|
doctor 7 posted:Still it seems like a good way to save money on using dollys, tracks, cranes and all sorts of poo poo. And even then you've got to have skill. When I think of how confusing, irritating, and nauseating real "in the moment" action can be, like amateur footage sent in to the local news or your uncle's home video of his trip to Italy, you can appreciate something like NARC where the camera chases one character at length through a neighbourhood in a full-on, hand-held sprint like something out of COPS. It's remarkably steady for what's actually going on. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWJ1IfpenII
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2011 21:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 23:07 |
|
|
Lobok posted:And even then you've got to have skill. This clip reminds me of a technique that really does bug me. Why is everything so goddamn blue? I hate that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2011 21:56
|
|
|
the Bunt posted:This clip reminds me of a technique that really does bug me. Why is everything so goddamn blue? I hate that. It's called Bleach Bypassing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2011 22:02
|
|
|
InfiniteZero posted:I would argue that they're not really pretentious at all because if they were, Lynch would give a poo poo if people didn't understand his films. He doesn't give a poo poo though. One of the reasons he's consistently interesting is probably because he isn't trying to meet anybody's particular expectation. Although their films aren't at all similar, it's something like the impression of Tarantino you get from watching his films. You can imagine Tarantino as a kid with a bunch of action figures, bashing them together and making `pew-pew' and `ker-pow' noises and talking about how cool everything is, man. In a similar way, Lynch is the kid who's performing a magic trick he's been practising for weeks for the first time in front of a crowd and he knows it's going well. And if I can get away with making another somewhat off-the-wall comparison, like John Waters, I always get the feeling that Lynch is always kinda sympathetic toward everyone in his films. That's not to say he agrees with all of them, or approves of them. But even when they're getting mileage out of how weird or obscene or grotesque their characters are, you get this feeling that it's never malicious or mean-spirited (as opposed to, say, Brian De Palma's films or Rob Zombie's, which sometimes seem to take unselfconscious glee in the grotesqueness).
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2011 22:31
|
|
|
Jay Dub posted:"Handheld" and "shakey-cam" aren't even the same thing. It's not a term you'd use on set. cloudchamber posted:It's called Bleach Bypassing. What? No. Bleach Bypassing is a way to desat the colors - in Narc it's probably using a color filter on the camera and pulling the colors towards blue in color correction.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2011 23:27
|
|
|
NeuroticErotica posted:What? No. Bleach Bypassing is a way to desat the colors - in Narc it's probably using a color filter on the camera and pulling the colors towards blue in color correction. Exactly. I don't understand why people think it's bleach bypass when it's pretty clearly filters and colour correction. Whenever people say this I just tell them to watch Three Kings as an example of bleach bypass.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2011 23:30
|
|
|
NeuroticErotica posted:What? No. Bleach Bypassing is a way to desat the colors - in Narc it's probably using a color filter on the camera and pulling the colors towards blue in color correction. Oh, I just remember hearing that Minority Report was shot using bleach bypassing and that film's bluer than, I don't know, blue.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2011 23:42
|
|
|
I was watching the Godfather on AMC Saturday, and the mansion the Producer lives in, was that used in another movie? I know I've seen it somewhere. Also, when the Producer says "she was the best piece of rear end I ever had!" AMC changed rear end to Stuff. This confused me. Couldn't they have said tail? Stuff just makes sense. Is there any standards for TV edits, or do the broadcasters change it themselves? twistedmentat fucked around with this message at 07:10 on Feb 15, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2011 07:06
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:I was watching the Godfather on AMC Saturday, and the mansion the Producer lives in, was that used in another movie? I know I've seen it somewhere. The Beverly House, previously known as the Hearst compound. "The Hearst compound, which sits on 6.5 acres on a hilltop above the Beverly Hills Hotel, was built in 1926 and featured in the film, "The Godfather." The estate consists of six separate residences with a total of 29 bedrooms and more than 50,000 square feet of living space, three swimming pools and a movie theater. It is arguably the most famous property in Beverly Hills. The H-shaped mansion has massive gardens original landscaped by Paul Thiene, a stone-paved motor court and it's where Jacqueline and John F. Kennedy honeymooned" sursumdeorsum fucked around with this message at 17:03 on Feb 15, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2011 16:30
|
|
|
er wrong thread
pike fucked around with this message at 21:01 on Feb 15, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2011 20:58
|
|
|
sursumdeorsum posted:The Beverly House, previously known as the Hearst compound. Interesting. I must have seen a documentary on Hearst or something, because I know I've seen it on tv somewhere else.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2011 08:36
