|
Jerkface posted:Welcome to the future I think he was noting that the shots are too short, not too long. TWIST FIST posted:I think it's cool that we see a lot of ships flying around in the atmosphere, there wasn't very much of that in the previous movies, I think There kinda was in the PT but it was hard to tell because there were invasions happening.
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 05:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 09:05 |
|
|
Still lolling that it was ever implied that the movie has no/not enough good shots
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 05:26
|
|
|
*Tom Kane voice* Meanwhile, the Resistance fleet arrives at Q'Dar! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 05:28
|
|
|
TWIST FIST posted:I think it's cool that we see a lot of ships flying around in the atmosphere, there wasn't very much of that in the previous movies, I think Clone Wars has a really beautiful sequence of Padme's space-ship traveling through the clouds of Coruscant with its entourage like a giant B-52/Whale combo. Until I rewatch this I'm sticking with my opinion that the film has beautiful shots but feels afraid that we'll get bored of them and moves on immediately to the next one rather than really lingering anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 05:38
|
|
|
A film that is afraid of its audience. Or at least anxious about it. A film lacking confidence?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 05:43
|
|
|
Jerkface posted:Welcome to the future "The odd thing is, film culture has changed so much since the 1993 Jurassic Park that trailers (a tool of marketing) have become the end-point of interest in movies. Jurassic Park’s F/X spectacle was the event; now the sell is the event. Those who were teased by [Force Awakens]’s trailer will surely prefer it to the two-hour-plus movie. Who can blame them? But that preference signifies a huge problem." -Armond White (writing about Mad Max 4, but it's far more applicable here).
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 06:01
|
|
|
A film without confidence? I don't even know if this poo poo is trolling anymore and I'm just getting whooshed real hard but jesus loving  You don't have to hate everything that isn't George Lucas-made to also enjoy George Lucas-made things. You're allowed to like both. It's okay, no one will think less of you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 06:05
|
|
|
Barudak posted:
This is definitely true on Jakku. Though in fairness I saw Lawrence of Arabia at about the same time so I got spoiled on high quality desert shots.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 06:07
|
|
|
Friendly Factory posted:A film without confidence? I don't even know if this poo poo is trolling anymore and I'm just getting whooshed real hard but jesus loving  Nobody hates the movie. It's a pretty decent movie.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 06:08
|
|
|
I've been on record as expressing my true and sincere belief that all seven Stars Wars are good, and that it is fun to understand and try to express ideas about why certain artworks are the way they are.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 06:10
|
|
|
It's pretty decent. It's just lacking in any themes, complexity, art or good writing. Yeah, pretty decent I'd wager.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 06:10
|
|
|
Friendly Factory posted:It's pretty decent. It's just lacking in any themes, complexity, art or good writing. Yeah, pretty decent I'd wager. The movie has themes (e.g. feudalism), and it is complex. Complexity isn't as good as nuance though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 06:13
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:"The odd thing is, film culture has changed so much since the 1993 Jurassic Park that trailers (a tool of marketing) have become the end-point of interest in movies. Jurassic Park’s F/X spectacle was the event; now the sell is the event. Those who were teased by [Force Awakens]’s trailer will surely prefer it to the two-hour-plus movie. Who can blame them? But that preference signifies a huge problem." There will always be people more caught up in the hype or something I could easily just change the point to being about stills and some people will prefer the excitement of seeing the hype stills vs sitting and watching the actual movie. I think the quote is meaningful, but I don't think it applies to the idea of a movie being more gifable than still framed due to the length of the shots. Both types of films can be enjoyed extracurricularly by fans, but now we have such amazing technology that you can make & share gifs even on your phone. Tumblr is a huge resource for fans & the premier tumblr post will always include gifs. TFA is definitely a star wars for the new generation of fan. Here are a series of frames I liked in TFA related to Kylo:  After Snoke doubts Kylo's ability to resist the light the hologram fades leaving Kylo bathed in light & surrounded by dark. This is a foreboding moment for Kylo.  We have the same situation where Kylo faces his father. I really liked this shot!  After Kylo does the deed we see that he was literally teetering over a pit of the lightside. I hope we get a lot more of Kylo & his struggles as I really enjoy the idea of someone where the lightside is the danger surrounding him. In the climatic fight, when Kylo & Rey are clashing, we see Kylo's face. Rather than illuminated in the mix of red & blue we see his face alternating between light & dark   Jerkface fucked around with this message at 07:12 on Mar 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 06:46
