|
Kull the Conqueror posted:Yes, thank you. I feel less ashamed I could not remember that name, but now I won't forget it. Yep, and of course it was something instigated by a photograph. And anytime Muybridge comes up I have to recommend Rebecca Solnit's River of Shadows, which is a great book on him and on California, technology, Native Americans, and shooting people in the chest. quote:Those gestures -- a gymnast turning a somersault in midair, a nude pouring water -- were unfamiliar and eerie stopped because they showed what had always been present but never seen. Set into motion, they were uncanny another way when they undid the familiar distinction between representations, which did not move, and life that did. Through the new technologies -- the train to the landscape, the camera to the spectacle -- the Victorians were trying to find their way back, but where they had lost the old familiar things they recovered exotic new ones. What they had lost was solid; what they gained was made out of air. Edit: oh, and the "killed a guy" part: quote:Larkyns was with a group of men and women playing cribbage in the parlor. He came to the doorway and asked of the figure obscured by darkness, "Who are you?" The photographer, who must have seen only a silhouette before the light, answered, "My name is Muybridge and I have a message for you from my wife." At the word wife, he squeezed the trigger of his revolver. The bullet pierced Larkyns an inch below his left nipple. He clapped his hand to his heart and ran through the house and out the other door, collapsing under a large oak tree. Another man at the scene covered Muybridge with his own gun and disarmed him. Muybridge never tried to resist or flee. He was taken to the parlor, and he apologized to the women there for "the interruption". CharlieFoxtrot fucked around with this message at 19:49 on Apr 21, 2013 |
#
¿
Apr 21, 2013 19:42
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 13:15 |
|
|
Mescal posted:Thanks. The NPR podcast Planet Money did a rather accessible episode on Hollywood Accounting: http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2010/05/the_friday_podcast_angelina_sh.html If you want to go more in-depth, you can check out the book they mention: Edward Jay Epstein's The Hollywood Economist: The Hidden Financial Reality Behind the Movies.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2013 07:45
|
|
|
RagingBoner posted:There is a movie where a woman and her friend conspire to kill a man, I think he was either an abusive husband, or a terrible landlord... I can't remember. They work together to try and conceal the murder (I think they roll the body up in a carpet?) Is the friend a woman? Then that sounds like Diabolique (1956).
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2013 18:10
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:What does "shot" mean in this context. In the context of looking at the final film, you'd have 15 different shots from two angles.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2013 11:28
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:I just do not remember anything about it. I have seen it a couple of times and all I really remember is Roger Moore dressed as a clown. Also the racism in regards to the British and Indians. He's a clown that defuses a nuclear bomb! If Homer Simpson has seen that movie twice, surely we can see it at least once.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2013 15:59
|
|
|
Friedpundit posted:Re: Czech film. Is The Cremator (1969) stylistically singular, or was it part of a movement of Czech film from around that time period? Juraj Herz is usually framed as being tangentially connected to, but not really a part of, the Czech New Wave of the late 60s, which was noted both for its formal experimentation and its often allegorical political critique. Depending on what stylistic factors you're thinking of, you might want to look at Valerie and Her Week of Wonders (1970) or Case for a Rookie Hangman (1970). Edit: Though a lot of that separation is probably because of (historical and current) ethnic bias against Slovaks? CharlieFoxtrot fucked around with this message at 19:05 on Jun 9, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2013 18:45
|
|
|
4K refers to the resolution of the image: If you've seen Lawrence of Arabia in the past it was probably a 35mm print (and probably a not-well-preserved one); the digital 4K restoration will look much better and more detailed in comparison. CharlieFoxtrot fucked around with this message at 21:55 on Jun 14, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2013 21:53
|
|
|
Alfred P. Pseudonym posted:I walked past the electronics department at Wal-Mart today. Toy Story was playing on all the TVs on Blu-Ray. One of the TVs was one that artificially increases the frame rate. It was loving horrible, especially being able to compare side by side. It looked like a cut scene from one of the Lego Star Wars games. Why do these TVs exist? Sports. And video games.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2013 22:49
|
|
|
FishBulb posted:It wasn't just that it was a flop, it was a big enough flop to destroy his company. I can't help but picture him in his vineyards like Don Corleone in his garden.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2013 15:31
|
|
|
