Film forum off topic/random chat thread

Sad Professor

This is some magnificent shade-throwing on superhero movies by Christian Bale:

“I have not (seen Affleck's Batman yet). Yes, I’m interested (in seeing it), my son seemed like he was really interested, but then I realized he just wanted to see the trailer and that was it – I tend to go see films that (my kids) want to see. I have to confess I’m not a huge superhero film fan. People seem surprised at that, I don’t know why. I’ve not seen any of the Avengers films or any of those films at all. I hear they’re very good, but I’m quite happy just hearing they’re very good.”

pixelburp

Is it shade? I dunno, just came off like a fairly noncommittal admission that superhero films aren't his thing. I guess it's a bit of an endictment of Justice League but that's fairy low hanging fruit. Knowing the actor it's not surprising he lacks any interest in maintaining a connection with that time in his career, but he doesn't seem to be actively knocking the genre either.

Sad Professor

pixelburp wrote: »

Is it shade? I dunno, just came off like a fairly noncommittal admission that superhero films aren't his thing. I guess it's a bit of an endictment of Justice League but that's fairy low hanging fruit. Knowing the actor it's not surprising he lacks any interest in maintaining a connection with that time in his career, but he doesn't seem to be actively knocking the genre either.

Even the bit about his kid only wanting to watch the trailer? I mean, he's being subtle and doesn't want to rule out future collaborators, hence why I said shade, but if he really thought the Avengers was a good movie and not just a good genre movie, then he'd watch it.

That said, maybe he just doesn't really watch movies in general except the ones he has to for work purposes. Lots of filmmakers and actors are like this, but if so he should have said that because it does sound like he's looking down his nose at Marvel to me.

FunLover18

He throws a lot more shade towards romantic comedies in the interview from which that excerpt was taken leading me to believe that he doesn't really care about ruling out future collaborations.

pixelburp

Sad Professor wrote: »

Even the bit about his kid only wanting to watch the trailer? I mean, he's being subtle and doesn't want to rule out future collaborators, hence why I said shade, but if he really thought the Avengers was a good movie and not just a good genre movie, then he'd watch it.

That said, maybe he just doesn't really watch movies in general except the ones he has to for work purposes. Lots of filmmakers and actors are like this, but if so he should have said that because it does sound like he's looking down his nose at Marvel to me.

Well I did say it was an indictment of Justice League that the son just wanted to watch the trailer, but I don't think he was broadly having a swipe at the Superhero genre either; to me he often comes off as the kind of actor that wouldn't necessarily watch the films - or genre of films - that he stars in TBH, and that feels closer to the language used in that quote. That said, it wouldn't surprise me either that he DOES look down on the Marvel films either so it's all possible.

Sad Professor

pixelburp wrote: »

Well I did say it was an indictment of Justice League that the son just wanted to watch the trailer, but I don't think he was broadly having a swipe at the Superhero genre either; to me he often comes off as the kind of actor that wouldn't necessarily watch the films - or genre of films - that he stars in TBH, and that feels closer to the language used in that quote. That said, it wouldn't surprise me either that he DOES look down on the Marvel films either so it's all possible.

Yeah I'd understand him not being interested in seeing Affleck as Batman given that he also played the character. Sort of like Tim Burton not wanting to see Nolan's Batman movies. I think there's probably a fear in those cases of seeing someone else do it better than you did which is understandable. But Bale has no connection to The Avengers. Unless perhaps he felt some competition with those films. I recall Wally Pfister pissing on the cinematography of The Avengers suggesting he was comparing his work with them, so perhaps that was a feeling shared by others involved in the Nolan Batman films.

FunLover18 wrote: »

He throws a lot more shade towards romantic comedies in the interview from which that excerpt was taken leading me to believe that he doesn't really care about ruling out future collaborations.

Yeah but he also talks about being offered a role in the Han Solo movie and takes a much more positive tone about the possibility of working with Kathleen Kennedy on some other film, so I think he does care about future collaborators.

Sad Professor

Sad Professor wrote: »

Yeah I'd understand him not being interested in seeing Affleck as Batman given that he also played the character. Sort of like Tim Burton not wanting to see Nolan's Batman movies. I think there's probably a fear in those cases of seeing someone else do it better than you did which is understandable. But Bale has no connection to The Avengers. Unless perhaps he felt some competition with those films. I recall Wally Pfister pissing on the cinematography of The Avengers suggesting he was comparing his work with them, so perhaps that was a feeling shared by others involved in the Nolan Batman films.

