|
Yea all the way through Fallout the M:I movies always had like a texture to them that connected back to their original roots(the first one being made in 1996 after all). Real locations, minimal greenscreen, always maintaining the air of "drat how'd they shoot that?" because it felt like they were actually out there doing it. Dead Reckoning was the first time where Mission Impossible felt like a Marvel movie, and I hope it really was due to the COVID issues because that would mean they can right the ship in the next one(although I do really hate the storyline with this "Entity").
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 15:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 19:27 |
|
|
The real travesty was all the terrible CG added to obscure rigging and wires from all the practical effects, with an end result that made it just look like it was all done in front of a green screen. If you knew nothing of the production you'd think the fight scene on the train was all green screen but they actually did it! They're on top of a moving train, fighting! But there's so much fake smoke that it looks like complete poo poo. This is also the first one they didn't shoot on film but idk how much that impacted things.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 15:49
|
|
|
My main problem with DR was all the talk about A.I. that was supposed to be important and threatening and perhaps topical commentary but came off like several Architect speeches from the Matrix.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 16:53
|
|
|
I am still baffled by how much time the movie spent insisting the ENTITY could access all modern technology so we need to go back to analog, then the entire climax of the movie has Benji using a laptop in a car being driven by autopilot and all of that unreliable technology foreshadowing is completely ignored. What the gently caress??
fishing with the fam fucked around with this message at 17:28 on Jan 9, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 17:23
|
|
|
fishing with the fam posted:I am still baffled by how much time the movie spent insisting the ENTITY could access all modern technology so we need to go back to analog, then the entire climax of the movie has Benji using a laptop in a car being driven by autopilot and all of that unreliable technology foreshadowing is completely ignored. What the gently caress?? I just assume Luther was supposed to be there and due to COVID couldn't be.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 17:39
|
|
|
dokmo posted:Sudden Death rules. WRT too late for the 80s action movies, my vote is for Soldier, the Kurt Russell movie from 1998. It really belongs in the previous decade. Your post made me go and watch Soldier for the first time, and I think you may be on to something. I mean, it's mostly a very 90s movie, aesthetically at least, but final act was about as 80s as it gets. Kurt Russell's character is loading up his fully automatic weapons one by one, and then looks at the camera and goes "I'm going to kill them all.", followed by him emerging from the shadows and stabbing bad guys, and emerging from water, blasting a machine gun. Then again I wonder if by 1998 stuff like this was already considered a deliberate action movies of the past. Oh well, I enjoyed the movie. I'm a total Kurt Russell-fanboy, and I really liked the art design. Reminded me of the early Command & Conquer-games. I noticed that Death Wish 2, 3, and 4 are up on Prime here in Finland. Are those movies worth my time? I'm not necessarily looking for technically spectacular action set pieces, but rather something that makes me feel like a little kid running around in the backyard with my friends. For example, I watched Missing in Action last weekend and fully enjoyed it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 21:26
|
|
|
Huojis posted:Your post made me go and watch Soldier for the first time, and I think you may be on to something. I mean, it's mostly a very 90s movie, aesthetically at least, but final act was about as 80s as it gets. Kurt Russell's character is loading up his fully automatic weapons one by one, and then looks at the camera and goes "I'm going to kill them all.", followed by him emerging from the shadows and stabbing bad guys, and emerging from water, blasting a machine gun. Then again I wonder if by 1998 stuff like this was already considered a deliberate action movies of the past. Oh well, I enjoyed the movie. I'm a total Kurt Russell-fanboy, and I really liked the art design. Reminded me of the early Command & Conquer-games. Death Wish 2 is exceedingly grim and nasty so I wouldn't recommend it for a good time, but 3 is absolutely insane.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 21:33
|
|
|
Darthemed posted:Rewatched xXx today, for the first time since 2003 or so, and as much of a joke as it (and its sequels) have become since it came out… I had a surprisingly good time with it. Silly premise, good execution. Mostly practical stunts, which get pretty ambitious at times (and apparently resulted in the death of a stuntman, sadly), good use of lighting and set stylization, and a variety of approaches to the action (motocross and basejumping action scenes! The latter while livestreaming at 240p!). Xander Cage really did have to be played by Vin Diesel, and as ridiculous as the character and story premise are, Diesel mostly makes it work. Apparently Eric Bana was considered before settling on Diesel? Real casting bullet dodged there. Setting aside how much 2002 ephemera is crammed into the film, it makes sense that Diesel would be able to ride this film upwards on his Hollywood trajectory. It’s not actually great, but it’s definitely better than the reputation that’s built up around it over the years. I find myself revisiting mid action films and finding them refreshing simply for having practical poo poo in them. I even enjoyed Van Helsing somewhat, which was egregious with its use of CGI on release but now kinda seems quaint. There are actual sets!
