|
Sporadic posted:With Aguirre, the Wrath of God which is the original audio? German or English? This is funny because I asked this same question in a previous "questions too short for their own thread". Anyway, the audio is looped, so the "original" audio doesn't really matter because neither version is the actual original audio anyway. Pick what you will. Having seen it now with both audio tracks, I personally prefer the german version with subs simply because Kinski sounds better to me in German than English (which is what was originally suggested to me too).
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2008 22:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 30, 2024 20:17 |
|
|
Cbouncerrun posted:There was a movie my uncle was watching when I was 5 or 6 years old. It was something about a killer baby. I only remember two scenes. One is of someone picking up the baby and it biting them in the neck. The other is a big fire in the baby's house, I think the baby died in it. Any ideas what movie it was? You're probably thinking of I Don't Want To Be Born. (also, this is more of an "Identify A Movie For Me" sort of post)
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2008 16:46
|
|
|
Pedro De Heredia posted:It was just a Bill Murray cameo. I don't think he was intended to be anyone's dad. It's just funny, to have his character seem important and then leave him behind. I just thought it was amusing to have an actor who is always in Anderson's films miss the same train that the "new guy" (Adrian Brody) happens to make it onto. A sort of wink from Anderson to his fans that he's slightly changed up his regular stable of actors for that film. I'm with you that we probably weren't supposed to read anything else into that (if we were even supposed to read in what I did). Also -- Murray seems to enjoy making cameos anyway, so it's not surprising when he pops up like this.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2008 21:33
|
|
|
Mr. Gone posted:I hate that chickenshit disclaimer, and I always wonder why they started putting that in The commentary track for "Blair Witch 2: Book of Shadows", for example, is basically the director working through the whole movie explaining how what you're seeing isn't what he intended for you to see, how the producers forced his hand and ruined the movie, and why it's basically a failure as a film. I'm not sure why the studio bothered leaving his commentary on the DVD, but it's there, and I can guess why they'd want to be sure that people understood that he wasn't speaking for them.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2008 14:30
|
|
|
LDJohnson posted:So why is Matt Murdoch acting as a prosecutor is Daredevil? It's his day job. Superheroes tend to have high profile day jobs. To my knowledge, there has never been a superhero who destroys super beings from alternate dimensions at night but teaches middle school during the day. There should be though.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2008 16:40
|
|
|
BooDoug187 posted:I thought for awhile Spider-man was a high school teacher, before the whole Civil War thing, and really his other day job of being a freelance photographer was also low profile. I forgot about that. My comic book nerd cred is smashed. I obviously also didn't know about the whole prosecutor/defense attorney problem in Daredevil though. Not that there aren't a few other issues with that movie ...
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2008 18:43
|
|
|
bows1 posted:Does anyone know of any movies, or scenes that are shot in first person? Horror movies are full of first person scenes. Try "The Blair Witch Project" or "Cloverfield" or "Diary of the Dead". [REC] is also all in first person. For a comedic take, check out the scenes from The Breather's perspective in "Student Bodies". Come to think of it, if anything, there are far too many horror films that use this gimmick now.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2008 23:05
|
|
|
incredible bear posted:it's a bit weird that this stuff gets away with such a low rating, but it seems to be pretty consistent. Check out the documentary "This Film Has Not Yet Been Rated" for an interesting tour of how the system works.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2009 16:20
|
|
|
timeandtide posted:I just saw Don't Look Now, and I have to ask about the ending I guess I'll spoiler too, since we are talking about the final reveal and all ... It isn't a previously mentioned character, but it is wearing the same sort of coat his daughter was when she died -- we're supposed to suspect that it is his daughter (until the reveal). The colour red is also a recurrent theme in the film too. I also think that the ending was simply intended to mess with your head a bit, and if the reveal was something "ordinary", it would have taken away from the weirdness. I suspect you got all of those things already, but then I'm at least confirming that I think you took from it what you were supposed to. I think that "Don't Look Now", being an Italian/American production, is actually a little bit more Italian in theme and style. Don't worry about trying to figure everything out, just go with it (the best example of this kind of style I think is Argento's "Inferno" -- if you try to understand everything properly, you'll hate the film, but if you approach it like a dream/nightmare, it's awesome).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2009 17:05
|
|
|
Moeru posted:Thanks to the Giallo thread, I want to see some of the good examples. My first foray in was when I rented the Suspiria DVD from netflix. I couldn't make out anything anyone was saying but it had no subtitle\hearing impared track. Would there be a good legitimate place to find subtitles for DVDs so I can rent this again and enjoy it? If you can track down the Blue Underground 2 DVD release of Suspiria, it should have English subtitles included (at least, that's what the Blue Underground website says).
