Hi Russell, On 10 Oct 2008, at 08:14, thegeekfactory wrote:
> I expect there will be a lot of sceptics... The project wouldn't > be successful without them. I suspect you haven't been to the blog > because it's simply a course of multiple choice questions in order > to format the script then the subscribers get to choose from three > possible candidates for each part of member of the cast etc. It's > really quite simple. I have been to your site, and indeed it is a simple system. However, if it were simple to get people to give truly valuable input, then this format would have been an industry standard long ago ;) > Also the dice man the book is all about leaving choice and decision > to the roll of the dice. So all in all I don't identify with your > scepticism and am sure that with a little more knowledge you'll > feel more positive. Please understand that I don't feel negative - I'm skeptical, that's all. I have tried my hand at numerous interactive film projects (and processes) over the years and have rarely found one that produces as engaging an end result as a more traditional production. It seems that passivity is the preferred option for the majority of audiences. It could even be argued that it is the restriction of choice and access that piques an audience's interest. Celebrities very rarely hang out with their fans, for example. On a related note, I'm sure many videobloggers will confirm how difficult it is to get even close family members just to subscribe to their feeds let alone watch them. I dunno, perhaps there's something to be learnt from this. It's more than 20 years ago that I read the book, but IIRC, the protagonist himself ultimately admits the limitations of slavish adherence to the dice-rolling habit. I did enjoy reading the book though, and I hope you enjoy the process of carrying out your experiment just as much. Cheers, Christian