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 22:02
|
|
|
The Fast And The Furious has real cars, real locations (you can go to that lovely diner) and real people. It's sweaty and grimy and very much tactile. They crashed like 80 cars for the movie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 06:46
|
|
|
The CGI cars in 2Fast were astonishing. Mesmerizing even. Such powerful 2003 era tech.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 07:34
|
|
|
The tunnel chase in Fast 4 had the same issue someone mentioned upthread about Dead Reckoning; there's real stuff in there (they had cars being driven through about a mile of 'tunnels' made from shipping containers on a dockside), but on screen they were surrounded by so much CGI that it made the whole thing look fake.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 12:41
|
|
|
Midnight Pooptrain posted:I find myself revisiting mid action films and finding them refreshing simply for having practical poo poo in them. I even enjoyed Van Helsing somewhat, which was egregious with its use of CGI on release but now kinda seems quaint. There are actual sets! I love practical effects in movies, it really makes them pop. I've been rewatching some 90s action movies and I don't know what it is but it feels like the colours are more garish and everything feels more cluttered onscreen at the same time. Like everyone's desks have poo poo on them, every surface feels loaded with junk and all the screens are chunky and pushed really close to the face of whoever is sweating profusely and staring at it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 14:23
|
|
|
Midnight Pooptrain posted:I find myself revisiting mid action films and finding them refreshing simply for having practical poo poo in them. I even enjoyed Van Helsing somewhat, which was egregious with its use of CGI on release but now kinda seems quaint. There are actual sets! Yeah its wild how so much modern filmmaking just sucks. The real life practical solutions one needs to find to light a scene, for example, simply forced people to make better looking shots than then scourge that is digital lighting and grading. The other day I watched the movie Hardware from 1990 and it was loving awesome. Movie was made for like 1 million but has robots, squibs, awesome lighting, and the acting is...enough. The limitations and the creativity they necessitated make a lot of it hold up to this day. A modern version on an equivalent budget would with almost near certainty have flat lighting, cheap cgi for the robots, and none of the charm. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 15:03
|
|
|
Von Linus posted:I love practical effects in movies, it really makes them pop. I've been rewatching some 90s action movies and I don't know what it is but it feels like the colours are more garish and everything feels more cluttered onscreen at the same time. Like everyone's desks have poo poo on them, every surface feels loaded with junk and all the screens are chunky and pushed really close to the face of whoever is sweating profusely and staring at it. Some of it is just effort and passion about the project (and enough time). A good example is the office in EEAAO, the space was much larger than they had money for, and they couldn't put computers and chairs everywhere. So some PCs were real, a lot were prop cardboard, and then even more further back were just construction paper. Absolutely agreed about digital lighting/grading making things take a step back in many cases, though. I just watched meg2 which had a lot of awful CGI, completely wasted Wu Jing, but did have a few incredible shots like this one 
trevorreznik fucked around with this message at 16:02 on Jan 10, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 15:44
|
|
|
I've always been impressed whenever I read about how much work and effort went into lighting films. It seems like one of the more time consuming and labor intensive tasks involved in filmmaking, so I guess it's not surprising that people jumped at the chance to make the process easier when digital became an option. I can only imagine it makes filming so much more streamlined and ten times less frustrating on a scene by scene basis if you don't have to care about lighting. I'm sure it's a temptation that's very hard to resist.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 16:10
|
|
|
Lighting, staging and blocking have taken a nose-dive in recent years. Nothing but green screen and volume. Very little in way of practical sets and if there are the lighting still sucks, especially for night shots. It's just flat grey mess. The perfect example staging and blocking is you need not look further than two mediocre films: Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and Dial of Destiny. Watch them as a double feature, if you hate yourself, and just see how big a difference those techniques make, especially in action. It's the only time I'd say go watch those two films. As for lighting, I understand that it's a ton harder to light shots, for day or night, and if you wait for magic hour you have a very, very tight window to get your shots but drat doesn't that hard work show. Like I saw Mad Max 2 again recently and was floored at how gorgeous it looked. Look at this! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRanbAgyOWA&t=131s (the shot in question is even in the thumbnail, I linked it to the sequence in question but the whole clip is worth watching, heck the whole film is, even in a post-Fury Road world) You won't find shots like that often, or at all, in modern blockbusters. chef kiss
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 16:39
|
|
|
