|
ClydeUmney posted:I really, really like The Treatment, with Elvis Mitchell. Mitchell is one of the best interviewers around, and he has a habit of either really creating deep conversations about the film or exposing the director as an idiot who doesn't know what they're talking about. Either way, I really like it. More info here: http://www.kcrw.com/etc/programs/tt I've always been a fan of Elvis Mitchell's reviews. Had no idea he did these podcasts. Which episodes are the best?
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2010 02:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 15:15 |
|
|
ONE YEAR LATER posted:Filmspotting is really good. Seconding this. The Filmspotting forums are decent as well, although organized horribly. Also check out the /Filmcast. The first half of each show the 3-4 dudes talk about what they've been watching and film news. I've discovered a few great movies from this podcast (such as The Vicious Kind recently). The 2nd half is a standard review including both non-spoiler/spoiler segments.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2010 03:07
|
|
|
codyclarke posted:I've always been a fan of Elvis Mitchell's reviews. Had no idea he did these podcasts. Which episodes are the best? Hard to say. Tarantino is always a great interview on here, as is Aronofsky. More recently, Bobcat Goldthwait was awesome - he was obviously a big fan and it showed. And Tod Philips' interview for The Hangover was really bizarre - it's all going fine and then he just starts getting pissy and attacking Elvis for panning Old School. Really odd. Honestly, I can only think of a few bad ones. Pretty much every interview is fascinating, even if only for Mitchell. I've ended up really learning a lot about movies that I liked (I really loved the interview with Refn for Bronson) and being way more curious about stuff I would have never checked out. It's well worth just subscribing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2010 03:08
|
|
|
ClydeUmney posted:Hard to say. Tarantino is always a great interview on here, as is Aronofsky. More recently, Bobcat Goldthwait was awesome - he was obviously a big fan and it showed. And Tod Philips' interview for The Hangover was really bizarre - it's all going fine and then he just starts getting pissy and attacking Elvis for panning Old School. Really odd.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2010 18:36
|
|
|
This is a shot in the dark, but has anyone heard of a BJ McDonnell? I'm not sure if it's the same guy who's the steadicam operator ( http://www.mcdonnellsteadicam.com/ ). My work email is one of literally 100s (based on the CCd list) that is getting extremely bizarre, ranting messages from this guy claiming his father, George Lucas and others are using ideas and scripts culled from some kind of journal that was stolen. The bizarre punctuation and impossible claims point to a mentally disturbed individual, but with such a wide net cast I'm surprised I can't find a mention of him anywhere. I've gotten three emails so far, and I honestly hope the don't stop. The latest had the subject "REWRITTING MY BOOT SECTOR! CLONING MY HARD DRIVE! ALL THEY FOUND OUT! IS HOW MANY PEOPLE I SEND MY WORK TOO!" and a random page of script apparently about Quasimodo as an Irish Ultimate Fighter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2010 18:56
|
|
|
Egbert Souse posted:I hate Mrs. Doubtfire with the rage of a million suns. With the dubbing cartoons bit, I assumed that he was being hired to do the voices because the original recording quality wasn't that good so they had to re-do it or something. It's pretty obvious that they do the voices first so I just thought that was the answer - makes more sense than them doing the animation first, anyway. And he was just taking the first job that was offered so he can show that he's gainfully employed so he can have access to his kids - not that far fetched since he's just been fired from the voice acting job so might find it difficult to get work there. And the rest are just standard movie cliches so it's pretty easy to gloss over.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2010 21:32
|
|
|
The Remote Viewer posted:Are there any good 'serious' film podcasts? (By serious I mean the opposite of something like AICN's previews) Mondomovie Podcast has been my favorite for a couple years now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2010 23:45
|
|
|
This probably sounds like a request that Google could fill, but I wanted someone's personal recommendation. Does anyone know of a good website that talks about common techniques in film making and special effects? I want to get a basic understanding of things like steadicams, tracking shots, rotoscoping, compositing, and other related techniques. I'm not trying to be a film maker, I just want to be a better film watcher when it comes to the technical side of things.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2010 00:20
|
|
|
VFXworld had some nice articles but lately they all sort of read like ads.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2010 01:31
|
|
|
Goons hate him because he dislikes their favorite movies but Mark Kermode is where it is at.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2010 08:31
|
|
|
poonchasta posted:This probably sounds like a request that Google could fill, but I wanted someone's personal recommendation. Does anyone know of a good website that talks about common techniques in film making and special effects? I want to get a basic understanding of things like steadicams, tracking shots, rotoscoping, compositing, and other related techniques. I'm not trying to be a film maker, I just want to be a better film watcher when it comes to the technical side of things. I've always liked this site for an easy to understand, yet rather comprehensive explanation of foley (and also goes into pretty much all aspects of film sound, though some of the sections aren't written in detail yet).
