|
Your shift key broken, brah?
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2009 01:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 12:13 |
|
|
i am not so sure posted:so because two movies fail at exploring this premise, that means there aren't enough movies that do it correctly? i can list so many movies that successfully raise the right questions about the human condition. i don't think surrogates is supposed to be revelatory in terms of conceptual thinking. Would you mind sharing some of the examples so that I could check them out?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2009 03:50
|
|
|
jjack229 posted:Would you mind sharing some of the examples so that I could check them out? generally, a film explores themes that are part of this greater theme of the human condition. technically every movie ever made about people concerns the human condition and our strengths and weaknesses. but to start with films directly about that greater theme, anything by tarkovsky and bergman should do the trick. also check out charlie kaufman's "synecdoche, new york."
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2009 05:27
|
|
|
Nevermind.
Jesto fucked around with this message at 17:29 on Jul 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2009 16:40
|
|
|
This is more of a movie forum question than an actual movie question: Not too long ago, somebody on here posted a two-part youtube video deconstructing Mad Max. I was wondering if anybody knew what happened to those videos, or which thread that happened in?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2009 15:51
|
|
|
In The Thing, is it ever established who actually went and destroyed the blood supplies in the locked fridge so they couldn't do the first blood test? They said that the doctor and Garry were the only guys with access to the key, but neither of them ends up being infected. I assume it's meant to be Blair since he was the one going around loving with stuff while they thought he was locked up in the shack, but how did he get into the fridge without breaking the lock? e: nevermind, found the discussion here http://www.outpost31.com/movie/faq.html colonel_korn fucked around with this message at 20:14 on Oct 16, 2009 |
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2009 16:45
|
|
|
i really want to find out the first movie or play or whatever to feature an unruly mob w/ torches or like if that trope is extremely older than film. where did it come from?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2009 12:45
|
|
|
Pablo Naruto posted:i really want to find out the first movie or play or whatever to feature an unruly mob w/ torches or like if that trope is extremely older than film. where did it come from? Frankenstein (1931) is the earliest film I can think of that has it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2009 13:00
|
|
|
Nuke Goes KABOOM posted:Also, you can't exist at the same time as you're already existing, that's why the movie made a good move in not having him hunting in the scene where he dies. Since he died and still exists (in the book) the one that was hunting can now jump around replacing the one that was shot.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2009 13:47
|
|
|
Nuke Goes KABOOM posted:Also, you can't exist at the same time as you're already existing, that's why the movie made a good move in not having him hunting in the scene where he dies. Since he died and still exists (in the book) the one that was hunting can now jump around replacing the one that was shot. Do you know this from your own personal time-travelling or...
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2009 00:51
|
|
|
Something that always bothered me, why did Dirty Harry came back to the police after the end of the first movie? I guess it could have been a similar situation to Sherlock Holmes's death and ressurection, but the ending of the first movie makes it somewhat hard to believe he would just go back like if nothing happened. Are the sequels in fact prequels?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2009 22:49
|
|
|
Honest Thief posted:Something that always bothered me, why did Dirty Harry came back to the police after the end of the first movie? I guess it could have been a similar situation to Sherlock Holmes's death and ressurection, but the ending of the first movie makes it somewhat hard to believe he would just go back like if nothing happened. Are the sequels in fact prequels? Most of the later films are just generic cops-n-robbers schtick, and are difficult to parse as presenting a political message.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2009 23:16
|
|
|
edit: ignore me 
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2009 16:54
|
|
|
I've seen "Yellow Submarine" and "A Hard Day's Night." Are any of the other Beatles movies worth watching if you're not a huge fan?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2009 23:56
|
|
|
Binowru posted:I've seen "Yellow Submarine" and "A Hard Day's Night." Are any of the other Beatles movies worth watching if you're not a huge fan? I remember Help! being closer in tone to Airplane! and being hilarious, but it's been a long time since I saw it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2009 00:14
|
|
|
ClydeUmney posted:I remember Help! being closer in tone to Airplane! and being hilarious, but it's been a long time since I saw it. Is that the one where Ringo gets the magic ring stuck on his finger? I caught part of it on TV and it seemed pretty funny.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2009 01:25
|
|
|
Rake Arms posted:Is that the one where Ringo gets the magic ring stuck on his finger? I caught part of it on TV and it seemed pretty funny. Yep, that's the one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2009 03:25
|
|
|