echoplex posted:Can anyone recommend some films that focus on The Troubles in Northern Ireland circa 1970/80? I've got Shadow Dancer which is a bit more recent. Or anything of that period/location - could be a comedy or horror etc, so long as it looks a bit bleak and bombed out. There's also Ken Loach's Hidden Agenda (1990), and Alan Clarke's Elephant (1989). The last one might be of particular interest if you're looking for "bleak and bombed out"; the film's basically a bunch of Steadicam shots through locations in Belfast depicting sectarian killings. It was produced by Danny Boyle and was an inspiration for Gus Van Sant's film of the same name.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2013 19:52
|
|
|
What is a good book on the history of American film? A one-stop survey of the whole shebang is preferred.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2013 05:40
|
|
|
Schweinhund posted:Everything on here from 1927 or earlier plus City Lights and Modern Times which are from the 30's: http://www.imdb.com/chart/top?ref_=nb_mv_3_chttp And you probably shouldn't make a silent movie unless you have a good reason to because it's not 1927. Well, many introductory film classes start off asking students to make a silent (or at least non-dialogue) film in order to emphasize the visual storytelling possibilities of the medium.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2013 07:53
|
|
|
Five Cent Deposit posted:Also FYI nobody says "smash cut". It's just "cut". "Smash cut" pops up in screenplays all the time.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2013 21:49
|
|
|
Five Cent Deposit posted:It is considered bad form by everyone else on the crew when screenwriters do this. Well, yes, I understand it's not useful to the work done in production and post-production phases, but screenwriters do use this when they're writing specs and when scripts are in development. They obviously don't indicate every cut in their script so when they do, and when they use terms like "smash cut", they're trying to emphasize the impact a transition should have on the audience (and to the reader of the script). Similarly, critics and people who write about film also use the term to indicate the different emotional impact of certain cuts (as scary ghost dog points out) because not all cuts have the same value and function to the audience. I'm mainly taking issue with the "this is wrong, don't use it" attitude when there are quite a few people who do use it, and use it for a reason, especially since chances are the poster is not working in post.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2013 05:10
|
|
|
WYA posted:Why is Duncan Jones directing a World of Warcraft movie? Dude likes making movies about isolated loners dependent on computer technology to make their lives whole... seems like a perfect fit.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2013 20:40
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:Hollywood needs to make an action-packed remake of Blue. Well, Red did well enough for a sequel... Serious recommendations beyond other Wong Kar-Wai films: Reprise (2008) or Bonsái (2011), both of which happen to be one-word titles about young writers, but both also have a similar mix of manic energy and melancholic introspection, plus a strange relationship to music.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2013 02:15
|
|
|
If intersex/gender identity issues fall under this purview there's also the Argentine film XXY (2007).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2013 01:39
|
|
|
meristem posted:I'm almost afraid to ask this here, but could anyone recommend any good heartwarming romantic comedies (defined as: ones that don't feature narcissist mains and stupid unrealistic hijinks, or keep these to a minimum, but do have a happy ending)? Something that would fall into a cluster defined by: About a Boy; Love, Actually; Four Weddings and a Funeral; Secretary; Don Jon; My Sassy Girl (the Korean one); Vicky Donor; Ek Main Aur Ekk Tu; Monsoon Wedding. Bonus if not American/British. Sidewalls (Medianeras) (2011) from Argentina might be up your alley. It's also on Netflix Instant. Although it's kind of hard to parse a list of films without narcissist mains and stupid unrealistic hijinks that also contains Love, Actually.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2014 21:57
|
|
|
Hbomberguy posted:I study both English Lit and Film, so I kind of have it both ways. There are definitely a lot of smart people between the two courses, it's just weird being confronted with the ones who don't actually have any interest in learning about the medium beyond scriptwriting 101, is the action cool or whatever. Especially in the United States and the UK there is a huge gulf between the people who study filmmaking and the people who study film as a medium and art form, and it's not just in terms of the new film school brats whose knowledge of film barely extends beyond the handful of directors they want to emulate or those beelining to work in the mainstream industry; even those who look to the fringes in terms of films and filmmaking tend to cloister themselves off with the idea of film as personal expression and thus looking to context or analysis sullies the work somehow. I could go into all the reasons why this is especially prevalent in the US but I'll just echo the fact that (especially if you're in a small liberal arts college) that lit students might be more receptive to those kinds of conversations. I'm just actually kind of interested in what film courses you're taking if you're running into this attitude all the time. I can understand people being resistant or uninterested in the more esoteric or specialized film theory and criticism, but you're talking about people not understanding basic concepts in aesthetics and narrative.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2014 21:02