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2009 23:10
|
|
|
OK FOLKS posted:My question is, when shooting a movie, don't the scenes with a lot of CGI get filmed first, so they can be completed while other shooting is done? Why would they have done it like that? It just seems weird that they filmed it in that order. It takes a long time to complete the CGI scenes, so it actually makes perfect sense to film the live action sequences of those scenes first so they could be shipped off to whichever studio was doing the CGI as soon as possible so they could get to work on that. EDIT -- Reading comprehension issues (thanks Akuma) InfiniteZero fucked around with this message at 18:26 on Nov 30, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2009 16:16
|
|
|
Akuma posted:Because OK FOLKS is saying they did it the opposite way; shot the non-CG scenes first. Well then that makes me quite the idiot I guess.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2009 18:25
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:Yea, I'm one of those "BUT THOSE AREN'T PANZERS!" people who can't watch Patton. There are two unrelated threads about panzer tanks in CineD in one day (they're discussing panzers over in the "Best of 2009" thread too). I find this very confusing.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2010 16:31
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:Well, to me it's more a movie using something that looks completely different from what they're describing. It would be like watching Public Enemies, and insted of cars from the 20s, they were all scooting around in PT Crusiers because they were easier to get, or they were toting MP5 because they would be easier to get than Thompsons. Oh that's fine, and I even understand your issue with it all. I just didn't expect this to be Panzer Discusso today. No worries.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2010 20:53
|
|
|
Regression posted:I feel this very fascinating question didn't get enough "time" in the movie, apart from that one line of Rachael's. No spoiler tags considering everything is debatable. I'm not sure which version you saw, but the movie actually spends a whole lot of time on this issue. There are visual clues, like the glow in the eyes of replicants (watch and see if this ever happens to Deckard), the infamous dream sequence (how would Gaff know?), Deckard's collection of photographs, and a whole bunch of tiny clues which are debated and argued over endlessly by fans of the film (ex: is Gaff the actual Blade Runner and Deckard his puppet?).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2010 15:56
|
|
|
dorkasaurus_rex posted:Is there some sort of "must see" movie list out there that isn't the IMDb top 250 out there? They Shoot Pictures is an exceptionally good list, and when you find stuff you like, you can search for other essentials from the same director. You can also find recommended viewing broken down by decade, the best films of the 21st century, and a really good list of just noir films there.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2010 14:01
|
|
|
Piano posted:stuff like The Devil Wears Prada(fashion/magazine publishing industries) You might want to check out The September Issue, which is basically the real life version of "The Devil Wears Prada". I was actually much more interested in Wintour's second ("Grace" I believe is her name) by the end. Bonus points for the most ridiculous tennis lesson ever put to film, courtesy of the always ridiculous Andre Leon Talley.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2010 16:16
|
|
|
melon cat posted:\/ Thanks, man. I just didn't think his character would go that far, but I guess he did. Rewatch the film and think about how things played out from that character's perspective. I don't think he was acting out of character at all. I don't mean this in a lovely "you didn't get it!" sort of way either, a movie like The Departed is actually fun to watch a second time when you know how it's going to play out because it helps you understand character motivations that seemed odd on first viewing. There are little nudges and winks throughout for you on second viewing.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2010 14:51
|
|
|
NeuroticErotica posted:And even if you did have your own print, you can't show it at a theater because of copyright. That depends on the studio and what you're trying to show though. Some studios will let you pay a flat rate royalty fee up front for films and don't even ask where you got the print from. It's weird.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2010 03:53
|
|
|
Saul Bass was a graphic designer who made some incredible and iconic movie posters: (he also designed the Bell Telephone logo and the AT&T "death star") He also made some fantastic film title sequences, like the one from Psycho (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4L9J-CUAl8) or Vertigo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkHn8PNGYaA). Anyway, here's what happens when a graphic designer makes a movie: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070531/ I think this is a really good and largely overlooked film. I don't know why people don't lump it in with the canon of 70s sci-fi, because it really belongs in there.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2010 14:53
|
|
|
Akuma posted:I watched Kick-rear end last night, and it got me thinking; how often do films use pieces of music from another film's score? I'm sure it must happen a decent amount, but I'm drawing a complete blank. Shaw Brothers films often share music, probably just to cut costs (*). They also cribbed the siren sound effect from "Ironside" for "King Boxer" and then Tarantino used that same sound effect in "Kill Bill", so the circle was completed when a western director stole the sound effect from the Asian director who had stolen that same sound effect from the west. I also believe that there are low budget Italian films that pilfer soundtracks from American films, but I can't immediately recall any examples. (*) Shaw Brothers films also often share not only music, but entire sets. If you watch a lot of their films you start to recognize sets between films which is odd but some critics like Bey Logan will argue that it actually makes a fan of their films feel sort of "at home" when you start constantly seeing the same set.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2010 16:15
|
|
|
FitFortDanga posted:This also happened frequently under the old Hollywood studio system. You spend a lot of money on a set, you want to get the most out of it. Are the reused sets very recognizable in those films? I don't do a lot of these films myself so I've never noticed this. With Shaw Brothers films, the sets are often barely changed between films (there's a dining room/restaurant set that I think gets used in almost every film and it is instantly recognizable, for example).
