|
twoot posted:New Kingsman: The Secret Service trailer I like the British-ness. The title is not great, although I guess the original comic book was just called "The Secret Service" which is worse.
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 16:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 16:34 |
|
|
It looks like they looked at the book which is a piece of poo poo and then were like let's concentrate it more.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 22:12
|
|
|
mind the walrus posted:Get used to it. You're going to see that and more with Hawkeye in the next Avengers flick and I don't wanna hear no guff 'about it But hawkeye sucks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
Anyone see this movie yet? Wetlands https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REJdvJ26R6M
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 03:25
|
|
|
Harminoff posted:Anyone see this movie yet? Wetlands It's interesting but it's seriously not something you should watch if you get grossed out easily. It's kind of hosed up for just being hosed up. It is funny in parts though and interesting. It's a fun movie to suggest to friends who have no idea what they are watching, similar to Shortbus.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 20:40
|
|
|
Yeah that's actually why I'm interested. Right now my wtf recommendation is happiness. Hoping this is even more wtf.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
It's other than the subject matter actually a good movie, sure it's gross but it's well done and well acted plus really funny. They kind of sell it as a gross out film but really it's a coming of age film and it's a really well done one at that. Think The Spectacular Now ( I dunno if you liked that film, I did) but with a lot more well poo poo and vaginal fluid and loving. It's just a good movie. It get's pretty gross , like I was grossed out and I was a EMT for 6 years and had to deal with bodily fluids of all kinds.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 05:33
|
|
|
Blackhat, a Michael Mann movie where Chris Hemsworth plays a globe-trotting hacker. A genius ex-MIT gun-wielding muscular badasss hacker. Probably the same way Indiana Jones is an archaeologist. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKyuDgygvqc
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 08:14
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:It's other than the subject matter actually a good movie, sure it's gross but it's well done and well acted plus really funny. They kind of sell it as a gross out film but really it's a coming of age film and it's a really well done one at that. Think The Spectacular Now ( I dunno if you liked that film, I did) but with a lot more well poo poo and vaginal fluid and loving. It's just a good movie. It get's pretty gross , like I was grossed out and I was a EMT for 6 years and had to deal with bodily fluids of all kinds. In spoilers, what's the grossest scene?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 13:02
|
|
|
PriorMarcus posted:In spoilers, what's the grossest scene? There's a scene where she has a anal fistula and in order to remain in the hospital she purposefully sits down on a object to burst it , that and there is a scene where her and a friend exchange bloody tampons between each other , meaning they show them taking each others tampons and shoving themselves inside each other
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 15:19
|
|
|
The MSJ posted:Blackhat, a Michael Mann movie where Chris Hemsworth plays a globe-trotting hacker. A genius ex-MIT gun-wielding muscular badasss hacker. Probably the same way Indiana Jones is an archaeologist. Why do Michael Mann's handheld shots still look like a high quality Hi-8? Obviously he's going for a certain aesthetic, but I can't for the life of me imagine why. The night shots look like they're from Cloverfield. Collateral was his first movie shooting on digital but it still looks the best out of his new ones to me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 18:20
|
|
|
It looks like this generations Hackers. Like seriously, that looks ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 18:22
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:It looks like this generations Hackers. Like seriously, that looks ridiculous. You're telling me you didn't like the reverse shot from underneath a transparent keyboard? Unimaginable.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 18:24
|
|
|
Bolek posted:You're telling me you didn't like the reverse shot from underneath a transparent keyboard? Unimaginable. Hacking scenes in film already peaked so there's no point in trying anymore https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjGbvpr_dB8
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 18:34
|
|
|
The MSJ posted:Blackhat, a Michael Mann movie where Chris Hemsworth plays a globe-trotting hacker. A genius ex-MIT gun-wielding muscular badasss hacker. Probably the same way Indiana Jones is an archaeologist. That trailer does not fill me with confidence for your new movie, Mr. Mann.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
I don't even know if it counts as a "hacking scene" per se, but I've always enjoyed the facemash creation scene in The Social Network. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSKoVsHs_Ko
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
