|
Thanks for all the suggestions, everyone.
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 22:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 02:03 |
|
|
fenix down posted:Found him. Thanks! No wonder I recognized him, it was freaking Tom Kenny. Also, I didn't know about voicechasers, that's an awesome thing to have as a resource.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 23:21
|
|
|
Gladiator: Theatrical or Director's Cut?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2012 18:26
|
|
|
http://www.fastcocreate.com/1679472/martin-scorseses-film-school-the-85-films-you-need-to-see-to-know-anything-about-filmquote:The Godfather: “Gordon Willis did the same dark filming trick on The Godfather as he had done on Klute. And now audiences accepted it, and went along with it, and every director of photography and now every director of photography of the past 40 years owes him the greatest debt, for changing the style completely — until now, of course, with the advent of digital.” 1972 Reading through this article about Scorsese's 85 essential films there is this bit about Godfather. Can anyone explain what is meant by the dark filming trick?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2012 21:41
|
|
|
foodfight posted:http://www.fastcocreate.com/1679472/martin-scorseses-film-school-the-85-films-you-need-to-see-to-know-anything-about-film Gordon Willis earned the name "_____ of Shadows"*, and a huge reason is the Godfather films. Someone better can explain the technical aspects, but honestly just pull up any shot on google and see whether you can spot a face that doesn't at least have some shadow on it - especially near the eyes. *I can't believe I blanked on that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2012 21:46
|
|
|
fenix down posted:Gladiator: Theatrical or Director's Cut? I'd go with Theatrical. Ridley Scott prefers it as well. The "director's cut" isn't his actual preference and simply inserts deleted scenes (already available on the DVD) back into the film. Shows the differences: http://movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=2462
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2012 21:49
|
|
|
foodfight posted:http://www.fastcocreate.com/1679472/martin-scorseses-film-school-the-85-films-you-need-to-see-to-know-anything-about-film  There's a few scenes in Godfather 2 that are almost indecipherable. It's funny, a lot of movies from the era are difficult to watch on a computer because there's so much darkness. Half the screen is just reflecting your goofy face all scrunched up trying to see what's going on.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2012 22:10
|
|
|
So basically what it says on the tin.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2012 22:12
|
|
|
foodfight posted:So basically what it says on the tin. Pretty much, yup.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2012 22:13
|
|
|
penismightier posted:There's a few scenes in Godfather 2 that are almost indecipherable. It's funny, a lot of movies from the era are difficult to watch on a computer because there's so much darkness. Half the screen is just reflecting your goofy face all scrunched up trying to see what's going on. I can't imagine watching a film like Godfather Part II or Manhattan on a shiny computer screen. I even had issues with Part II on my matte-finish HDTV. On the big-screen, though, I'd imagine they function just fine (The Godfather certainly does).
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2012 04:09
|
|
|
Voodoofly posted:Gordon Willis earned the name "_____ of Shadows"*, and a huge reason is the Godfather films. Someone better can explain the technical aspects, but honestly just pull up any shot on google and see whether you can spot a face that doesn't at least have some shadow on it - especially near the eyes. "Prince of Darkness." 
