Whatever happened to the cinematography in MCU? All the movies

>Thor 2
>GoTG
>Ant-Man
>Iron Man 3
>Age of Cucktron

>>84957118
>Iron Man 3
>Ant-man
>cinematography

>>84956969
Who cares about cinematography? It's a dumb /tv/ meme that arbitrary decided if something looks good or not

>>84957141
I care. I can't watch movies that look bland, they leave no impression on me.

>>84957223
But we don't care about you.

>>84957141
>who cares about a visual medium looking good when you can have quips?

>>84957244
You care enough to post in my thread.
Don't ever reply to me again.

>>84957132
Iron Man 3 was Shane Black directing and as for Ant-Man
>http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005665/
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUw67hayZAs

>>84957118
GotG looked great in some parts and like actors standing around a soundstage in others.

>>84957261
Okay.

File: avngrs.jpg (3MB, 2800x1867px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2800x1867px

compare this

I've never heard or seen an explanation as to why the MCU has bad cinematography. People just post those compilations like it's self evident which leads me to believe this is just another dank /tv/ meme.

>>84957118
C'mon Age of Ultron looked like a Transformers movie and had no good shots apart from the one where they fought the robots.
Thor 2 green palette was tiring too.

File: batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice-image.jpg (618KB, 3640x1556px)

618KB, 3640x1556px

>>84957325
..to this

>>84957141

File: cap.jpg (402KB, 2000x1331px) Image search: [Google]

402KB, 2000x1331px

>>84956969
the first Cap movie was gorgeous, it felt like a real movie

File: 1460948519382.webm (2MB, 550x310px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 550x310px

>>84957329

>>84957345
This looks clean. Should I watch this movie is the plot good enough to hold 2 hours of my attention? Or are there shitty plot holes and retarded writing like Batman stopping from beating Supes ass because both of their mothers have the same name?

>>84956969
Check the director credits.

>>84957345
I don't see why that's supposed to be impressive. It's just lit differently. And of course it would be, because it's raining and at night, so comparing that to inside during the day is disingenuous.

>>84957373
What is a "real" movie?

>>84957345
Love or absolutely fucking hate Snyder you can't say he's a shit visual director. I wish he'd step down as director and became just a visual director. Let Affleck direct

>>84957382
It's a visual medium, you can watch movies purely for the visuals.

>>84957395
Drive (2011)

>>84957378
Case in point. You think you've made some incredibly poignant value judgement here but you've said nothing beyond "just look at it! if you don't agree with me you're a pleb!"

>>84957414
That's a real human tho.

>>84957414
What makes that a "real" movie? Because it has scenes you can pause and screen shot then post on boards and say it looks neat.

>>84957411
No that's why I go to art galleries.
I go to movies to be entertained by the fullness of the production.
I don't know if you've ever sat through a movie's credits but there's a whole fucking lot of people working on it that are doing things that aren't visual in nature.

I can think of a couple movies that are only so-so in the visual department but have amazing sound design.

>>84957373
that's because it was directed by the guy who made Hidalgo.

File: aureo.gif (8KB, 501x309px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 501x309px

>>84957141
>that arbitrary decided if something looks good or not
Fucking ignorant piece os shit.

>>84957382
I absolutely loved it, but then I've only seen the 3 hour long Ultimate Edition. If nothing else, it is a very nice film, visually.

File: dawn-of-the-dead-(2004)-large-picture.jpg (231KB, 2048x869px) Image search: [Google]

231KB, 2048x869px

>>84957382

>>84957411
this.
Snyder's movies may have the writing of a shitty anime, but they have the cinematography of top tier anime

>>84957485
Ghost Busters (2016) looked nice visually as well, Anon. I enjoyed it, visually.

File: quadre3.jpg (15KB, 400x262px)

15KB, 400x262px

>>84957329
And this is why /co/ opinions on movies are irrelevant. This board Animated movies threads are great, the problem is that most people here defending the MCU just go to the movies to go capeshit and only watch crap movies.

The CW flash show has bad cinematography too.

>>84957340
AoU had some nifty shots of the twins, and the PERFECT shot of Cap looking around an empty dance hall in his flashback. But the good shots were far outweighed by the bad.

Thor 2 should have benefited from the alien worlds; you can do some amazing things with otherworldly sets. But it was all same-y and the stuff on Earth was far too bland.

Civil War probably suffered the most. It was a great movie in my opinion, but the weight of things was lessened because of very generic camera angles and lighting.

