#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 some that came to mind:GravityBatman beginsThe Dark Knight RisesFrozenX-Men movies (i have seen only the first 4)Transformers movies (I've seen only the first 2)Spiderman 3 (I'm not so sure about 1 & 2 yet)Speed 2Terminator 3The ArtistHugoA lot of these are good films, or at least perfectly watchable!You have weird movie tastes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus 5,399 Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 The Fifth Element is perfect? The mind boggles.To me it's like a Doctor Who feature film where Bruce Willis plays an alternative Doc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A24 4,331 Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 I can think of a few. The director's name rhymes with Fanley Tuberick.Even though 2001: A Space Odyssey is great, to me, the trip really starts to kick in when we reach the second act. It's then when my jaw drops to the floor. The 'men dressed in apes' segment, no matter how good the storytelling is, it's not truly perfect. Aesthetically, I can't say it's of the same level as the rest of the film. Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brónach 1,302 Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 My favourite parts are the opening segment and the last segment, although I used to prefer the Discovery stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dixon Hill 4,234 Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 That's fair enough Alex, though I don't feel the same way. With 2001 and Barry Lyndon, there isn't a single bit of minutiae that I would change. And for the rest of his filmography, I'm sure there are things that could be improved, but I remain willfully and blissfully ignorant of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koray Savas 2,251 Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 Barry Lyndon felt too long. Also didn't live up to my expectations as a lot of people here praise it. Best shot film ever, Karol? Not even close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A24 4,331 Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 That's fair enough Alex, though I don't feel the same way. With 2001 and Barry Lyndon, there isn't a single bit of minutiae that I would change. And for the rest of his filmography, I'm sure there are things that could be improved, but I remain willfully and blissfully ignorant of them.I won't change it either but I think it's limited by design: Dressed men, studio caves and boulders, big screen instead of real nature ... It's not a total 10/10. Of course, I ignore it too, but it takes a little more effort compared to the rest of the film. Best shot film ever, Karol? Not even close.Top ten? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koray Savas 2,251 Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 Not mine; but maybe there are unclear specifics about the term "shot." Does that encompass both cinematography and the visual frame? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488 Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 I've had pretty much no desire to re-watch anything recent I've seen since around the mid-2000s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koray Savas 2,251 Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 Pull your head out of your ass and you might find some Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Hilary Bray 235 Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 ATTACK OF THE CLONES (2002) -- I made my mother take me to this following my birthday. That poor lady. Even when I was 12, I could tell that she couldn't stand being there.You're only 24? I thought you were in your 70's. I guess it's the profile pic that threw me off. Me and Brown were dubbed the Statler and Waldorf of the last forum we were on.True, true. Heady days them were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Brown 91 Posted May 7, 2014 Author Share Posted May 7, 2014 I wouldn't call BARRY LYNDON the best shot film ever, but it's certainly one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrbellamy 6,286 Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 Not mine; but maybe there are unclear specifics about the term "shot." Does that encompass both cinematography and the visual frame?That's a confusing question. Cinematography is the visual frame... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koray Savas 2,251 Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 I equate cinematography with lighting, not necessarily the types of shots implemented in the film (dolly, crane, zooms, etc.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharkissimo 1,973 Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 Cinematography is both. Lighting is important, but equally so are the lenses (wide angle, telephoto or somewhere in between - plus fog filters, nets, neutral density grads etc.), aspect ratio, what the camera is doing, focal length, framing/mis en scene, deep focus or shallow focus (this is dependent on both the focal length and how much light is available) and various processing techniques (DI or for traditional film - push/pull processing, fogging, bleach bypassing etc.). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus 5,399 Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 I equate cinematography with expressive visual ethos and stylistic iconography. Framing. /beret wearer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrbellamy 6,286 Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 Cinematography is both. Lighting is important, but equally so are the lenses (wide angle, telephoto or somewhere in between - plus fog filters, nets, neutral density grads etc.), aspect ratio, what the camera is doing, focal length, framing/mis en scene, deep focus or shallow focus (this is dependent on both the focal length and how much light is available) and various processing techniques (DI or for traditional film - push/pull processing, fogging, bleach bypassing etc.).Yes, exactly. Just because a director may have more control over or expertise in aspects other than lighting doesn't mean those things aren't cinematography. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koray Savas 2,251 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Cinematography is both. Lighting is important, but equally so are the lenses (wide angle, telephoto or somewhere in between - plus fog filters, nets, neutral density grads etc.), aspect ratio, what the camera is doing, focal length, framing/mis en scene, deep focus or shallow focus (this is dependent on both the focal length and how much light is available) and various processing techniques (DI or for traditional film - push/pull processing, fogging, bleach bypassing etc.).I'm referring to the compositional frame. I know cinematography includes all aspects of lighting and photography. To put it in context, I didn't find anything particularly noteworthy with how Barry Lyndon was lit, but Kubrick's zooms and his picturesque shots are very good and memorable.But I guess with him he was responsible for both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrbellamy 6,286 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Yeah, but what Shark was saying is that composition, camera movement, and lenses are still aspects of cinematography, even though the director will often have a firm opinion on such things and work with the cinematographer to incorporate them into the overall mise-en-scene. They're not exclusive to either department. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharkissimo 1,973 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 To put it in context, I didn't find anything particularly noteworthy with how Barry Lyndon was lit, but Kubrick's zooms and his picturesque shots are very good and memorable.Well, BARRY LYNDON was groundbreaking in its use of natural light (candles, fires etc. - what they call in the industry 'practicals'). The only lens with an aperture large enough (an f-stop low enough) to pick up the low-level light was made by NASA, which is what Kubrick brought in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mark 3,631 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 95% of the films I see I don;t want to see again Gruesome Son of a Bitch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kühni 485 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 95% of the films I see I don;t want to see againIt is logical. I have a core group of favorite films that I will re-watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mark 3,631 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 There's always the "classics" we grew up but only Hunger Games and Kick Ass in the past few years I wanted to see more than onceAll those Marvel supehero films I only see once Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wojo 2,453 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 I find it impossible to emphatically declare I will never watch a particular movie again. I haven't raised kids yet and my girlfriend periodically points out movies she hasn't seen before, which makes interested to watch them again with her. The question, of course, is deciding which films I would never want to show her or any future kids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dixon Hill 4,234 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Don't show your kids anything you're not willing to watch ten thousand times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A24 4,331 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 I equate cinematography with lighting, not necessarily the types of shots implemented in the film (dolly, crane, zooms, etc.)What else would you call those?!I didn't find anything particularly noteworthy with how Barry Lyndon was lit ...The lighting and the fact that there was no artificial light used during this movie (what Sharky said), not even indoors, are some of the reasons why Barry Lyndon is called one of the best shot movies. People often find Barry Lyndon to have a paint-like quality. And like a painting, the shots are often daringly static, especially when there's no action. It managed to impress Ridley Scott for The Duellists is heavily influenced by Barry Lyndon (Although Scott did use some artificial lighting).The Duellists interior shot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Brown 91 Posted May 8, 2014 Author Share Posted May 8, 2014 To put it in context, I didn't find anything particularly noteworthy with how Barry Lyndon was lit, but Kubrick's zooms and his picturesque shots are very good and memorable.Well, BARRY LYNDON was groundbreaking in its use of natural light (candles, fires etc. - what they call in the industry 'practicals'). The only lens with an aperture large enough (an f-stop low enough) to pick up the low-level light was made by NASA, which is what Kubrick brought in.Indeed. Pretty amazing. And considering those lenses came with many restrictions (in terms of camera movement, blocking, etc.), I'd guess that quite a bit of thought went into composing each and every shot for BARRY LYNDON.I think it's an excellent film. Haunting in some ways, based on the visuals alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crocodile 8,012 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Apparently Kubrick would wait ages for ideal light. And it shows. I need to check out Blu-ray sonetime.Karol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filmmusic 1,827 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Don't show your kids anything you're not willing to watch ten thousand times.But wouldn't you get frustrated if you did show them the films you love and they didn't care AT ALL?It happened to me multiple of times, when I showed FANTASIA (some extracts) to the kids at school.I was very angry and disappointed afterwards that they "didn't get it". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodBoal 7,538 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dixon Hill 4,234 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Good taste has run in my family for generations, and the latest is no exception. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filmmusic 1,827 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 What is there to "get" in Fantasia?that it's a film with great aesthetics... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweeping Strings 2,358 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Pineapple Express - absolutely atrocious 'comedy'.The Watch - see above.Gothika - 'horror' about as scary as a basket of kittens. Jaws : The Revenge - we're a long, LONG way from Spielberg's classic original here. Sharkissimo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dixon Hill 4,234 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Don't show your kids anything you're not willing to watch ten thousand times.But wouldn't you get frustrated if you did show them the films you love and they didn't care AT ALL?It happened to me multiple of times, when I showed FANTASIA (some extracts) to the kids at school.I was very angry and disappointed afterwards that they "didn't get it".Well it hasn't happened yet, though I've been careful about what to show them. It's a difficult call because something like 2001 might be off-putting at that age, or it might be totally engrossing like it was for me.Watching Fantasia when the teacher was absent was the only thing I really got from my elementary school music class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KK 3,307 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 I hated 2001 when I first saw it (I was 15 at the time). I love it now, but I'm still not sure if its my favourite of Kubrick's works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightscape94 965 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Pineapple Express - absolutely atrocious 'comedy'.The Watch - see above.Gothika - 'horror' about as scary as a basket of kittens. Jaws : The Revenge - we're a long, LONG way from Spielberg's classic original here.4 shitty movies in a row? That last one you just did to yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,355 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 This isn't the "last movie you watched" thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightscape94 965 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 I'm realising that now, thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koray Savas 2,251 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 To put it in context, I didn't find anything particularly noteworthy with how Barry Lyndon was lit, but Kubrick's zooms and his picturesque shots are very good and memorable. Well, BARRY LYNDON was groundbreaking in its use of natural light (candles, fires etc. - what they call in the industry 'practicals'). The only lens with an aperture large enough (an f-stop low enough) to pick up the low-level light was made by NASA, which is what Kubrick brought in.Yeah but it doesn't automatically make it look good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brónach 1,302 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Barry Lyndon looks awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodBoal 7,538 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crocodile 8,012 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 The music is terrible. Karol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dixon Hill 4,234 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Too many violins and shit. Where's the drop, and the dope lyrics that I can relate to in a vague way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Hilary Bray 235 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Pineapple Express - absolutely atrocious 'comedy'.The Watch - see above.Gothika - 'horror' about as scary as a basket of kittens. Jaws : The Revenge - we're a long, LONG way from Spielberg's classic original here.My God Blunty, I hope you recovered. Stiff drink perhaps. Sweeping Strings 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharkissimo 1,973 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 To put it in context, I didn't find anything particularly noteworthy with how Barry Lyndon was lit, but Kubrick's zooms and his picturesque shots are very good and memorable. Well, BARRY LYNDON was groundbreaking in its use of natural light (candles, fires etc. - what they call in the industry 'practicals'). The only lens with an aperture large enough (an f-stop low enough) to pick up the low-level light was made by NASA, which is what Kubrick brought in.Yeah but it doesn't automatically make it look good.No shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 I hated 2001 when I first saw it (I was 15 at the time). I love it now, but I'm still not sure if its my favourite of Kubrick's works.Werent you 15 like...6 months ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filmmusic 1,827 Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 What is there to "get" in Fantasia?that it's a film with great aesthetics...What exactly did your students think of it?They didn't think anything..They were talking all the time, criticizing everything, etc. etc..Another time in another school they were laughing, and mocking the film..I expected of them to be dazzled and just watch the film speechless..(like I did the first time)I guess it was too much to ask at this age of internet etc.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharkissimo 1,973 Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 It's a film you need to watch from a very early age. For me it was 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dixon Hill 4,234 Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 What is there to "get" in Fantasia?that it's a film with great aesthetics...What exactly did your students think of it?They didn't think anything..They were talking all the time, criticizing everything, etc. etc..Another time in another school they were laughing, and mocking the film..I expected of them to be dazzled and just watch the film speechless..(like I did the first time)I guess it was too much to ask at this age of internet etc..Don't blame the internet. Not everything is the fault of the internet.Blame moronic, soulless, artless, clueless parents who don't give their children a bit of reason to comport themselves with any kind of decency.It's a film you need to watch from a very early age. For me it was 2.Yes, early exposure is vital! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now