Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wonder Woman is a badass movie all around. IMO a superhero movie should be rich in detail and look like artwork. It shouldn't look dull and flat as if it was filmed with the latest iPhone.
Agree to an extent. I still think both Guardian of The Galaxy films, Ant-Man & The Wasp, and Avengers: Infinity War & End Game, have some of the best visuals out of any other superhero movie. The cameras they used to film them were good choices to use as well.
I guess. There's also that scene in "The Brave Little Toaster" where the vacuum cleaner dies in quicksand and the scene from "The Never Ending Story" where Atreyu's horse succumbs to the Swamps of Sadness. We could even throw in Scar tossing Mufasa over a cliff in The Lion King. Those scenes are "sad" but I don't think there's much emotional depth or richness to them. Even G-rated films from the 80s and 90s explored the idea of death and ensuing sadness.
Emotional complexity is a different story. That's "cinema" and very few, if any, blockbusters have any.
Yeah, those are sad scenes, but it's still apples and oranges. There was plenty of emotional depth and richness in the examples I gave you. Go on YouTube and watch them and try and tell me they stack up to the films you listed.
Agree to an extent. I still think both Guardian of The Galaxy films, Ant-Man & The Wasp, and Avengers: Infinity War & End Game, have some of the best visuals out of any other superhero movie. The cameras they used to film them were good choices to use as well.
Meh. Marvel movies are "okay" to me. They've clearly sunk millions and millions of dollars into these projects so nearly everything about them will be high-quality, but they lack any kind of signature cinematic quality.
The Matrix, for example, was the first film, in my recollection, to have those 3-D/freeze frame and slow motion panoramas. It was mindblowing seeing it then and it's still awesome seeing it now. Other filmmakers started using the same technique.
Tarantino is polarizing, but the man employs some great camera techniques, my favorite of which is the wide open eyeball peering through a crevice or floorboard. I love the scene in Inglorious Basterds where Shoshannah's wide blue eyes can be seen through the floorboards as the Germans are pressing the family that's hiding them about their whereabouts.
Marvel movies don't really have anything like that. There's a sense of "this is good, but nothing we haven't seen before" outside of the ridiculous CGI budget. Game of Thrones also relied heavily on CGI, but the cinematography in "Battle of the Bastards" blows away anything in MCU history IMO, and that's with a smaller budget.
Another reason I don't care for the MCU that much is that it's kept RDJ from making the next installment of Sherlock Holmes. Now this is awesome cinematography!
Meh. Marvel movies are "okay" to me. They've clearly sunk millions and millions of dollars into these projects so nearly everything about them will be high-quality, but they lack any kind of signature cinematic quality.
The Matrix, for example, was the first film, in my recollection, to have those 3-D/freeze frame and slow motion panoramas. It was mindblowing seeing it then and it's still awesome seeing it now. Other filmmakers started using the same technique.
Tarantino is polarizing, but the man employs some great camera techniques, my favorite of which is the wide open eyeball peering through a crevice or floorboard. I love the scene in Inglorious Basterds where Shoshannah's wide blue eyes can be seen through the floorboards as the Germans are pressing the family that's hiding them about their whereabouts.
Marvel movies don't really have anything like that. There's a sense of "this is good, but nothing we haven't seen before" outside of the ridiculous CGI budget. Game of Thrones also relied heavily on CGI, but the cinematography in "Battle of the Bastards" blows away anything in MCU history IMO, and that's with a smaller budget.
Ughhhhhh!!! I love that we both like/appreciate The Matrix and Tarantino films, but you're killing me smalls!!! The final battle in End Game was way more epic than that GOT battle. Although I will give them major props for working with a smaller budget. However, there's a reason they were on HBO; they could give them a budget no one else could in terms of TV networks.
I will say that Tony Stark suiting up as Iron Man was more epic and cooler looking in the early stages of the MCU, before they resorted to all CGI. But even RDJ said he preferred the CGI option because of how complex it was to wear the suit, as well as how hot he'd get from wearing it. I also give Disney credit because they have opened new doors with CGI and the tech used on these movies. No one else has done a better job digitally de-aging someone in a movie than them. Michael Douglas and Samuel L. Jackson are prime examples. Hell, I remember showing my dad Michael Douglas in the flashback scene in the first Ant-Man movie, and he was blown away from it. Speaking of digitally de-aging actors, pretty sure Scorsese did it for De Niro, Pacino, and Pesce for The IrishMan. Pacino doesn't look that good for his age, yet he looks amazing in that trailer.
Another reason I don't care for the MCU that much is that it's kept RDJ from making the next installment of Sherlock Holmes. Now this is awesome cinematography!
Ughhhhhh!!! I love that we both like/appreciate The Matrix and Tarantino films, but you're killing me smalls!!! The final battle in End Game was way more epic than that GOT battle. Although I will give them major props for working with a smaller budget. However, there's a reason they were on HBO; they could give them a budget no one else could in terms of TV networks.
So let me ask: What new techniques did Endgame bring to the table?
"Battle of the Bastards" wasn't just a cool scene because of the arrows and the gore and the death and the agony. I don't think we'd ever seen a scene on TV or film where someone is being trampled to death. And we get it to see it from Jon's perspective! Here's Jon trying to get up and he's heaving because hundreds of men are stomping on top of his face and chest. That was simply incredible.
Plus, there's the scene where hundreds of horses are charging at him full speed and it's NOT CGI as a lot of people think.
Sorry, but I don't see Endgame bringing any revolutionary film techniques to the table. When the Matrix came out, and Trinity fights that cop in the opening sequence, we lost our collective minds since we had never seen anything like it before. Endgame is loaded to the hilt with awesome CGI, but it doesn't make quite the impression that the Matrix did, or even Star Wars when it first hit theaters. IMO there's just the sense of "it's cool."
If I could rep you again, I would. Fury Road is a visually stunning work.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
