My theory of matching as the basic art of cinema (I don’t know a damn thing about the art of cinema):
So, to make a movie you need lots of people. Hence, we watch credits for a really long time. But to make cinema, you need lots of artists. I’m not into film enough to know the great costume designers or computer animators etc, and only have a superficial understanding of great actors, directors, producers. But it seems to me, that a great movie will happen when either a bunch of artists work together or an artist coaxes the best out of a bunch of technicians. We’ll concentrate on the bunch of artists. We’ll need a writer/screenwriter who doesn’t stink. Maybe a few. The words usually come first, I bet. You need someone to shoot the movie in a meaningful way, an interesting way. If you don’t have decent actors, it will be very hard to make a good movie, so we’ll say some good actors too. For some music we’ll recruit a whole sub-bunch of artists, someone to write the score and people talented enough to do it justice with thier instruments. I think it’s easy to forget that it takes talent not only to write a score, but to play it, too. Then there’s all the details I don’t know about, lighting, makeup, costume, etc. But you can have all these things and still flop, if they don’t cohere.
The coherence comes through ‘matching’ as I understand it. The power of the cinema is the ability to convey the same emotion through several coextant forms of art, making a greater art. The actor, the camera, the dialog, the music- when they all come together, cinema happens. Like a good band, they will each have their solos, while the other parts step back for a moment and provide the rhythm section. But the overall effect is bigger than the parts.
Maybe that’s obvious, reading over it. But the matching, that’s what I wanted to point out. There are so many forms of art happening, and they are each carrying the same narrative, the same film.