Movies The Movie Thread! - Continuation

[M3J]

Watchin' Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist. It's an awesome movie, love it.

Underworld 4 was good, but I guess it's cuz of Kate and my obsession with her.

 

[Gats]

It seems that Avengers is rocking. The reviews are excellent etc.
And it seems that we finally found the legitimate Hulk.

I didn't watch the movie yet but I had faith when I discovered that Joss Whedon would be the director, it seems he did this difficult crossover pretty well. I'm glad for him.

 

[xi0]

Yeah, a 97% approval rating on RottenTomatoes is pretty astounding

 

[Riku]

Wow. We'll big hype films tend to get high scores after first viewings due to fanboys. More on IMDB though than Rotten Tomatoes though. I asume it to drop after coupe of weeks. Anycase, I think I'm going to go to watch this on the premiere tomorrow.

 

[goldb]

I've already got my tickets and going to watch it tonight. So very excited

In other news, there was a 10 minute preview of The Hobbit released by Peter Jackson at CinemaCon and it has apparently come under mixed reviews and divide fans...mainly because of its shootingin 48fps instead of the industry standard 24fps. Read Article here.

 

[xi0]

Wait, so something can look so real it feels artificial? What the fuck are these critics and film nerds talking about? Jackson was better off showing nothing at all...

I understand what upping the frame-rate to a film can do to an image. The only way I see this being an issue is because of the film of course being shown on a big screen...but I suppose that's the only thing that matters ....... Oh well.

Maybe directors should spend less time being innovative or trend-setters and more on making good movies *cough*James*cough*Cameron*cough*

 

[goldb]

Yep that seems to be the gist of it. Reading that makes me curious as to how I'll react to what is essentially a fantasy film looking like a "behind the scenes" footage. amuse

Did you also read that James Cameron is planning to shoot the Avatar sequels in either 48fps or 60fps?

 

[xi0]

I guess they're complaining about the picture being TOO clear?

It's not as if Jackson couldn't just go back to 24fps really.

Yeah I saw...maybe for 3D and in IMAX it will work. I don't know.

 

[Gats]

Wow. We'll big hype films tend to get high scores after first viewings due to fanboys. More on IMDB though than Rotten Tomatoes though. I asume it to drop after coupe of weeks. Anycase, I think I'm going to go to watch this on the premiere tomorrow.

The thing I also read reviews from more general newspapers, even critics from the guys who think themselves as elitists, and they liked the movie.

 

[Riku]

The thing I also read reviews from more general newspapers, even critics from the guys who think themselves as elitists, and they liked the movie.

Hoo, that seems promising then. Well, I have trust for Whedon anyways, so maaan, I'm getting soo hyped.

As for the 48FPS issue... I kinda understand why the critique, as it changes the cinematic feel drastically. However, for 3D to looks pleasing 48fps is almost a must. And they can always change it back to 24fps neatly, if things just don't work.

---------- Post added April 28, 2012 at 05:52 PM ---------- Previous post was April 26, 2012 at 03:11 PM ----------

Saw The Avengers. Awesome, cool, an epic at times. A great piece of light entertainment. The action choreography was incredible, effects top notch and character interactions priceless. If I were 12 this would have been the best film ever, however I'm not anymore. Can't deny it's value though, pretty damn neat action package, thrilling and funny, but just that. As far as action blockbusters go this is among the best in my recent memory.The final carnage on Manhattan was amazing.

 

[Gats]

Wait, so something can look so real it feels artificial? What the fuck are these critics and film nerds talking about? Jackson was better off showing nothing at all...

I understand what upping the frame-rate to a film can do to an image. The only way I see this being an issue is because of the film of course being shown on a big screen...but I suppose that's the only thing that matters ....... Oh well.

Maybe directors should spend less time being innovative or trend-setters and more on making good movies *cough*James*cough*Cameron*cough*

I didn't see the 48 fps cutscene but I understand it can divide people. I mean, even now, even if maybe that has nothing to do with the fps, when I see the new HD/HQ/whatever TV showing a film...often it feels like it's not a film anymore, but some kind of documentary or TV report. I think some light ajustement has to be done to compensate the high fps now.

 

[goldb]

Response from Peter Jackson regarding the shooting in 48fps:

"Nobody is going to stop. This technology is going to keep evolving. At first it's unusual because you've never seen a movie like this before," Jackson told EW.

"It's literally a new experience, but you know, that doesn't last the entire experience of the film; not by any stretch, after 10 minutes or so. That's a different experience than if you see a fast-cutting montage at a technical presentation.

"There can only ever be a real reaction, a truthful reaction, when people actually have a chance to see a complete narrative on a particular film. A couple of the more negative commenters from CinemaCon said that in the Gollum and Bilbo scene they didn't mind it and got used to that.

"That was the same 48 frames the rest of the reel was. I just wonder if it they were getting into the dialogue, the characters and the story. That's what happens in the movie. You settle into it."

source: digitalspy.co.uk

 

[Doraku]

I'm not an expert in movies or cameras, but what would be the problem if Hobit is going to be shoot in 48fps? Is the picture is more clear like HD 1080p or something?.

I'm looking forward to watch Avengers, sadly I have to wait until 4th May..

 

[xi0]

I'm not an expert in movies or cameras, but what would be the problem if Hobit is going to be shoot in 48fps? Is the picture is more clear like HD 1080p or something?.

I'm looking forward to watch Avengers, sadly I have to wait until 4th May..

A higher frame rate means the camera that is used for filming takes more pictures per second than usual. That means more nuance to movements is captured and it looks closer to real life. The picture might not be clearer necessarily, but it's probably more vivid.

 

[goldb]

First theatrical trailer for Skyfall is out:

 

[Crude]

I've been wondering, do cinemas in other countries have a break/intermission around the middle of a movie?Because in Portugal they do, but see I've watched movies in Scotland and in England and they didn't have any. I've also seen two movies in the US, but I was too young too remember if they had any xD.

 

[Riku]

Not in decades. My dad still remembers that they used to have those when he was a kid, but not in a really long time. That's kinda ridiculous imho. I can see the point in 2 hours 40 min epochs, but thats still kinda stupid. Couldn't potentially ruin the mood completly?

 

[xi0]

I think they might still do it for some really long movies, but it would be rare. Cinemas try to fit in as many showings of a movie as they can.

 

[goldb]

I can't imagine going to cinema to watch a film, then having some sort of interval in between....it'd ruin the momentum of the film for me.

 

[xi0]

I can't imagine going to cinema to watch a film, then having some sort of interval in between....it'd ruin the momentum of the film for me.

If the movie was Schindler's List or Heat -long I actually wouldn't mind an intermission for various reasons. Movies do tend to be longer these days, but that type of length isn't terribly common.

It used to be that the movie would actually run around a type of intermission and it would be in the film instead of added by the theater. Movies like Ben-Hur or The Ten Commandments come to mind.