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.