The thing is the dog whisperer starts out and the dog feels him, loves him. Then either of the branches happens as a result of this.

So sound that is musical, be it a song, a poetic moment, a epic moment, a tender moment where it’s soothing sound, this is followed by either branch one or branch two where the singer is heard.

Does the singer continue to be branch one and soothe the dog, or does the music become branch two and mutter profanity at the disturbance they witness?

This is how music plays in, for everytime, every single time music is played 100% guarantee it is followed by a fearful dog whisperer muttering to himself or a graceful delivery of speech that reassures the dog.

[Author]

Posts