Bolek posted:Why do Michael Mann's handheld shots still look like a high quality Hi-8? Obviously he's going for a certain aesthetic, but I can't for the life of me imagine why. Happy Noodle Boy posted:Hacking scenes in film already peaked so there's no point in trying anymore https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8qgehH3kEQ For several years in a row that was the highest-rated show on American television.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:There's a scene where she has a anal fistula and in order to remain in the hospital she purposefully sits down on a object to burst it , that and there is a scene where her and a friend exchange bloody tampons between each other , meaning they show them taking each others tampons and shoving themselves inside each other W-why... the gently caress would anyone subject themselves to watching this garbage? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 20:03
|
|
|
Something something what the gently caress is wrong with German people.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 20:05
|
|
|
Deakul posted:W-why... the gently caress would anyone subject themselves to watching this garbage? What's scary is there are no doubt people out there who would find that kinky.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 20:11
|
|
The MSJ posted:Michael Mann... Chris Hemsworth... genius ex-MIT gun-wielding muscular badasss hacker Sold. I don't even need to watch the trailer, this is extremely my poo poo.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 20:17
|
|
|
I want to see real computer hacking in a movie like I want to see Mel Gibson and Danny Glover doing interviews and paperwork.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 20:21
|
|
|
Robert Denby posted:Given that he owns all the cameras he shoots with (which is extremely rare for filmmakers), I'm guessing he's using early-2000s digital cameras that can't quite hack it in terms of the image quality you expect out of the Alexa or a similar 4/5K camera. He also very rarely uses lighting rigs, which is why his movies look kind of 'off' during night scenes. Have you seen any interviews with him or his DP's that explain why he finds that look acceptable? I just don't understand how someone can release a major feature that looks like Public Enemies or some of the scenes in Miami Vice. It's bizarre to me. Once Upon A Time in Mexico came out in '03 and a lot of it still holds up visually. I dunno, maybe it's me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 20:24
|
|
|
I remember hearing about an instance during the production of Miami Vice where the crew had the shooting location lit and ready to go. Then Michael changed the location at the last second which didn't allow them to break down and set back up in time, so they just filmed without it. Doesn't explain why they still allow it happen though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 21:56
|
|
|
iSheep posted:I remember hearing about an instance during the production of Miami Vice where the crew had the shooting location lit and ready to go. Then Michael changed the location at the last second which didn't allow them to break down and set back up in time, so they just filmed without it. Yea, I dunno. The only thing anyone can really say -I guess- is that we're at a point now. and have been for some time, that night scenes shot on digital have absolutely no excuse to look as they do in Mann films, unless that is a stylistic choice. In which case all I can say is that I hate it. edit: and again, i gotta stress that I have absolutely no qualms with how Collateral looks, which makes this that much more weird.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
morestuff posted:I want to see real computer hacking in a movie like I want to see Mel Gibson and Danny Glover doing interviews and paperwork. I'd rather see real hacking, because "real" hacking is like 90% social engineering i.e. con artistry. It's why phishing is so successful. It's more Oceans than Hackers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 22:17
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:I'd rather see real hacking, because "real" hacking is like 90% social engineering i.e. con artistry. It's why phishing is so successful. It's more Oceans than Hackers. The DIY hacking in "WarGames" was totally real and awesome. They even still did some phone hacking in "Hackers" and early in "Mission Impossible", though payphones can't be unscrewed now I think.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 05:17
|
|
|
I saw a kind of clever commercial for Gone Girl where they put the critics' blurbs on the screen in the style of a news ticker.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 05:22
|
|
|
Buying your own cameras does seem like the kind of strategy that would work in a pre digital era and then totally fail with digital due to technology advancements.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:09
|
|
|
apropos of that dumb looking Michael Mann movie- is there a supercut somewhere of all the shots in which someone angrily slides all the paperwork off their desk directly at the camera? I can't believe people still do that in movies.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:09
|
|
|
Robert Denby posted:This is still the best hacking scene in history. Now the computer's poorly from too much electric. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:33
|
|
|
Bolek posted:Yea, I dunno. The only thing anyone can really say -I guess- is that we're at a point now. and have been for some time, that night scenes shot on digital have absolutely no excuse to look as they do in Mann films, unless that is a stylistic choice. In which case all I can say is that I hate it. It's a stylistic choice. Do people really think Michael Mann just can't afford a new camera?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 15:14
|
|
|
Human Tornada posted:It's a stylistic choice. Do people really think Michael Mann just can't afford a new camera? I don't know if Mann's going for an immersive picture, at any rate -- at least not in the traditional sense. The high gamma and high framerate may look "weird," but in their own way they feel like images captured in a moment, lending a sense of immediacy to the film.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 15:50
