These threads the last few days were fun, let's make it official. It's better than shitposting anyway.
Best thing about Badlands is the scene where he gets arrested and suddenly the camera is at low angle and it's just magnificent feel of space.
Let's talk about stylized cinematography. Specifically, when does it stop being cool and start being gimmicky.
Sin City is gimmicks: the movie but isn't all that cinematographically impressive regardless
Really as soon as attention is drawn to the cinematography in a "look at this isn't this cool?!" way, it's gone too far. Cinematography can stand out, but it shouldn't seem "showy," if you know what I mean.
You have to admit though, it looks close to the comics.
Every cinematography is 'stylized'.
I guess you are just looking for 'when does this certain aesthetic run to the ground'
and answer is probably whenever it becomes more of a 'pretty image' thing rather than 'this is done to help the storytelling, to give us info about characters'
and Sin City is boring visually.
Rodriwhatever is visually boring director.
Is this any good as cinematography then?
I'm genuinely curious, I'm a dumbass and want to learn more about what makes good cinematography.
That is photography, a still image. Cinematography involves motion pictures and how the camera evolves over the movie.
The world I suppose.
It's still motion picture so yes
Why is he such good auteur director lads
Watched Cranes Are Flying last night and the cinematography was unreal considering it was made in 1957.
well that would be great production design and an intesting image overall but not necessarily good cinematography
>le cinematography can't be shown in stills argiment
fuck off cunt
Well it really can't be shown in stills. You can't take a random still and ask to rate its 'cinematography'
You need the entire movie and have it in motion, to see what the camera does, how everything works together in motion.
You are rating photography with stills.
Friday Night Lights by far has the best cinematography of any TV series.
Directors, at least auteurs, will always direct cinematographer so the director gets what he wants.
That's why they have visual consistency and are 'discussed' more in depth than say, Ron Howard who clearly lacks any visual aesthetics-sensibilities.
That's bit binary of you, but it did look outstanding sometimes and its basic cinematography suited the atmosphere of it very well
This will forever remain one of my favorite shots in cinema.
You can use cinematography techniques in animation, sure.
You can do a long take, although everyone will understand that it's much easier to pull of in animation because you aren't literally trying to shoot everything in one go.
It does work for it, such barebones and grounded without tricks, works well for the detective approach. If it were flashy and bullshitted like Deakins memetography it'd just look weird.
It's Such a Beautiful Day was pretty goddamn pretty.
I think this is a terrible picture.
I would have lowered the camera so the actors, the campfire and car would contrast with the sky.
But what do I know. I'm not Terrence Fucking Malick.
Another great Friday Night Lights shot.
Last one. I have to say, the cinematography and the music on this show contributed A LOT to the quality.
Anno's mancrush did it better
PTL was self-indulgent wank, but it had some nice scenes
Yeah lets not talk about anything before we are savants, just sit with mouths shut and have the information just randomly appear to us :v)
lmao figured you were that cuck, you lead a pretty sad life.
The pilot episode of Twin Peaks was astonishing to look at and still is.
I really hope Lynch can do something equal with the new season. I don't think his later work ever looked better than pilot of TP.
What orange-blue thing? They have a outright blue night time scene and then it's just orange, there is no orange/blue?
I didn't mind it's color grading.
>Miller or fury road
Stick to video games and comic books. Try and compare it to classic directors too. Show me that my suspicions about its low cineIQ fanbase are correct
The pilot really was something else. Let's hope for the best.
Surprised nobody's posted this yet.
I should rewatch it someday, I've seen it probably five to six times (talking about season 1 overall).
because it's png
is that the blue coated bluray version? or did I have an aneurysm and forgot that the one ring was blue not golden?
have to agree with you though, the first film had wonderful camerawork
This is from a 70s film called World on a Wire (Welt am Draht). There's a mirror in pretty much every scene. I highly recommend it.
It really did. People shit all over the Hobbit movies for being bad, but The Two Towers and Return of the King are more like The Hobbit than they are like Fellowship.
What a pity.
