Guest Mirezzi Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2011/05/the_dying_of_the_light.html The dying of the light [snip] Do you remember what a movie should look like? Do you notice when one doesn't look right? Do you feel the vague sense that something is missing? I do. I know in my bones how a movie should look. I have been trained by the best projection in the world, at film festivals and in expert screening rooms. When I see a film that looks wrong, I want to get up and complain to the manager and ask that the projectionist be informed. But these days the projectionist is tending a dozen digital projectors, and I will be told, "That's how it's supposed to look. It came that way from the studio." The most common flaw is that the picture is not bright enough. I've been seeing that for a long time. In the years before digital projectors, the problem was often that tight-fisted theater owners weren't setting the Xenon bulbs in their projectors at the correct wattage, in the mistaken belief that dialing them down would extend the life of the expensive bulbs. [/snip] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delet... Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 The irony is, that at the same time they were pumping the volume up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ego Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 It is as if the Industry is courting self-destruction. Pretty much. I can count the number of times I went to the cinema in the past year on 1 hand. The few 3D movies I saw were as he described: very dark and muddy. I'd rather download (since the movie industry is inept at quality low-cost distribution over the net as well) me a nice rip and cut through all the bullshit and ridiculous pricing. And at least I get to bring my own drinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdamAnchorman Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 how many films that are shown in 3-D are actually really worth seeing, artistically? im not trying to be a dick, i honestly have no feel for the movie culture out there now. all i know is stupid people are ranting about pirates of the caribbean, and that the last shitty pirates movie is the only movie i actually fell asleep to in the theater (was dragged by shitty friends) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 The irony is, that at the same time they were pumping the volume up. at least at the theaters i've patronized in the last 10 years i've noticed a huge decrease in decibels/loudness when you go see a movie in a normal standard theater, but when you go see an Imax movie it's cranked to insane levels. I feel like they do this on purpose to get people who enjoy really loud movie sounds to fork over the extra $8 for the imax seats. The movie industry is more of a corporate money making racket now than it's ever been, let's hope blueray is the final disc based format sony forces down our throats. I really wouldn't mind the whole pay extra for a 3d version of a movie if a) most of the movies were halfway decent or enjoyable, the only really good ones i've seen are completely animated cartoon films b) they actually filmed them in 3d and didn't convert them, you can really tell the difference c) they didn't have this pussy attitude of 'we want people to feel like they are looking through a window and no gimmicks like stuff jumping out at you', why the fuck not? right now when 3d technology is crisper and better looking than it's ever been before you say you're not going to fully utilize it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oscillik Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 let's hope blueray is the final disc based format sony forces down our throats. many are saying that digital distribution is now extremely viable. i think physical formats will still be out for some time - there will always be customers who would prefer to not have just digital files, same as with music. for some, (american's anyway) Hulu and Netflix is just fine and dandy. and that's cool, i wish we had a similar service over here. but i still think a physical medium will be favoured for a while by a lot of viewers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delet... Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 as long as data costs so much, i don't think digital distribution of full size movie files can make primetime yet. -- And to awe, maybe in your country they have been reducing the volume. It's still way high here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oscillik Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 as long as data costs so much, i don't think digital distribution of full size movie files can make primetime yet. -- And to awe, maybe in your country they have been reducing the volume. It's still way high here. oh yeah i agree, i think we're a long way off slurping bluray movies to our home computers (note, actual bluray quality, not compressed). but as the popularity of Hulu and Netflix will attest - there is a market for lower quality downloads. volume in the cinemas i've been to here in the UK, has definitely decreased. they're most certainly quieter than they used to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 The irony is, that at the same time they were pumping the volume up. Definitely agree. I was dragged to Thor recently, and my ears were ringing by the end because of the incredibly loud fight scene sound effects. If I'm going to damage my ears for something I'd at least rather have it be with some form of music, instead of fucking stock sound effects. also btw agree with there being no 3d films with artistic merit (and I don't go for that fucking "oooh it looks so pretty and real" bullshit so without art or humor I couldn't give a shit if I wanted to about the movies they've been putting out.) edit no 2: i did just see jumping the broom though and that was an enjoyable cinema experience Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J3FF3R00 Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 RE: "Dark and Muddy" 3D projections. This is such a simple fix. Ebert is right to say they need to be brighter. If you think about basic photographic process, if you are shooting something with a filter on the lens, you open up the aperture to let more light in so that the image isn't underexposed. When you are in a movie theater and wearing 3D glasses, they basically act as sunglasses (or filters, for that matter). The result is an underexposed image in your eyes. They definitely should brighten the projection in 3D screenings because everyone basically has fucking sunglasses on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zephyr_Nova Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 I saw Severance in Ireland and actually had to put in ear plugs it was so loud. I did enjoy feeling every volume spike reverberate through my body, but ear plugs really shouldn't be a necessity at a theatre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Blanket Fort Collapse Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 u r teh gay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pylonbitch Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 i wouldn't mind so much if the spotty 16 year old oiks doing switching the projector on and off knew how to a) focus and b) mix the dialogue speaker at an audible level. # multiplex cinemas are wank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
