|
Lots of blue rear end, though 
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 09:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 06:52 |
|
|
I had a good time watching Avatar and any time I want to remember what happened in it I just think of literally every movie from the 1990s combined.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 09:25
|
|
|
What advanced algoritmic techniques did they use to always ensure the blue aliens nipples where concealed
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 09:38
|
|
|
A GLISTENING HODOR posted:The best use of 3D was Jackass 3D which used the avatar cameras but in practical and creative ways. 100% this. Lego Batman looked good in 3D but they're supposed to be little plastic figures so that was cool. The only 3D movies I actually want to see and haven't are Cave of Forgotten Dreams and Death of Language. Everything else I've ever seen in 3D has been embarrassing poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 10:02
|
|
|
FrensaGeran posted:So Rich Evans rich evans is pallid and bloated like a corpse
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 10:27
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:100% this. I saw cave of forgotten dreams in 3D in the cinema and it was incredible, perhaps the best use of 3D. Also The Walk in 3D on imax was amazing, gravity was a fun ride in 3D also
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 10:47
|
|
|
The only movie I saw that I felt was enhanced by 3D was Life of Pi.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 10:49
|
|
|
3d is like a curse that comes round every 30 years and I'm glad it's died off again.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 10:57
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:100% this. Cave of Forgotten Dreams was boring and the 3D wasn't all the special or necessary.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 11:00
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Cave of Forgotten Dreams was boring and the 3D wasn't all the special or necessary. Lol, I found it utterly captivating and wonderful, seeing these 30,000 year old pieces of art that are going to be sealed away to keep them pristine. The 3D was important because of the contours of the caves being utilised by the artists. I found it mesmerising and the red hand prints were incredible, it's amazing to think that these humans living way before our recorded history had art and culture. I bet they even had their own version of internet movie critics who discussed in excruciating detail which cave has the best depictions of horses and mammoths.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 11:04
|
|
|
bitterandtwisted posted:3d is like a curse that comes round every 30 years and I'm glad it's died off again. "This time it'll be different  "
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 11:06
|
|
|
 Best 3D movie.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 11:42
|
|
|
Avatar had an okay plot, cutting edge CGI, 3d that was marketed to the moon, but most importantly it all happened at precisely the right time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 13:41
|
|
|
A GLISTENING HODOR posted:The best use of 3D was Jackass 3D which used the avatar cameras but in practical and creative ways. It's an amazing movie. I wish they'd re-release it in theaters so I can watch it in 3D again.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 13:42
|
|
|
mng posted:
i'm the obvious wire that hd has revealed
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 13:43
|
|
|
bitterandtwisted posted:3d is like a curse that comes round every 30 years and I'm glad it's died off again. The Great Gatsby. In 3D. What was the loving point?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 14:34
|
|
|
Ant Man and Doctor Strange were both excellent in 3D.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 15:54
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:100% this. Did you ever watch any of the Hobbit movies in 3D and HFR? There's never been any HitB episode I've agreed more with than when they talk of that experience as being like a living cinematic nightmare.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 16:26
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:Did you ever watch any of the Hobbit movies in 3D and HFR? Nope, I intentionally went out of my way to see it in 2D, 24 FPS AS GOD INTENDED My girlfriend and a few other friends went to see it in 3D IMAX 48FPS in a BRAND NEW IMAX SCREEN in Dublin. Like this cinema screen had specifically been designed to showcase the Hobbit in iMAX. Five minutes into the film and... the sound went out of sync for the remainder of the film (all 800 minutes of it). They all thought it looked absolutely poo poo too, with everything so obscenely sharp that it looked like a home-movie. My gf is a massive LOTR fan and said she's never been more disappointed with a cinema experience in her life. I felt the same way but that was more to do with the quality of the movie, it was utter shite anyway so I'm glad I didn't spend nearly €15 on a ticket for it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 17:08
|
|
|
I hate that 60 fps has somehow caught on for youtube videos. It always looks so weird and jarring.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 17:50