|
|
|
SkunkDuster posted:At the end of a lot of movie credits, I see the MPAA logo and another logo that looks like a flower with 5 petals. What is that second one? It's IATSE, the International Alliance of Theatrical and Stage Employees, the union which represents most of the below-the-line (i.e., makeup artists, lighting technicians, etc.) personnel on a film crew. 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2014 02:48
|
|
|
See also: basically the entire French New Wave
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2014 08:46
|
|
|
Really, what's anathema to the "show don't tell" rule is expositional dialogue. Film isn't just a visual medium; it's a multisensory medium. All the good examples of voice-over post so far take advantage of that; I'd add Godard's Tout va bien (Everything's All Right, 1972) where the entire first ten minutes is basically voice-over and yet it's one of the most energetic, insightful, and psychologically subtle intros in film. That is, in all these good examples, the film uses the voice-over and visuals in ways that either accentuate each other or play against each other. What the narrator/actor says is undercut by what we see, or what we hear adds irony to what we see, and so forth. This is something that voice-over is especially good for precisely because it's displaced in time, and because it signals non-immediacy. Expositional dialogue, where you have the actors basically standing in a scene reciting what's happened (this is very common in soap operas and procedurals), is what the "show don't tell" rule fights against. In this case, you have a redundancy between what you hear and what you see, which is good for audiences that are distracted and just have the TV on while doing something else, but not so much for an attentive audience who want to see something that's actually good.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2014 19:27
|
|
|
The color temperature of lights is measured in Kelvin so it's probably the only kind of temperature that has any relevance in this thread, Jesus. Edit: Sir Kodiak posted:I'm trying to recall, does this issue come up in movies? I can't remember the last time I heard a movie character comment on the weather in terms of specific degrees. Miles get used a lot, does that seem weird to foreigners who watch American movies? When they do subtitles or dubs, do they switch it out for metric units? This is an interesting question, though. I have seen movies where they have miles in the subtitles even though what was said was in metric. I've also seen films that, when they mention currencies, they convert it to dollars. CharlieFoxtrot fucked around with this message at 02:03 on Apr 6, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2014 01:55
|
|
|
The Best of Youth was was a pretty good 20th-century Italian family saga, but it's also really just a miniseries that got screened in theaters.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2014 08:26
|
|
|
regulargonzalez posted:Interesting. Is that from any particular style guide? I'm trying to imagine how a biography of Muhammed Ali would read. Would it say "Muhammed Ali was born to Cassius and Odessa Clay in 1942" and refer to him as Ali throughout his childhood and adolescence? Certainly that wouldn't happen with a woman who later took her husband's name -- you wouldn't find "Hillary Clinton's 3rd birthday was a momentous event" or w/e. A cursory look at an Ali biography has this sentence: "Cassius Marcellus Clay, Jr., as Ali was once known, was born..." and then refers to Ali from then on. Also, the AP Stylebook is pretty clear on referring to people by the names they publicly live by, just look at Chelsea Manning
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2014 01:13
|
|
|
bows1 posted:Weird. DVDs are so low quality though. Is here a reason for that? You send your works to the LoC for the purposes of establishing copyright, not for any archival purposes.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2014 01:55
|
|
|
david_a posted:Chungking Express and Fallen Angels have crime segments in them, although I wouldn't call them action movies (there are some action scenes in the second, though). Days of Being Wild and As Tears Go By would be the Wong Kar-Wai films that feel more "crime-y" to me. The former even has a gunfight and assassination that kinda comes out of nowhere.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2014 23:18
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:Superman Returns uses deleted scenes from Donner's Superman and The Limey uses clips from old Terrance Stamp films to show a young Terrance Stamp. Are their other movies that re-appropriate old footage like that? Kirk Douglas plays a washed-up actor in Two Weeks in Another Town (1962), and in it they screen footage from another film, The Bad and the Beautiful (1953), to show his younger self. Both were directed by Vincente Minnelli.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2014 09:36
|
|
|
They did have an offhand reference to a lost spacecraft in Rise, though who knows if that was just a wink and a nod or if they have been planning to pay that off this whole time.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 17:43
|
|
|