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2012 05:12
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:I can't imagine watching a film like Godfather Part II or Manhattan on a shiny computer screen. I even had issues with Part II on my matte-finish HDTV. On the big-screen, though, I'd imagine they function just fine (The Godfather certainly does). I really like Night Moves, but on the computer a solid third of it is just my face.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2012 07:00
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:I can't imagine watching a film like Godfather Part II or Manhattan on a shiny computer screen. I even had issues with Part II on my matte-finish HDTV. On the big-screen, though, I'd imagine they function just fine (The Godfather certainly does). Yeah, but this isn't really a computer-specific thing. Watching a movie in the daytime, outside of a theater, has been a Sisyphus-like experience for me as long as I can remember, except for the times when I had true black-out curtains/blinds or windowless rooms.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2012 07:24
|
|
|
I'm not sure who gets bugged more when I watch a movie, my roommate who has a general fear of being alone or me who wants total silence and darkness. Usually we can find a balance but it drives me nuts when I can see his laptop screen because it's like having a big blinking billboard right there aaaaa. Some movies are nice with open windows and lights on, though - Paris, Texas took on an interesting dimension when I opened every window and had a cool evening breeze going.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2012 08:44
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:Some movies are nice with open windows and lights on, though - Paris, Texas took on an interesting dimension when I opened every window and had a cool evening breeze going. Kung fu movies are 50 times better on a Sunday afternoon. I don't know why this is the case, but it's an immutable law.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2012 09:11
|
|
|
Heh, I too classify some movies as inexpressibly perfect for Sunday afternoons.Magic Hate Ball posted:Paris, Texas took on an interesting dimension when I opened every window and had a cool evening breeze going.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2012 11:15
|
|
|
penismightier posted:Kung fu movies are 50 times better on a Sunday afternoon. I don't know why this is the case, but it's an immutable law. For me, at least, this makes a lot of sense. Sunday afternoons are all about putting off the work you need to do before the week. Bad (and even some good) Kung fu movies do the same thing: going through the motions of plot and characterization with occasional bursts of activity (ie, dudes hitting each other).
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2012 16:35
|
|
|
There's something kinda magical about going into a dark room and concentrating entirely on some else's problems for a couple of hours, then coming out and it's still daylight. It's something like those ancient caves that were used for shamanistic ceremonies in the paleolithic: you crawl through this tiny opening that leads to a huge open space decorated much more vibrantly than anything else in your daily life. It's all structured toward shifting you into a whole other mindset. Then when you crawl back out, you're left squinting and blinking at the blinding daylight as your brain tries to re-adjust to the real world. Theatre entrances would totally be harrowingly long, narrow, twisty fissures in stone if they didn't have to be wheelchair accessible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2012 21:46
|
|
|
SubG posted:It's something like those ancient caves that were used for shamanistic ceremonies in the paleolithic: you crawl through this tiny opening that leads to a huge open space decorated much more vibrantly than anything else in your daily life. It's all structured toward shifting you into a whole other mindset. Then when you crawl back out, you're left squinting and blinking at the blinding daylight as your brain tries to re-adjust to the real world. It reminds me of a house I saw on MTV Cribs a while back (can't remember whose) but they had a claustrophobic little room that was half crawlspace and half alcove where they would watch movies. When I was very young I remember going into a theater with a ramp with a high incline (and a walkway lighted with those white lights) and equating it to entering a spaceship.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2012 22:45
|
|
|
This isn't a general question, but I'm wondering, in Star Trek (2009) were the lens flares added post production, or did they happen naturally on set?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2012 23:37
|
|
|
JohnnyDavidson posted:This isn't a general question, but I'm wondering, in Star Trek (2009) were the lens flares added post production, or did they happen naturally on set? Naturally on set. In some instances it's a person with a flashlight.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2012 23:55
|
|
|
NeuroticErotica posted:Naturally on set. In some instances it's a person with a flashlight. I imagine the poor chump at a bar taking credit for that ending up like this: quote:Advertising agent: You know those radio ads where two people with annoying voices yammer back and forth? I invented those.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2012 01:58
|
|
|
I really didn't mind the lens flares in ST09. If they started popping up in every film I'd get annoyed, but it's a stylistic choice that works for me in this particular film in this particular setting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2012 09:18
|
|
|
