What makes an amv original for you?

JaddziaDax · Post by **JaddziaDax** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 6:44 pm

even books are open to interpretation...

i remember having to decode "The Grapes of Wrath" in highschool just the right way or else i was wrong :/

x_rex30 · Post by **x_rex30** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 6:45 pm

Edit well, that would be original.

Flint the Dwarf · Post by **Flint the Dwarf** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:00 pm

JaddziaDax wrote:even books are open to interpretation...

i remember having to decode "The Grapes of Wrath" in highschool just the right way or else i was wrong :/

But the plot isn't. Motives behind character's actions and all that jazz is interpretation, but not plot. I mean, yeah, some books are abstract to the point where there is no discernible plot, but that's not what I'm talking about.

Orwell · Post by **Orwell** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:25 pm

Flint the Dwarf wrote:
Orwell wrote:I don't foresee this going anywhere, so;

Obligatory kusoyaro quote wrote:We don't need a leader. We need to SHUT UP. Make what you want to make, don't make you what you don't want to make. If neither of those applies to you, then you need to SHUT UP MORE.
Yeah you're throwing that around a little too often.

Or the threads come up too often.

For something a little more productive, original to me is far too subjective. It could range between what's said here to simply being not a copypasta video. If you take a video, strip the audio and insert a foreign version of the same song, do you have originality? The audio hasn't been used before to the sites knowledge.

In the interest of those asking questions deserving a kusoyaro quote, how much does originality matter to whether you like/keep/etc. the video?

To me, its a possible redeeming factor of a otherwise badly edited video, or just another factor of how cool is this video.

Knowname · Post by **Knowname** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:26 pm

I just look for how efficient it is at portraying whatever it's supposed to portray.

Knowname · Post by **Knowname** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:30 pm

Otohiko wrote:The opposite of imitation, to me, is just as bad as imitation. Making something with Y just to piss on videos made with Z is not real artistic originality, it's pretension.

Originality should never be a matter of source+footage+editing style. These play a role, but only to an extent. To be really original, to me, a video has to be novel on a conceptual level. I wish people who try to make something original would think less of surface originality and more conceptual originality.

^^ (basically what I said, but in a bunch of confusing words... gotta love Oto ;p)

Knowname · Post by **Knowname** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:39 pm

Knowname wrote:I just look for how efficient it is at portraying whatever it's supposed to portray.

Thus quoth the Raven

anyway, yeah, I like to avoid mentioning ANYTHING about 'new' this or that
1> cuz it's stupid
2> cuz it pisses off the newbs.

but mostly cuz it's stupid, makes no sence, and spins in circles. I mean, everything new is going to become old some day. Might as well piss off the newbs in the process!!

Castor Troy · Post by **Castor Troy** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:55 pm

mario sprites

godix · Post by **godix** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:05 pm

You know what would be original? If people would quit pointless navel gazing. Someone who doesn't think make the same old action video we've seen hundreds of times with a different anime means an automatic 10 for originality. Someone who can come up with an idea and do it without running a fucking poll on what should be included. Someone with enough balls to say 'I did what I wanted. If you don't like it, I don't give a fuck.' Someone, in short, who doesn't try to make videos by consensus opinion.

These topics are really rather sad. We *COULD* talk about different ways to effectively convey sentiment without being hokey. We *COULD* talk about how to convey a meaning in AMVs. We *COULD* talk about how to express yourselves using source material you have little control over. Instead all we do talk about is shiny effects and if using an angsty fighting anime other than Naruto is 'original'. If I didn't already have such a low opinion of most amvers I'd be a little depressed by this.

Anyway, to answer the stupid ass question, originality is something that hasn't been done before (or at least not often). A pointless action video is not original no matter how new the damned anime is. Aother bouncing boobie video isn't suddenly fresh just because you found a brand new novelty tittie song (granted, I'm guilty of producing this type of crap). If you make something that causes me to think 'Euphoria II' or 'WoTB did it better' or even 'oh look, it's the same sierra/silvermoon video they always make. Damnit, why can't they both retire? Do you really despise me that much God?' then you aren't original. If you make me think 'I haven't seen someone try that before' then you are original.

Keeper of Hellfire · Post by **Keeper of Hellfire** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 4:25 am

Originality for sure isn't defined by the use of anime, music or pre made effects that never had been used before. It can be found in a very special editing style, the creation of effects or content at all, in the concept behind the AMV and many more. Originality usually can't be forced, so it's pretty useless to ask "What's original?". If you have to ask, you probably never will be original. Originality is created by that parts inside YOU that make you different from other people. So if you stop listening what other people think is original and start giving yourself into your AMV's, the chances rise that you will create an original AMV. But noone can promise you that you will ever make an original AMV.

Since these threads po up regularly, I wonder why people care about being original at all.