impakt Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 3D is fucking gay and retarded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcbpete Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 I just farted out a poster promoting the use of 3D in multiplexes - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
impakt Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hahathhat Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 1) my local imax is good, if expensive 2) i appreciate rumbly loud bass in a movie theater, but please save me from a loud high-end. i'm bad enough listening to the hihats on one of my trax for six hours 3) i feel like 3D animated films made entirely on SGIs or whatever are in the best position to make use of 3D. namely, to fucking have fun with it. 3D is just an afterthought on many releases. avatar did 3D better than anything i'd previously seen in a theater... but i saw a preview for "cars" somethingorother 3D when i went to see avatar, and watching cartoon missiles come out of the screen was actually quite exciting. i'd like to see what a talented 3D animator could do with being able to give an audience true 3D. i was interested in seeing cars, but i never got around to it while it was still in theaters (as it cycled out real fast). the fundamental problem with 3D, for me, is that the one theater around here worth a damn shows precisely one movie at a time. it showed "how to train your dragon" for months. and fuck me if i'm driving 25mins and paying 25dollars to watch that bullshit. edit: it might have been tron legacy i saw that preview for. whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azatoth Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 I wonder when 3D will be used as an element of the film rather than just "have shit fly at you" gimmick. Avatar was sort of in the right direction but still think it could be used more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blir Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 I wonder when 3D will be used as an element of the film rather than just "have shit fly at you" gimmick. Avatar was sort of in the right direction but still think it could be used more. How could this work though? I can't see it as being more than a gimmick. When reading about Saw 3D before it was out (yeah alright shut up) they said they were utilizing the 3d to give more depth of field and immerse you. Plus there'd be segments where you're in the characters perspective and the the 3d makes you feel more like you're in the trap and I thought that would be really good. Turned out they did nothing of the sort and that was disappointing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Member Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 It is as if the Industry is courting self-destruction. Pretty much. I can count the number of times I went to the cinema in the past year on 1 hand. The few 3D movies I saw were as he described: very dark and muddy. The sad thing is this doesn't stop at 3D, a lot of 2D movies are fucked to smithereens by post processing retards in the industry... the Road - I'm looking at you! edit: an example Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azatoth Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 I wonder when 3D will be used as an element of the film rather than just "have shit fly at you" gimmick. Avatar was sort of in the right direction but still think it could be used more. How could this work though? I can't see it as being more than a gimmick. When reading about Saw 3D before it was out (yeah alright shut up) they said they were utilizing the 3d to give more depth of field and immerse you. Plus there'd be segments where you're in the characters perspective and the the 3d makes you feel more like you're in the trap and I thought that would be really good. Turned out they did nothing of the sort and that was disappointing. I don't know, but I am not a film director either. They ought to figure it out. Maybe it can only be used as a way to add the audiences immersion. The things flying at you is just pure gimmick if it doesn't serve a purpose on a whole. Avatar stayed away from that aspect for the most part and really worked with the immersion bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azatoth Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 It is as if the Industry is courting self-destruction. Pretty much. I can count the number of times I went to the cinema in the past year on 1 hand. The few 3D movies I saw were as he described: very dark and muddy. The sad thing is this doesn't stop at 3D, a lot of 2D movies are fucked to smithereens by post processing retards in the industry... the Road - I'm looking at you! edit: an example Agreed that so many movies are post-processed in away it looks like shit. Either too washed out colors, to make it look gritty and real, or too much added filmgrain or making everything a certain color probably mostly blue, green or orange. Some directors go way overboard with their post-production fuckery... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Coalbucket PI Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 I think the dimness of 3D films has been the worst thing about them, but I haven't noticed it to be a problem with 2D films. Avatar and Tron were okay though. I watched Alice In Wonderland in 3D and it looked like a sack of plop. Dark plop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Iain C Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 Until recently, I hadn't been to the cinema for about 5 years because it's crap. But thanks to my lovely girlfriend, I've recently discovered the joys of independent cinemas that show old movies - the kind of movies I'm willing to pay to see. No 3D junk, no multiplex bullshit, no kids... and it's easy to sneak booze inside. In fact, if you're watching a film from the 40s I'd say sneaking booze inside is mandatory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Braintree Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 I never noticed the brightness thing since my eyes are already very sensitive to light. Also, fuck 3D just because I already wear glasses and have to wear an extra pair of glasses. Also, fuck 3D because it's a fucking gimmick. Would you ever watch Monty Python and the Holy Grail in 3D? No. Because it wouldn't fucking make any goddamn sense. Avatar wasn't any better in 3D than otherwise since the story was still "meh" and the acting was still "blagh." I'm drunk. Fuck you. Pay me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.