feedmyleg posted:I really didn't mind the lens flares in ST09. If they started popping up in every film I'd get annoyed, but it's a stylistic choice that works for me in this particular film in this particular setting. I may have mentioned this before, but when seeing the movie for the first time in theaters, some little wiseass pulled the fire alarm. The flashes and sirens just happened to synch up with the on screen action (the first encounter with the Romulans after Kirk stowed away) so well that it took far too long for people to realize what was going on. So I guess what I'm saying is, don't watch Star Trek ('09) in a theater where fire is a real possibility.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2012 18:31
|
|
|
Does the old black guy in No Country for Old Men that gives Llewelyn a ride to Del Rio get killed by Anton? It seems like it was implied, I'm just not one hundred percent on it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 00:49
|
|
SeenUnnoticed posted:Does the old black guy in No Country for Old Men that gives Llewelyn a ride to Del Rio get killed by Anton? It seems like it was implied, I'm just not one hundred percent on it. Where was it implied? He was just a random guy giving Llewelyn a lift.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 01:06
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:Where was it implied? He was just a random guy giving Llewelyn a lift. Nevermind, I read something on the NCfOM TVtropes page that said both guys that give Llewelyn a ride end up dead. Maybe it was in the book?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 01:27
|
|
|
TREE OF LIFE... What the gently caress? What in the hell am I attempting to watch? I remember seeing the previews and thinking "wow that looks interesting"... and then I forgot about it... the other day I ran across it at the video store and thought "Oh I remember this looked really good". I rent it. My first attempt to watch it I only made it 20 minutes in before the mind numbing boring-ness made me turn it off. The next night I tried again and made it through an hour based on shear will power to make it to an hour. I really don't think I'm going to be spoiling anything since I never made it to the end... but just in case I stumble upon some big secret in my rambling... So far it is basically nothing more than whispered thoughts and no story telling. Any and all dialog is never coherent and often trails off leaving the viewer in a constant state of "what?". Every character I would describe as "depressed and dis-connected from reality" but I have no clue what reality is in this movie. Apparently, Brad Pitt is the father of 3 boys, one of which is Sean Penn. Apparently, the oldest of the sons dies... maybe in a war... I have no idea. This fucks with Brad Pitt's families heads and like 30 years in the future it also fucks with Sean Penn's head. Then in the middle of all that nothingness there is like 30 minutes of the big bang, space, galaxies, water, apparently life forming, huge dinosaur, baby dinosaur, medium dinosaur steps on baby dinosaur's head and then leaves instead of eating it, birds flying, Sean Penn being an architect, and Sean Penn walking across rocks.. I am now of the opinion that you must need to be REALLY, REALLY high on weed and/or acid in order to get any enjoyment or meaning out of this film,... but again I have only watched an hour. I beg of you internet... what the gently caress? VVV I assume you are talking to me... and I have no idea who that is so... no? EDIT2: I just read the imdb... apparently I am Sean Penn in this movie and I still couldn't understand it... so this film was made to reinforce my own lack of understanding of life by being a movie about life that I couldn't understand. Totally awesome. FrankeeFrankFrank fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Feb 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 19:35
|
|
|
Have you seen any of Terrence Malick's other films?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 19:38
|
|
|
FrankeeFrankFrank posted:TREE OF LIFE... What the gently caress? What in the hell am I attempting to watch? It's one of my favorite movies of all time, HOWEVER I would say it does help immensely to familiarize yourself with Malick's other films to mentally prepare for Tree. If you look at Badlands, Days of Heaven, Thin Red Line, and The New World in that order, you'll notice right away that the storytelling becomes less linear, and the art/philosophy progressively takes center stage. Anyway, here's one reviewer's take on the subject matter, and the SA thread - probably both chock full of spoilers. http://www.salon.com/2011/07/02/watching_tree_of_life/singleton/ http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3345065
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 19:53
|
|
|
FrankeeFrankFrank posted:I am now of the opinion that you must need to be REALLY, REALLY high on weed and/or acid in order to get any enjoyment or meaning out of this film,... There's a new Ghost Rider movie playing right now. You might want to give that a try instead. It requires no hallucinogenics whatsoever and will probably make sense to you. If you make it all the way through it, please report back to tell us how normal it was.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 20:01
|
|
|
caiman posted:There's a new Ghost Rider movie playing right now. You might want to give that a try instead. It requires no hallucinogenics whatsoever and will probably make sense to you. If you make it all the way through it, please report back to tell us how normal it was. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nf74qellkok
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 20:03
|
|
|