It's not really that. The first one balanced out the seriousness and the goofiness pretty well. It was only later on when it went full-retard.
And also, the EE of Fellowship flows really well - I honestly never get bored of watching it even in a single sitting.
But holy shit the EE of Towers and King are TERRIBLE. That march to Helms Deep just feels fucking ENDLESS.
Whedon is such a fucking dead inside director. He literally cannot frame a scene look interesting to save his fucking life and all of his setups scream 'I'm doing a TV-show' quality (meaning dead inspiration)
Fucker got away with it too for a long time
Wish i had one of those collages for this film
Also RIP Cameron for going off the deep end decades ago.
I hated it. It is the sort of limp dicked movie that always wants to point at fingers in retrospect, at problems and issues, but never once proposes what they lead to (OK he touches it TWICE with very short scenes, one of them is also pretty good I give him that) or what they could do to fix that.
It'd be okay if it didn't try to be deeper than surface level, procedural, but damn it rustles my jimmies
also I never really liked Spielberg's visual aesthetics. the more he started to mess with lightning the more I disliked it
This scene looked sexy as hell.
snowtown is going to be his only good film
>Spielberg's visual aesthetics. the more he started to mess with lightning the more I disliked it
He loves this kind of diffused lighting
I know. But Spielberg loves it too for he wouldn't make him do it in his movies. It really rustles my jimmies in a bad way. I don't like it all, nor do I understand it at all.
He can direct scenes very well and he has eye for visuals (Spielberg); he is by no means hack or untalented despite being old
I just don't like how BoS lacks a good proper gut punch.
I barely considered the politics of the film. The classical humanist argument, sure, but as said the mastery on composition and flow is very big and unequivocal. It's a minor effort, but I'm using auteurism here.
Looks good enough for me.
from the POV of the color grading my only annoyance in FR was that there was a shot that lasted for a 2 seconds or something and I don't think it had color grading and it jumps out like an error in the film.
It's like Spielberg had lot to say but was told to tone it down. All sorts of speeches about human/civil rights, foreshadowing of spying on people and countries, governments etc.
>tfw plebs try to say it would be impossible to shoot at night in the desert
>mfw this scene comes in
>mfw I seriously did not expect this sort of hammering of USA's history in Spielberg movie
Are you dumb? The reason it's shot that way, and that it's the center of their attention, is to show that the ring is larger than life and the fucking pivotal thing. Them seeing it interrupts a fucking fight.
It's as close to perfect as any film I've seen. Impeccable performances, GOAT cinematography, the pacing is perfect and the soundtrack is almost orgasmic.
I wonder if Lean was making a joke having a literal "match cut" in that video.
Even if it was , it the greatest it works on a number of levels.I would love to see the film in the cinerma.
Only match cut as famous is prehaps the bone cut in 2001: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtbOmpTnyOc
The most obvious is the link between the sun and the flame of the match.
I'v always thought it was him giving birth to the true start of the film.the sun coming up signifies the beginning of the day i.e his adventure
and of cource the 'match' match cut
As far as I know the TE Blu-ray and the EE DVD are the ones that aren't bathed in blue. But I could be wrong.
I personally like the blue, but that's just me.
Check this out, lads.
I didnt really like the hatefull 8 but i have to admit it looked stunning and the stuff in the lodge worked really well in widescreen
i love broen's cinematography
He's Gandalf the Grey alright.
Just try to think 'critically'.
Does the lighting match the mood of the narrative, story, character(s)? What about colors, do they appear in certain cases?
I'd say De Palma for terrible symbolism studying
Watch anything where Deakins worked to see cinematography that doesn't really add anything to the movie and is there to just look pretty
Also if you want to understand cinematography you should pick auteur, like Kubrick, De Palma, Michael Mann etc. and go through few of their movies chronoligcally to see 'things' develop that's when you notice it the best.
>is just there to look pretty
Does that necessarily mean shit cinematography? Surely it's complementary as long as it doesn't distract from the narrative. Or is it a case of a lack of connection between the cinematography and the narrative meaning the whole isn't cohesive
I really liked 'Don't Look Now', it does an amazing job of creating a sense of foreboding visually, and I think the sex scene is one of the more true I've ever seen. Is Roeg always that good?