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2010 18:42
|
|
|
poonchasta posted:This probably sounds like a request that Google could fill, but I wanted someone's personal recommendation. Does anyone know of a good website that talks about common techniques in film making and special effects? I want to get a basic understanding of things like steadicams, tracking shots, rotoscoping, compositing, and other related techniques. I'm not trying to be a film maker, I just want to be a better film watcher when it comes to the technical side of things. Wikipedia is actually pretty good for a lot of stuff. There are also some great, beginner friendly books that I know of (that are fairly cheap, too.) I meant to post links to them when someone earlier in the thread was asking what you are asking but specified books. Finally, there are a few people here who work in the industry who, judging by my own observation (and speaking for myself, of course) are more than happy to share their knowledge. I know that coming up with your own questions and then waiting for a response isn't as engaging as following a bunch of hyperlinks wherever they take you... but it never hurts to ask and they conversation might turn to things you didn't even know enough to ask about. Anyway, for reference, I work as an Assistant Editor/VFX Editor. I'm trying to finish out the longest, biggest job of my career, a 3-D movie slated for release in late summer. Anyway, working in the picture editing department means that ultimately I have to know a lot about about cinematography, visual effects, and sound work in addition to understanding editing technique. I am pretty busy with work so I don't have a ton of time to answer questions, but I dunno, maybe the rest of the Something Awful industry pros could all pitch in and we could do an Ask/Tell thread... Meanwhile, I'll try to dig up some links. EDITED: I changed "photography" to "cinematography" because while I do have a deeper than average understanding of photographic technique and lighting... I am the wrong person to explain things like T-stops or whatever. I know enough about general photography to have a deep understanding of what cinematography is, though. Hope that distinction is clear. Anyway, I guess the broader point is that 98% of what I do as an Assistant Editor doesn't demand that I understand VFX, sound, or cinematography... and a lot of people in my position don't bother learning about that stuff, but I am constantly trying to expand my knowledge for the same reasons you are- to be a better film watcher. In my situation I hope that it does help me advance my career- and I was educating myself long before I entered the profession (never went to film school.) Part of why I am eager to offer help to you is that I admire your inclination to "watch movies better" just for the sake of your own enjoyment. We work insanely hard, even on shitbag movies, but most of what we do is supposed to be invisible, so it's always nice to know that there are some folks out there who will appreciate the work. 2ND EDIT: Out of curiosity I went to check out what Wikipedia has to say about roto and composite work, and I really can't stress enough that it has become a really great place to learn about stuff like that. I mean, on Sunday I was working until midnight rotoscoping and keying a computer monitor effect... but it would take me forever to describe everything I was doing on this specific shot. For an overview, Wikipedia really is pretty great. Five Cent Deposit fucked around with this message at 19:41 on Mar 31, 2010 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2010 19:12
|
|
|
Five Cent Deposit posted:maybe the rest of the Something Awful industry pros could all pitch in and we could do an Ask/Tell thread... That would actually be pretty interesting. I tried to start a thread one time about working in post-audio, but it never really took off. There's only so much I can say about my job before it becomes redundant.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2010 19:26
|
|
|
Guys, I need help and the sooner the better. I went to see How to Train Your Dragon for a second time, and I saw it with a bunch of friends, but the picture was really cropped. It was really close, words that were on the edges of the frame were cut in half (and illegible) and characters would constantly be talking from outside of the loving frame. It was infuriating. I tried googling what could have been going on with the projector, but the best I can get is overscan? I am writing a complaint, I guess, to Empire Theatres (I wish there was a better way to get to them than the "survey" on their main website... I googled for someone who works there's e-mail but found nothing there, either). I left the theatre ten minutes in to ask someone to fix it, she said she would radio up. I went back, sat down, it was still zoomed-in... cropped, overscanned? I left a second time, before the halfway point, and asked an usher in a dark uniform (usually they're managers) who was pulling tickets, told her about it, and that it was the second time, and she said she'd be on it. I went back in, and sat down... 20 minutes later, it is still not fixed. Everything is super loving