|
Pacific Heights is about Michael Keaton terrorizing a couple after he moves into a suite in their home. Haven't seen it in ages, but I seem to remember enjoying it at the time.
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2013 05:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 07:09 |
|
|
You gotta pay the cave-troll toll, if you wanna get in that hobbits hole.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2013 07:56
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:The fitting alone would make it hard for anyone other than the person the suit was made for to wear. Rhodey - "...okay, Tony, tell me again why your making a full body cast of myself?" Stark - "Quiet. Whatever, it's just a thing... it's a thing I'm doing. Don't worry about it."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2013 21:58
|
|
|
Just got a great email from my boss about a big project at work. It's a large project that will take a lot of time and effort to complete, so she chose to convey this with a choice movie quote. "This will be a very big project everyone, so as they said in Jaws, "We'll have to go get a boat that is much larger." 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2013 23:36
|
|
|
a radii hike posted:That phrasing is so awkward, it seems intentional. You would think, but knowing her, it's definitely not intentional. She's talked about movies before and said things like "Wasn't Gary Busey in BttF?" I don't know if she thought he was Biff or the Doc....
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2013 00:00
|
|
|
Well, it's a classic story of redemption, it's a feel-good read and watch, and it presents christmas in a way that can appeal to both religious and secular crowds. People love a story about a bad guy becoming the good guy, and Scrooge is the ultimate rear end in a top hat who eventually becomes the ultimate good person. It's even more sympathetic, as Scrooge and his demeanor are very much a product of his environment and the times he lived. He's partially a victim in the story, and you feel for him because he could've been a happy, giving man his entire life, if only he wasn't dealt so many bad hands in life.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2013 11:42
|
|
|
Luckluster posted:Got you covered: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9G4jnaznUoQ One of few good things Family Guy ever gave us was when they dedicated a full four minutes to show this entire video and go "Look how loving dumb this is." Peter - "Yeah, this happened. And you let it happen."
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2013 04:24
|
|
|
Snak posted:I am really disappointed in Blueray as a format that is supposed to be higher quality, but seems like it's trading color correction for resolution. What? It has nothing to do with format, and everything to do with some overzealous mastering dickwad who thinks they know better than the director how a film "should" look.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2013 20:07
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:He does a great job bridging the gap between technological pioneer and weird old perv. There's a movie of his that's a naked woman climbing a ladder and pouring a jug of water onto another naked woman in a bathtub, which seems kind of low on the list of events needing to be captured for science. Oh gently caress, did they finally release "Ladder Ladies 7: An Aqueous Caprice"?!? gently caress, gotta get to the store now, I'm jerkin' a half-chub already.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2013 21:29
|
|
|
feedmyleg posted:Yes, unequivocally, as stated above. Weyland originally had a lot of flashbacks in the shooting script. By the time they started filming, all those scenes had been cut or movified but Pierce had already been locked in. It was a pretty anti-climactic as well, as there wasn't even any buildup to the reveal that Weyland was on the ship. Rapace basically gets an inkling that maybe he's aboard, she runs around for about 10 seconds, turns a corner and then he's just there. I mean, I've seen better-paced episodes of Three's Company than that "stunning" reveal.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2013 17:09
|
|
|
Dissapointed Owl posted:It wasn't supposed to be a reveal though. We see David communicate with a stasis pod and we infer from his meeting with Vickers in the hallway afterwards that it was Weyland. Yeah, the viewer gets it, but you still need to reveal it to the characters, and that was done pretty poorly.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2013 19:10
|
|
|
scary ghost dog posted:You just know Herzog was massively interested to see how a Tom Cruise movie functions behind the scenes. "I just deed not understand. I say to my new friend Thomas Cruise, 'Why are you always running? What is weeth all the running? Who are you running from... is it your mother?' He deed not have any answers for me, but perhaps no one can understand what makes a man run."
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2013 12:23
|
|
|
caiman posted:In the absence of Roger Ebert I feel lost and confused. What are some recommendations for a new "go to" critic? The movie critics on the SA front-page.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2013 01:02
|
|
|
Zogo posted:
True, but it's almost an exact representation of Dredds costume. Karl Urbans Dredd costume was cooler and looked more real, but it deviated quite a lot from the costume seen in the comics.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2013 05:45
|
|
That suit looks like a cheap Halloween costume.