Is this a good show? Are any seasons much better than others?
I love that sorta realistic night time photography, like house of cards
>le /v/ meem
The visual storytelling, especially in Road Warrior, is masterful. Fury Road and Road Warrior are creatively and technically excellent. They are modern kindred spirits of Keaton and Chaplin's work.
Stick to memes, cinema obviously isn't for you.
It's good mate. Season 1 is good, season 2 is mediocre but comes with equal cinematography as other two seasons, season 3 is good. All come with this sort of night time cinematography that makes me fucking go wild. I absolutely love the job photographers and cinematographer do with the show, the night time scenes are wonderful.
You should definitely watch the three seasons, Saga is well enough written character to follow through them
>Surely it's complementary as long as it doesn't distract from the narrative
That's what Deakins does though. Especially clear in Sicario where he would need to paint something ugly (since he has lots of control) but ends up falling on his own trappings, making yet another run of the mill Deakins digital photography work and framing everything prettily in position with Always Perfect Lightning and Always Perfect Framing etc.
>The whole isn't cohesive
There's a scene in Amores Perros where there's a dying, bleeding dog in backseat of a car and that just stuck with me for the longest time. don't have bluray so can't get you a screenshot or webm, sorry.
Is Deakins really a meme cinematographer? He does quality work, not exceptional, but it's always above average. His DP30/30 on Sicario was a super interesting insight into the world of a cinematographer. He seems like a nice guy.
It's just that directors rarely if ever push him to do something you haven't seen or make him uncomfortable. Sometimes Deakins himself gets a genius fart (like the fight in Skyfall at the hotel), but that's it.
It's a really beautiful black and white shot. I am in love with the contrast and value range in this picture. Clearly someone well versed in photography and a good eye for editing was involved. And for that alone, this shot should be notable.
It starts to get really fucking grating really fucking fast, especially in Sicario. Do you really think the first thing characters saw in the kill house were heads in perfect position at the wall with perfect lightning and coloring like from Adobe's Gradient Tool?
It never manages to portray death, violence, war, corruption, anger, as ugly to me because it's just Deakins' standard procedure. It makes it all fit into nice little shapes and colors like they were staged there.
in Assassination of JJ this actually works because the movie is partly about fame and its deconstruction.
and in True Grit it doesn't annoy me because it's simple morality tale with sick screenplay meaning I don't look too much into it where as Sicario tried to be deep and failed at it.
>Do you really think the first thing characters saw in the kill house were heads in perfect position at the wall with perfect lightning and coloring like from Adobe's Gradient Tool?
No. Are you retarded? They're characters in the movie. What we see isn't what they see. Do you think Lawrence saw all the desert in rich color with the horizon always along the vertical eighths of the frame?
>It never manages to portray death, violence, war, corruption, anger, as ugly to me because it's just Deakins' standard procedure. It makes it all fit into nice little shapes and colors like they were staged there.
Nothing wrong with filming things beautifully. Do you hate beauty?
I'm actually a bit annoyed at the film. It's so close to being literally perfect, but the second half has something about the pacing that throws me. I can't even put my finger on it exactly either. It's so close to being 10/10 for me.
>Lawrence saw all the desert in rich color with the horizon always along the vertical eighths of the frame?
no but it captures his amazement, curiosity extremely well
we should really be talking about something else than villeneuve and deakins, they aren't interesting. just saying. you can leave your letterboxd or steam acc. if you want to talk about my issues with Sicario more later.
>no but it captures his amazement, curiosity extremely well
How does this sweeping shot capture his amazement and curiosity when he's preparing to lead a rag tag bunch of tribals into battle? Cinematography doesn't have to scream intention every time, sometimes it can just be pretty pictures.
>you can leave your letterboxd or steam acc. if you want to talk about my issues with Sicario more later.
Why do you assume I have a letterboxd or Steam account? Are you this presumptuous all the time when you have no argument to make?