Or maybe he just has no interest in them. Maybe he saw a trailer for one of them and thought that they looked cheap and fake. Does it really matter what Bale thinks of The Avengers, he's hardly their target audience I can't imagine he's the kind of cinemagoer who wants to watch a 2 and a half hour CGI fest that could very well be made up of cut scenes from a video game.

The opening scene of Age of Ultron has The Asylum levels of bad CGI and editing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_Vbma4lJ2g

I agree with Wally Pfister that the cinematography in the Avengers and Marvel films is poor, it's like they tried to shoot it the Avengers like a war film but then gave up and thought why not shoot it like a TV show. I think the whole shared universe and shared look hurts any Marvel film wanting to stand out from the pack.

pixelburp

Whatever about the CGI and editing, the 60fps in that video about is nausea inducing. I could barely watch it all the way through without pausing to let my eyes settle.

I've only watched one 60fps film in the cinema (The Hobbit part 1) and that was enough to convince that it wasn't for me & that the gimmick was just that. Do people actually like that format? Just seems to make everything look cheaper and more phoney.

RocketRaccoon

pixelburp wrote: »

Whatever about the CGI and editing, the 60fps in that video about is nausea inducing. I could barely watch it all the way through without pausing to let my eyes settle.

I've only watched one 60fps film in the cinema (The Hobbit part 1) and that was enough to convince that it wasn't for me & that the gimmick was just that. Do people actually like that format? Just seems to make everything look cheaper and more phoney.

I couldn't focus on the hobbit in the cinema for that that reason, it looked like it was in fast forward and I just couldn't enjoy it.

pixelburp

pixelburp wrote: »

Whatever about the CGI and editing, the 60fps in that video about is nausea inducing. I could barely watch it all the way through without pausing to let my eyes settle.

I've only watched one 60fps film in the cinema (The Hobbit part 1) and that was enough to convince that it wasn't for me & that the gimmick was just that. Do people actually like that format? Just seems to make everything look cheaper and more phoney.

So far the only film that has benefited from a higher frame rate has been Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk. I got the 4k Blu-Ray a couple of weeks back as I was interested to see how it works having only seen the film previously on normal Blu-Ray. The film was shot in 3D in 4K at 120fps and from what I have read it looked great in cinemas and felt like you were watching something play out before them on a stage. I've only watched a couple scenes of the 4K but the 60fps does give it a strangely realistic feel. I do think that future of the format is going to see some interesting experiments, especially when people realize that you can mix and match frame rates depending on the scene in question.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x091jfFFe9g

Sad Professor

Like 3D, HFR should be for games and other immersive technologies, not movies. Movies involve plot-lines and editing that require suspension of disbelief to work. There has to be an acceptance that what you are seeing isn't real. The frame rate plays an important role in this.

pixelburp

Yeah; the inherent principle of film is that it's an artifice, a fictional construct of composition, colour, sound etc. - by infusing it with 'natural' movement and FPS it just jams a cognitive dissonance into the experience - but then I presume that Avengers variant went down well with some people so what do I know?

Deleted User wrote: »

So far the only film that has benefited from a higher frame rate has been Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk. I got the 4k Blu-Ray a couple of weeks back as I was interested to see how it works having only seen the film previously on normal Blu-Ray. The film was shot in 3D in 4K at 120fps and from what I have read it looked great in cinemas and felt like you were watching something play out before them on a stage. I've only watched a couple scenes of the 4K but the 60fps does give it a strangely realistic feel. I do think that future of the format is going to see some interesting experiments, especially when people realize that you can mix and match frame rates depending on the scene in question.

I'd say it works there because that scene you posted was definitely of the 'over the shoulder' flavour, where the emphasis is on getting as close to reality as you can; it was much easier to watch something that my brain could interpret into "this could be real", in stark contrast with a 60FPS Thor's hammer

pixelburp

pixelburp wrote: »

I'd say it works there because that scene you posted was definitely of the 'over the shoulder' flavour, where the emphasis is on getting as close to reality as you can; it was much easier to watch something that my brain could interpret into "this could be real", in stark contrast with a 60FPS Thor's hammer

The fact that The Avengers is little more than some CGI constructs against a green screen also adds to the truly woeful look of the scene. I think that in the hands of a good director and cinematographer something like a 60 or 120 fps film could work.

