|
Friedpundit posted:Repo's Man's generic brand was from Ralph's, or based off of Ralph's, I don't remember. Unless Ralph's sold cans just labeled as "FOOD" then based off of.
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2013 07:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 01:44 |
|
|
Barudak posted:Fun fact on product placement; Beer companies are typically very uptight about being featured in a movie if a character is just pounding them to pound them or goes and does something stupid/dangerous/horrible while drunk. When the went to make Hellboy no beer company was willing to be Satan's child's beer of choice for his benders except Tecate who were just thrilled to be in a movie. Same deal for Adam Carolla's movie The Hammer. Seems to be a thing around Tecate HQ that they just don't give a poo poo
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2013 03:52
|
|
|
Tecate has that hilarious promotion for boxing PPV's where if you buy a twelve pack of Tecate and show them the receipt for it plus a bill for the PPV, you get 25 dollars off. They know what side their bread is buttered on, nobody's going to think Tecate is some kind of aspirational adult beverage.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2013 14:16
|
|
|
Watching Barry Lyndon for the first time in years, I noticed that when Lady Lyndon slaps Lord Bullingdon after he will not kiss Barry his reaction to me could only be construed as genuine surprise and shock. I feel when watching this scene that Kubrick did not tell the young actor the slap was coming to get that reaction. Knowing what I know about Kubrick's treatment of his actors, him terrifying Shelley Duvall to get her into a state of near nervous breakdown being the most infamous example, was this the case?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2013 14:45
|
|
|
He's also known for making dozens of takes of a shot. And I think the Shelley Duvall mistreatment idea is overblown. From watching the Shining making of documentary she seems very difficult to work with, and his attitude towards her probably stemmed from that, not some cruel calculation. This is the same movie where he didn't even tell the child actor he was working on a horror film, so he doesn't seem all that fanatical about method acting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2013 20:04
|
|
|
Gweenz posted:Watching Barry Lyndon for the first time in years, I noticed that when Lady Lyndon slaps Lord Bullingdon after he will not kiss Barry his reaction to me could only be construed as genuine surprise and shock. I feel when watching this scene that Kubrick did not tell the young actor the slap was coming to get that reaction. Knowing what I know about Kubrick's treatment of his actors, him terrifying Shelley Duvall to get her into a state of near nervous breakdown being the most infamous example, was this the case?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2013 22:08
|
|
|
^ Or when Brando slaps Al Martino in The Godfather.Schweinhund posted:From watching the Shining making of documentary she seems very difficult to work with, and his attitude towards her probably stemmed from that... I especially like when Duvall is complaining, saying "hunks of my hair are just coming out, look Stanley!" and Kubrick holds up the 2 strands of hair to the camera with this tired smirk on his face and says "...hunks of hair... ok Shelley...". This, combined with Duvall admitting that she was very jealous of the constant adulation received by Nicholson, because she "loves being the center of attention" too, does makes it seem like she was just a real pain to work with, especially over a shoot that long. Origami Dali fucked around with this message at 22:23 on Oct 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2013 22:19
|
|
|
In Zero Dark Thirty is there supposed to be some kind of explanation as to Maya's answer that she can't talk about why she was recruited to the CIA right out of high school?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2013 00:56
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:In Zero Dark Thirty is there supposed to be some kind of explanation as to Maya's answer that she can't talk about why she was recruited to the CIA right out of high school? I assume whatever project she was working on back then was classified, or on a need-to-know basis.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2013 01:18
|
|
|
Schweinhund posted:He's also known for making dozens of takes of a shot. And I think the Shelley Duvall mistreatment idea is overblown. From watching the Shining making of documentary she seems very difficult to work with, and his attitude towards her probably stemmed from that, not some cruel calculation. This is the same movie where he didn't even tell the child actor he was working on a horror film, so he doesn't seem all that fanatical about method acting. Malcolm McDowell has said that during the making of A Clockwork Orange, Kubrick treated him really well and made promises to set him up in the industry and make his career for him because he was the greatest actor he had ever seen, indulging him in whatever he wanted. Then, after the movie finished, he never took McDowell's calls or spoke to him again. McDowell said that he came to believe that Kubrick treated him that way to influence his performance. I heard that in summary from sources I never read, so take it for what it's worth. However, it also makes me think of the scene in Eyes Wide Shut where some teenagers harass Tom Cruise by calling him gay. It makes no sense in the narrative but would obviously frustrate Tom Cruise and put him on edge at some level.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2013 17:16
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:However, it also makes me think of the scene in Eyes Wide Shut where some teenagers harass Tom Cruise by calling him gay. It makes no sense in the narrative but would obviously frustrate Tom Cruise and put him on edge at some level. That's actually an adaptation of a scene from the novella and makes sense in regards to Cruise's character's desire for power.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2013 19:13
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:That's actually an adaptation of a scene from the novella and makes sense in regards to Cruise's character's desire for power. Isn't the scene in the original story a bunch of teenagers yelling anti-Semitic slurs at a Jewish guy though (I have not read it myself)?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2013 19:42