|
|
|
I'm not talking about gifs versus screenshots. I'm talking about how the film itself is an appendix to the collection of 2-second gifs that can be arranged to tell a superior custom story. In an analogous way, fans 'ship' the characters, and so-on. The entire film has been instantly reedited from the ground up, while people speculate about what future entries will eventually make it mean. The actual film is brought down by some very noticably bad editing. Try watching the car chase through the junkyard, trying to follow what's going on. It's a flurry of half-second close-ups of hands grabbing levers and things wooshing past the screen.  These are five consecutive shots in the film. Daisy Ridley pulls a lever, and it does something. That looks like a death scene, but as far as I can tell the ship is simply banking right, then left. Why is there a full-frame explosion of off-white at the instant she pulls the 'turn left' lever? Why cut away from the ship to show her being violently jostled forwards for no clear reason? This is the kind of sequence that Michael Bay is often falsely accused of making, and the entire action scene is like this. ... Let's do a moviefight.   The second shot is much less flat, static and boring than the one in TFA. Note how the light on the rock wall draws your attention directly to the figure. The light source - the hole in cave wall - is included in the composition, so we have a clear relationship. We have the visual tension between the light source, the pool of light being cast, and the dark passageway in between. It's very painterly, whereas the shot from TFA is very 'concept art'. And I don't buy for a second this 'light represents light' stuff. It's like the 'star wars represents star wars' thing. In case people don't recognize it, the second image is a brief throwaway shot from Attack Of The Clones. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 09:10 on Mar 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 09:07
|
|
|
Re-watching it and I agree completely about the flatness of everything and the poor editing. Also, so many shots stand out to be there as a sort of popping out 3D gimmick. This film falls apart as soon as they get off Jakku.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 09:21
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The actual film is brought down by some very noticably bad editing. Try watching the car chase through the junkyard, trying to follow what's going on. It's a flurry of half-second close-ups of hands grabbing levers and things wooshing past the screen. You left about like...100s of frames from your little sequence there. She flies into the grave yard, slewing the ship on its cockpit in the sand for a few seconds whiles shes doing so. She pulls the lever. We pull out to the falcon over correcting and grinding its belly on a giant piece of star destroyer. We cut inside to see her jostled by the falcon grinding against the hull of the destroyed cap ship. The next shot is of the falcon rolling off the grind and going in the opposite direction. Following the momentum of this move we go back inside the falcon to see BB-8 getting tossed up in the air. The editing & kinetic direction of the falcon chase is actually pretty great. Here is the actual sequence:      http://i.imgur.com/dS9EJgY.gifv Edit: Like why even bring up the flash of white? Its a piece of debris in the foreground that is 1 frame out of 24. Personally I think that bit you're criticizing is really slick. Jerkface fucked around with this message at 09:49 on Mar 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 09:29
|
|
|
My take on TFA is that it's good, but it could have been great if they'd felt more free to tell their own story instead of randomly grabbing bits of the older movies near the end.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 09:30
|
|
|
Jerkface posted:You left about like...100s of frames from your little sequence there. She flies into the grave yard, slewing the ship on its cockpit in the sand for a few seconds whiles shes doing so. She pulls the lever. We pull out to the falcon over correcting and grinding its belly on a giant piece of star destroyer. We cut inside to see her jostled by the falcon grinding against the hull of the destroyed cap ship. The next shot is of the falcon rolling off the grind and going in the opposite direction. Following the momentum of this move we go back inside the falcon to see BB-8 getting tossed up in the air. The editing & kinetic direction of the falcon chase is actually pretty great. I did not notice the ship crashing into the wall, because that's a very bad camera angle to show that happening. Like, if you want to show a car careening against a wall during a car chase, you don't use this angle:  You