On the Nature of Things | Forum

Typhoon wrote: ↑Wed May 18, 2022 6:04 pm I think that the talented and creative people that were once attracted to the film industry now go into other fields.

NapLajoieonSteroids wrote: ↑Thu May 19, 2022 3:01 pm Yes the shortside lighting; the bleach bypass; the use of dynamic use reds with a cyan tint in that blackness as main character theming.

What I most had in mind though was that very process of taking what they shot with the ARRI cameras and animorphic lenses and printing it on 35mm film before scanning it back into digital. It all provided actual texture.

The effort is notable because it was an actual attempt at something compared to the rest of the slop on the playing field.

It was the opposite of the third movie I forgot to mention-- Free Guy-- the less said the better, but it was in the same range as The King's Man.

------------------

All that said, yes; it all collapses under its own weight. For any scene that looked sorta cinematic, two scenes would look tv quality. Some of that is on the Warner Brothers budgeting [my understanding this film, before COVID, was a mid-budget property]; a lot of it is on the director though.

For all the fancy camera manipulation, there is no energy or action to any of the shots...especially the action shots.

Just an example: the car chase scene had everything going for it, a lot of good ideas; so how did it end up underwhelming? There was nothing kinetic going on there. At no point was I really engaged. The movement of everything was just...off. Like some of the acting, particularly from Andy Serkis who always looks uncomfortable acting in his own skin. On and on and on...

The director made such a big deal about how much he was copying David Fincher (specifically Seven and Zodiac), and I am hardly a David Fincher fan, but the comparisons only hurt the Batman. Zodiac is mostly a bunch of actors sitting around in a newsroom, and there was more energy and excitement and intrigue in each frame than the Batman could ever muster.

noddy wrote: ↑Sat May 21, 2022 10:54 am

NapLajoieonSteroids wrote: ↑Thu May 19, 2022 3:01 pm Yes the shortside lighting; the bleach bypass; the use of dynamic use reds with a cyan tint in that blackness as main character theming.

What I most had in mind though was that very process of taking what they shot with the ARRI cameras and animorphic lenses and printing it on 35mm film before scanning it back into digital. It all provided actual texture.

The effort is notable because it was an actual attempt at something compared to the rest of the slop on the playing field.

It was the opposite of the third movie I forgot to mention-- Free Guy-- the less said the better, but it was in the same range as The King's Man.

------------------

All that said, yes; it all collapses under its own weight. For any scene that looked sorta cinematic, two scenes would look tv quality. Some of that is on the Warner Brothers budgeting [my understanding this film, before COVID, was a mid-budget property]; a lot of it is on the director though.

For all the fancy camera manipulation, there is no energy or action to any of the shots...especially the action shots.

Just an example: the car chase scene had everything going for it, a lot of good ideas; so how did it end up underwhelming? There was nothing kinetic going on there. At no point was I really engaged. The movement of everything was just...off. Like some of the acting, particularly from Andy Serkis who always looks uncomfortable acting in his own skin. On and on and on...

The director made such a big deal about how much he was copying David Fincher (specifically Seven and Zodiac), and I am hardly a David Fincher fan, but the comparisons only hurt the Batman. Zodiac is mostly a bunch of actors sitting around in a newsroom, and there was more energy and excitement and intrigue in each frame than the Batman could ever muster.

yes.

the other thing that struck me, in a jolt out of immersion kind of way was how they framed it.

the absurdity of the rich man in the silly costume requires a certain level of support from the movie itself, to not come across as idiotic.

the 60's batman and the burton and schumacker batmans just embraced the sillyness - so batman was normal within the context.

the noire type gritty batman of nolan or snyder is again, an absurd situation, which allows that character to exist.

with this one, the modern grittyness, the realism in the joker and his legion of internet fans, left the whiny goth boy in the costume looking incongruous and irrelevant.

maybe it is the feature of this iteration, but to me it just was a mess of tonal imbalances, too aware of its woke political place in the world, without having any fun with that self awareness.

NapLajoieonSteroids wrote: ↑Sun May 22, 2022 9:59 am who are we exactly watching on screen?

A mentally ill young man with severe trauma who everyone indulges to the extreme for a variety of reasons.

It's not even deconstructing of the character or archetype; it's something beyond that.

noddy wrote: ↑Wed May 18, 2022 10:02 am

NapLajoieonSteroids wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 2:00 am The thrill is gone.

Hollywood is now mere content for the internet, just as books were once for movies.


-----------------

Came across someone who made an analogy that as the cult of the artist as god bloomed during the renaissance, so has the cult of the fandom as god during the great awokening.

increasingly of late - hollywood is also gross people, the other half and I noticed the lack of charismatic leads in the current crop of movies

they arent sending us the best people.