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:I was watching the Godfather on AMC Saturday, and the mansion the Producer lives in, was that used in another movie? I know I've seen it somewhere. I think in your specific example, Godfather was never intended to be viewed on broadcast TV, and the censoring was likely an afterthought. Also in 1972 when the movie came out, TV rebroadcasts were not things that were done often or accounted for*. Movies had much longer runs in theaters (on average). If a movie does poorly in theaters it hangs around for 2-3 weeks today where I don't believe it would be unusual for movies in the 70's to hang around in theaters for several months, just so the maximum number of people could view them. The thing to remember when it comes to the FCC and standards is that your rule is "Lowest Common Denominator". What is the least offensive version/word that I could use in place of it's more offensive cousin? And with that in mind, the reason "stuff" was used is because back then you may not have been able to even use "tail" in that regard on TV. Keep in mind you could only say 'rear end' "if you were riding one on a religious feast day". Look at old TV from just before that time, a married couple had to sleep in separate beds (till the 60's). Bathrooms consisted of sink and shower, but no toilet (70's). You couldn't even say the word "pregnant" on TV for a while (60's). We've come a long way. I believe that there are generally two versions of any scene with "adult language": Obviously the original version, and the cleaned version. I think some movies are now filmed with TV rebroadcasts in mind and certain scenes that can't be cut are re-filmed with less offensive language as opposed to just dubbed over**. *Not that it never happened, just that Coppola likely never though to himself "This is gonna be huge when NBC shows this in 5 years. Better clean it up." **probably not true, but they should do this so you don't get "Monkey Fighting Snakes" tl;dr: The FCC probably didn't allow any euphemism for "rear end" at the time The Godfather was cleaned for TV, and typically only one "clean" version of any movie is produced to save costs of editing/re-dubbing multiple times.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 05:26
|
|
|
CzarChasm posted:I believe that there are generally two versions of any scene with "adult language": Obviously the original version, and the cleaned version. I think some movies are now filmed with TV rebroadcasts in mind and certain scenes that can't be cut are re-filmed with less offensive language as opposed to just dubbed over**. I've never seen it, but apparently the broadcast version of The Big Lebowski has John Goodman shouting "This is what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps!" as he destroys the Corvette.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 05:45
|
|
|
SaintFu posted:I've never seen it, but apparently the broadcast version of The Big Lebowski has John Goodman shouting "This is what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps!" as he destroys the Corvette. Along with the equally absurd, yet not as iconic "This is what happens when you feed a stoner scrambled eggs!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 06:21
|
|
|
A really bizarre edit I saw the other day was when watching Talladega Nights on TBS they edited out the punchline to the Highlander joke. In the original version its "By the way, I saw the Highlander movie... it was poo poo!" They edited out the "it was poo poo" part so its no longer a joke and just some bizarre random comment.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 12:45
|
|
|
CzarChasm posted:I think in your specific example, Godfather was never intended to be viewed on broadcast TV, and the censoring was likely an afterthought. Also in 1972 when the movie came out, TV rebroadcasts were not things that were done often or accounted for*. Movies had much longer runs in theaters (on average). If a movie does poorly in theaters it hangs around for 2-3 weeks today where I don't believe it would be unusual for movies in the 70's to hang around in theaters for several months, just so the maximum number of people could view them. Interestingly, the Godfather (and Godfather II) is one of those movies that has a special cut for TV: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Godfather_Saga I've never seen it, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 17:59
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Interestingly, the Godfather (and Godfather II) is one of those movies that has a special cut for TV: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Godfather_Saga Yea, this is what I figured that they'd do, have TV cuts for films that they can send out. Though I do find it interesting that AMC would cut out swear words out of films, but leave that in their shows. It was even 12am when I was watching it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 20:28
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:Yea, this is what I figured that they'd do, have TV cuts for films that they can send out. Right but again, AMC almost certainly didn't cut it, they just used a broadcast cut from who knows how many years and FCC regulations ago. This particular discrepancy is just due to laziness on their part, but the general schizophrenic attitude toward swearing on basic cable is because the channels are being pulled in two directions, and free from FCC regulations they aren't quite sure how to proceed. The public at large wants HBO style everything goes dramas, but the advertisers who actually pay for this stuff are terrified of pissing off grandma. The new freedom in drama is only a recent change anyway, so there's a lot of holdover for everything else.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 20:40
|
|
|
Lobok posted:And even then you've got to have skill.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 22:20
|
|
|
I just saw just 'the scene' from Brown Bunny, and I just have to say what was Chloe Sevigny thinking? That's not graphic, it is just a straight hardcore porn scene. Even the whole posing and kneeling on front of the guy is straight out of 'Cum in My Mouth Vol. 5: Coed Edition'.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2011 01:57
|
|
EVERYTHING I SAY ABOUT JAPAN OR LIVING IN JAPAN IS COMPLETELY WRONG, BUT YOU BETTER BELIEVE I'LL 
ABOUT IT.