cramped an annoying. There was a manager walking the theatre, and I was in the very back so I grabbed him and asked him if he could fix it, and I explained to him that the image was being cut-off. Ten minutes later, the screen wiggles in and out for a second, but nothing is changed. I was pissed. I don't know what the exact term is, and I need to know, because I'm sending an e-mail off. When the movie was over I was talking to the dude, and he was telling me that the "ratio on the hard-disk they gave us" was what was on the screen, but I told him I watched it in another theatre (in the same... Theatre) and it was fine. What is it called! Sorry for the rage post, but I'm pissed. He didn't care if I was happy or not and I was polite the entire time, I know what it's like to work in retail and I was trying to get it fixed... but I left the theatre twice and asked three times. gently caress that. I didn't get a refund or anything.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 00:40
|
|
|
Penpal posted:I didn't get a refund or anything. Did you explicitly tell him you wanted a refund? They're generally not going to offer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 00:43
|
|
|
Yeah, he said I couldn't because I stayed for the entire film.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 00:47
|
|
|
Penpal posted:Yeah, he said I couldn't because I stayed for the entire film. Is it a chain theater? Escalate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 00:49
|
|
|
The Remote Viewer posted:Is it a chain theater? Escalate. Empire Theatres, the biggest (and really only) theatre chain in the eastern provinces of Canada. They're all across the country, but mostly situated right here. I am just really pissed off. It was incredibly incredibly distracting. But characters were constantly half in the frame and poo poo like that, it was just annoying as gently caress. I don't have the e-mail of the President, and I don't think I want to e-mail the dude with my little problem. I think that might be too much. But I paid like 13 bucks to see a movie in a chain theatre that didn't have their poo poo together, which sucked. Is the term still Overscan? Because apparently that term is dated, I don't know if there is special projector lingo. Also, finding President's and CEO's emails is tough. forest spirit fucked around with this message at 00:58 on Apr 2, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 00:55
|
|
|
In the new Sherlock Holmes with Robert Downey Jr., my friend and I have been arguing over whether or not Lord Blackwood murdered the midget, or whether it was Moriarty's doing. It doesn't make any sense to me for Blackwood to do it, since it seems to me that he'd want to keep the midget around to make up more chemistry magic. Besides which, he must have known that Sherlock would be able to figure everything out from the clues left on the body. My theory is that Moriarty killed him and planted the corpse as a way of getting Sherlock to do his dirty work for him. My friend thinks this is stupid, because Moriarty could have just bought the midget off and gotten the machine that way. What do you guys think?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 03:28
|
|
|
Penpal posted:Empire Theatres, the biggest (and really only) theatre chain in the eastern provinces of Canada. They're all across the country, but mostly situated right here. I am just really pissed off. It was incredibly incredibly distracting. But characters were constantly half in the frame and poo poo like that, it was just annoying as gently caress. I don't have the e-mail of the President, and I don't think I want to e-mail the dude with my little problem. I think that might be too much. But I paid like 13 bucks to see a movie in a chain theatre that didn't have their poo poo together, which sucked. I've had this problem with a few theaters in NYC. Never had a single theater actually fix the problem, which makes me wonder if it even can be fixed while the projector is still running. I know nothing about projectors though. When I've asked for a refund I've gotten one. I usually just describe it as the picture being cropped and they know what I mean. Barely anyone complains about this though, I've only seen a few other people besides myself mention anything or ask for a refund, and this was for movies where names in the opening credits were cut in half. Similarly, I've been to a lot of movies where the focus was off. I've found that to be way more common than cropping. Vincent Gallo, after being pissed off at the focus being off in theaters showing Buffalo '66, made his Gray Daisy production company logo a focus chart, so that when the focus was off on The Brown Bunny at a theater, he would know instantly and could point it out directly to the staff, without seeming like he's just nitpicking and crazy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 03:40
|
|
|