|
Baron Bifford posted:In the 1997 movie Contact, Ellie is whisked away to an alien world by the Machine, but everyone on Earth thinks it was her hallucination because only seconds passed on Earth while she passed hours in space. She is then called crazy and is humiliated before Congress. I always wondered why they didn't just try again. The Machine is still intact, isn't it? It's good for multiple journeys, isn't it? It doesn't cost a billion dollars per trip, right? Just send another guy and see what he has to say. I get the feeling that the government knows that it works and believes what Ellie is saying is true, but now that they've got proof they're going throw up a smokescreen and discredit her so they can keep it under wraps and use it secretly. They could even dismantle it under the guise of it being a failed program, only to rebuild it somewhere hidden so they can start jumping around the universe and exploring/exploiting space.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2013 10:56
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:Doesn't sound very much like a Carl Sagan plot. Maybe not, I'm just going on the fact that at the end of the movie, James Woods and Angela Basset clearly know that Ellie was speaking the truth, and they're keeping it hush hush. And any time the government keeps things under wraps, it's because they want to take advantage of it in secret.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2013 16:26
|
|
|
foodfight posted:Was he being serious? That is a really odd opinion. It was a somewhat common opinion though among Laserdisc fans when DVD's first started appearing. Can't say I necessarily blame them either, as a new format was coming out that was cheap, high quality, and readily available, and was making their expensive as poo poo Laserdisc collections somewhat pointless.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2013 21:32
|
|
|
Oh god, I just had a terrible thought. In Will Smiths quest to money his son into the film industry, we're probably only a few years away from Will and Jayden "starring" in a MiB film. The horror. ......the horror.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2013 02:53
|
|
|
Wedemeyer posted:I hope this is the right thread. I'm looking for a gbtl themed movie. I remember two scenes. One was a cheerleader singing a beatles song that was a lesbian love song to another cheerleader, but the singer wasn't out of the closet. The beatles song was supposed to be upbeat and fast, but for the scene it was a slower tempo. I wish I remembered the song but I know so many beatles songs it could be any of them. I think the singer might've been hispanic? Hot Dog 3: Escape to Boner Mountain
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2013 07:30
|
|
I can't remember how it turned out.
|
Five Cent Deposit posted:Here's another bit of inside dope: TONS of 4K remasters and restorations have been created by scanning at 4K, downrezzing to 2K, cleaning up, then uprezzing back to 4K. So the 4K digital master is an uprez, and the new 35mm archival film neg master is lasered out from that. Why do they bother downrezzing to work on it, and then uprezzing back to 4k? Is 4K too unwieldy to work with?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2013 16:51
|
|
|
For all we know that was a pickup shot and Depp wasn't even there to do it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2013 21:59
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:Ugh, all of my googling can only find advertisements: A "clicker"? Are you a senior citizen or something?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2013 05:01
|
|
|
Bio-pick may sound dumb, but it's the correct way. When you say bi-op-ic around someone else, they think you sound dumb. Don't be dumb, just say the dumb word. 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2013 05:10
|
|
|
Also while we're at it; Americans, it's foy-ay, not foy-er. :getoffmylawn:
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2013 07:10
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:I care even less about the "proper" version of the phrase "I could care less", so that much at least. I think it's something from the flyover states.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2013 07:24
|
|
|
Did you guys hear something? I think I have my Poors-Filter set too high. Or at just the right level. 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2013 07:39
|
|
|
Wait, so you mean it knight isn't kuh-niget?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2013 00:19
|
|
|
It could've been filmed from the back of a truck, and then the image stabilized in post later.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2013 20:13
|
|
|
effectual posted:How would you stabilize it in post? You track certain elements during the shot, and then use a software package (or by hand, if you're adventurous) to smooth the motion. A tracked point may start at location X/Y, and then end at another X/Y location, but between those two points it jumps all over the place because of camera movements, prop movements, character movement, etc etc. The software will then try to plot a smoother path for that point, so to the viewer it will eventually appear as smooth, judder free movement. Of course, you have to do this dozens, or hundreds of times for a long shot, smoothing bits here and there and making sure they all work together. The tech's getting more advanced all the time though. Even Youtube now has an option to auto-smooth camera motion when you upload a vid. Sometimes it works and give good results, other times..... it makes it looks like the walls are melting and your dropping acid.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2013 06:20
|
|
|
It doesn't get a lot of praise out there, but I really liked it. The animation is really great, and the story is interesting and takes the characters to some crazy looking body locations. The only thing that really brings it down are the live action segments. Weird, especially as they're focused on Bill Murray, but they mostly just fall flat.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2013 07:52
|
|
|
goku im piss posted:How many people here have really given up on seeing theatrical features when they premiere because of negative theater experiences? Boom, this guy, right here. Apart from seeing Django Unchained in the theatre, which I only did because I had to kill time while I was skipping work one day, I haven't been to the theatre in at least ten years. High prices, lovely food, noisy kids/teens, the endless sea of shiny smartphone screens, bad seats, all that have lead my friends and I to forsake the theatre for home viewing. We've all bought giant screens and audio setups at this point, so on "movie night", we head to one of our places and watch a movie with some good food and drink on comfy chairs and couches. It a dick, movie theatres. Eat all the dicks.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2013 10:21
