The Instigator
BA_BA_BA
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
1dustpelt
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points

plays are better than movies

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
1dustpelt
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/28/2012 Category: Arts
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,920 times Debate No: 21583
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (3)

 

BA_BA_BA

Pro

post first argument on round one. No Rebuttal. Round 2 is rebuttal. Round three is close up with final points

Argument: Plays are better than movies because:
1. You see it live. It is an exclusive performance you can only see at that time. That makes it more special than an everyday movie.
2. requires more talent. In a movie you can have voice overs and auto-tune and special effects. In a play, the actors have to rely on skill and what they have. This makes it more realistic.
3. The play is a lot more inspirational. If you have ever gone to Lion King you will see what I mean. The opening scene gave me shivers while in the movie I am just board.
4.The costumes are more fun. It is fun to see what the play comes up with for costumes. In the Lion King The costumes are amazing and add a sense of awe to the play.

I would thank you to abide by the rules and accept my argument.
1dustpelt

Con

This looks interesting. What is stupid is the is the outrageous character limit.
Rebuttals

1. My opponent does not define "special". I do not know what he means by "special".

2. Actually movie actors also require lots of talent. People train years to become actors, and the actor has to act exactly how the character would act. The fact that play actors have less technology does not make plays more "realistic". In a movie, you can use the special effects to make it more realistic.

3. Please explain more. You gave no description of how the play was better than the movie.

4. Costumes are unrealistic and clumsy, while in a movie, the animations are much more realistic and awing. Also, some movies do require actors to wear costumes.
Debate Round No. 1
BA_BA_BA

Pro

Sorry, I have been very busy but here are rebuttals and clarifications.
1. special we will say is unique and distinct. I will add that plays change every night when actors try something new onstage. It adds to the fun and you never know what you will get. unlike a movie where the same thing happens over and over without and difference.
2. Please! the same thing is so for stage actors. They train and train for years as well. Not only that but they don't rely on multiple takes but have to do the whole show without stopping. Special effects are easy to pick out and make movies a lot more gory than they should be. But that is a debate for another day.
3. I told you. The opening scene with real people singing in perfect harmony beats all canned music. It is just like watching a concert rather than listening to your iPod. No Contest.
4. In a movie they can either go in animation or people. play they can only go people. The actors are bound to that but still make the play fun.
1dustpelt

Con

Rebuttals
1. What do you mean, "unlike a movie where the same thing happens over and over without difference"? In different movies, different things happen, just like in different plays, different things happen.
2. Movie actors and stage actors both train for years. However, because a movie has multiple takes, they can film the same scene many times and choose the final, so the final movie is perfect, while in a play, you mess up, too bad.
3. In a movie, there are also real people singing. If you have good speakers, it would be just as good as a play.
4. In a play, the actors are bound to acting it out, with no special effects or animation to make it more vivid or exciting. In a movie, there is animation to make the movie the way the director wants.

Conclusion: Movies are better because of multiple takes to remove mistakes, animation, and technology.
Debate Round No. 2
BA_BA_BA

Pro

1. Don't flounder. In one movie, not multiple movies, the same thing happens over and over. In a play, as I said before, you can add little distinct changes.
2. Yes but mess ups rarely happen and the actors are trained for the situations like that and end up making the play more humorous. In movies, the actors rely on the technology and are stiff in the standards of "perfect" so there is no additional, unexpected, humor.
3. Not everyone can afford good speakers and nice TV's.
4. The animation makes the movie unreal and gory as I stated before, and unfortunately, that is where most directors are going. The acting is the fun part, to see how the actors of a play can escape their earthly bonds and slip to a surreal performance. It is also fun to see them toe the bonds with the costumes, singing and the stage tricks and trapdoors they have.
1dustpelt

Con

Rebuttal
1. How does the same thing happens over and over? In which movie has the same thing happens over and over? There are different themes and they act out a story, just like a play.
2. Mess ups do happen at times in plays. Not in movies because of multiple shoots. There is "humor" in movies, there are many humorous movies.
3. It is true, but even a mediocre sound system would show music and stories. Plays do not have better music than movies, in fact, some of the greatest pieces have been writen for movies. When was the last time you heard the whole Orchestra playing at a play?
4. The animation does not make the movie unreal and gory. Many movies have animations that are not "gory". Also, animations can make the movie more realistic, someone can edit the video so that a scene can work.

Conclusion
A movie is just as fun as a play, you can do just as much as what you can do in a play, but more because of the technology and animation.

Source
http://movies.ign.com...

Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by BA_BA_BA 5 years ago
BA_BA_BA
congrats! Let me clarify on the movies being the same. THIS DOES NOT COUNT FOR THE DEBATE!!! If you watch a movie and then watch it again, the same thing is going to happen but in a play going from one night to the next, the thing the actors do differ slightly.
Posted by 1dustpelt 5 years ago
1dustpelt
I had one source, I get sources.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by TUF 5 years ago
TUF
BA_BA_BA1dustpeltTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Very poor debate, not alot of argumentation was done, as I would have liked to see. But it can't really be helped with the character limit I suppose.
Vote Placed by Yep 5 years ago
Yep
BA_BA_BA1dustpeltTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: Bad arguments by both sides, sources came in at the very end, so sources to con. No decisive winner from bad points countering bad points. Con's conclusion was worded horribly, simply saying movies are better b/c of animation is a bad argument. Neither side had a good debate.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
BA_BA_BA1dustpeltTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: Con had a source. I will explain how args are tied: Both brought up mediocre points. Pro pushed talent, as con refuted it, all of pros points where beaten, but cons where too. I think the args where tied as neither side had a good case and all of the arguments where basically even as to who won it at the end.