So many movies now, and not just because of COVID, have me wondering if the actors were even talking to each other in a scene. If they were there together at all. We see one face. Then the other. And back and forth. Very topical around this time of year because we have a tradition of watching White Christmas on Christmas morning and while on one hand you could say a movie like that has boring or slow camera movement / editing, I would say it is so refreshing and charming to have scenes where you get the actors acting out the whole thing in one shot, together, where the timing and focus of their action/reaction is purely up to them. One scene in particular stands out, when Crosby and Kaye are discussing and arguing in their dressing room and moving around and changing clothes and doing this little routine where they toss clothes back and forth to each other. Now that is a general statement on movies but to make it appropriate to this thread, I can't help but think of Jackie Chan movies when I watch it and the influence old Hollywood had on his filmmaking choices.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 17:33
|
|
|
Movies are taking shortcuts because the studio system has functionally collapsed and isn't giving teams enough money or time to do a good job. Also, the slap-dash shortcut way has become the norm, so the newer industry people have internalized it. That's just "how it's done" (as somebody in management, this is the most insidious legacy of a previous bad manager. They literally train people, even very smart and capable people, into doing a bad job.) So now we've gone backwards. You look at something like The Holdovers, it's a 62 year old director who shot and lit his movie like a real rear end film. Megaman's Jockstrap fucked around with this message at 20:32 on Jan 11, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 17:50
|
|
|
I find it hard to believe Holdovers cost just 200K
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 17:59
|
|
|
Lobok posted:So many movies now, and not just because of COVID, have me wondering if the actors were even talking to each other in a scene. If they were there together at all. We see one face. Then the other. And back and forth. Going back to Dead Reckoning, I came out of my rewatch absolutely convinced Cruise and Rhames were never in the same room together the entire production.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 18:04
|
|
|
morestuff posted:I find it hard to believe Holdovers cost just 200K I had heard that earlier and went looking for it now and I can't find it. The only thing I can find is that Focus Features paid 30 million for the distro rights. I am sure it's going to make a profit. You know what genre I miss? The action thriller, the movie where it's mostly a thriller but at the end there's a big fight. That was another 90s special, Pacific Heights is the one that comes immediately to mind.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 18:06
|
|
|
Yeah, I mean Holdovers was one of my favorite movies of the year but 200k probably wouldn’t even cover Giamatti’s quote. At 20M or whatever it’ll turn a nice profit and everybody will be happy, just from talking to friends it seems to be killing it on Peacock and home rentals
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 18:16
|
|
|
Was it shot digitally? I saw a 35mm showing of Oppenheimer and they had a 35mm trailer of the holdovers. Seems weird they converted it to film, and incredibly pricy but idk
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 23:13
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:Was it shot digitally? I saw a 35mm showing of Oppenheimer and they had a 35mm trailer of the holdovers. Seems weird they converted it to film, and incredibly pricy but idk they def printed The Holdovers on 35mm anyway, that's how I saw it. the movie theater i saw it at is also the movie theater they filmed the movie theater scenes at which was fun.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 18:19
|
|
|
Darthemed posted:Rewatched xXx today, for the first time since 2003 or so, and as much of a joke as it (and its sequels) have become since it came out… I had a surprisingly good time with it. Silly premise, good execution. Mostly practical stunts, which get pretty ambitious at times (and apparently resulted in the death of a stuntman, sadly), good use of lighting and set stylization, and a variety of approaches to the action (motocross and basejumping action scenes! The latter while livestreaming at 240p!). Xander Cage really did have to be played by Vin Diesel, and as ridiculous as the character and story premise are, Diesel mostly makes it work. Apparently Eric Bana was considered before settling on Diesel? Real casting bullet dodged there. Setting aside how much 2002 ephemera is crammed into the film, it makes sense that Diesel would be able to ride this film upwards on his Hollywood trajectory. It’s not actually great, but it’s definitely better than the reputation that’s built up around it over the years. XXX: State of the Union is a loving classic and blows this out of the water (by Ice Cube shooting bullets into it)
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 20:18
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:they def printed The Holdovers on 35mm anyway, that's how I saw it. I’m gonna say I don’t think it was 200k then. Unless converting to film is cheaper?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 20:21
|
|
|
Just finished the TV show Obliterated, a really fun comedy/action series on Netflix that tried really hard to embody a level of 80s style American action excess and somewhat succeeded (uses digital squibs and is a bit too modern and self aware to completely qualify). Its a recommend from me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 20:29
|
|
|
It was more than 200k. I just misremembered the cost totally.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 20:31