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:Malcolm McDowell has said that during the making of A Clockwork Orange, Kubrick treated him really well and made promises to set him up in the industry and make his career for him because he was the greatest actor he had ever seen, indulging him in whatever he wanted. Then, after the movie finished, he never took McDowell's calls or spoke to him again. McDowell said that he came to believe that Kubrick treated him that way to influence his performance. Well they also did genuinely fall out. McDowell talked about it at length (But I don't think he talked about the specific incident itself). They fell out and just never spoke again. McDowell said he regretted it deeply, but whatever happened between them caused a giant rift.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 00:03
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:That's actually an adaptation of a scene from the novella and makes sense in regards to Cruise's character's desire for power. I just realized how my earlier post sounds: I mean that it makes no narrative sense for the kids to call him gay as an insult vs anything else (old, uptight, rich guy in the wrong neighborhood)--ostensibly there's no indication of the character's orientation, but the actor has a public history of attacking anyone who calls him gay.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 00:13
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:I just realized how my earlier post sounds: I mean that it makes no narrative sense for the kids to call him gay as an insult vs anything else (old, uptight, rich guy in the wrong neighborhood)--ostensibly there's no indication of the character's orientation, but the actor has a public history of attacking anyone who calls him gay. Cruise's character is feeling sexually inadequate and jealous. It makes perfect sense to have them "challenging his manhood" in this way. The extra-textual bit is a bonus.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 07:04
|
|
|
Plus they're a bunch of bros and using gay as an insult is like breathing. The metatextual element to it made me laugh.Power of Pecota posted:Unless Ralph's sold cans just labeled as "FOOD" According to the commentary, they did! (It was corned beef hash or some other potted meat product.) Only one or two of the generic products were created for the movie... IIRC "Beer" was the one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 09:02
|
|
|
Nope, 'BEER' was a real product and readily available around here back in the '80s. I had too much self-respect to ever sample it, and I was drinking Lucky goddamned Lager at the time (which I eventually had to give up because it made my piss foam like laundry detergent) edit: nevermind, just saw the "DRINK" gif. I don't suppose that would have sold very well, even in 1985. Bimmi fucked around with this message at 10:12 on Oct 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2013 09:59
|
|
|
What happened to Patrick Swayze's career after the early 90s? I was just checking his IMDB page, and there are very few recognizable titles after 1991. Was he not a box office draw or something?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2013 19:33
|
|
|
CopywrightMMXI posted:What happened to Patrick Swayze's career after the early 90s? I was just checking his IMDB page, and there are very few recognizable titles after 1991. Was he not a box office draw or something? Point Break happened. Edit: I kid, it was actually a decent movie. He kind of just lost his appeal I guess. youknowthatoneguy fucked around with this message at 20:15 on Oct 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2013 20:08
|
|
|
Trying to figure out who says that old timey gangster line "Now look here, see?" in a nasally voice. Is it Edward G. Robinson?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2013 20:53
|
|
|
Yeah, he's the one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 03:06
|
|
|
regulargonzalez posted:Trying to figure out who says that old timey gangster line "Now look here, see?" in a nasally voice. Is it Edward G. Robinson? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4ouaPw3dno
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 16:19
|
|
|
CopywrightMMXI posted:What happened to Patrick Swayze's career after the early 90s? When you star in Red Dawn, Dirty Dancing, Road House and Ghost within six years it's merely regression to the mean.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2013 03:41
|
|
|
Does anyone have a suggestion for where to buy the Lord of the Ring animated films? There isn't much for cost-effectiveness on Amazon and ebay has nothing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2013 07:34
|
|
|
Zogo posted:When you star in Red Dawn, Dirty Dancing, Road House and Ghost within six years it's merely regression to the mean. Don't forget North and South 1&2.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2013 18:21
|
|
|
Netflix sent me the third disc in Kieślowski's The Decalogue before the others, should I be watching these things in order or does it matter?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 02:57
|
|
|
Human Tornada posted:Netflix sent me the third disc in Kieślowski's The Decalogue before the others, should I be watching these things in order or does it matter? Doesn't matter.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 03:32
|
|
|
pomme posted:Does anyone have a suggestion for where to buy the Lord of the Ring animated films? There isn't much for cost-effectiveness on Amazon and ebay has nothing. You mean the trilogy boxset they put together? They're OOP, so eBay/Amazon is kind of it, as far as I know.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 18:03
|
|
|
Anyone know when and why older styles of transition like dissolves / cross-fades, irises, etc fell out of favor and the direct / smash cut came more into favor? It seems like if anything, before the advent of digital technology the simpler direct cut should have been used exclusively but things like irising out into a new scene definitely feels old timey; the only time non-standard cuts are used now are generally to give a film a certain atmosphere of that era (Star Wars recalling sci-fi serials, for instance).