|
kapalama posted:I just saw just 'the scene' from Brown Bunny, and I just have to say what was Chloe Sevigny thinking? That's not graphic, it is just a straight hardcore porn scene. Did you bother with watching the rest of the movie? That kinda explains it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2011 01:59
|
|
|
NeuroticErotica posted:Did you bother with watching the rest of the movie? That kinda explains it. Yeah I am kinda weird about sex in movies. I like porn, and I like movies, but I kind of hate love scenes in movies because they are working of a weird view of how people have sex, that you see people imitating IRL because they saw it in a movie. In interacting with Japanese women, this really jumped out at me: they saw love scenes in Western movies and they kept trying to act them out with the white guy . I ended up feeling like I was just not important to what was going on. They just needed a white guy to act out particular movie scenes with, forgetting that movie scenes are staged so that the camera can see things, not so that it properly portrays what happens in real life. (Of course, the scene did not just fade to black like Purple Rose of Cairo because modern movies show the sex.) That scene in Brown Bunny jumped out at me for being informed stylistically by random hardcore porn, rather than being anything about how real people interact sexually. (other than people like Travis Bickle, or apparently Vincent Gallo, who think porn is just a regular movie who then reintegrate porn portrayals into their own life, or their own movies.) It might even make sense in the frame of the movie, which I have not seen, but then you have to wonder if he framed the movie to make that scene (which he has scene in a porn film) make sense in a movie. A movie(Art) about life, where Life is imitating 'Art(pron)'.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2011 02:15
|
|
|
Saw this outside an antiques store and it looked techy and bizarre enough to catch my eye. It weighs about 15 pounds so I'd love to know if it was worth hauling it home. Near as I can tell it's an old Moviola synchronizer for 35mm film. I can find very little about it on the internet. It has two info plates on it. The one on the front gives its model as "SYB" and serial number 1513. The one on the back says: quote:CINETECH COMPANY, Inc Can anyone tell me more about this thing? I don't so much care about its appraisal value, more whether it's notable or historic in some way.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2011 04:34
|
|
|
kapalama posted:In interacting with Japanese women, this really jumped out at me: they saw love scenes in Western movies and they kept trying to act them out with the white guy . I ended up feeling like I was just not important to what was going on. They just needed a white guy to act out particular movie scenes with, forgetting that movie scenes are staged so that the camera can see things, not so that it properly portrays what happens in real life.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2011 20:50
|
|
|
kapalama posted:Yeah I am kinda weird about sex in movies. I like porn, and I like movies, but I kind of hate love scenes in movies because they are working of a weird view of how people have sex, that you see people imitating IRL because they saw it in a movie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2011 23:17
|
|
|
kapalama posted:That scene in Brown Bunny jumped out at me for being informed stylistically by random hardcore porn, rather than being anything about how real people interact sexually. I don't want to blow your mind or anything, but in real life people "interact sexually" in a whole bunch of different ways.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2011 23:32
|
|
|
InfiniteZero posted:I don't want to blow your mind or anything, but in real life people "interact sexually" in a whole bunch of different ways. People do a lot of things a lot of different ways. It's when they do it the exact same way it's done in movies, that you get the 'Life imitating Art' or at least what they saw in a movie, that these things jump out at you. People who study these things say that one of the nice things to come out of the glorification of guns in gang media portrayals is that real people have started holding their guns sideways (cause they saw it in the movies and it looked cool), and shooing with your gun sideways is much less accurate, thus much less deadly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2011 02:16
|
|
|
kapalama posted:People do a lot of things a lot of different ways. It's when they do it the exact same way it's done in movies, that you get the 'Life imitating Art' or at least what they saw in a movie, that these things jump out at you. I'm really not getting your point here, especially your comparison to gun handling. Are you saying its a bad scene, or that it's unhealthy to show sex like that? Have you at least looked up the film to gain context or? Honestly I don't think there is such a thing as normal or realistic sexual interaction.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2011 03:02
|
|
|
kapalama posted:People do a lot of things a lot of different ways. It's when they do it the exact same way it's done in movies, that you get the 'Life imitating Art' or at least what they saw in a movie, that these things jump out at you. What the hell are you babbling about?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2011 03:35
