@@ntihaboseeric1911 Talent can be wasted if he has to go through the same learning journey with beginners that he has already done once. Karyuri teaches the others dance steps. But dance is not only a step, but also a choreography. There is no choreography here. There is only movement here, which the director of the video juxtaposes, and dense cuts that make the otherwise unspectacular movement lively. To the discerning eye, this is frivolous. So we don't see activities here that Karyuri can learn anything from, because he can only learn from someone who dances himself, and better than him. In addition, Safi shaped Karyuri's movement culture, which is why the kid lives in that movement culture. In a movement culture that Salongo mocked in an interview. He mocked Safi with this, and now he is trying to build on it. No matter how we look at it, Safi makes the best videos in this genre. Salongo can't build anything on a knowledge he doesn't have. Knowledge can only be built upon with more knowledge.
If I were Salongo, I would delete any post that insults Safi because it is unworthy. Karyuri TV builds on what Safi taught Karyuri. Anyone who has seen the full recording of Goodnews TV knows that Safi is still the best in Rwanda. His work is partly a reference point. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-JAZJyXOXAD4.html Dance is not only dance, but also education. Safi raised Karyuri to be a good dancer from the human side as well. Karyuri is persistent, can fight for results, is a disciplined and pleasant child during interviews. Safi shaped Karyuri's sense of form, style and performance qualities. Safi takes personal responsibility for all his work, all his videos and all his dancers. If he made moral demands on Karyuri, he did it well. If he is able to resolve these conflicts, that is also a valuable quality. He doesn't deserve cheap comments.
When I lived in an African country, I met lepers and other poor people sitting at the church gates and begging. I saw their physical condition and clothing, but they never put their feet in front of the people passing by to show them their torn shoes. In 2020, Karyuri danced several times in such a way that when he lifted his foot, we saw that there was a huge hole in the sole of his shoe, but he never intentionally showed the sole of his shoe to the camera. When a cameraman asks a child to hold up his torn shoes for the camera so we can feel the horrors of poverty, his vision may be clouded by the memory of a Nike sneaker commercial. In the video, we also see "poor girls" pretending to bring water. But these girls with pretty faces are in front of the camera as models. In the film, we find many similarly false scenes. That's why when I first watched this video, I just wrote: "As the rich think and play the poor." The director, the cinematographer, does not know something basic about poverty, and this makes the video discredited. A film can be good, authentic, artistic, and capable of giving a false or distorted image even at the most basic level. If I go out into my garden to make a beautiful film and I don't see the beauty in my garden, the problem is how I look at the garden. There is beauty in the world of poverty, and there is also the drama of poverty. The two together give the most perfect artistry. Beautiful and authentic footage was taken of Karyuri when he was very poor. These pictures would be successful at any international photography exhibition. This is the merit of cameramen and photographers with a good eye. Karyuri's grandmother placed the boy's head in her apron and cut off his hair with a pair of scissors. In this video, we see Karyuri with dyed hair, and even so, he is the most authentically played poor kid. I see serious conceptual problems in the three videos.