use something like this angle:  (from here) In TFA, you have to notice that yellow-ish flash amidst all the other beige things flashing across the screen, plus the explosions from lasers. I actually had to review the shot in repeated gif form, and be told what I was looking at, in order to discern that those were sparks from grinding metal and not from the ship being hit by lasers or something. It's especially tricky because they cut away for most of the impact. Every single exterior shot in that sequence is pure CGI. The animators, editors, and other people included that single-frame flash of beige on the screen for a reason - presumably to punctuate the pushing of the lever and create a 'beat' for the action scene that corresponds to theflash of darkness flying into your eyes at the end of the maneuver. The junk in the foreground that's obscuring the action is all carefully-placed CGI. Of course the actual function of the lever is unimportant. We're just getting: hand, flash, far, face, close, lengthy spiral, etc. You can discern the logic, but it doesn't make for a clear narrative. Did she smash into the wall on purpose? Whose POV is this, roughly? SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 10:35 on Mar 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 10:31
|
|
|
quote:Of course I am not going to individually screencap 100 frames. It's cute watching how you treat this movie compared to the prequels.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 13:08
|
|
|
Can someone GIF Rey force pulling the lightsaber and igniting it?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 13:24
|
|
|
Neowyrm posted:of course. I wonder if Wookiepedia has entries on those ships from the New Republic Fleet that get destroyed immediately by Starkiller Base.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 14:34
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Like, if you want to show a car careening against a wall during a car chase, you don't use this angle: Gonna have to agree/disagree here. Take, for example, this scene of a man and a woman in a stolen car running from the cops in the desert, not completely dissimilar from the scene in TFA: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOi1l_Dkl-A The side tracking shots can be done well, but in this case they are done from the perspective of the police officers in the car driving parallel, aiming a shotgun. It's obvious what our POV is and why the angle is used. It is similarly used in the diner, when the cops watch the Night Rider speed by (and even there, it's a slightly diagonal angle, not flat). The lever throwing has the same effect on a mechanical level as the cuts to the Nightrider's feet -- it briefly cuts the car action to show that something is about to happen, giving you a pause of breath, before the action hits. But they also show us that he is barefoot and in chains, therefore in dialectical opposition to the literally jackbooted police officers who he opposes (and who cause as much destruction and seem to contribute just as much to the downfall of social order as he does). Does the brief cut to the Night Rider's hands turning the wheel away, losing the game of chicken (3:20-3:26), make the scene incomprehensible? I submit that it does not, and lends itself to a better understanding of the Night Rider's loss of nerve and the establishment of Max (who, up until this point we have only seen as a car, sunglasses, and a pair of gloves) as a much cooler head and more dominant character. But it is never unclear what the mechanical actions lead to (NR hits the brakes, cut to his car slowing down and evading the police. NR turns the wheel, cut to his car jaggedly rushing out of the way of Max's car). Whether TFA does it as well as Mad Max is up for debate (TFA doesn't use the cuts to tell us things about the characters the way they do in Mad Max), but the side angle shots and cuts to "mechanics of operating the vehicle" can be used properly. Toph Bei Fong fucked around with this message at 14:37 on Mar 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 14:34
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:
Is this another thing you'll have to concede later as well?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 15:27
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:It's cute watching how you treat this movie compared to the prequels. TFA does literally everything that makes SMG masturbate over films, and got all of the things he considered good about the prequels, and yet somehow none of that is good enough for this movie. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 15:32
|
|
|
I said come in! posted:TFA does literally everything that makes SMG masturbate over films, and got all of the things he considered good about the prequels, and yet somehow none of that is good enough for this movie. Seriously. The film is AMAZINGLY rich in nuanced visuals, amazing shots, relatable characters, explicit ties and references to prior entries, and an overwhelming number of layered metaphors. He opts to ignore all of this, instead choosing to intentionally build negative readings of everything and hiding from critique and his own views with "decent. Decent! Decent?"