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2010 17:41
|
|
|
KillRoy posted:I didn't see a reccomendations thread, so I thought I'd ask here. Are there any good documentaries or behind the scenes DVD special that goes into detail about older,practical pre-CGI special effects? There's a documentary making of on John Carpenter's The Thing that isn't specifically about practical effects (it covers the making of the whole film), but has a lot of really interesting information about how some of the SFX shots in that film were created.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2010 14:43
|
|
|
Amazon review posted:PLEASE DO NOT BUY THIS. PLEASE!, January 28, 2010 THE ONLY WAY TO PROPERLY REVIEW A STEVEN SEAGAL DVD IS IN ALL CAPS. twistedmentat posted:Finally, I really want to get a blu ray player, and they're fairly cheap now. I used to buy a lot of DVDs, but i've put a hold on that due to BRs. Though I discovered that I have to get a HD tv first because of the connections. Which sucks because if I have an HD tv I need to get an HD box from my cable company which is more money, on top of the TV. You can get BR players that use composite video but I'd suggest that you save your money for an HDTV first. You're not really getting your money's worth from a BR player if you're using a regular TV and a composite output. It's not really an upgrade at all, since your TV won't even support the higher resolutions that BluRay uses. InfiniteZero fucked around with this message at 22:27 on May 11, 2010 |
|
#
¿
May 11, 2010 22:21
|
|
|
bad movie knight posted:As great as Raiders of the Lost Ark is, it would be 100x more awesome if it starred Klaus Kinski as the villain and was directed by Werner Herzog. RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK EXT. DESERT - DAY CAMERA LINGERS ON SAND BLOWING IN THE WIND FOR FIVE MINUTES WHILE POPOL VUH PLAYS.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2010 14:53
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:So what was the first film to have a cross promotion with something outside of the movies?  As a child, I was really mad at my brother because he got two Berlin Alexanderplatz cups and I even offered to trade him for three Katzelmacher cups but he wouldn't.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2010 18:06
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:And yea, Zhora really effortlessly takes out Deckard, but just stuns him. Though I would choose to think that this is because she knows if she takes out a Blade Runner, the cops will put even more heat on them. Or alternatively she only stuns him because he's a replicant and can absorb a lot of physical damage. The only Blade Runner in the film is Gaff.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2010 17:50
|
|
|
Blompkin posted:It doesn't make any sense, given all the facts given about replicants. There would have to be an absolutely huge conspiracy, it doesn't make sense that he'd be weaker than the other replicants and feel pain, his personality is too human (far more human than the replicant with implanted memories) What if he's a newer model or a prototype like Rachael? Why does it have to be a huge conspiracy? Blompkin posted:and there's no way the authorities would leave him unmonitored for one minute of the day if this were the case. That's why Gaff is with him all the time. I believe that Gaff is the Blade Runner and that Deckard is his tool he uses for the investigation. Blompkin posted:It just doesn't make any sense, and to me, always sounded like something the director decided after the movie was finished. As a final nail in the coffin, the author of the original story, Phillip K. Dick, has him test himself at the end, and he discovers that he is human. Right, but the book isn't the movie and vice versa. In the movie, Deckard very specifically avoids the question of whether he ever tested himself. Blompkin posted:The fact, however, that he actually begins to question whether or not he's human or a replicant comes from him finally growing to empathize with the replicants. He realizes that they're not alien or inferior, but just as real as any human being. As a man who prides himself in being able to tell the difference between a replicant and a human, he's no longer sure, even to the point that he can't be sure about himself. Also true, but there are some other incidents that lead Deckard to question his own origin -- especially in his interaction with Gaff, who very importantly teases Deckard about the unicorn dream. Blompkin posted:That said, it wouldn't make any sense if he was a replicant, which is why I don't like the theory. It takes a brilliant and beautiful masterpiece, and distorts its wonderful ending into a senseless 'M. Night Shamalamadingdong' twist. I think it's even better that the film leaves it open ended and it's so much better than a Shyamalan twist because it works on several levels and it doesn't punch you in the stomach or even really matter that much to the rest of the film as a whole.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2010 20:01
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:Wait, Dear Prudence as in the Souxsie song? I never noticed it being in there. No, Siouxsie was "Helter Skelter": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szPQCvJ8MPg
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2010 21:55
|
|
|
