A dancer in a static pose on the screen. Is there movement? It seems not. But the film of the movie camera is moving, filming the dancer. Electrons are running, pixels of the digital matrix are changing. Does this mean that movement is happening? The dancer's body comes to life within the frame set by the cameraman. How does this frame and the dancer's choreography interact? Should the frame obey the laws of choreography or exist in counterpoint with it? Or, perhaps, should it freeze, allowing the dancer to create his own pattern within the frame? The dancer makes his body move according to the laws of choreography. But at the same time, his nature determines how the body will exist within this choreography. After all, nature created the plasticity of the body outside of choreographies and directorial tasks. So what is more interesting to watch? What is the real beauty - in an artificial, memorized choreographic movement or in a natural, random gesture?