>>84957511
There's better looking movies than his. He does have some nice shots, but a few shots inbetween crappy storylining isn't really notable.

File: 369.jpg (80KB, 716x362px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 716x362px

>>84957373
;_;

>>84957447
Does it have an underlying message, a theme? If that's so, it's a real movie. It doesn't have to be necessarily good though.

As for superhero movies for example, Spider-Man 2 and Superman are both good movies.

>>84957481
Malick's visual style is good and usually detached of the chart you posted. Snyder for example, uses fake, animated lightning, high contrast on shit filters and is a bad visual director.

>>84957395
All movies are real but he means movies with identifiable filmic merits, filmic referring to stuff that comes after scriptwriting and manifests itself in the audiovisual component that makes film film as opposed to a stack of paper. Things like directing, editing, art department, score and so on.

>>84957529
the golden ratio is a hoax that nobody should fall for these days

>>84957529
>It's bad!
>You just don't know! But I do! It's bad!
>No I won't explain why it's bad! It just is!
Listen bro I can honestly say that I don't give a shit whether or not the MCU has bad cinematography or not. I'm not going to get offended or defend it if it does.

I'm just pointing out that you fucks never even attempt to define it beyond "it looks like a TV show!". For people that insist they're so smart and informed you can't seem to argue your position for shit.

If anything, good cinematography feels wasted when the rest is shit.

The BvS fight had some stellar shots but goddamn the context, dialogue and pacing ruined it.

File: file.png (136KB, 279x277px)

136KB, 279x277px

>He was tricked into liking Marvel because of Evansposting.
Hotheads begone.

>>84957529
>And this is why /co/ opinions on movies are irrelevant.


No, so are /tv/'s opinions on movies, because they've admitted they're politically bias to movies as well. No one here has an opinion that is relevant to the movie genre and can push it forward.

>MCU just go to the movies to go capeshit and only watch crap movies.

No, people go there to be entertained. That's what movies first intention are. To bring joy and snap you from the real world. That's what music is, that's what plays are, that's what books are. They're meant to entertain you. That's why it's called "entertainment".

There are different ways to entertain an audience, the MCU has their way, but other movies have a way where they can trigger a sense of relaxant from the visuals alone. MCU does it by being exciting and keeping the fans laughing and invested.

File: 1465047565644.jpg (149KB, 800x820px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 800x820px

>>84957625
>tripfag

>>84957576
No where, because one is a fucking poster.

>>84957596
Who determines merit?

File: 1456858109688.png (63KB, 316x266px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 316x266px

>>84957597
>not believing in the golden ratio

>>84957648
saved

>>84957667
Rotten Tomatoes :^)

>>84957581
>Does it have an underlying message, a theme? If that's so, it's a real movie. It doesn't have to be necessarily good though.


Who's to say what makes a real movie? Many MCU movies have an underlying message and theme. On top of that, some of the best movies in history don't have specifically a message or theme. Sometimes it's just taking use through a narrative that we can respect.

>>84957621
This. It doesn't matter how visually interesting the DCEU movies are because when I'm sleeping through them all I can see are the insides of my eyelids.

>>84957611
>I'm just pointing out that you fucks never even attempt to define it beyond "it looks like a TV show!

Well, let's me tell you this: If you use the American shot as your main way of filiming, if you don't create any dynamism with the angle of view and you use close ups for the sake of doing close ups you are using the same cheap techniques TV shows use for Fast paced filming in small spaces. The MCU movies look like a TV show since they are filmed like tv shows. There's no attemps are composition beyond "put the guy you are trying to film in the middle".

>>84957453
>I go to movies to be entertained by the fullness of the production.
Why are you lying about going to the art galleries plebbo?

>>84957675
>>84957675
He probably believes it's some kind of meme about nature or something like that.

>>84957752
He probably meant sadpanda.

>>84957752
Art galleries occasionally have pop art and comic book exhibits so it gives me an excuse to get out the house.

>>84957746
>There's no attemps are composition beyond "put the guy you are trying to film in the middle".

But that's not true, because there's various examples of this in Ant-Man and some of Marvel's most recent works. Hell look at Doctor Strange.

This is not me defending this shit, i'm just saying this is a silly argument with people who already go in with a confirmation bias.

File: refrain from speaking.png (459KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

459KB, 640x480px

>>84957411
>I care if movies look pretty but if you also care about writing, acting, editing, scoring, or sound design YOU'RE the pleb

>This thread

It seems Anons are confused with people simply wanting to be entertained, as overall philistinism of the worlds population.

