1917
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ocho
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 45805

PostPosted: Mon Feb 10, 2020 4:20 pm    Post subject:

Definitely did not recognize Tommen

Never ends well for that dude.
_________________
14-5-3-12
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 44850
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Mon Feb 10, 2020 4:31 pm    Post subject:

ocho wrote:
Definitely did not recognize Tommen

Never ends well for that dude.


Well, here's no Sean Bean.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 25287

PostPosted: Mon Feb 10, 2020 7:52 pm    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:

Blackhawk Down > 1917


Apples>oranges

Agreed.


Then do you have a point or are you just trying argue about a comparison that isn't being made?

My points were twofold:

1) apples are better than oranges

2) BHD and 1917 are similar war films and that BHD is a better movie
_________________
hipster film aficionado
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 44850
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Mon Feb 10, 2020 8:55 pm    Post subject:

Baron Von Humongous wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:

Blackhawk Down > 1917


Apples>oranges

Agreed.


Then do you have a point or are you just trying argue about a comparison that isn't being made?

My points were twofold:

1) apples are better than oranges

2) BHD and 1917 are similar war films and that BHD is a better movie


So you have one point. And you have one opinion.

Apples are better than oranges. And while that is an opinion, it is one that I share. So you do have a point there.

BHD and 1917 are not even remotely "similar war films" other than their stories take place in the setting of war. Their approaches, intent and story form are decidedly and undeniably different. They are essentially "similar" in the same way that "Steve Jobs" is similar to "The Jerk" because they are both about inventors. That's not a statement about quality or anything other than to emphasize the degree of dissimilarity. So not really a point made there.

Your opinion is that BHD is a better movie than 1917. That's a perfectly good opinion and one that I am certain you not alone in. I think BHD is a great movie, but it's a conventional movie all the same. My personal preference is with 1917. Its approach to storytelling is more poetry than prose. It's cinematic approach allowed a more visually stimulating experience. The continuous cut allows visual images to linger longer and production design wise, the format allowed for a more painterly approach to the imagery. The decision to forgo traditional editing was intriguing to me as an Editor because of how it so dramatically changes the idea of storytelling by encapsulating it with inherently temporal imagery - which is exactly how we experience life. You don't get to exploit a cut to add emphasis, dictate pace, easily manufacture a reveal or manipulate performance. All tools that traditional filmmaking has to its advantage. For those reasons and others, my opinion is that 1917 is a more interesting movie.

I find it unfortunate that the approach didn't resonate with you, but I am glad that you found BHD more enjoyable.


_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 85577
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Mon Feb 10, 2020 9:35 pm    Post subject:

The casual racism of BHD makes it hard to watch anymore
_________________
I guess I just miss my friend.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 44850
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Mon Feb 10, 2020 9:43 pm    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
The casual racism of BHD makes it hard to watch anymore


Perhaps you missed the profound anti-war message that the seminal Director Ridley Scott so artfully crafted via his sensationalistic rawness and box office awesomeness while you focused on things of substance.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 25287

PostPosted: Tue Feb 11, 2020 12:12 pm    Post subject:

One of my favorite war movies is Alberto Cavalcanti's Went the Day Well. It was made in Britain in 1943 and starts out as a flashback from a proposed future in which the Allies had defeated Germany and focuses on a story about how a bucolic, sunny English countryside town near a communications hub was invaded and taken over by German spies. The setup is ridiculous and hinges on a chocolate bar, but as the Germans kill off townspeople who try to escape to get word out about a pending invasion, the other townspeople gradually rise up and begin killing off the small group of "Huns." It's insane to see two teenage girls with rifles picking off German soldiers, the local shop owner slitting throats, etc., and it's structured very much like an action movie by the end.

But it feels so, so ugly. I think it could only be made by an outsider like Cavalcanti tasked to film wartime propaganda that ends up showing the indomitable British spirit as bloodthirsty and vicious as their German enemy's. That's a "fun," action-based war movie that works, imo.
_________________
hipster film aficionado
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 44850
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 11, 2020 12:24 pm    Post subject:

Since the following action of the oners in 1917 didn't work for some of you guys, I'm curious as to how you feel about the similar moments in Once Upon a Time . . . where several times the camera spends 30+seconds on the backs of people's heads as they drive with no dialog, or the Bruce Lee oner that plays predominantly on Pitt for for an extended time while he just sits there and Lee's lines take place off camera?
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ocho
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 45805

PostPosted: Tue Feb 11, 2020 12:58 pm    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
Since the following action of the oners in 1917 didn't work for some of you guys, I'm curious as to how you feel about the similar moments in Once Upon a Time . . . where several times the camera spends 30+seconds on the backs of people's heads as they drive with no dialog, or the Bruce Lee oner that plays predominantly on Pitt for for an extended time while he just sits there and Lee's lines take place off camera?


I’m not anti-oner, although making a whole movie a oner is probably not the best idea. You’ll typically sacrifice a lot in the name of grandstanding. They have their place though and can be very effective. I do think they’re becoming fetishized. I think the ones you mention in Once Upon a Time work great, partly because (as you said) they’re moments. If we never left the car I think that would be a mistake.
_________________
14-5-3-12
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 25287

PostPosted: Tue Feb 11, 2020 1:07 pm    Post subject:

ocho wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
Since the following action of the oners in 1917 didn't work for some of you guys, I'm curious as to how you feel about the similar moments in Once Upon a Time . . . where several times the camera spends 30+seconds on the backs of people's heads as they drive with no dialog, or the Bruce Lee oner that plays predominantly on Pitt for for an extended time while he just sits there and Lee's lines take place off camera?


I’m not anti-oner, although making a whole movie a oner is probably not the best idea. You’ll typically sacrifice a lot in the name of grandstanding. They have their place though and can be very effective. I do think they’re becoming fetishized. I think the ones you mention in Once Upon a Time work great, partly because (as you said) they’re moments. If we never left the car I think that would be a mistake.

A lot of Deakins' work to cover conversations without two shots and with naturalistic blocking was most interesting to me. Assayas tried to do something similar in his movie Non-fiction (2019), but was aided by characters in a dining or living room scene moving around the room at times to change up the blocking.

But Deakins moving the camera around for every conversation that way became monotonous, and that became my experience with the whole movie from the scene with the baby until Schofield met Blake's brother (Richard Madden): "here's some more (bleep) for George McKay, great." It felt like function was totally subverted to form and I stopped caring about anything except the camera and finding digitally altered cuts.
_________________
hipster film aficionado
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB