2012-09-23, 16:00 | Link #184 | |
Logician and Romantic
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Within my mind
Age: 43
|
Quote:
Seriously, isn't the point of watching a movie being that you WATCH it? I mean, I barely watch TV, I watch everything online with the highest possible resolution. I would never imagine watching anything with a fog filter intentionally.
__________________
|
|
2012-09-23, 16:16 | Link #185 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
|
Quote:
|
|
2012-09-23, 16:19 | Link #186 |
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 66
|
It depends.. sometimes the fog filter creates an artistic or emotional effect that ultra-sharpness simply can't. Sometimes black and white *is* the best way (Kansas in Wizard of Oz).
Personally, I get annoyed at the "we're having a huge battle but we're going to stand too close so its all just confusing and defocus the camera slightly". LOTR did this occasionally so it wasn't so bad but some movies used it all the time to the point I think it just substituted for good stunt work.
__________________
|
2012-09-23, 17:15 | Link #188 | |
Logician and Romantic
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Within my mind
Age: 43
|
Quote:
I just don't understand. The complaint is that TV technology has surpassed movies, and that's why mentally some people associate inferior frame rate as movies and higher frame rates as tv shows. But as someone who stares at a monitor for fun, I don't see the argument. What's the point of the HD Blu Ray and the crazy prices we pay for them, if we intentionally nerf the video quality? This is purely psychological. Guess I get easily excited when something that seemed illegal pop up at me. Sorry for the outburst.
__________________
|
|
2012-09-23, 17:25 | Link #190 |
Logician and Romantic
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Within my mind
Age: 43
|
TV movies and TV dramas are made at a higher frame rate than movies because filming equipment stagnated. Some people psychologically then associate superior video quality to TV shows, and thus decided that higher video quality is a sign of an inferior product. People are insane.
__________________
|
2012-09-24, 11:27 | Link #191 |
Seishu's Ace
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Kobe, Japan
|
The best of both worlds is 70mm of course, but due to cost and the sparsity of theatres that can show it 70mm is almost never used these days. "The Master" was shot in 70, and supposedly looks unbelievably great.
__________________
|
2012-09-24, 13:25 | Link #192 |
Me at work
|
Of course it is,old habbits die hard The limitation has pretty much defined the medium until now,it's similar to how if an anime came out with full 24fps animation (instead of something like 12) then you'd have people saying it doesn't look like anime.
__________________
|
2012-11-27, 06:59 | Link #195 |
Blooming on the mountain
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Deep in their roots, all flowers keep the light....
|
FIFY
I just knoowww this is what you were actually thinking. In other news I was quite delighted to see that someone I assume to be Radagast the Brown will be showing up in the Hobbit trilogy. Good call imo....
__________________
|
2012-11-27, 12:09 | Link #198 |
Logician and Romantic
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Within my mind
Age: 43
|
Actually, I have yet to see any novel being incapable of fitting multiple films. Most film adaptations of books are condensed and stripped to bare bones.
For example, TLotR Trilogy really could be 4 films, or even five, if you put all the existing extended scenes into account. Nevermind the fact that the final battle in Hobbiton was never actually filmed. I guess my point is there had never been a movie adaptation of a book that was too long.
__________________
Last edited by Vallen Chaos Valiant; 2012-11-27 at 14:41. |
2012-11-27, 12:25 | Link #199 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 46
|
If I don't miss my guess, we will have:
Film One: Shire to Mirkwood Forest Film Two: Dale to the Lonely Mountain Film Three: Battle of the Five Armies, back to the Shire and some of what happened to lead up to the Lord of the Rings. They are adapting more than just one novel. They are also adapting materials of the surrounding events of that novel that are only mentioned in passing. Details of what Gandalf was doing for most of the novel are from other sources, and would be very entertaining to watch. In the Hobbit, Gandalf mostly just evades questions about what he was doing, or sums them up quickly. Radagast the Brown for example was from the Fellowship of the Ring, but only there to give Gandalf a message. There is more stuff on him, but it is from other source than the Hobbit. The whole story about what the White Council did during the events of the Hobbit and the Necromancer, were barely covered in the Hobbit, but have major importance to the setup for Lord of the Rings.
__________________
|
Tags |
movie |
|
|