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:Just finished the TV show Obliterated, a really fun comedy/action series on Netflix that tried really hard to embody a level of 80s style American action excess and somewhat succeeded (uses digital squibs and is a bit too modern and self aware to completely qualify). Its a recommend from me. Just a warning though, there is a surprising amount of nudity. Nothing I'm prudish about but in case it would keep anyone here from watching it with a partner or family (or make them do so) it's good to know.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 20:38
|
|
|
back in my day we watched movies with nudity with our parents and accepted it
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 20:41
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:back in my day we watched movies with nudity with our parents and accepted it I have traumatic memories of watching basic instinct with my parents and uncle, and my uncle rewound the police station interrogation to rewatch it Edit: The most shocking thing about the Holdovers was not how well executed everything was, but that I could hear all the audio with no issue whatsoever and didn't even notice that I didn't need subtitles til I went to another movie trevorreznik fucked around with this message at 21:01 on Jan 11, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 20:49
|
|
|
Lmao
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 20:49
|
|
|
finally saw Atomic Blonde. Powerfully stupid rear end movie, way too long, not really worth watching but there are a couple of pretty good visceral fights so it's at least worth watching those on YouTube. shout out to those two KGB agents in the stairwell, like goddamn lol...thank you for your service. now that's true determination for the cause.  it's sad seeing an obnoxiously idiotic movie (not like charming 80s action stupidity) with great action scenes and then seeing like, a fairly charming film like Polite Society where all the action scenes were pretty bad. Wish they had whoever choreographed the poo poo in Atomic Blonde, at least. Punkin Spunkin fucked around with this message at 23:17 on Jan 11, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 23:15
|
|
|
Lobok posted:Just a warning though, there is a surprising amount of nudity. Nothing I'm prudish about but in case it would keep anyone here from watching it with a partner or family (or make them do so) it's good to know. Very true. Felt like the creators were trying to bring that back as well. E: it also made reminded me how odd movies are today, where sex is something that just doesn't seem to happen. It's a huge part of our lives.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 11:35
|
|
|
Jimbot posted:Lighting, staging and blocking have taken a nose-dive in recent years. Nothing but green screen and volume. Very little in way of practical sets and if there are the lighting still sucks, especially for night shots. It's just flat grey mess. The perfect example staging and blocking is you need not look further than two mediocre films: Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and Dial of Destiny. Watch them as a double feature, if you hate yourself, and just see how big a difference those techniques make, especially in action. It's the only time I'd say go watch those two films. This really stuck out to me when watching this parody https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9X_FmCbrIA The backgrounds in a lot of the star wars footage just looks way better than in the 2023 film being made fun of. Compare the backdrops in the Luke/desert scenes to the ones around the village at the start of Rebel Moon (with the stupid square waterfalls in the background)
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 11:44
|
|
|
That's just what happens when you shoot on location. I'm surprised netflix gave them the budget to build actual sets in Rebel Moon. Glad they did because they all look great.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 15:24
|
|
|
Jimbot posted:
The cinematographer has had an interesting career: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005871/ There is Dances with Wolves (which won him an Oscar), Apocalyptico, Waterworld and City Slickers. But also Stealth, Paul Blart 2 and The Ridiculous Six. Oh, and xXx which was just mentioned as looking way too good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 16:47
|
|
|
Cinematographers always have funny careers. They're just there to shoot, so the eventual product can vary wildly with quality.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 16:56
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:Cinematographers always have funny careers. They're just there to shoot, so the eventual product can vary wildly with quality. Pretty much anyone below director is going to have weird looking careers. Best boys can't be picky.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 17:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 19:27 |
|
|
Glad to see Tiger 3 is finally on prime video. Kaif really is a lot more fun than Salman Khan, but man it is some delightful dumb action in general. The entire middle sequence of SRK's Pathaan helping out for 25 waves of escalation is incredible. Especially the last little bit of Salman just letting go of the parachute, kind of reminded me a bit of the absurd fast five jump into the river, or The Other Guys where sam Jackson and the rock just go for the jump. The whole sequence is so stupid it made me smile Edit: finished it today and it has possibly the most insane character development scene between two movies of all time, if you watch it you'll know what I mean. It's kind of funny to watch the 3 tigers evolve over the decade because they're so tied to specific eras. 1 is all parkour all the time, 2 is generic middle east terrorism, and then this is the war/pathaan/bond/MI/f&f style over the top action trevorreznik fucked around with this message at 20:43 on Jan 13, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 06:28
|
|