Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I can’t tell if this is parody or not. 

I don't care at all about these ratios of aspect, I'm just happy the trailer finally answered one of my most lingering questions...     We do in fact live in a society. 

There’s some serious comedy gold surrounding this film.    This guy has never actually seen a Terrance Malick film, has he?

6 minutes ago, Jay said:

 

Doesn't it happen more than once?  I remember a bit where it shows the boat crew gawking at old lady Rose when she's talking about her younger self being naked

 

I haven't seen the film since 1998 so don't remember specifics

 

Correct. If I remember correctly, she appears:

  • Opening scenes (of course)
  • After the linked sunset scene with them on the bow of the ship
  • Again shortly after that, as you mentioned, right after the drawing scene (which has a very nice transition back to her)
  • She appears after the ship has sunk too, kicking off the final montage of them getting rescued by the Carpathia (I hope I remembered the name of that ship right)
  • Closing scenes.

However, she functions as the film's narrator. So she has VO over a couple scenes like when the ship takes off, I remember her explaining who Molly Brown was in a montage scene, and other places as well. It doesn't feel out of place for her to appear for me. She's woven through the movie in various ways pretty well I recall.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bilbo said:


Not available in Ireland 😭

 

Just type "titanic theatrical vs imax" into youtube

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TSMefford said:

Again shortly after that, as you mentioned, right after the drawing scene (which has a very nice transition back to her)

 

This is the main one that jumped into my mind and the one that I think functions as sort of intermission before the disaster movie half.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Gruesome Son of a Bitch said:

I like open matte in general for Super 35. I like seeing more stuff at the top and bottom.

 

So do you prefer the Justice League treatment (to bring it back around) or do you only like it filled in to cover only the 16:9 space? Not trying to debate, just curious what your preferences are, because you could fill out Super 35 into nearly a square.

 

There are people who want to see all of what was shot on the negative, which can be more than what we ever see in theaters or on Blu-Ray.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always really liked the flash "forward" to the present day in the middle of Titanic. Not b/c it acts as an intermission, but because Cameron is so good at pulling us into that story that it's always a small surprise, no matter how many times I've seen it, when it happens and we're reminded that we're actually just watching historical events, as seen through old Rose's eyes, and most of the people we're seeing are dead. It's incredibly effective cinema in my opinion, and adds a lot of punch to the end. 

 

Though it does raise the interesting question of whether we're watching events as they actually unfolded, or merely Rose's imperfect memory of those events.  Who knows maybe Cal was a nice guy after all!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cameron's an interesting case though. Both Titanic and Avatar were filmed with displaying the films in different aspect ratios in mind (1.78, 1.85, 2.39). Most of his films I have been 1.85 I think. Titanic was an exception with its wide release at 2.39, but you could make the argument that the 1.78 version is no less "legitimate". And I know he's said his prefered version of Avatar is 1.78.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, TheUlyssesian said:

2.39 looks way better.

 

Framing in cinema is a very precise art. The greatest directors obsess over it for hours if not days to get it exactly right and a lot of planning goes in preproduction to get those right.

 

You can't suddenly change the frame and expect the composition to have the same impact.

 

I think open mattes are good as novelty. But if you have an even slight academic interest in films and film-making, then the original framing is your best bet. It is the best way to truly engage with the direction of the film. 

 

100% agree Ulyssesian. I mean I only do a fraction of what is done on a feature film and I still spend hours and days working on framing and shot composition for my projects. Even at my level it is planned and thought out carefully. It is certainly a hugely intricate and time consuming artform.

 

On the flip-side though, I'd say most people are watching films for entertainment or an escape and not necessarily in an academic sense or even in an artistic sense. Most people just want to enjoy the movie and it seems to really annoy them when there's black bars. I've heard some people say it takes them out of it. Personally, I find most of the time it brings me into it more and I am not ever bothered by the unused portions of the screen. I do support people watching altered versions if it really is that necessary for engagement to remove the bars, but I always want to have the Director's intent available first and foremost.

 

11 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

Cameron's an interesting case though. Both Titanic and Avatar were filmed with displaying the films in different aspect ratios in mind (1.78, 1.85, 2.39). Most of his films I have been 1.85 I think. Titanic was an exception. I know he's said his prefered version of Avatar is 1.78.

 

Oh yeah it can get real into the weeds when a film is shot with multiple ratios in mind, like Justice League, Dunkirk, many of the Marvel films, among others. Then the question becomes: What ratio does the Director prefer? Having to cater to these multiple formats can affect the framing a bit and be restrictive. Personally, were I in that situation I know I would come across a time where I want a certain shot, but doing it that way would be a problem in one of the other ratios. 

 

It gets so complicated so fast and I don't even want to think about cases where there are multiple edits, plus the various changes to color grading and VFX over the years. Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, and even Titanic have now all altered color grading and VFX in the various releases and remasters of their films. Plus, tastes change if a Director were to revisit it. Then what do you do as an "Originalist"? Which one do you watch? Lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I went on my phone quite a bit during the soapy scenes in Titanic. There are occasional cutaways to the historian operational bits and White Patriarchal glory, but it becomes a totally different movie when the disaster occurs. It really is a better disaster movie than romance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone showed me the trailer yesterday, all hyped that this was finally coming...

 

...needless to say, I thought it looked like one giant pile of shit, like it was a convincing AAA video game trailer. Shots of Cyborg so close-up are disturbingly poor in their execution and make him look more fake than he did the first time. I mean look at this crap - it's pre Iron Man 2008, it's worse than that; it's something from before Transformers!

 

JUSTICE-LEAGUE-Official-Trailer-11264-cyborg.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, the more I've thought about this (which I didn't know about until I read it here yesterday), the more I think Snyder should have just stuck with 16x9. I just think he's being too clever by half. I mean seriously Zack, you're not Kubrick and this film, even if it's a big improvement, still isn't going to be anyone's idea of a masterpiece. So stop trying to be the special artiste' with the comfortable shoes. Cinema only has room for one Nolan at a time. TV's a rectangle, coffee table's a rectangle, couch is a rectangle, and since I'm watching this at home, your crappy movie should be a rectangle.

 

My suspicion is that this has less to do with some kind of artistic vision and more about Snyder doing as much as he can to distinguish his precious work of art from what Wheedon did.

 

Even if Snyder originally framed the film with an IMAX release in mind, it's stupid to do when it's intended to be a home release. Get over yourself Zack.

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, The Big Man said:

So speaking of aspect ratios, I've gotten into a fight with some weirdo on a home theatre group who thinks watching movies like this is ideal.mv

 

I mean... I can't even. He got really defensive about it too.

 

Watching a movie with that charity shop furniture isn't ideal in any aspect ratio.

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

 

Watching a movie with that charity shop furniture isn't ideal in any aspect ratio.

 

It's a whole generation in a state of arrested development, stuck in adolescence.  With disposable income to waste on expensive equipment, but no ability to furnish and decorate a home like a proper grown-up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He should purchase a slicer.

Just now, Jay said:

 

I would speculate this guy knows how to properly watch things and felt like having an argument with people online, purposely posting a picture knowing it would raise the ire of people on that forum.


It's the same thing various people do on this forum.

 

Sadly this fella was in earnest. I've seen him get defensive about it several times before.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.