|
sbagliom posted:Has there ever been a movie where the actors are just reading from the scripts? As in, literally carrying around the script the entire time? I am pretty sure that it happens in Robin Hoods Men in tights. When Robin Hood looses he gets confused and checks the script to see if he gets another try. The rest of the cast also checks it.
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 21:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 11:30 |
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:Is that the Polanski one? That movie's weird as hell. Yeah but I just roll with it and it works. The music certainly helps the atmosphere.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 08:13
|
|
|
Is anyone familiar with this DVD edition of Yeelen? A lot of the information I can find about the release is less than inspiring, but it also seems to be the only way to see the film. Or alternatively does anyone know if there is better version of the movie available that I'm overlooking? I've been interested in seeing this for a while, so if the only option I've got is a lovely copy, I'll probably pick it up, but it seems like something worth seeing a quality version of.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 03:03
|
|
|
Otto von Ruthless posted:Is anyone familiar with this DVD edition of Yeelen? A lot of the information I can find about the release is less than inspiring, but it also seems to be the only way to see the film. Or alternatively does anyone know if there is better version of the movie available that I'm overlooking?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
Too bad there isn't a better option. Get on that poo poo Criterion.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
Is there a reason why so many films that were intended to be released in 3D, such as any Marvel film of the last couple years, were shot in 2D and converted? It made sense when studios were hopping aboard the 3D bandwagon in the wake of Avatar, but it's been years and they're still doing it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 20:03
|
|
|
JohnSherman posted:Is there a reason why so many films that were intended to be released in 3D, such as any Marvel film of the last couple years, were shot in 2D and converted? It made sense when studios were hopping aboard the 3D bandwagon in the wake of Avatar, but it's been years and they're still doing it. Converting is cheaper.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 20:10
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Converting is cheaper. I guess I should have figured it would be something like that. e: How expensive is shooting in 3D that digitally altering every frame of footage in order to create depth is cheaper? Baronash fucked around with this message at 20:18 on Oct 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 20:14
|
|
|
Post-conversion does not have to be automatically poo poo, as it depends on how much time and effort get put into the conversion; Titanic was pretty good about that. And in films where most of the elements in the frame are computer-generated in the first place, the distinction is minimal. Edit: JohnSherman posted:e: How expensive is shooting in 3D that digitally altering every frame of footage in order to create depth is cheaper? Ironically, native-3d shooting something like a chamber drama would most likely be cheaper than trying to convert it in post. The expense imbalance starts flipping when you take into account that 3d rigs are extremely finicky and if you want to be precise in production (rather than causing stereographic errors which would make you have to "fix it in post" anyway), that incurs more time in production, which involves more production days and thus more money to everyone involved. This also increases when you have to use shots involving camera motion, mounted on vehicles, underwater, etc.; along with any shots you have to plan to composite with computer graphics later. These elements, you may notice, are exactly the kinds of things that Marvel films use a ton of. Avatar itself had a handful of shots that had to be post-converted, anyway. It's not necessarily an either-or thing CharlieFoxtrot fucked around with this message at 20:56 on Oct 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 20:29
|
|
|
Yeah didn't Nevaldine or Taylor say that even movies natively shot in 3d will quite often have a good chunk that's post converyed just because of technical issues.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 22:23
|
|
|
I think it's also an issue that post conversion makes it easier to make things pop-out more. A lot of "filmed in 3d" doesn't have as much pop in a lot of scenes because realistic depth isn't always as dramatic. But I could be wrong.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 22:34
|
|
|
sbagliom posted:Has there ever been a movie where the actors are just reading from the scripts? As in, literally carrying around the script the entire time? Dr Evil referenced the script in his Prison Rap in Goldmember.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 16:01
|
|
|
I just saw the Equalizer and kind of liked it, the high point being the end, wherein there's a Home-Alone style "catch the criminals with homemade traps" sequence. Any other actions movies that have a lot of booby traps on unsuspecting mooks? And on Denzel, was Man On Fire watchable, and if not, what are some good mature action films that actually "bring the action". I feel like i'm disappointed when an action film has maybe a set-piece or two, and they're short, and you're usually left with a threadbare story and a nice looking film that is dead on screen when people aren't shooting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 04:37
|
|
|
Was it "Blown Away" that had Pierce Brosnan using household items to kill generic bad guys in a house for the finale? It's been a long while since I saw it but I remember it fitting your criteria fairly well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 05:00
|
|
|
There were at least a few traps in the manor scene of Skyfall.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 05:02
|
|
|
Penpal posted:I just saw the Equalizer and kind of liked it, the high point being the end, wherein there's a Home-Alone style "catch the criminals with homemade traps" sequence. Any other actions movies that have a lot of booby traps on unsuspecting mooks? And on Denzel, was Man On Fire watchable, and if not, what are some good mature action films that actually "bring the action". Death Wish 3 easily fits your Home Alone criteria, though I wouldn't label it as good or mature.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 05:10