NapLajoieonSteroids wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 11:51 pm
Yes, here the missus observed that people in movies are theoretically getting prettier but they're never horny; they're increasingly sex-less cogs with no strong attractiveness.

Typhoon wrote: ↑Sat Oct 22, 2022 10:43 am https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3oWrNQo_Ng

l3oWrNQo_Ng

Watched a few episodes, rather better than I had expected.
Directed by Michael Mann.

Remaking an Oscar-winning movie is a dicey proposition. Why mess with success?

But when German director Edward Berger decided to redo Lewis Milestone’s 1930 epic “All Quiet on the Western Front” for Netflix (streaming Friday), he was on a mission to tell the futile (and fatal) tale of a 17-year-old World War I German conscript from a German point of view.

As Berger saw it, whenever American or British directors make war movies, it is impossible to avoid letting well-earned heroism seep into such efforts, befitting their victors' point of view.

As a result, Berger wanted to anchor his "All Quiet" to the national yoke of loss and shame that burdens many Germans.

“When it comes to both world wars, as a German there is nothing to be proud of in that part of history. There’s only guilt, terror, horror and a deep sense of responsibility to the past,” says Berger, 52. “That’s in me. That’s in my kids.”

The result is possibly one of the most searing and soul-crushing depictions of warfare that has ever muddied the screen. It has the staggering battle sequences of “Saving Private Ryan,” the gruesome trench warfare of “1917” and the exploration of quieter moments in soldiers' lives seen in "Apocalypse Now.”

Nonc Hilaire wrote: ↑Sat Oct 29, 2022 2:03 pm

Typhoon wrote: ↑Sat Oct 22, 2022 10:43 am https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3oWrNQo_Ng

l3oWrNQo_Ng

Watched a few episodes, rather better than I had expected.
Directed by Michael Mann.

Standard plot so far but the 90’s Japan setting is great. Any recommendations for contemporary Japanese setting in any genre?

NapLajoieonSteroids wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 11:51 pm

noddy wrote: ↑Wed May 18, 2022 10:02 am

NapLajoieonSteroids wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 2:00 am The thrill is gone.

Hollywood is now mere content for the internet, just as books were once for movies.


-----------------

Came across someone who made an analogy that as the cult of the artist as god bloomed during the renaissance, so has the cult of the fandom as god during the great awokening.

increasingly of late - hollywood is also gross people, the other half and I noticed the lack of charismatic leads in the current crop of movies

they arent sending us the best people.

Yes, here the missus observed that people in movies are theoretically getting prettier but they're never horny; they're increasingly sex-less cogs with no strong attractiveness.

When Paul Verhoeven adapted Starship Troopers in the late 1990s, did he know he was predicting the future? The endless desert war, the ubiquity of military propaganda, a cheerful face shouting victory as more and more bodies pile up?

But the scene that left perhaps the greatest impact on the minds of Nineties kids—and the scene that anticipated our current cinematic age the best—does not feature bugs or guns. It is, of course, the shower scene, in which our heroic servicemen and -women enjoy a communal grooming ritual.

On the surface, it is idyllic: racial harmony, gender equality, unity behind a common goal—and firm, perky asses and tits.

And then the characters speak. The topic of conversation? Military service, of course. One joined for the sake of her political career. Another joined in the hopes of receiving her breeding license. Another talks about how badly he wants to kill the enemy. No one looks at each other. No one flirts.

A room full of beautiful, bare bodies, and everyone is only horny for war.

We’re told that Tony Stark and Pepper Potts are an item, but no actual romantic or sexual chemistry between them is shown in the films. Wonder Woman and Steve Trevor utterly lack the sexual chemistry to convince us that either of them would be thirsty enough to commandeer a coma victim’s body (as they do in Wonder Woman 1984) so they can enjoy a posthumous hookup. In defiance of Norse mythology, Chris Hemsworth’s Thor smiles at Natalie Portman like a dumb golden retriever puppy without ever venturing to rend her asunder with his mighty hammer, so to speak. Not that the competition is any better. Despite accusations of being an incel icon, it is Heath Ledger’s Joker, not Christian Bale’s chaste and sexless Batman, who exudes the most sexual energy in the Dark Knight trilogy.

noddy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 28, 2023 7:25 am

NapLajoieonSteroids wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 11:51 pm

noddy wrote: ↑Wed May 18, 2022 10:02 am

NapLajoieonSteroids wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 2:00 am The thrill is gone.

Hollywood is now mere content for the internet, just as books were once for movies.


