MovieChat Forums > Microcosmos: Le peuple de l'herbe (1996) Discussion > Why no narration?

Why no narration?

posted 10 years ago by Dan_323
7 replies | jump to latest

Skipping through it, I find no narrator. Why is this? Seems an awful waste of amazing video footage without a narrator.

______________
History is written by the victors.

[–] pdemonte987 10 years ago

Don't skip through it.

Not everything needs to presented as a lesson.

I believe the point of this feel was to get an extreme closeup of a world most people will never notice in their entire lifetime.

I love Attenborough documentaries more than the normal guy, but I found this simple 'observation' engrossing and amazing. I mean absolutely incredible really..

What an amazing film!

[–] esskayess 9 years ago

There were several scenes that badly needed narration. “The Hellstrom Chronicle” has that advantage over this, although there obviously were great advances in photography shown here.

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 6 years ago

Amen! I loved The Hellstrom Chronicle"!

😎

[–] aaronyovanovits 8 years ago

I like this so much precisely because it has no narration.

[–] notsocrazyroy 8 years ago

I like this so much precisely because it has no narration.

Same here, I don't think narration was necessary. It did have a pretty inventive score and I think that was all that was needed, for once the picture told the whole story.

This means something, this is important.

[–] blue-7 7 years ago

What would been nice would have been an option for a second narration track. Then we could have learned more about what we were seeing and still be able to just enjoy the beauty of the images along with the music and sound effects.

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 6 years ago

I felt the same way. It was fascinating, but I constantly found myself thinking "Huh? WTF?" So it was entertaining, but not very educational. I like documentaries like this to be both.

😎