|
|
|
You're Next is all about this poo poo. It's basically "evil killers assault a family during a reunion but one of the guests grew up as a hardcore survivalist and schools the poo poo out of all of them one by one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 05:11
|
|
|
Baron von Eevl posted:You're Next is all about this poo poo. It's basically "evil killers assault a family during a reunion but one of the guests grew up as a hardcore survivalist and schools the poo poo out of all of them one by one. So essentially a horror movie for horror movie villains? That actually sounds kind of interesting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 05:17
|
|
|
JohnSherman posted:So essentially a horror movie for horror movie villains? That actually sounds kind of interesting. It's a pretty good take on slasher movies. It doesn't redefine the genre or anything but it's a solidly watchable film. Also, the family finds the time to be incredibly petty to one another while being shot at by crossbow bolts.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 05:29
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:The Road Warrior is one of those rare movies I don't think I've ever heard an unkind word about, ever. Like, the closest thing is people saying "shame what happened to Mel Gibson, huh?" I know this is a two week old post, but I just wandered in the thread and am reading backwards through the pages WHILE the ending of The Road Warrior is playing on my tv during my first watching. The only thing I really didn't like about it is that the score is so loud throughout the entire movie. Like, hard to hear what characters are saying (though that doesn't seem to matter much in the grand scheme of things). I only ever saw Mad Max 1 a few years ago, but Best Buy has Mad Max 2 and 3 blu-rays for $5 each, though I only walked out with 2 knowing what people have said about 3. Really wanted to see it after checking out the Comic-Con trailer for Fury Road and loving every second of it. But yeah, after my first watch, the only problem I had was the music was way too loud (and CONSTANT). Maybe it's just a problem in the mix on the blu-ray, but ehhhh...
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 07:25
|
|
|
Soul Glo posted:I know this is a two week old post, but I just wandered in the thread and am reading backwards through the pages WHILE the ending of The Road Warrior is playing on my tv during my first watching. I wouldn't be suprised if it was the mix on the version you have. I remember a lot of DVDs in general used to have the problem of mixing the music way too loud.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 13:25
|
|
|
Yeah, I've noticed that on the DVD version as well and I just figured they destroyed the mix when they turned it into 5.1.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 17:35
|
|
|
Penpal posted:And on Denzel, was Man On Fire watchable, and if not, what are some good mature action films that actually "bring the action". Man on Fire was fantastic.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 20:38
|
|
|
Baron von Eevl posted:It's a pretty good take on slasher movies. It doesn't redefine the genre or anything but it's a solidly watchable film. Also, the family finds the time to be incredibly petty to one another while being shot at by crossbow bolts. So it's more like The Ref of horror movies.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 20:50
|
|
|
Slugworth posted:Man on Fire was fantastic. I liked it a lot but I saw it on a plane and they cut off the ending so I assumed it was much darker than it was for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
The first few times I saw Real Genius, I missed the the opening sequence with the evil military meeting and came in during the science fair. After seeing the film from the true beginning, I have come to the conclusion that it is a much better movie without that opening scene. The reveal of the military project seems to come out of nowhere and really puts the viewer in the characters' shoes for a few moments. Are there any other films(other than the theatrical cut of Dark City) where cutting a few minutes from the beginning makes a significant improvement?
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 06:01
|
|
|
Ninja Gamer posted:The first few times I saw Real Genius, I missed the the opening sequence with the evil military meeting and came in during the science fair. After seeing the film from the true beginning, I have come to the conclusion that it is a much better movie without that opening scene. The reveal of the military project seems to come out of nowhere and really puts the viewer in the characters' shoes for a few moments. Interesting question. I can think of loads of movies where cutting the last few minutes makes it better (Identity, Lincoln) but I'm not sure about the converse. I do know a person who thinks the ape section of 2001 is boring and should be cut but that person is an idiot so
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 07:49
|
|
|
Probably most modern big budget sci-fi movies that have a huge info dump at the beginning, like Edge of Tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 08:55
|
|
|
I'm pretty certain I had the same experience with Alien Abduction: Incident in Lake Country, but it was many years ago so can't remember exactly how much I missed at the start. I didn't see discovery of the UFO and aliens, so then it had a Jaws-like effect where I was waiting ages to see what was terrorising the family and all that was lost when I watched it again to show friends. My question: I watched Rear Window for the first time last night, and was gripped right until the end when I almost laughed at it. There was a 10 second section where the footage was sped up and I thought it comical, so is this actually what happens or is there a problem with the Amazon streaming version? I'm presuming its legit, but can only find one mention of it, on an IMDB review. I also didn't get the East River line, did the police really manage to interrogate Thorwald in 5 seconds? And are we supposed to know who the woman was who leaves the apartment with Thorwald when Jeff is asleep?