File: imvthor.jpg (37KB, 432x261px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 432x261px

>>84957345
Can I compare it to this instead?

>>84957840
>Hell look at Doctor Strange.
That does not look good, at all. It really does look like a CGI shitfest the likes of Transformers and I say that looking excited for the film.

File: cw.jpg (92KB, 1920x783px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 1920x783px

>>84957541
This. I can't quite put my finger on it but I could feel how Civil War and Winter Soldier looked soulless and lacked depth. The plot and action was pretty good, but cinematography dragged this movie down for me.

File: cap smug.jpg (52KB, 338x389px)

52KB, 338x389px

>>84957373
The Star Spangled Man sequence is one of my favorite things Marvel has done. Literally Cap's theme song.

>>84957881

Special effects have ALWAYS been part of cinematography.

....are people finally joining me in saying Cap 1 is the best MCU film?

>>84957895
The Russo Brothers came from directing sitcoms like Community. As much as I like those two films, they DO look like "really expensive television" as OP put it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doaQC-S8de8

Educate yourselves and see why many people say Avengers look like a TV show, which includes a scene showing why the Avengers has bad cinematography

File: Blade 2 Grid.jpg (1MB, 3000x1687px)

1MB, 3000x1687px

Marvel cinematography peaked with Blade 2

>>84957923
Anon, it was always the only good MCU film, you've been right all this time.

>>84957923
Pfahahaha

>>84957917
It's too much. It's almost as bad as this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFI0jsnTCvg&feature=youtu.be&list=PL7oGGg7qjS8HLG5Ka2ClJ_UA_fBELWogg

>>84957927
Honestly I'm torn as to whether or not I'd be willing to sacrifice cinematography for their ability to manage large casts and different storylines in one movie.

Because goddamn BvS was pretty but it was really painful to watch them switching gears so hard every time they did it.

>>84957895
Both movies deeply bothered me when I was watching them. The fights are good, but everything between feels stilted and incredibly disjointed.

You kinofags have your own board to shit up. Go back there.

>>84957943
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Marvel
It's a Warner film.

>>84957840
Strange is the only movie since guardians that look like a movie.

>>84957993
You don't have to sacrifice anything. Ensemble cast movies have been done before and they didn't all look as cheap as The Avengers.

File: Hellboy Grid.jpg (1MB, 3000x1625px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3000x1625px

>Marvel films will never look this good

>>84957937
That was a great video. I really want WB to let Snyder do his seven samurais with Justice league. hope he doesnt get fucked.

>>84957923
People is saying the cinematography was great.

the movie wasnt, marvel was afraid of the word nazis, of violence and it was pretty generic, but is a well done solid film, the problem was the script. Captain America could had been a really good 80's movie classic.

File: shitty lined up shots.png (4MB, 2548x1060px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 2548x1060px

>>84957981
>>84957881
Here I lined up some shitty shots for you to appease your autism.

>>84958278
What's shitty about them

>>84958125
Guardians looked like a videogame though

>>84958299
I lined them up shitty and didn't feel like adjusting them to be symmetrical. I didn't mean the shots themselves, just how I lined them up.

Side note: You can literally do this with any movie.

>>84958222
>>84958202
>>84958202


Can you guys post BvS and MoS? i have no idea what this things are called

File: 1417978400403.jpg (37KB, 1229x253px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 1229x253px

>>84958330
here's the lazy way to do it

>>84958278
I dunno, it still looks like Civil War to me. Maybe it's the ratio...

>>84958278
1,2,3,4, 5, are shit, 6 is ok, 7 is pretty good, 8 ad 9 are ok.

>>84958406
>>84958376
>>84958375
Keep in mind this is strictly from the trailer.

>>84958329
Yes, it did, but it was a well done videogame.

>>84958406
They are all good. Shut the fuck up.

>>84958376
Maybe it's the camera and your overall confirmation bias.

I'm sure it'd be better if it was shot in 25mm and in black in white and show with actual film.

>>84958478
So what? Trailer is more than enough to judge the cinematography's quality as its composed of different scenes and set pieces which gives us an overall impression of how the movie will look like.

>>84958478
I know. But i do believe it will be a good looking movie, looks way better in the trailer than the TV crap we saw in Civil War. From the trailer it looks too CGI, but there's hope for it,

>>84956969
>three random close ups
>two insert shots of the Hydra symbol

C'mon at least add some variety to the compositions you're putting in there

>>84958278
I enjoy the contrast between 1 and the picture below it. If you know of Strange's origin, then you know what's to happen to him. Then those two images...go hand and hand.