|
|
|
kapalama posted:In interacting with Japanese women, this really jumped out at me: they saw love scenes in Western movies and they kept trying to act them out with the white guy . I ended up feeling like I was just not important to what was going on. They just needed a white guy to act out particular movie scenes with, forgetting that movie scenes are staged so that the camera can see things, not so that it properly portrays what happens in real life. (Of course, the scene did not just fade to black like Purple Rose of Cairo because modern movies show the sex.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2011 03:55
|
|
|
the Bunt posted:What the hell are you babbling about? Weird stories about foreign women aside, I think the general idea is that movie sex is very modest, distant, and somewhat ritualistic, to the point where it's very similar in most movies (because of ratings and stuff). While it's a little presumptuous to say that it's not normal, I'm pretty sure that having sex like it's portrayed in the movies (think PG-13) would be clumsy and difficult.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2011 05:00
|
|
|
the Bunt posted:What the hell are you babbling about?  I think he's saying that strange and unorthodox sex techniques emulated by those watching films are good because they cut down on teen pregnancies? Personally when I think of sex on film I think of Enemy at the Gates http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fi9cYU_k-tc or A Fish Called Wanda http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1YgfxjP-aU Real sex lies somewhere between these two chasms.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2011 05:25
|
|
|
the Bunt posted:What the hell are you babbling about? Never question the neckbeard Casanova of Japan.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2011 05:50
|
|
|
kapalama posted:real people have started holding their guns sideways I don't know what this means. Sounds like something you heard from D.A.R.E.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2011 12:25
|
|
|
The concept of art/media replacing life experience is not that new or confusing, you guys are just jumping on the kook because he bothered to bring Japanese women into the equation. And everybody knows only the gooniest of goons talk about Japanese women As I understand it, kapalama is talking about the disconnect between real life and what people perceive as real life. Films are a collective vision of life, and when somebody watches a movie with scenes depicting things a viewer does not have much experience with, the movie becomes the viewer's life experience. So if a sheltered Japanese schoolgirl sees Chloe taking a load in her mouth or whatever (which is Gallo's interpretation/perception of real sex, albeit as kapalama argues, shown through his individual lens that is colored by his viewing of pornography), she assumes that it is normal operating procedure and attempts to reenact that with each partner. So when a kid sees some gangsters holding their guns sideways for whatever reason, he just thinks it's normal/cooler than holding it regularly. And honestly Gaggins, do you just not speak English? How do you not know what "real people have started holding their guns sideways" means?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 01:14
|
|
|
That Brown Bunny question made me wonder, is Chloë Sevigny the biggest actress do have done an explicit scene in a movie? I know she's not on the A list, but she's not exactly unknown either. I know its not uncommon in Europe, so I'd discount that, or any porn actresses that have moved over to mainstream film.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 01:24
|
|
|
Not an actress, but there's Rip Torn's "dick microphone" scene in The Man Who Fell to Earth.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 01:29
|
|
|
So I'm watching Superman/Shazam!: The return of Black Adam and it begins with an interior shot of a comic book store. It's probably just a set but I could swear I have been to this comic book shop. I think it was on my trip to NYC several years back. Am I crazy or is this a real place? Maybe this would be a better post for BSS....
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 01:45
|
|
|
I haven't seen that yet, but if it was New York it could be Midtown Comics. They're in Times Square so they're probably the most well known comic book store.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 01:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 23:07 |
|
|
The Maestro posted:The concept of art/media replacing life experience is not that new or confusing, you guys are just jumping on the kook because he bothered to bring Japanese women into the equation. And everybody knows only the gooniest of goons talk about Japanese women The problem with both the Sevigny posts and the Japanese women posts is that he's not actually specifying what is so weird and un-natural, and therefore we have no idea if he's making a real point about art replacing life or if he just can't fathom that people have sex in different ways. I've seen the Brown Bunny scene and I honestly have no idea what the gently caress he's talking about when it comes to the scene being different than how real people interact. It looked fine to me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 04:13
|
|