|
|
|
Stop paying for 3D movies you hacks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 17:52
|
|
|
DoctorStrangelove posted:I hate that 60 fps has somehow caught on for youtube videos. It always looks so weird and jarring. No it isn't, it looks like what it is which is videos of live people filmed with digital cameras. It only looks weird and jarring when it's a film because 24 FPS gives the films an unreal quality that's taken away when you turn up the FPS. Then the movies basically turn into awkward stage plays where you're right in the actors' faces instead of watching at a distance.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 17:56
|
|
|
King Vidiot posted:No it isn't, it looks like what it is which is videos of live people filmed with digital cameras. It only looks weird and jarring when it's a film because 24 FPS gives the films an unreal quality that's taken away when you turn up the FPS. Then the movies basically turn into awkward stage plays where you're right in the actors' faces instead of watching at a distance. Well, I thought that, in the Hobbit at least, the most jarring shots weren't the closeups of faces or anything. It was scenes where people were packing stuff into suitcases and bags and such or folding letters or walking normally, everything seemed to be going a little too fast (like small subtle movements seemed off and too fast while the movie as a whole seemed to be moving at a normal pace) and everything was far too sharp and it made my brain hurt and I couldn't focus on anything. A nightmare. Like a bad acid trip.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 18:03
|
|
|
Yeah it's cos there's less motion blur between the frames at a higher frame rate so you get more information to process. I remember Peter Jackson saying how 48/60fps was gonna be the future of film until everyone (rightly) told him to gently caress off.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 18:12
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:Yeah it's cos there's less motion blur between the frames at a higher frame rate so you get more information to process. The reduced motion-blur feature on a lot of new TVs drives me insane. But what really sends me over the edge is that I'm seemingly the only person who notices it. That feeling like you're on set and watching people filming whatever you're supposed to be watching. Awful
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 18:17
|
|
|
Peter Jackson seems to have mostly gotten really lucky with Lord of the rings cuz all his other movies have been bad and the hobbit movies just werent very good
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 18:22
|
|
|
Zzulu posted:Peter Jackson seems to have mostly gotten really lucky with Lord of the rings cuz all his other movies have been bad and the hobbit movies just werent very good Meet the Feebles, Braindead and Bad Taste are amazing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 18:28
|
|
|
They are amazing, but they are not good
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
I liked King Kong when I saw it in the cinema but that was a long time ago, no idea how it holds up. Lovely Bones was absolute garbage, cannot believe he made that. The Hobbit series is my Star Wars prequels though. I never understood the nerd rage for those films until I sat through Battle of the 5 Armies. I loved LOTR, especially Two Towers. I saw them as a kid and even on rewatch now, they hold up very well. Sitting in the cinema watching the abomination that was 5 armies really broke me. I finally understood the negative reactions people had to Phantom Menace.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
The Hobbit movies aren't even close to the shittiness of the Star Wars prequels.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
That's a really good comparison. I was super into LOTR but the hobbit was so loving prequels-level bad it made me absolutely sick of the entire fantasy genre. It also made me realize ROTR was probably only good despite of jackson, not because of him. Or he's like many artists and filmmakers that can make good work when they are constrained and have a team that can give a lot of push-back, but if you give them 100% control you get jar jar binks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 18:39
|
|
|
I genuinely think 5 armies is prequel level bad. It's definitely worse than Revenge of the Sith at the least. I fell asleep during one of the many many battle scene in 5 armies, it was so loving boring. I started imagining Billy Connolly was talking in my head as I slept... then I woke up and there was a CGI Billy Connolly dwarf 😳😳😳 The bluray of 5 armies has a REALLY candid behind the scenes documentary on its troubled production. They ended up shutting down production for three months or something because the literally had no idea what they were doing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 18:43
|
|
|