TonTon posted:In the new Sherlock Holmes with Robert Downey Jr., my friend and I have been arguing over whether or not Lord Blackwood murdered the midget, or whether it was Moriarty's doing. It doesn't make any sense to me for Blackwood to do it, since it seems to me that he'd want to keep the midget around to make up more chemistry magic. Besides which, he must have known that Sherlock would be able to figure everything out from the clues left on the body. My theory is that Moriarty killed him and planted the corpse as a way of getting Sherlock to do his dirty work for him. My friend thinks this is stupid, because Moriarty could have just bought the midget off and gotten the machine that way. But the midget was part of the pentagram, so he was essential to whatever occult practice Blackwood was pretending to do. And I don't think Moriarty had any real reason to put his murder victim in someone else' coffin.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 04:15
|
|
|
codyclarke posted:Barely anyone complains about this though, I've only seen a few other people besides myself mention anything or ask for a refund, and this was for movies where names in the opening credits were cut in half. People just don't give a poo poo. Ever go to someone's house and they're watching a 4:3 program on their 16:9 HDTV all stretched out? They don't give a poo poo. As long as they can pretty much see the actors, they don't give a poo poo. Nobody gives as poo poo. It loving sucks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 05:11
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:People just don't give a poo poo. Ever go to someone's house and they're watching a 4:3 program on their 16:9 HDTV all stretched out? They don't give a poo poo. As long as they can pretty much see the actors, they don't give a poo poo. Nobody gives as poo poo. It loving sucks. That drives me nuts! A friend recently bought a big HDTV, but doesn't have HD service. All of his shows were 4:3 stretched to 16:9, and he didn't seem to care. Why buy the HDTV, then?! (besides for the occasional Blu-Ray disc) He didn't even know how to fix it, when I pointed it out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 07:40
|
|
|
Is it even possible to buy a new TV that isn't a flatscreen HDTV at a non-specialty retailer any more?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 07:42
|
|
|
I have no idea what the gently caress "cropped" is supposed to mean. Is there some sort of visual aid someone can give me to understand this, because I bet if I saw it, I could figure out what the gently caress they're doing wrong in like ten seconds.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 07:47
|
|
|
The Cameo posted:I have no idea what the gently caress "cropped" is supposed to mean. Is there some sort of visual aid someone can give me to understand this, because I bet if I saw it, I could figure out what the gently caress they're doing wrong in like ten seconds. 
codyclarke fucked around with this message at 07:56 on Apr 2, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 07:53
|
|
|
codyclarke posted:Clever way of showing that.  That would be the aperture plate being set to "flat" for a scope film, I imagine. At least, the 2D version of Dragon is scope. All they would have to do is slide the plate to the correct aperture, really. It's sad that by working with projectors from the 60s (I think; they might be older), I've become more aware than projectionists at more modern theaters. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 08:05
|
|
|
Rake Arms posted:But the midget was part of the pentagram, so he was essential to whatever occult practice Blackwood was pretending to do. And I don't think Moriarty had any real reason to put his murder victim in someone else' coffin. I think I'm just going to have to watch it again, really. I see what you're saying, but I thought the pentacle was already complete, and now he was working on the four points on the cross. Bull, man, eagle and lion. I can't remember where the midget was killed offhand.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 08:12
|
|
|
TonTon posted:I think I'm just going to have to watch it again, really. I see what you're saying, but I thought the pentacle was already complete, and now he was working on the four points on the cross. Bull, man, eagle and lion. I can't remember where the midget was killed offhand. You're right about that, actually, but the point still stands that only Blackwood would any reason to complete the cross. My guess is that Blackwood had all that he needed from the midget and killed him to cover his tracks. I think Moriarty would have preferred him alive anyway, since his ultimate goal was to recover or duplicate the radio detonator device.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 10:15
|
|
|
I just saw The Ghost Writer and I had a question. The Ghost calls the number on the back of the photo once he gets checked into the hotel near the ferry. We know at this point the number belongs to Adam Lang's old friend Richard Rycart. My question is this: why was Rycart in Massachusetts already? I thought he was doing his press conferences from England, yet when The Ghost calls him, he shows up the same night. Did I miss something?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 11:31
|
|
|
I'm working on a presentation on Greek history for a cultural class and was wondering if anyone knows of a film with a decent shot of ancient Athens, capturing if not the whole city then at least some of the major landscapes and general cityscape.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 18:10