>>84957485
MARTHA

>>84958534
>Trailer is more than enough to judge the cinematography's quality as its composed of different scenes and set pieces which gives us an overall impression of how the movie will look like.
It used to be like that.

In the trailer they waste frames on showing us his hands and big "where is he" shots.

File: 1468275939340.png (603KB, 854x383px)

603KB, 854x383px

>>84957895
This was the only good shot.

"cinematography" looks to be color corrected as fuck.

File: 1460555456005.png (3MB, 2000x1287px)

3MB, 2000x1287px

Every single shot in Strange trailer was better than anything DCEU has done.

File: Tron Legacy.jpg (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>84958222
>>84958202
>>84956969
You know who I want to see direct a superhero film? The guy who made TRON: Legacy and Oblivion. The story in those two films was nothing special but the visuals were some of the best I've ever seen in a blockbuster and the guy really needs a good script behind him.

Him doing a Green Lantern film would be incredible; he's one of the few directors in Hollywood who can use that much CGI and actually come out with a great looking film.

>>84957529
Yeah, /tv/ is where the real cinema connoisseurs are, TFA is shit because plebbit, the prequels are great because autism.

>>84958534
You're limited to the scenes in a trailer. They don't capture the true essence, only hint at it.

>>84958542
I don't understand the hatred for a well done CGI scene, but I guess I never will

>>84958610
I miss Tron Uprising

>>84958615
>They don't capture the true essence, only hint at it.
*cough*Ultron*cough*

>>84958679
Yea, Ultron looked horrible. Too light and cheery. It's wasn't as terrible as /co/ would make it, but it was an abomination cinematography.

Remember, nothing is ever as good as /co/ says it is, but nothing is never as bad either.

>>84958762
>nothing is ever as good as /co/ says it is, but nothing is never as bad either.

This is 100% right. I tend to only hear /co/'s opinion when it comes to Animated movies.

You're just mad because the colors are real, and they don't apply a fuckton of filters on the image like >>84957345.

They hire tv directors to save money and stick to formula, and the results are tv visuals. Kenneth Branagh was the only exception and that's because he has a lot of experience with medieval/fantasy settings.

>>84957141
Marvel shills confirmed to be plebs.

Winter Soldier was absolutely kino

>>84960438
This looks bad. Especially the filters and fake lightning.

>>84960512
retard alert

>>84957345
Snyder is great at making pretty irl pictures.
Too bad he was supposed to make a movie.

>>84960512
HURR DURR EVERYONE WE GOT A RETARD

RETARD ALERT!

>>84956969
>cinematography in film adaptation of a cartoon

Who give a fuck?

>>84957943

Good old Del Toro

>>84960512
For fucks sake, look at the composition you dumbass

>>84964139
I don't give a fuck about the opinions of this board.

>>84965773
It's shit?

>>84965839
Is not, and you calling shit just show own worthless your opinion is.

Notice how elements are not just in the middle of the frame

>>84965925
It looks like literal shit. There's no "composition". It's just bunch of shitty shots plastered with piss filters on high contrast and fake lightning.

Watch some Ceylan and see what good cinematography looks like.

>>84966089
Getting triggered by the truth?

File: 1.png (446KB, 733x302px) Image search: [Google]

446KB, 733x302px

>>84966171
>Proven wrong
>LOL TRIGGERED :-)
Kill yourself

>>84965925
That's not exactly a novelty

>>84957141
>visual medium
>who cares about the visuals

>>84957895
In CW, there was a scene where they used four cuts to show SW fly in.
I checked out pretty quickly after that.

Someone post that fancy Doctor Strange one

>>84957261
You sure showed him

>>84960438

the shots from the indian ocean in bvs and man of murder were great

File: obituary.jpg (361KB, 1200x600px)

361KB, 1200x600px

>>84957874
No, DC fans have to compare a non action scene to a clear trailer-tease shot to make a coherent argument.

Out of curiosity I suppose, how will they address Clark Kent coming back to life? And how will half the fucking world not know he's Supes?

>>84960615
>>84964086
>>84965773
Salty Snyder Fans

>>84957280
Which parts looked like a soundstage to you? I can't think of any off the top of my head. All the sets looked pretty seamless IMO.

Not that it necessarily means much for the cinematography. Action scenes definitely could have used some work.

>>84966622
What scene was it?