Sad Professor

The gaps between frames are a fundamental part of cinema IMO. You fill them in and you end up with a different art form. And that's fine. Make a different art form out of it, but don't call it cinema.

Even the Billy Lynn sequence doesn't work for me. It looks like a video game or a staged documentary - realistic in appearance but also drawing attention to how fake and contrived it is. Appearing as if it's happening on a stage in front of you is a good description of it. Because that's what it looks like: filmed theatre. And there's reason why filmed theatre is generally looked down upon. You can put that aside when you are playing a game, but not when you are a spectator.

Despite the growth in recent years of immersive spectacle-type movies - Gravity, The Revenant etc - cinematic immersion is more about immersion in the communal experience of watching a story than feeling like you are a character in the story. Movies aren't theme park rides.

mikhail

I can't say high frame rates have bothered me any. Eyesight works at something like 15-20 fps anyway, so it's mostly a matter of slightly different motion blurring in what you're seeing. Some of the more philosophical comments about cinema as an art form make me chuckle though. I bet there were people decrying the use of sound and colour, two examples of far more violent intrusions of reality into the medium. I can't be sure there isn't something more to it, but I suspect it's 90% an objection to things looking slightly different from what people are used to.

Sad Professor

People did decry the arrival of sound and they weren’t wrong to do so. It destroyed silent cinema, which was a separate art form not a primitive version of modern cinema as is the popular perception.

Sad Professor

Paddy Considine doing a DDL? Not clear if he just means directing or acting too. Might also just be having a bad day.

https://twitter.com/Phil_on_Film/status/950778369439928320

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

His latest film isn't even out yet, is it?

Is this a reaction to not getting any BAFTA nominations?

Sad Professor

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

His latest film isn't even out yet, is it?

Is this a reaction to not getting any BAFTA nominations?

He's since deleted the statement, so yeah I'd say that was it alright. And yeah his film isn't even out yet. lol.

This is the worst thing about social media. People get a few drinks in them or are having a bad day and immediately reach for the phone.

johnny_ultimate

Let the idle speculation commence!

https://twitter.com/ava/status/960260249843216384

(Since it's the Superbowl, it is sadly probably not the trailer for the new Godard film)

FunLover18

It's either her own new film or Infinity War given both are Disney.

Mickeroo

Probably just hyperbole for the Han Solo trailer?

johnny_ultimate

Mickeroo wrote: »

Probably just hyperbole for the Han Solo trailer?

Oh absolutely hyperbole for something - that something being a blockbuster of some description.

Sad Professor

A trailer or ad for Black Panther, I assume.

johnny_ultimate

This could be it, as it does lend credence to 'history in the making' and all that. DuVernay also has history with Netflix: http://deadline.com/2018/02/cloverfield-sequel-god-particle-super-bowl-trailer-netflix-streaming-release-1202276386/

Sad Professor

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

This could be it, as it does lend credence to 'history in the making' and all that. DuVernay also has history with Netflix: http://deadline.com/2018/02/cloverfield-sequel-god-particle-super-bowl-trailer-netflix-streaming-release-1202276386/

That would be pretty cool actually.

pixelburp

That'd feel very Cloverfield if they did that actually, insofar as those 2 movies have a 'thing'. They've definitely thrived on stoking social media speculation, so it'd be the next leap from that.

I love the idea of a franchise that isn't wedded on continuity or long form storytelling, instead more on an approach or atmosphere. Could be a cinematic Twilight Zone series if they keep making them as strong as 10 Cloverfield Lane was...

johnny_ultimate

It does feel like a logical step for Cloverfield of all series.

I've always wondered why stealth launches aren't done more for stuff with some buzz or name recognition already behind them. I've especially thought that should be the case with video games, where digital platforms are well established as a means of distribution.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Cloverfield it is.

https://twitter.com/ava/status/960307970750889984

johnny_ultimate

This is an urgent plea for Hollywood marketing teams to please kill the twinkly music / moody piano trailer trope:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NooW_RbfdWI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wb49-oV0F78