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:People just don't give a poo poo. Ever go to someone's house and they're watching a 4:3 program on their 16:9 HDTV all stretched out? They don't give a poo poo. As long as they can pretty much see the actors, they don't give a poo poo. Nobody gives as poo poo. It loving sucks. I visited my parents recently (who have a new HDTV) and my father told me to make sure that every time a show came on in 4:3 (or in his words "has the black bars on the sides") to switch it so it gets stretched out. He said the guy at the store told him that the black bars could burn the image into the screen and hurt the picture. Even if the show is only half an hour. I recall TVs having those kinds of problems years ago, but is it still an issue? From what you guys are saying, it sounds like it's not a problem.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 18:18
|
|
|
It's not a problem.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 18:29
|
|
|
OctoberBlues posted:I visited my parents recently (who have a new HDTV) and my father told me to make sure that every time a show came on in 4:3 (or in his words "has the black bars on the sides") to switch it so it gets stretched out. He said the guy at the store told him that the black bars could burn the image into the screen and hurt the picture. Even if the show is only half an hour. I recall TVs having those kinds of problems years ago, but is it still an issue? From what you guys are saying, it sounds like it's not a problem. I think it used to be a problem with rear-projection TVs. I had one that would put gray bars instead of black on the sides to minimize burn-in. But, with modern screens (LCD, plasma, etc.) it shouldn't happen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 19:29
|
|
|
OctoberBlues posted:I visited my parents recently (who have a new HDTV) and my father told me to make sure that every time a show came on in 4:3 (or in his words "has the black bars on the sides") to switch it so it gets stretched out. He said the guy at the store told him that the black bars could burn the image into the screen and hurt the picture. Even if the show is only half an hour. I recall TVs having those kinds of problems years ago, but is it still an issue? From what you guys are saying, it sounds like it's not a problem. It's only a problem if you leave the TV on that setting constantly for something like 6 months. You can see it in the TVs at airport terminals, the ones that constantly show arrival and departure times. Those screens are burned in, but they're constantly on the same kind of image for many months at a time. People are so scared of new technology, it's amazing. I leave my HDTV for hours on screens like that all the time, and it's been fine for 4 years now (knock on wood). By the way, every time I have been helped by someone at a Best Buy store, or anything like it, they've given me false information. Many years ago, one guy insisted an 80 hour Tivo records 80 hours of the highest quality setting. I knew he was full of poo poo, but he was just so sure of himself. I bought it anyway, only because I anticipated that he was lying and it was such a steal. Tivo - already an anachronism. So glad I didn't buy the "lifetime service" package.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 20:40
|
|
|
Ah, good to know. I'm sure my father will never be convinced and always insist on stretching it, but at least I can try to inform him now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 20:42
|
|
|
The Cameo posted:Clever way of showing that. You wouldn't happen to know (or be able to find out easily) what the problem could be with a digital projector, would you? The manager of the theatre e-mailed me back, and said I could call him when he's back next week but I have no clue what to call it other than "cropped" or something or other. I wish I had a technical term so I could at least not sound like I'm making poo poo up. if not, that's cool!
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 20:52
|
|
|
OctoberBlues posted:Ah, good to know. I'm sure my father will never be convinced and always insist on stretching it, but at least I can try to inform him now. I hope your parents actually listen. My wife's parents don't believe anything I say because they are older than me and know better. They stretch everything and it fills me with rage.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 20:53
|
|
|
FishBulb posted:I hope your parents actually listen. My wife's parents don't believe anything I say because they are older than me and know better. Do you show them the difference between 4:3 correctly displayed and when it's stretched out? It's kind of hard to dispute the obvious evidence.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 21:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 15:15 |
|
|
VorpalBunny posted:Do you show them the difference between 4:3 correctly displayed and when it's stretched out? It's kind of hard to dispute the obvious evidence. Yeah you don't know them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 21:20
|
|