|
|
|
fenix down posted:Your solution is great, but don't you think your opinion is a bit of a generalization based on one time in ten years? You misunderstand. It wasn't the Django screening that had me swear off theatres, it was the hundreds of screenings 10+ years ago that made my friends and I give up on theatres. I actually dated a girl who worked at a theatre at one point, so we saw everything there was to see for about a 5 year period since it was free for us. After a while, the few pros of seeing a movie at the theatre just couldn't outweigh the ever-growing list of cons, so eventually we just said gently caress it and never went back. I can't even remember what the last movie I saw in theatres was, besides Django, it was so long ago now. Maybe one of the LoTR movies?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2013 23:38
|
|
|
ethanol posted:I saw the movie Flight last night. Isn't everything in the cockpit recorded? Why don't the investigators care that captain denzel is taking oxygen hits and sleeping for half of the flight? Probably because drinking on the job was the more worrying concern, plus the fact that despite being against the rules and grounds for dismissal, a pilot or copilot sleeping during the flight is not entirely uncommon and one of the dirty little secrets of the airline industry.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2013 00:16
|
|
|
david_a posted:Do "high-end" TV shows like Breaking Bad have greater volume dynamic range than other shows? It seems I have to ride the remote a bit more than something like the X-Files. Maybe it's just modern drama shows having a more cinematic presentation? With home theaters nowadays I imagine the sound can be mixed more similar to movies than it could in the 90s. I've wondered this myself, and thought maybe it had to do with modern shows being mixed for 7.1, and when your TV or whatever downsamples to two channels the balance gets all thrown off. Which if it's the case, it's odd that they mix for 7.1. As much as widescreen TV's have invaded every home out there, I still know very few people who own a discreet audio system to back up their TV. People seemed to care way more about a big picture and higher res, and still don't really give a poo poo about better audio.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2014 01:55
|
|
|
Trump posted:If the downmixing is done straight up, with no weird processing like virtual surround or presets like the "movie" or "music" option some TVs have, you won't be able to tell the difference. Downmixing doesn't remove channels, but simply throws the available sound out 2 speakers. The center channel will come out of both speakers. Yeah, but in a 7.1 setup, you can tune the volume on each speaker, not to mention that there's an expectation that certain channels are going to be coming from different angles, and will sound different just based on physics. A 7.1 downmix to 2 channels can sound just fine, but to say they sound the same is patently false. Patently, I say!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2014 03:16
|
|
|
Lester Shy posted:At the very beginning of Dallas Buyer's Club, what has McConaughey's character done to cause all the rodeo guys to chase after him violently? I haven't seen the movie yet, but based on the description of the movie and his character, maybe he slept with all their wives/girlfriends?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2014 11:58
|
|
|
regulargonzalez posted:Given the mechanics of how x-ray machines work, this seems unlikely. Film cameras work by gathering in light through a lens which focuses that light onto the film contained behind the lens. X-ray machines work by shooting out radiation from the "camera" at a distant piece of film which is sensitive to that type of radiation, and materials that are too hard for the x-rays to penetrate as well (bone, for instance) that are in the way block some of that radiation so they show up, kind of like a shadow, on the film. He might be thinking of Cineradiography. That's capturing moving images with a camera and a fluoroscope. I wouldn't be surprised if filmmakers had messed around with fluoroscopes in the early days of film before the deadly effects of long-term x-ray exposure where known.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
NeuroticErotica posted:I've got a hunch that they were talking about infrared photography and just kinda took one step too far. Probably right. People certainly did gently caress around with x-rays a lot though, and not all that long ago. My parents remember being taken to buy new shoes when they were kids, and some shoe shops would measure your feet with a "Shoe-Fitting Fluoroscope". Those things were still in operation up into the early 70's, being ran by shoe-salesman with little training other than "stick their feet in there, then turn it on". The machines were extremely poorly constructed as well, and x-ray leakage was a given.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2014 12:57
|
|
|
xcore posted:Holy poo poo. What have I been doing with my life? Masturbating.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2014 07:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 07:09 |
|
|
Speaking of practical effects, I posted this bit in a hobbies thread, but anyone interested in the real nitty gritty of practical effects might like this too. Check out the Stan Winston School of Character Arts website. You can sign up for a paid account, but you get a 3-day free trial, during which you can watch as many of their videos as you want. Just cancel before the 3 days are up, and you won't be charged. You can also cancel your entire account, and then rereg for another free 3-day trial, ad-nauseum. Keep in mind this stuff isn't glitzy "The Magic of Movies!" type vids, these are "mix these noxious chemicals, how to make a mold, how to make animatronics" vids. There's tons of vids on everything from mold making, to animatronics, to maquette painting, chroming, sculpting, fabrication; seriously, just a poo poo ton of seriously cool stuff. If you have even a passing interest in any of this stuff, it's hours and hours of crazy behind the scenes stuff of professional effects artists. Hell, you may never need to know how to create a cable-controlled tentacle effect, but it's drat cool watching how it's done. Great personalities like Jordu Schell and Shannon Shea's stuff are great too, they're really easy going and have fun with the material. Shane Mahan has a few vids up too I believe; much more serious guy, but he's one of the originals from Winstons studio and has some great insights into effects. Plus you get to see loads of pictures of a young Mahan constantly wearing jorts (he may be a nevernude).
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2014 13:25
|
|