|
That part of Living in Oblivion is directly referencing Twin Peaks, but the scene they reference was not filmed as a dream sequence, and Michael J. Anderson and David Lynch had been friends for years, as Lynch had intended to cast him in the starring, titular role in "Ronnie Rocket," Lynch's intended second feature, and long, long-time passion project. So the implication that Lynch was exploiting Michael J. Anderson is misrepresentative.
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 11:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 19:01 |
|
|
I thought the whole point of the scene is that the dwarf feels exploited - this same phenomenon happens in In Bruges - the two characters have very similar attitudes to the idea of trashy dream sequences / eurotrash movies with weird dream-logic. This distinction is important. Again, a movie doesn't have to literally take place in a dream to be dreamlike, and all David Lynch's films I've seen work like that. See Michael J. Anderson's presence in Mulholland Drive (you can interpret a lot of that movie as a literal dream even, although I don't think Lynch intended for it to be a simplistic dream/reality dichotomy when he wrote it as a tv pilot the point remains the same) - the commentary of Living's scene is that dwarves have come to define 'weirdness' in a way that a lesser director than Lynch could be seen to be exploiting. And Nick is a lesser director (I only worked for you because I thought you were tight with Tarantino! etc.). I really really like Living in Oblivion too  Edit: VVVV Yeah, I agree completely. Hbomberguy fucked around with this message at 12:37 on Feb 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 12:09
|
|
|
I actually agree with everything you said, really I just dislike the way that scene has been used by many as a criticism of Lynch, when it seems to me, and based on what I know of DeCillo, that it is much more applicable, and intended as being so, toward "a lesser director than Lynch." One who would think of "dream-logic" with such inaccurate shortcuts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 12:27
|
|
|
This is what I meant by the influence of Twin Peaks being hard to understate.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 15:51
|
|
|
I've never seen Twin Peaks but I saw the episode of Psych called Dual Spires, which apparently was a painstaking homage to Twin Peaks, and it made me want to watch it...just haven't gotten around to it. It's a really fun episode.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 18:13
|
|
|
I've seen the first season of Twin Peaks, and it sure is a thing. To me the most interesting thing about it is that David Lynch is intentionally using a soap-opera archetype, which I feel he is simultaneously parodying and exploiting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 18:17
|
|
|
Twin Peaks gets beyond stupid in its second (and last) season but it's still worth watching.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
CPFortest posted:Twin Peaks gets beyond stupid in its second (and last) season but it's still worth watching.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 19:02
|
|
|
Even if you give up halfway through season 2 of Twin Peaks (it really goes downhill once you find out who killed Laura Palmer), it's worth skipping ahead to watch the last two episodes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 19:27
|
|
|
I saw two episodes and never really got into it. Should I make more of an effort or just watch the rest of his movies?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 21:21
|
|
|
Hbomberguy posted:I saw two episodes and never really got into it. Should I make more of an effort or just watch the rest of his movies? Including the pilot? Because when I recommend the show to someone it's the end of the second non-pilot episode that usually tells them whether they're in or they're out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
Hbomberguy posted:I saw two episodes and never really got into it. Should I make more of an effort or just watch the rest of his movies? Yeah. I tried again after really disliking it at first, now I think it's great. Give it another shot.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
As a word of warning, depending on which of the many, many versions you watch, you may be stuck with the European pilot which adds an unnecessary, spoilery, and confusing epilogue to the episode. The episode should end with Laura's mother suddenly waking up, startled, on the couch. If there's anything after that just turn it off and start episode 2.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 00:04
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure the version on Netflix is the right version.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 01:35
|
|
|
But it lacks the Log-Lady intros you get on the DVD...
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 01:44
|
|
|
The third quarter of Twin Peaks's second season is legit some of the worst professional television I've ever seen, but everything around it is some of the best.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 02:25
|
|
|
Yeah there's a small chunk that's bad but it's not that many episodes. The rest of it is so good you'd be dumb not to watch it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 02:55
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:The third quarter of Twin Peaks's second season is legit some of the worst professional television I've ever seen, but everything around it is some of the best. I really like season 2 of Twin Peaks because it followed the escalation of the first season. Every silly thing in season 2 had precedent in season 1. Edit: What I'm saying is that season 2 feels like a continuation of season 1 and not a sequel to it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 03:08
|
|
|
I actually liked the main plot of part 2 of season 2, and the finale is superb, but gently caress every single mid/late S2 James or Nadine scene
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 04:06
|
|
|
What is the difference between visual effects and special effects? I know (think) visual effects are done entirely in post, but wouldn't special effects be done the same as well? Ninja edit: Are practical effects like a branch of sfx?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 04:50
|
|
|
yoohoo posted:What is the difference between visual effects and special effects? I know (think) visual effects are done entirely in post, but wouldn't special effects be done the same as well? Visual effects and special effects are terms with mercurial meaning. CGI is explicitly computer graphics.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
I know for some- mostly older- films the convention was that special effects were things on set like fires, car crashes, etc. while visual effects were more for optical effects, mattes, animation, and so on.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 05:03
|
|
|
I keep forgetting when I'm about to grab it; should I be buying the Director's Cut of Kingdom of Heaven or avoiding it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 07:33
|
|
|
PTizzle posted:I keep forgetting when I'm about to grab it; should I be buying the Director's Cut of Kingdom of Heaven or avoiding it? Only ever watch the director's cut of that movie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 07:37