Irradiation posted:The Hobbit movies aren't even close to the shittiness of the Star Wars prequels. This is true. They do still somehow feel reminiscent of them though and they were definitely disappointing compared to the original trilogy, there's a lot of people who were pretty excited leaded up to the first film and then were just completely disinterested in the next ones beyond maybe just seeing them because they were there. The biggest faults of the Hobbit movies is, I think, trying to make the completely wrong film out of the source material, stretching it into three movies, and attempting to make what is in all respects, a childrens' book into an epic of 3 hour long movies about WAAR trying to overcome the LOTR movies in that respect. Like the line from the trailer for five armies sums up just how stupid they went about it, "It has all led to this, the defining moment of the Middle Earth saga!", I mean, really? Compared to the LOTR trilogy where they literally fight for the fate of the world? Also the tone was all over the place and the action scenes were mostly just boring.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 18:43
|
|
|
new feature films are still using 48fps/60fps just not through the whole movie, so you probably don't notice it
Relin fucked around with this message at 18:54 on Mar 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
Relin posted:new feature films are still using 48fps/60fps ust not through the whole movie, so you probably don't notice it Which ones? I haven't seen any noticeable stuff
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
Irradiation posted:The Hobbit movies aren't even close to the shittiness of the Star Wars prequels. The Star Wars prequels just get worse and worse when you watch it again.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
If they had just mostly faithfully re-made the book, at least even as faithfully as the LOTR movies, but mostly kept the tone and scale down to earth like in the book, it could have been great. The action in the books is very limited and mostly depicts the dwarves as borderline useless, or constantly in over their heads and helpless and needing their burglar to get them out of it. In the movie everyone is some leaping acrobatic superhero. There's so many movies out there that drown in their own budgets, if the studio had given half or a third the budget they would have been forced to make a more grounded movie. I might have to check out logan one of these days. I have a pretty strict "gently caress superhero movies" because, like the hobbit, they're just over the top ridiculous action scenes that quickly lose all novelty and without an interesting plot or characters in between. But Logan sounds like it's an actual proper movie, not a youtube of a video game's cutscenes edited together. Baronjutter fucked around with this message at 18:57 on Mar 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 18:50
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:Which ones? I haven't seen any noticeable stuff
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
King Kong felt 10 hours long. Think I'd rather watch every Resident Evil movie rather than sit through it again. I really like Bad Taste though
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 06:52 |
|
|
Baronjutter posted:If they had just mostly faithfully re-made the book, at least even as faithfully as the LOTR movies, but mostly kept the tone and scale down to earth like in the book, it could have been great. The action in the books is very limited and mostly depicts the dwarves as borderline useless, or constantly in over their heads and helpless and needing their burglar to get them out of it. In the movie everyone is some leaping acrobatic superhero. There's so many movies out there that drown in their own budgets, if the studio had given half or a third the budget they would have been forced to make a more grounded movie. The original LOTR movies had a pretty big budget and they, well atleast the first two, seem downright grounded compared to the Hobbit movies. After watching Five Armies I watched a friend I watched it with how it was that the 5 minute or so fight in Moria with the Orcs and the Troll in Fellowship was more exciting than all the big battle scenes in Five Armies put together? It's probably not just about it being grounded, I mean even in that action scene you have some kind of ridiculous things happening like them slaughtering dozens of Orcs, though no one, outside of Legolas (and even he is kind of restrained in that movie) does anything that's completely ridiculous. I guess it might be, as Mike likes to say that action has to mean something to be exciting, you have to care about the characters and you have to care about why they are fighting and there must (or atleast often needs to be) some kind of threat to the characters (the characters just slaughtering dozens of CGI goons or similar without breaking a sweat usually just becomes boring). Berious posted:King Kong felt 10 hours long. Think I'd rather watch every Resident Evil movie rather than sit through it again. I haven't rewatched King Kong since it came out, but when I watched it I thought it was pretty good. It's one of those movies that you kind of like while you are watching and you think of as pretty drat good, but you have no real desire to ever see again. I watched Bad Taste after having seen Fellowship. I was both incredibly confused and amazed. That's a movie I have seen several times, it is 100 times more interesting than any of the Hobbit movies or King Kong. Randarkman fucked around with this message at 19:05 on Mar 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 18:58
|
|