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 21:02
|
|
|
Most feature editors I know - and maybe even moreso their assistants, myself included - hate dissolves because they are often used as a last resort, when the editor can't decide what frame to cut on, or can't figure out another way to grease the cut (music or a sound cue). Cuts are seen as precise, decisive and strong. Dissolves are for editors who can't cut, or for very specific mood evoking time transitions. Even the classical use of a dissolve to get out of one location and into another (e.g. dissolving from a lingering shot of the hero contemplating his future in a saloon, to a wide establishing shot of him riding on the prairie some days later) aren't used much because modern visual and sound techniques will grease that cut pretty well and today's audiences don't need a wipe or dissolve to understand that time has passed. Prelapping and panning a sound cue is the easiest way to help the audience anticipate a cut from on location/time to another so that the visual discontinuity of the cut isn't too jarring. Also FYI nobody says "smash cut". It's just "cut". Five Cent Deposit fucked around with this message at 21:39 on Oct 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2013 21:35
|
|
|
Is there a good place to start reading about film analysis that's lighter on jargon*? I really enjoy reading Terry van Feleday and SMG posts on here, since they come from a clearly knowledgeable perspective without relying on a whole new vocabulary, but any time I try to read something from a more formal scholarly perspective and  I'm fine with something that will ease me into the jargon, but right now I'm struggling with a learning cliff. *I mean this in the actual "technical words used in a specialty field" sense and not the "nonsense Star Trek babble" sense.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2013 11:16
|
|
|
Nolanar posted:Is there a good place to start reading about film analysis that's lighter on jargon*? I really enjoy reading Terry van Feleday and SMG posts on here, since they come from a clearly knowledgeable perspective without relying on a whole new vocabulary, but any time I try to read something from a more formal scholarly perspective and Any of Roger Ebert's "The Great Movies" books.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2013 21:47
|
|
|
Five Cent Deposit posted:Also FYI nobody says "smash cut". It's just "cut". "Smash cut" pops up in screenplays all the time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2013 21:49
|
|
|
Maybe the Hulk wrote it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2013 02:27
|
|
|
CharlieFoxtrot posted:"Smash cut" pops up in screenplays all the time. It is considered bad form by everyone else on the crew when screenwriters do this. I'm gonna elaborate now that I have more than a minute - shooting scripts almost never have camera or cutting notes like that. If they do, they just look silly. Some scripts have poo poo like that in them before they get turned into a shooting script, I'd guess in order to help convey the ideas that the screenwriter has, and to make them read a certain way. Finally, I just wanted to make a clear distinction that the alternative to a dissolve or wipe transition is NOT called a smash cut. It's just a CUT. Someone might have something specific in mind when they write SMASH CUT but since there is no universally accepted definition of the term, it's a lousy way to try to communicate that notion to an editor who has his hands on the footage months later. Five Cent Deposit fucked around with this message at 04:21 on Oct 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2013 03:29
|
|
|
Five Cent Deposit posted:It is considered bad form by everyone else on the crew when screenwriters do this. A smash cut is when every element cuts, sound and picture.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2013 04:57
|
|
|
Five Cent Deposit posted:It is considered bad form by everyone else on the crew when screenwriters do this. Well, yes, I understand it's not useful to the work done in production and post-production phases, but screenwriters do use this when they're writing specs and when scripts are in development. They obviously don't indicate every cut in their script so when they do, and when they use terms like "smash cut", they're trying to emphasize the impact a transition should have on the audience (and to the reader of the script). Similarly, critics and people who write about film also use the term to indicate the different emotional impact of certain cuts (as scary ghost dog points out) because not all cuts have the same value and function to the audience. I'm mainly taking issue with the "this is wrong, don't use it" attitude when there are quite a few people who do use it, and use it for a reason, especially since chances are the poster is not working in post.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2013 05:10
|
|
|
I'm watching the original Halloween on tv, and the psychiatrist and cop went into Michael Myers' old house. I either wasn't paying attention or it just wasn't shown, but they were talking about something on the floor. What was it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2013 02:07
|
|
|
Which movie should I choose to watch tonight between these 80s neo-noirs: Thief or The Long Good Friday?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2013 03:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 01:44 |
|
|
friendo55 posted:Which movie should I choose to watch tonight between these 80s neo-noirs: drat, those are both really loving good. There's no wrong answer, but I'll say The Long Good Friday. dumptruckzzz posted:I'm watching the original Halloween on tv, and the psychiatrist and cop went into Michael Myers' old house. I either wasn't paying attention or it just wasn't shown, but they were talking about something on the floor. What was it? A dead dog Michael ate, IIRC.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2013 03:12
|
|