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:Only ever watch the director's cut of that movie. I knew it was definitely one way or the other, cheers! Looking forward to it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 11:28
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:Only ever watch the director's cut of that movie. Watch the director's cut and then the theatrical cut if you want a crash course in how important editing can be.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 11:30
|
|
|
Hbomberguy posted:Watch the director's cut and then the theatrical cut if you want a crash course in how important editing can be. The editing was fine in the theatrical cut, it was just missing key scenes. Edit: Tons of key scenes from throughout the movie, like the movie got horrible cancer all over it
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 12:02
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:I know for some- mostly older- films the convention was that special effects were things on set like fires, car crashes, etc. while visual effects were more for optical effects, mattes, animation, and so on. That is the distinction we are using. SFX is on set and in-camera, VFX is in post.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 12:44
|
|
|
therattle posted:That is the distinction we are using. SFX is on set and in-camera, VFX is in post. Same. SFX and VFX supervisors by that nature have very different but similar sounding roles. (kill all VFX supes) e: out of interest, which dept's budget is your SFX coming out of? I'm seeing it bounced to Art Dept a lot lately and I don't feel that's right. e2: the lines blur somewhat when you have SFX guys make breakaway tables and other props, but say pyro stuff - who do you extract that from? echoplex fucked around with this message at 13:24 on Feb 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 12:48
|
|
|
Speaking of practical effects, I posted this bit in a hobbies thread, but anyone interested in the real nitty gritty of practical effects might like this too. Check out the Stan Winston School of Character Arts website. You can sign up for a paid account, but you get a 3-day free trial, during which you can watch as many of their videos as you want. Just cancel before the 3 days are up, and you won't be charged. You can also cancel your entire account, and then rereg for another free 3-day trial, ad-nauseum. Keep in mind this stuff isn't glitzy "The Magic of Movies!" type vids, these are "mix these noxious chemicals, how to make a mold, how to make animatronics" vids. There's tons of vids on everything from mold making, to animatronics, to maquette painting, chroming, sculpting, fabrication; seriously, just a poo poo ton of seriously cool stuff. If you have even a passing interest in any of this stuff, it's hours and hours of crazy behind the scenes stuff of professional effects artists. Hell, you may never need to know how to create a cable-controlled tentacle effect, but it's drat cool watching how it's done. Great personalities like Jordu Schell and Shannon Shea's stuff are great too, they're really easy going and have fun with the material. Shane Mahan has a few vids up too I believe; much more serious guy, but he's one of the originals from Winstons studio and has some great insights into effects. Plus you get to see loads of pictures of a young Mahan constantly wearing jorts (he may be a nevernude).
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 13:25
|
|
|
scary ghost dog posted:The editing was fine in the theatrical cut, it was just missing key scenes. After that watch Brazil and the Love Conquers All cut for another important lesson on editing and how to destroy a directors intent.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 15:54
|
|
|
echoplex posted:(kill all VFX supes) Yeah. What the gently caress is it with these guys and why are they all so loving bad at their jobs?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 16:58
|
|
|
echoplex posted:Same. SFX and VFX supervisors by that nature have very different but similar sounding roles. (kill all VFX supes) SFX is a separate sub-account under Art Dept. Where would you have it otherwise? Its own account? Art director didn't seem to mind. We kept art and SFX separate when budgeting and qetting quotes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 17:34
|
|
|
Any word when/if Snowpiercer is getting a North American release
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 19:38
|
|
|
Supposedly it is, uncut limited.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 20:02
|
|
|
therattle posted:SFX is a separate sub-account under Art Dept. Where would you have it otherwise? Its own account? Art director didn't seem to mind. We kept art and SFX separate when budgeting and qetting quotes. I would think that an Art Director would want some sort of approval over SFX since you want SFX in your movie to not clash with the rest of the movie's art style... But I'm out of my depth here and know nothing about the machinations of authority in things like this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 21:10
|
|
|
Snak posted:I would think that an Art Director would want some sort of approval over SFX since you want SFX in your movie to not clash with the rest of the movie's art style... But I'm out of my depth here and know nothing about the machinations of authority in things like this. For me it's one of the continual grey areas of accountability, second only to the fight of Costume and Art Dept bouncing responsibilities for certain items off each other.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
Snak posted:I would think that an Art Director would want some sort of approval over SFX since you want SFX in your movie to not clash with the rest of the movie's art style... But I'm out of my depth here and know nothing about the machinations of authority in things like this. That's a separate issue from where in the budget it sits. I agree but that's not the question. All departments should ensure that their choices are consistent with the whole.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
Ego-bot posted:Any word when/if Snowpiercer is getting a North American release John Hurt was being interviewed on the latest Kermode & Mayo review podcast/show and said it should be released soon. According to Hurt the hold up was due to Weinstein wanting to cut scenes (big surprise) to give it more action. Apparently this led to as stalemate between Bong Joon-Ho & Weinstein until Weinstein recently relented and agreed to release as is.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 22:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 19:01 |
|
|
therattle posted:That's a separate issue from where in the budget it sits. I agree but that's not the question. All departments should ensure that their choices are consistent with the whole. Yeah that makes sense. I guess I was making an assumption that some amount of budgetary accountability would confer some amount of authority, i.e. if the art director is in some way accountable for the art department's budget and SFX falls under that purview it might give him some amount of defacto authority in SFX matters. That's just what I was thinking. I see how it doesn't really relate to the question asked. Of course all departments should be working together to make a consistent and coherent film, but It doesn't always actually happen...
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 22:25
|
|