|
|
|
DivisionPost posted:I don't know if Mann's going for an immersive picture, at any rate -- at least not in the traditional sense. The high gamma and high framerate may look "weird," but in their own way they feel like images captured in a moment, lending a sense of immediacy to the film. Well that's what everyone said about the high-frame rate The Hobbit and absolutely hated it right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 16:03
|
|
|
Jewmanji posted:Well that's what everyone said about the high-frame rate The Hobbit and absolutely hated it right? True. I can't speak on that with a lot of authority since I didn't see The Hobbit in HFR. But going on what I heard, there were a lot of technical glitches with the process and a general "uncanny valley" sense in the final result, which works against the reality the film is trying to create. Mann -- and I'm going on pure sensory experience here, I've done zero research (I've braced for film nerd emasculation accordingly) -- tends to film at a base of 24 frames and deploy higher rates strategically. That, plus the lighting, detracts from a consistent, classically immersive picture -- and on that front you're absolutely allowed to dislike it. But unlike The Hobbit in HFR, you're (or at least I'm) not in the valley when I sit down to watch it. I still feel like I'm watching a movie. And because I'm more open to different styles of lighting and composition (not a brag), I can allow Mann's choices to affect the overall atmosphere of the film. DivisionPost fucked around with this message at 16:44 on Sep 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 16:41
|
|
|
IIRC, at one point David Lynch announced he would only shoot on friggin' DV cam. This was before HD cameras were as prevalent as the are today, but not THAT long ago. Maybe just after Mulholland Drive?Jewmanji posted:Well that's what everyone said about the high-frame rate The Hobbit and absolutely hated it right? Did anyone else notice the GoPro-shot insert in the middle of the barrel chase scene in the second film? It looked like someone grabbed a Go-Pro and dunked it in a river a couple times because someone in the edit suite (Pete) decided they needed a POV shot but were so far into editing they didn't have time to get a real camera and shoot a real insert. I laughed out loud in the theatre.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 16:51
|
|
|
DivisionPost posted:True. I can't speak on that with a lot of authority since I didn't see The Hobbit in HFR. But going on what I heard, there were a lot of technical glitches with the process and a general "uncanny valley" sense in the final result, which works against the reality the film is trying to create. Mann -- and I'm going on pure sensory experience here, I've done zero research (I've braced for film nerd emasculation accordingly) -- tends to film at a base of 24 frames and deploy higher rates strategically. That, plus the lighting, detracts from a consistent, classically immersive picture -- and on that front you're absolutely allowed to dislike it. But unlike The Hobbit in HFR, you're (or at least I'm) not in the valley when I sit down to watch it. I still feel like I'm watching a movie. And because I'm more open to different styles of lighting and composition (not a brag), I can allow Mann's choices to affect the overall atmosphere of the film. When you go handheld, the idea is to give the action more of an immediacy and immerse you in it, as if you're there. It's an illusion of added realism that the majority of people can accept(some of course hate "shaky-cam and will let you know quickly when given an opportunity). I feel Mann is doing the opposite. While trying to push for more of this faux realism that we all buy into he is breaking the fourth wall and making the whole thing look like a found footage movie. It's a different illusion of reality that belongs in a different genre. Anyway sorry for derailing the thread. I thought about making a separate thread for this but I don't know whether it's really warranted.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
Bolek posted:When you go handheld, the idea is to give the action more of an immediacy and immerse you in it, as if you're there. That's what I have a problem with. Handheld can provide a more intimate point of view on the story being told -- that includes action scenes that are more impressionistic than cleanly staged. But at the end of the day, you're looking through a camera, not the human eye. Immediacy is not the same thing as reality, nor is its end goal necessarily traditional immersion (though it can be). DivisionPost fucked around with this message at 18:46 on Sep 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 18:44
|
|
|
DivisionPost posted:That's what I have a problem with. Handheld can provide a more intimate point of view on the story being told -- that includes action scenes that are more impressionistic than cleanly staged. But at the end of the day, you're looking through a camera, not the human eye. Immediacy is not the same thing as reality, nor is its end goal necessarily traditional immersion (though it can be). I wasn't speaking about actual reality. The very next line that comes after the part you quoted clearly stated the point is "the illusion of reality". It's a construct we buy into.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 18:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 16:34 |
|
|
Actually the only realistic or at least kind of close to it hacking film is Sneakers, which is actually a pretty good film.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 19:09
|
|