Al pacino's speech on GOD all in typography.
I have mixed feelings about this animation. It looks really good, but I don't think it fits with the speech that well. The first half works really well, spreading the distance between letters to make it sound slower, extending letters to make them last longer. But at points, the designer has just but it in the place or angle that looks the best rather than the one that fits the dialogue the best.
I like the -'touch but don't taste' bit when then don't taste seems to sink and dissolve and shrink, which matches his tone exactly.
I kind of get lost in the animation, and not pay attention to what is actually being said. Is this good or bad? Does this not stop what the message actually is, and is just there to look good? I would have thought the type was there to help aid the message and put the message across more successfully and visually.
I have mixed feelings about this animation. It looks really good, but I don't think it fits with the speech that well. The first half works really well, spreading the distance between letters to make it sound slower, extending letters to make them last longer. But at points, the designer has just but it in the place or angle that looks the best rather than the one that fits the dialogue the best.
I like the -'touch but don't taste' bit when then don't taste seems to sink and dissolve and shrink, which matches his tone exactly.
I kind of get lost in the animation, and not pay attention to what is actually being said. Is this good or bad? Does this not stop what the message actually is, and is just there to look good? I would have thought the type was there to help aid the message and put the message across more successfully and visually.
No comments:
Post a Comment