victorious posted:Does anyone have any recommendations for good books about film-making that focus on the script-writing or screenplay side of things? My brother's an aspiring writer and I'd like to get him something like that for his birthday. Maybe even something written by a film writer would be good. William Goldman's Adventures in the Screen Trade would be my go-to. He's not only written great movies but can actually write well about writing them, which is not always the case with a lot of writing books.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 03:49
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
PaulDirac posted:Not really, dancing is rythmically moving to music. A lot can be said about a lot of action scenes. Some are visually very pleasing. Some have very complex martial arts movements etc, but that doesnt count for all of them. I suppose you cant really say much meaningfull about them that is universally the case for every action scene. They share the core similarity that each is about the manipulation of bodies (organic or mechanical) to produce forms in space over a specified period of time. It's just that in action scenes those forms usually end up with broken bones and poo poo blowing up.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2014 14:46
|
|
|
MrBling posted:Does Tony Gilroy prefer writing to directing or is there another reason he didn't really do much directing after Michael Clayton? It seems like he should have made a lot more movies after that. He directed Duplicity which did terribly, but then he also directed Bourne Legacy which was kind of a big deal.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2014 18:26
|
|
|
Criminal Minded posted:Since I have no cell phone (for a couple more days), no transportation, and three straight off days starting tonight, I'm going to watch Ken Burns' Civil War, La Commune (Paris 1871), and A Grin Without a Cat. This oughta be interesting. Peter Watkins is a really good filmmaker. I tell myself that one of these days I'm going to sit down and watch The Journey over a week or something but then I just think about it and it seems so intimidating
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:you jest, but this is actually sorta what i was getting at: i think some people look at a movie like Battle of Algiers and are a little too eager to fit it into a "scrappy underdogs vs. evil empire" narrative. not to say the underdogs weren't scrappy, or that the empire isn't evil, but it's too complex to apply the Rocky formula to. that's actually what i like about the movie, it doesn't flinch from reality. Considering that Gillo Pontecorvo made the movie in collaboration with the Algerians who actually fought in the war, yeah it's surprisingly even-handed. I've ended up watching the cafe bombing sequence dozens of times and it's a superb example of editing.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2015 17:47
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:Mostly thanks to the French new-wave. It's funny because for the stereotype I'd spot you the Left Bank stuff and Godard's later work, but all the "core" New Wave films pretty much have straightforward plots and fast-paced editing, and are usually filled with sexy women, guns, and pop music. It's like people using "Citizen Kane" as the epitome of "boring art film"
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2015 06:38
|
|
|
monster on a stick posted:I've been wanting to watch Red Cliff but my knowledge of period Chinese history isn't exactly great. Am I going to be lost and should I read some Cliff Notes version of Romance of the Three Kingdoms first or just go in blind and enjoy John Woo making a five hour war epic?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2015 05:39
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:How often is executive producer a real job? (I'm assuming that some people get this credit for putting up money, and that some actors or directors negotiate it as part of a deal where they get a cut of the gross.) Not some, all. The "executive" in executive producer is like the "executive" in CEO and if they get involved with the project it is usually only with extremely high-level decisions like packaging stars. The people who do the organizational work seeing the project through are usually credited as producers, and the ones who manage day-to-day operations are line producers.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2015 07:22
|
|
|
EP credits work differently in TV because writers are relatively more powerful and the head writer is usually the one who also oversees the production of all the episodes, so they (or another producer) get the executive producer credit to reflect that. Each episode will usually have their own director and producer but there is a bigger chain of command above them as compared to features. Though you still get the titular EP credit in TV as well, JJ Abrams had almost nothing to do with Lost after getting the project off the ground and directing the pilot CharlieFoxtrot fucked around with this message at 10:24 on Feb 11, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2015 10:21
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 13:15 |
|
|
Siets posted:For what it's worth, I just read through his "plot-holes" article by copy-pasting the content into a website that converted everything to lowercase. Quick problem solver. It is definitely also worth reading and answers pretty much every stupid thing any defender of Tactical Realism might throw out at you. Just what I was looking for, thanks thread! Now if you can get a website that automatically inserts articles into their proper places, we're in business
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2015 22:09
|
|