fenix down posted:If you look at Badlands, Days of Heaven, Thin Red Line, and The New World in that order, you'll notice right away that the storytelling becomes less linear, and the art/philosophy progressively takes center stage. Is Thin Red Line the war movie? I think I liked that... never heard of the others and have no wish to. caiman posted:There's a new Ghost Rider movie playing right now. You might want to give that a try instead. It requires no hallucinogenics whatsoever and will probably make sense to you. If you make it all the way through it, please report back to tell us how normal it was. I knew I would get this and I deserve it. Truth is hate Ghost Rider and most superhero movies. You know what is a good movie, The Godfather. That is a great story told in an interesting and entertaining way. When someone gets shot in the head I don't have to think about what the director is trying to represent by this. But I'm sure if right in the middle of The Godfather if there was a space scene that last about 10 minutes and then a dinosaur stepped on a another dinosaur and then RIPPED IT'S loving DAGO, GUINEA, WOP, GREASEBALL neck out, and I realized this signified Micheal's turning to the dark side of the family business it would have been much better. Actually last night I was pretty pissed that Workaholoics and The Godfather were being shown at the same time and I kept having flip back and forth. So... uh... yea there are my visual entertainment likes in a nutshell.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 21:47
|
|
|
FrankeeFrankFrank posted:Is Thin Red Line the war movie? I think I liked that... never heard of the others and have no wish to.  Also I'm not really sure that Ghost Rider 2 and Tree of Life are the only two available cinematic options.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 21:57
|
|
|
FrankeeFrankFrank posted:I knew I would get this and I deserve it. Truth is hate Ghost Rider and most superhero movies. You know what is a good movie, The Godfather. That is a great story told in an interesting and entertaining way. When someone gets shot in the head I don't have to think about what the director is trying to represent by this. But I'm sure if right in the middle of The Godfather if there was a space scene that last about 10 minutes and then a dinosaur stepped on a another dinosaur and then RIPPED IT'S loving DAGO, GUINEA, WOP, GREASEBALL neck out, and I realized this signified Micheal's turning to the dark side of the family business it would have been much better. It's cool, Malick just isn't for you. I'd recommend paying closer attention to directorial history before you jump into your next heady-looking film. Though I'm not exactly sure what you expected based on the trailer, I feel it's pretty darn representative of the film.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 21:58
|
|
|
FrankeeFrankFrank posted:That is a great story told in an interesting and entertaining way. This is pretty much exactly how I would describe The Tree of Life. Look, I understand that The Tree of Life is unusual and not for everyone, and I'm not going to jump into the "if you don't like it then you're stupid" camp because I think that's arrogant and misguided. But I just really dislike when someone says a work can only be understood or enjoyed while on drugs. It's the flip side of the "dislike it = you're stupid" point and is equally narrow minded and insulting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 22:00
|
|
|
caiman posted:This is pretty much exactly how I would describe The Tree of Life. OK... fair enough... I would need to be on drugs. I don't mean to be narrow minded either. I mean I want to understand why it is "good". That's the opposite of narrow minded isn't it? I'd like to think I'm not narrow minded at all, but the truth is I'm probably not as wide minded as I'd like to be. The ToL trailer was interesting to me... I can't really remember why actually... but maybe because I really dig "searching for the meaning of life & death" type stories and maybe because the crazy long visually stimulating parts which only amounted to a show of nature's fireworks and added nothing to the actual story, (to me anyway), only last 3 seconds in the trailer and not 30 minutes. In fact I think I understood more about the movie based on the 1 minute trailer, then I did the first 60 minutes of the actual film. Also admittedly I never choose movies based on the director, because directors grow and change just as I grow and change. For example, "Scanners" when I was 10 years old "loving AWESOME", and "eXistenZ" when I was 28 years old, "loving TERRIBLE". Honestly, about 90% of the movies I watch now-a-days feel like a complete waste of time. I recently watched "Drive" because everyone was orgasming over it and to me it was just OK, and I will probably never watch it again. And now I am ready to get ripped about on that one too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 22:50
|
|
|
General Movie Questions: The Thin Red Line is the War Movie
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 23:04
|
|
|
I really like Malick, especially the dream like, transcendental nature of his post-1990s films, but I have to agree with Sean Penn when it comes to Tree of Life: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2011/aug/22/sean-penn-tree-of-life
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 23:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 02:03 |
|
|
FrankeeFrankFrank posted:And now I am ready to get ripped about on that one too. Like what you like, and don't be ashamed of it. So long as you give reasons why you like or dislike something, most people in CineD won't rip on you. They might not agree with you, but none of us agree with each other on everything.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2012 23:27
|
|