kapalama posted:1. It is just Japanese slasher porn? It's not pornographic at all actually unless you're also prepared to argue that Annie Hall is "New York Intellectual Porn" and that The 400 Blows is "Character Study Porn" and that You The Living is "Surrealist Porn". Slapping a "[x] porn" label on something that doesn't prominently feature people getting naked and loving is pure laziness because you're just randomly assigning negative connotations and meanings to something without even bothering in the slightest to define those connotations and meanings. It smacks of academic hysteria and/or lackadaisical journalism. InfiniteZero fucked around with this message at 19:06 on Aug 3, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2010 19:02
|
|
|
ZenMaster posted:I assumed adding "porn" to a film description meant adding a modifier of "gratuitous", or "an excessive amount of". So is Annie Hall "East Coast Intellectual Porn"? Is Sense and Sensibility (pick your favourite) "Period Costume Porn"? Would Goodfellas be "Gangster Porn"? I'm just wondering. Also, if you download a whole pile of photos of cars at work, would it be alright if you were fired for "downloading porn"? Because really, nobody needs that many photos of Camaros. It's excessive and gratuitous. Pornographic!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2010 21:48
|
|
|
dolphins are gay posted:Fight Club was 2000, so uh, sorry. The UFC for that matter had peaked once several years before Fight Club showed up back in the days when nobody knew what to do about the Gracie clan. That was in the mid-90s.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2010 19:23
|
|
|
If you're interested in looking at a film that gained at the box office slowly over time rather than on opening weekend, take a look at the numbers for My Big Fat Greek Wedding. I'm not a Hollywood numbers pro by any stretch, but I do understand that the film is used as an example of a sort of weird "word of mouth" grower rather than your normal big opener you typically see now. The target audience (middle aged women) obviously factors into how that film performed but there you go.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2010 17:30
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Isn't "starts out small, but consistently grows" pretty much the definition of a sleeper hit? I would agree, but I believe that in the current "everything depends on opening weekend" style of releasing, a "sleeper hit" is also a movie that wasn't expected to do well that does in fact do well and/or a movie that actually has legs past three weeks or so, because almost every movie isn't expected to last that long theatrically.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2010 19:03
|
|
|
Izzy Mandelbaum posted:Does anyone know the name of the documentary about people obsessed with watching movies? Someone posted something about it here a few months ago but I can't remember the name of it. It looked kinda interesting and I'd love to track it down. Cinemania is good, but it's much more about obsessive behavior than it is about movies. It barely matters that the people are obsessed with movies specifically, they could be pokemon collectors for all it really matters to what the documentary is really about. It's still good though. If you want to watch a documentary about people obsessed with film and how film culture spreads, I'd recommend Z Channel: A Magnificent Obsession instead (and Z Channel will also probably leave you with a list of movies to hunt down and watch too).
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2010 17:15
|
|
|
Trump posted:Aliens directors cut. It doesn't take anything away and adds a bunch of awesome. gently caress the haters! I don't think the debate over the directors cut of Aliens is really about "hating" or even whether or not the extra scenes are "awesome" but rather that the added stuff further messes with the pacing of an already dangerously longwinded film, especially for the action genre. It works perfectly really -- on first viewing, you watch the regular version and if you decide to come back for more, you go for the extra stuff. On first viewing, however, it could seem needlessly long. EDIT -- Criminal Minded just summed it up better in one sentence really. Further evidence to my point about longer not necessarily being better.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2010 15:21
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:That's just mean. When I heard about Netflix finally in Canada and on Xbox, i was "getting rid of my cable and just watching stuff through that!" and then i found out they have nothing They have a bunch of Criterion films, a large library of MST3K episodes, and most importantly Robot Jox so I'm good while they expand their library (which they're doing all the time).
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2010 21:06
|
|
|
morestuff posted:Wow, whoever maintains that site is seriously dedicated and probably crazy. Holy poo poo yeah -- they even compare DVD versions to lovely bootleg work prints (see Starship Troopers). That's for all those times when you were wondering "hmm, should I watch this DVD here or maybe instead the director intended for me to see the WORKPRINT".
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2010 20:10
|
|
|
kapalama posted:I am always wondering about how the move to Vancouver for so much TV production will affect that 'non-accent' accent on TV. There are certainly a ton of Canadians in most of the TV I watch. Please, don't worry yourself aboot it. I'm sorry. Thank you.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2011 21:21
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 30, 2024 20:17 |
|
|
3. INT. CHARLIE'S OFFICE - A SMALL CUBICLE - DAY Charlie sits at his desk and checks his email. He has received his monthly water bill and an ad for discount viagra. He ponders each email equally and files both for later consideration and gets to work on the expenditures spreadsheet for last month.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2011 17:21
|
|