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 14:31
|
|
|
In the movie Memento, in the opening scenes before Leonard kills Teddy you see him finding bullets in a truck. Later, it is revealed that after Leonard kills Jimmy he is he one that leaves the bullets in the truck before taking Jimmy's car. What was the point of doing that?
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 17:45
|
|
|
ChrisXP posted:I'm pretty certain I had the same experience with Alien Abduction: Incident in Lake Country, but it was many years ago so can't remember exactly how much I missed at the start. I didn't see discovery of the UFO and aliens, so then it had a Jaws-like effect where I was waiting ages to see what was terrorising the family and all that was lost when I watched it again to show friends. I think the version of Incident in Lake County that was put on UPN is better than the original that the director has since put online, partially because the middle makes a better end.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
Ninja Gamer posted:Are there any other films(other than the theatrical cut of Dark City) where cutting a few minutes from the beginning makes a significant improvement? Zardoz has an overly explanatory prologue that was added in to explain some things. I think it works better without it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 00:28
|
|
|
The first time I saw Carlito's Way I missed the opening, so the ending came as a genuine surprise. The second time I saw it i saw that it starts at the ending and was a lesser movie for it.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 06:53
|
|
|
I have been reading a friends' experimental cinema website but she focuses on eastern/central europe (shameless plug: artincinema.com). Do you know any similar sites focusing on different parts of the world?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 19:19
|
|
|
ChrisXP posted:My question: I watched Rear Window for the first time last night, and was gripped right until the end when I almost laughed at it. There was a 10 second section where the footage was sped up and I thought it comical, so is this actually what happens or is there a problem with the Amazon streaming version? I'm presuming its legit, but can only find one mention of it, on an IMDB review. There are two or three shots of people running out of their apartments to watch that are sped up. Definitely less than ten seconds total. I'm not entirely sure why they did that, except perhaps add a sense of urgency that maybe the shots in real time didn't have. As for the East River, I think part of it is a technical aspect. This was still the days of the Hays Code and that meant bad guys needed to be punished. Rather than drag out a lengthy interrogation that would not fit in with the rest of the movie, setting and running time-wise, they had the cop mention that Thorwald is ready to confess, and that takes care of that as far as the audience knowing he'll pay for his crimes. Story-wise, I think Thorwald is just sick and tired of it all, stricken with guilt and harried by Jeff's harassment, not to mention the cops got him, so he's just ready to get it over with. He probably volunteered the info right away without the cops even asking. In regards to the woman, there is an implication that Thorwald is cheating on his wife, with the secretive calls he takes. His wife confronts him about one. I've always assumed the woman is his mistress, come to give his story credence about sending his wife off. Somebody in the area/neighbors would have seen him leaving with a woman, and they wouldn't have had reason to believe it wasn't his wife. This is also kind of a sneaky move by Hitchcock, because it's the only thing we see that Jeff doesn't see. It kind of sets up the audience, for a period anyway, as a witness against Jeff.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 02:25
|
|
|
Thanks DT. I've heard of the Hays code, but being British it didn't occur to me that it might be that kind of thing. I can accept that its just a throwaway line to tick that box. For the woman, I suppose I'd got it in my head that the audience seeing her was an accident rather than intentional on his part. As you say, she was meant to be seen but my brain had gone in a different direction. I wasn't aware that there was an earlier version of Incident in Lake County, thanks for the heads-up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 09:29
|
|
|
Penpal posted:And on Denzel, was Man On Fire watchable, and if not, what are some good mature action films that actually "bring the action". Most people seem to really like it, but I found the pacing really slow and the ending unsatisfying.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 07:18
|
|
|
Dr_Amazing posted:Most people seem to really like it, but I found the pacing really slow and the ending unsatisfying. I found the reveal rendered the whole film pretty horrifying, actually.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 12:00
|
|
|
Ninja Gamer posted:Are there any other films(other than the theatrical cut of Dark City) where cutting a few minutes from the beginning makes a significant improvement? Dune. A million times Dune. The theatrical cut has a short two minute prologue highlighting just the key story elements (the guild, the houses, Arrakis, the prophecy). The extended cut's prologue never ends, listing every drat event that occurs within the books with illustrations that are held on screen for far too long. No wonder David Lynch took his name off of that cut.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 15:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 11:30 |
|
|
FrostedButts posted:Dune. A million times Dune. To be fair there are so many problems with that movie that the prologue is very low on the list.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 16:43
|
|