-----------------

Came across someone who made an analogy that as the cult of the artist as god bloomed during the renaissance, so has the cult of the fandom as god during the great awokening.

increasingly of late - hollywood is also gross people, the other half and I noticed the lack of charismatic leads in the current crop of movies

they arent sending us the best people.

Yes, here the missus observed that people in movies are theoretically getting prettier but they're never horny; they're increasingly sex-less cogs with no strong attractiveness.

stumbled across someone who has written a huge rant on this.

https://bloodknife.com/everyone-beautiful-no-one-horny/

When Paul Verhoeven adapted Starship Troopers in the late 1990s, did he know he was predicting the future? The endless desert war, the ubiquity of military propaganda, a cheerful face shouting victory as more and more bodies pile up?

But the scene that left perhaps the greatest impact on the minds of Nineties kids—and the scene that anticipated our current cinematic age the best—does not feature bugs or guns. It is, of course, the shower scene, in which our heroic servicemen and -women enjoy a communal grooming ritual.

On the surface, it is idyllic: racial harmony, gender equality, unity behind a common goal—and firm, perky asses and tits.

And then the characters speak. The topic of conversation? Military service, of course. One joined for the sake of her political career. Another joined in the hopes of receiving her breeding license. Another talks about how badly he wants to kill the enemy. No one looks at each other. No one flirts.

A room full of beautiful, bare bodies, and everyone is only horny for war.

We’re told that Tony Stark and Pepper Potts are an item, but no actual romantic or sexual chemistry between them is shown in the films. Wonder Woman and Steve Trevor utterly lack the sexual chemistry to convince us that either of them would be thirsty enough to commandeer a coma victim’s body (as they do in Wonder Woman 1984) so they can enjoy a posthumous hookup. In defiance of Norse mythology, Chris Hemsworth’s Thor smiles at Natalie Portman like a dumb golden retriever puppy without ever venturing to rend her asunder with his mighty hammer, so to speak. Not that the competition is any better. Despite accusations of being an incel icon, it is Heath Ledger’s Joker, not Christian Bale’s chaste and sexless Batman, who exudes the most sexual energy in the Dark Knight trilogy.

etc

noddy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 28, 2023 7:25 am

NapLajoieonSteroids wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 11:51 pm

noddy wrote: ↑Wed May 18, 2022 10:02 am

NapLajoieonSteroids wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 2:00 am The thrill is gone.

Hollywood is now mere content for the internet, just as books were once for movies.


-----------------

Came across someone who made an analogy that as the cult of the artist as god bloomed during the renaissance, so has the cult of the fandom as god during the great awokening.

increasingly of late - hollywood is also gross people, the other half and I noticed the lack of charismatic leads in the current crop of movies

they arent sending us the best people.

Yes, here the missus observed that people in movies are theoretically getting prettier but they're never horny; they're increasingly sex-less cogs with no strong attractiveness.

stumbled across someone who has written a huge rant on this.

https://bloodknife.com/everyone-beautiful-no-one-horny/

When Paul Verhoeven adapted Starship Troopers in the late 1990s, did he know he was predicting the future? The endless desert war, the ubiquity of military propaganda, a cheerful face shouting victory as more and more bodies pile up?

But the scene that left perhaps the greatest impact on the minds of Nineties kids—and the scene that anticipated our current cinematic age the best—does not feature bugs or guns. It is, of course, the shower scene, in which our heroic servicemen and -women enjoy a communal grooming ritual.

On the surface, it is idyllic: racial harmony, gender equality, unity behind a common goal—and firm, perky asses and tits.

And then the characters speak. The topic of conversation? Military service, of course. One joined for the sake of her political career. Another joined in the hopes of receiving her breeding license. Another talks about how badly he wants to kill the enemy. No one looks at each other. No one flirts.

A room full of beautiful, bare bodies, and everyone is only horny for war.

We’re told that Tony Stark and Pepper Potts are an item, but no actual romantic or sexual chemistry between them is shown in the films. Wonder Woman and Steve Trevor utterly lack the sexual chemistry to convince us that either of them would be thirsty enough to commandeer a coma victim’s body (as they do in Wonder Woman 1984) so they can enjoy a posthumous hookup. In defiance of Norse mythology, Chris Hemsworth’s Thor smiles at Natalie Portman like a dumb golden retriever puppy without ever venturing to rend her asunder with his mighty hammer, so to speak. Not that the competition is any better. Despite accusations of being an incel icon, it is Heath Ledger’s Joker, not Christian Bale’s chaste and sexless Batman, who exudes the most sexual energy in the Dark Knight trilogy.

etc