Binowru posted:I've seen "Yellow Submarine" and "A Hard Day's Night." Are any of the other Beatles movies worth watching if you're not a huge fan? Help! is one of my all-time favorite movies and what got me interested in The Beatles. Great songs, extremely funny, and some awesome cinematography and editing. It's basically a Marx Brothers film with The Beatles. The supporting cast is terrific, including Leo McKern, Victor Spinetti, and Roy Kinnear. But if you don't like humor in the vein of the Marx Brothers or Monty Python, this will probably grate on your nerves. Magical Mystery Tour was made entirely by The Beatles. They directed themselves, wrote it, and produced it. So, it doesn't have the professionalism Richard Lester's two films have. Even at under an hour, it tends to drag whenever there's not a song. But it's worth it for the musical sequences, especially Blue Jay Way, I Am the Walrus, and The Fool on the Hill. Let It Be manages to be quite boring and unsatisfying for an 80 min. movie. You get to see loosely edited footage of rehearsals, arguments, and random stuff. It's not until the brilliant "rooftop concert" that it becomes worthwhile. You're better off watching the episodes of The Beatles Anthology. The Compleat Beatles sucks, too. Two hours of rostrum camera and dry interviews with people who knew them. Only the material with George Martin is worth watching, but it's essentially stuff covered again in The Beatles Anthology.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2009 05:06
|
|
|
Netflix question: Is there any way to view a comprehensive list of a specific genre? For example, say I want to see all of the "Italian Horror" subgenre. When I go to Italian Horror and click see all, it shows about 3 pages of what seems to be randomly selected ones, but certainly not "all" of what Netflix has. I want a full list.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2009 07:45
|
|
|
caiman posted:Netflix question: Would they really have more than three pages of "Italian horror?" That seems like a fairly specific genre.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2009 15:11
|
|
|
When I go to "Italian Horror" I get 5 pages of titles*. When I go to "Foreign" I get 285 pages. So 5 pages of Italian Horror is probably all there is. * if you're only getting 3 pages, try checking the "Show rated/seen titles" box
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2009 17:19
|
|
|
I can't even name an Italian Horror film 
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2009 17:34
|
|
|
the posted:I can't even name an Italian Horror film Not even Suspiria? Read InfiniteZero's excellent giallo thread
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2009 17:40
|
|
|
the posted:I can't even name an Italian Horror film Lucio Fulci is coming out of his grave to remind you with Zombi 2...
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2009 00:23
|
|
|
Even after I check the "Show seen/rated" box, I still don't get them all. I tested it by searching for Lucio Fulci's The Beyond. It is tagged as Italian Horror, yet does not show up when browsing the genre.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2009 02:00
|
|
|
Thanks to the Giallo thread, I want to see some of the good examples. My first foray in was when I rented the Suspiria DVD from netflix. I couldn't make out anything anyone was saying but it had no subtitle\hearing impared track. Would there be a good legitimate place to find subtitles for DVDs so I can rent this again and enjoy it?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2009 22:48
|
|
|
Moeru posted:Thanks to the Giallo thread, I want to see some of the good examples. My first foray in was when I rented the Suspiria DVD from netflix. I couldn't make out anything anyone was saying but it had no subtitle\hearing impared track. Would there be a good legitimate place to find subtitles for DVDs so I can rent this again and enjoy it? If you can track down the Blue Underground 2 DVD release of Suspiria, it should have English subtitles included (at least, that's what the Blue Underground website says).
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2009 23:10
|
|
|
With all this talk about "The Hobbit" movies being in pre-production, I had to start watching my LOTR: EE again. I'm at the part when Gandalf returns to Bag End after he does some research and realizes Bilbo's ring may be THE ring. He throws into the fire, drops it in Frodo's hand and asks if anything happens to the ring. Frodo says some sort of writing appears: it's Elvish but can't read it. Gandalf says it's the language of Mordor. So..........is Sauron some sort of evil Elf? Is Mordor the cradle of Elvish civilization?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2009 14:10
|
|
|
SimpleSandwiches posted:With all this talk about "The Hobbit" movies being in pre-production, I had to start watching my LOTR: EE again. Ok how to answer this question first of all no Mordor is not the cradle of Elvish civilization the first elves were found by the Valar In the far eastern land of Cuiviénen, on the shores of the Inland Sea of Helcar and beneath the mountains of the Orocarni. As for Sauron he is a maia (A Spirit that came into the world at its creation as a sort of helper to the Valar who are the gods of middle earth) He was corrupted by the first dark lord Melkor back in the first age long beore the time of the ring. Its interesting as the Wizards (Gandal, Saruman) are also Maia spirits. But because of how Sauron was corrupted, when they are sent to aid the people of middle earth their powers are capped by the high lord of middle earth so that all they can do is advise. Now as for the origins of black speech not much is known apart from the fact that it is corrupted elvish created by Sauron for the benefit of his Minions. I hope this is clear enough if you need anymore Tolkien questions answered feel free i am a huge nerd for this stuff.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2009 15:01
|
|
|
What are good film magazines? I'm looking for something with the same quality and depth of writing as Cinefex has for special effects, but for the other parts of the movie-making process.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2009 03:43
|
|
|
dik-dik posted:What are good film magazines? I'm looking for something with the same quality and depth of writing as Cinefex has for special effects, but for the other parts of the movie-making process. The only real craft-focused mags I can think of are American Cinematographer and Creative Screenwriting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2009 07:36
|
|
|
Nabeshin_Afroman posted:Now as for the origins of black speech not much is known apart from the fact that it is corrupted elvish created by Sauron for the benefit of his Minions. Most likely due to the fact that orcs are corrupted elves.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2009 14:20
|
|
|
This a movie production question: In The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus (don't worry, no spoilers), all of the scenes Heath Ledger is in take place in the real world. His contemporaries who stepped in to play his character after he died all have parts in the fantasy world of the Imaginarium, which is almost completely done in CGI. My question is, when shooting a movie, don't the scenes with a lot of CGI get filmed first, so they can be completed while other shooting is done? Why would they have done it like that? It just seems weird that they filmed it in that order. Also, regarding Heather Ledger's death during filming, is there some kind of insurance in place should an actor die? Like if they knew he was a pill-popping train wreck, could they protect against it ahead of time? Just wondering how common that is.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2009 03:09
|
|
|
OK FOLKS posted:Also, regarding Heather Ledger's death during filming, is there some kind of insurance in place should an actor die? Like if they knew he was a pill-popping train wreck, could they protect against it ahead of time? Just wondering how common that is. If that sort of insurance were available, nobody would write a policy for a Terry Gilliam movie.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2009 03:34
|
|
|
The completion guarantee is sort of like "production insurance". If a movie is suddenly unable to continue filming and has to be abandoned, this is the mechanism that would trigger to handle all the lost investments.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2009 03:49
|
|
|
OK FOLKS posted:This a movie production question: IIRC the having everybody "step in" for Heath was the plan for the film long before Ledger's death. It was only retconned to be the show of solidarity once they could get more publicity for the film. SaintFu posted:If that sort of insurance were available, nobody would write a policy for a Terry Gilliam movie. Like haveblue said, the completion bond is pretty much the insurance. The bond company is the one that wound up with the footage for his Don Quixote movie in Lost in La Mancha.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2009 15:22
|
|
|
OK FOLKS posted:My question is, when shooting a movie, don't the scenes with a lot of CGI get filmed first, so they can be completed while other shooting is done? Why would they have done it like that? It just seems weird that they filmed it in that order. It takes a long time to complete the CGI scenes, so it actually makes perfect sense to film the live action sequences of those scenes first so they could be shipped off to whichever studio was doing the CGI as soon as possible so they could get to work on that. EDIT -- Reading comprehension issues (thanks Akuma) InfiniteZero fucked around with this message at 18:26 on Nov 30, 2009 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2009 16:16
|
|
|
haveblue posted:The completion guarantee is sort of like "production insurance". If a movie is suddenly unable to continue filming and has to be abandoned, this is the mechanism that would trigger to handle all the lost investments. Mostly true but there is specific insurance one gets for cast, which is a specific risk that the bond excludes. If the film is not deliverable because the specified cast or director have not fully rendered their services (eg you have a deal to France which specifies Jean Rochefort in the role of Quixote, or that Terry Giliam will be the film's director - if those elements are not in the finished film, the French distributor refuses delivery and is not obliged to pay what it has agreed to) then the production has to get what is called essential elements insurance, which covers those people deemed to be essential for various (contractual) reasons. Getting that insurance for someone like Jean Rochefort will be a lot harder and pricier than for someone young and healthy. In Lost In la Mancha, it was not the completion guarantor that ended up with the rights, but Gehrling, the insurance company which had underwritten the essential elements policy and had to pay up when Rochefort fell out of the film. That said, the bond was lucky that they weren't on the hook for that disaster. SaintFu posted:If that sort of insurance were available, nobody would write a policy for a Terry Gilliam movie. Gilliam can get a bond without too much hassle. Tideland, for instance, was bonded by Film Finances, and it came in on time and on budget. He can also get essential elements insurance as he is fit and healthy. How insurable the actors he casts are is dependent on the actor in question.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2009 16:40
|
|
|
InfiniteZero posted:It takes a long time to complete the CGI scenes, so it actually makes perfect sense to film the live action sequences of those scenes first so they could be shipped off to whichever studio was doing the CGI as soon as possible so they could get to work on that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2009 17:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 12:13 |
|
|
Akuma posted:Because OK FOLKS is saying they did it the opposite way; shot the non-CG scenes first. Well then that makes me quite the idiot I guess.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2009 18:25
|
|