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 15:36
|
|
|
Like, you guys need to get over posting about other posters, it's creepy. But this, Neurolimal posted:The film is AMAZINGLY rich in nuanced visuals, amazing shots, relatable characters, explicit ties and references to prior entries, and an overwhelming number of layered metaphors. is all bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 15:38
|
|
|
No it's true, TFA does reference previous Star Wars movies. :P
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
AMAZINGLY rich in nuanced visuals and amazing shots.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
net cafe scandal posted:AMAZINGLY rich in nuanced visuals and amazing shots. Sorry for not using more words at 10 AM, I guess. The point is TFA is a great movie and gets dismissed for bizarre reasons. The Cantina scenes are absolutely loaded with everything I listed there, but it all gets handwaved with "doesn't dwell on anything long enough for me" or "the decrepit old alien built a 100 foot stone statue to worship herself", it's just strange. Neurolimal fucked around with this message at 15:44 on Mar 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 15:41
|
|
|
I dont think its a great movie, but looking at these gifs, it sure is gorgeous in a way that didnt fully translate in the theater.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 15:43
|
|
|
Please post lightsaber gifs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 15:43
|
|
|
net cafe scandal posted:I dont think its a great movie, but looking at these gifs, it sure is gorgeous in a way that didnt fully translate in the theater. See, this part I don't really get. The pretty images you're seeing here were right there in the theater. Fast editing can be confusing at times, but everything in these gifs was right in front of your eyes when you saw the movie. Nothing posted yet has made me say, "Where was that in the movie?" I can see if someone saw it in 3D, and as a result it was darker, or the 3D was distracting or something, but that's more of a knock against seeing movies in 3D (don't see movies in 3D, it's dumb), not the movie itself. I walked out of the movie with some incredible images I couldn't get out of my head. A lot of them have since been posted in this thread, but there's more. (There's one shot I love of when Kylo Force pulls the Imperial Officer to him after he tells him about the "girl", with Kylo on the left and the officer on the right. I loved it.) It's like the conversation from a few pages ago, about how people thought they inserted a shot of ships arriving at D'Qar to explain they went to a new planet. That was there in the theater. How did people miss things happening in this movie?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 15:51
|
|
|
net cafe scandal posted:AMAZINGLY rich in nuanced visuals and amazing shots. But enough about Age of Ultron. thrawn527 posted:
JJ's style of editing in this film is literally "blink and you'll miss it". The other thing is that the Rebel base geographically could fit in on Maz's planet no problem. This isn't true with Yavin IV, as the previous planets were either deserts or mechanical. If you wanted to make the TFA base distinct, use a different geography. Like Dantooine in KOTOR for example: 
computer parts fucked around with this message at 15:59 on Mar 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
Barudak posted:Clone Wars has a really beautiful sequence of Padme's space-ship traveling through the clouds of Coruscant with its entourage like a giant B-52/Whale combo. Since we're posting GIFs: http://i.imgur.com/MkMbwWp.gifv Sir Kodiak fucked around with this message at 16:11 on Mar 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 16:00
|
|
|
computer parts posted:But enough about Age of Ultron. I don't disagree that the two planets are similar, but the shot of them arriving at a new planet lasts a full 7 seconds. You'd have to keep your eyes closed for 7 seconds to miss it while blinking.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Sorry for not using more words at 10 AM, I guess. The point is TFA is a great movie and gets dismissed for bizarre reasons. It gets dismissed for being mediocre. Wanna feel depressed, it was JJ's dream to make this film. That's like, Joss Whedon saying Age of Ultron was an extremely personal film level of sad. Neurolimal posted:The Cantina scenes are absolutely loaded with everything I listed there, but it all gets handwaved with "doesn't dwell on anything long enough for me" or "the decrepit old alien built a 100 foot stone statue to worship herself", it's just strange. Nothing happens in the cantina, are you telling me the dudes Finn almost runs off with are relatable? Or the obviously evil clown lady that calls the First Order? That's what you call nuance? It's strange that you want to ignore that it's all a shrine to some little lady Yoda. Because that, is the interesting part, not background scenery. thrawn527 posted:How did people miss things happening in this movie? As you said, fast editing. Everything that happens is obfuscated, for effect. https://zippy.gfycat.com/TinyFluffyAmurstarfish.webm
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
thrawn527 posted:See, this part I don't really get. The pretty images you're seeing here were right there in the theater. Fast editing can be confusing at times, but everything in these gifs was right in front of your eyes when you saw the movie. Nothing posted yet has made me say, "Where was that in the movie?" I can see if someone saw it in 3D, and as a result it was darker, or the 3D was distracting or something, but that's more of a knock against seeing movies in 3D (don't see movies in 3D, it's dumb), not the movie itself. You said it yourself dude, the movie was edited in such a way that it felt overwhelming. It's a lot easier to take in the visuals divorced from the dizziness of the actual movie.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
computer parts posted:JJ's style of editing in this film is literally "blink and you'll miss it". Those are long blinks, dude.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
wyoming posted:As you said, fast editing. Everything that happens is obfuscated, for effect. net cafe scandal posted:You said it yourself dude, the movie was edited in such a way that it felt overwhelming. It's a lot easier to take in the visuals divorced from the dizziness of the actual movie. Agree to disagree then, it all seemed pretty clear and easy to follow to me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 09:05 |
|
|
thrawn527 posted:Agree to disagree then, it all seemed pretty clear and easy to follow to me. Easy to follow, sure, but not at all memorable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 16:08
|
|