Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it,
follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given
their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
Posts
wait, wait.
Shaolin Soccer isn't a true story?!
I FEEL SO BETRAYED
Kung-Fu Hustle is still true, however.
Speaking of which, we need a new Stephen Chow movie.
Nintendo Network ID - PirateLuigi
Sadly, we already got one, that being Dragonball: Evolution.
Of course that was just him in a producing role, he hasn't done the writer/director/star tri-fecta since Kung-Fu Hustle.
Although, my favorite Chow-driven piece is still God of Cookery.
I know nothing about God of Cookery, but the phrase "Pissing Beef Balls" has me intrigued.
Nintendo Network ID - PirateLuigi
I love the kungfu training in that movie. Two guys posing while the rest beat the shit out of him with chairs.
I use frame interpolation on my TV. For a little while, things look smoother and the effect is noticeable, and then after a little while the effect is completely transparent and you just become used to it. If it becomes standard, people will adjust, and in a few years nobody will even remember that this was a thing. There is no rational reason why 24fps is The Best Framerate and anything faster is bad and cheesy.
Remember when HD came out? And it was really good for some things but then people realized that HD made a lot of special effects in movies looks really cruddy because you could now see the faults? Or how CG often has uncanny valley issues when you take it past a certain level of realism? Yeah, this is the same thing. The solution is not to cling to stuttery prehistoric frame rates because they are "cinematic," but rather to push forward and figure out how best to use the new technology. Just like the solution to the uncanny valley effect in CG is not to never progress the technology past Toy Story, but rather to work with the medium until we can get amazing effects that don't make the viewer do a double-take.
I, for one, welcome our new faster-framerate overlords.
Maddie: "I am not!"
Riley: "You're a marsupial!"
Maddie: "I am a placental mammal!"
Maddie: "I am not!"
Riley: "You're a marsupial!"
Maddie: "I am a placental mammal!"
They have it up w/ English subs on Google Video:
God of Cookery
The quality is pretty crap, and if you like it you should definitely pick up a DVD copy. They did a small print-run that's Region 1 you can find relatively easily from various Amazon sellers.
It's those positively inexplicable moments that will give that movie some serious legs. People will spend years fantasizing about the scenarios they could not possibly have seen. I sure as hell will.
Favorite part?
Edit: To clarify it isn't the innacuracies that bothered me though. It is how they changed all this stuff to have a huge pro-China message where he says things like how Chinese martial arts are based on respect and the Japanese can never truly master them and that sort of thing. It comes off as really creepy to basically co opt a real person to make a blatant propaganda movie like that.
Yeah I read the wikipedia article which also pointed out the reason he left for the final time was because of the communist government.
3DS: 5284-1576-2362
I don't have any studies to back it up, but I'd be willing to bet that people are less likely to notice effects flaws in theater-projected movies than when watching HD blu-ray transfers at home because:
1) the first time you watch a movie you tend to focus less on the details in the scene, which is often the case when seeing a movie in the theater
2) things on the screen are possibly tens of feet across; your eye has to move around more and average together the moving parts of the image, rather than being able to capture a fairly large portion of what's going on without refocusing
3) things on theater screens are literally larger-than-life; I'm psychologically less prepared to recognize a grey potato as a potato instead of an asteroid when it's projected 20 feet across than when it's actually potato-size on my TV
This is true.
HD isn't any more faithful than the negative its struck from.
Well Ip Man 2 takes all the pro-China stuff in the first film and doubles it because those evil british blokes call them mean names and took Hong Kong from them and killed
Apollo CreedMartial Law!.found it on youtube:
No. No!
You have missed the point entirely.
Thank you for reminding me about AI, so i can rage about its ending anew
It's still something I'd like to see myself. Peter Jackson keeps insisting it really is better, so I'd like to give it a shot.
Nintendo Network ID - PirateLuigi
That movie should have ended with
But no, it didn't end that way. Did it.
I look forward to seeing it myself, too. However, I'm not sure PJ has backed up his claims of it being "better" with anything beyond "it shows much more clarity and decreases motion blur," complaints I'm not sure anyone was accusing cinema of actually having.
I personally haven't ever watched a film and said, "gee, I wish the framerate was more lifelike."
As an aside, I wonder if shooting in 48/60fps requires a much greater degree of lighting, since with the same aperture and input settings the film isn't being as exposed to as much light as it would be at 24fps. Meaning, when factoring all the extra money spent in nationwide projection conversion, the extra work the costume and set design and make-up artists have to put in, and all the extra lighting considerations, shooting at higher framerates is going to be a fairly expensive venture for a return of questionable value.
I've been saying that for years. It's almost like, you can "feel" Kubrick pulling the strings in that scene, grinning that maniacal Kubrick grin, then Spielberg punches him out and grabs all the strings and tangles them up.
Steam: DigitalArcanist | XBoxLive: DigitalArcanist | PSN: DigitalArcanist | Backloggery: Houn
I've heard this many, many times. I have yet to see a single person explain why or tell me what that being the ending would mean for the movie as a whole. The only reasons I've ever heard for this are "Spielberg added the rest to Kubrick's original ending," which appears to be factually incorrect, and "the current ending is too sappy", which others have pointed out isn't necessarily true.
And I'm not trying to be confrontational here--I just really would like to understand the other, more prominent point of view on this. Could somebody enlighten me?
I just hate the spacerobots with their spacemagic
It's horrifying, and bleak as hell, and probably the most subversive thing Spielberg has ever done, and all of it drenched in a heavy layer of irony.
http://troublethinking.wordpress.com (Updated Wed) http://twitter.com/#!/Durandal4532
For me it made everything look like a soap opera. It was terrible.
Yeah, I don't get why people are hating on the ending of A.I. Taken at face value, it's sappy as hell. Read into it though, and it's pretty fucking dark and more than a little disturbing.
the only people who think vinyl is better than digital are contrarians and hipsters and I've no time for either.
Stephen Foster is the shit.
Wasn't A.I. the last movie that Stanley Kubrick was working on before he died?
Yes.
SODOMISE INTOLERANCE
Tide goes in. Tide goes out.