Cinema Paradiso

Moderator: Eoin

Re: Cinema Paradiso

Postby Mully » Mon Jan 11, 2010 9:31 pm

pigography wrote:I loved it for its technology but the storyline was a bit of a let-down. One pet peeve was the inconsistency in characters, ex: when the guy/avatar mated with chief's daughter, there shouldn't be any kissing! - Their tails should've been doing that twirly-connecting-thingy! But having said that, I didn't hate the story. I absolutely loved the technology; I've been reading about the stereoscopic camera they built for it and the Occula visual effects software they had to develop to edit it. FAN-FREAKIN-TASTIC. It's the stereoscopic camera that gives both background and foreground such depth, compared to animated 3D films which generally give you a flat background and things popping out at you. Coraline wasn't too bad in 3D but I wasn't impressed with Up (I just liked the dog).


I'm really torn on this new 3D lark ... As you say, most of the animation is pointing at the screen or falling away from the screen. I'd hope that the immersive side of things is the way its going to go. Pixar seem to have side stepped the pointiness of 3D, as always with Pixar, the story is king.

As for Avatar itself, I was bored after about 30mins ... Sorry.
I just didn't care about the people, the tribe etc. Yes, the Photorealism is fantasic, outrageously so, but the 3D side of things added nothing for me. I'm not sure if this going to be the norm in 18mths time ... Remember the budget required is huge (I can't see the studios throwing that kind of money around for such a poor return) & I can see us only getting cheap knock offs, similar to post-Matrix 10yrs ago.
"The band that is now the core of BELL X1 but at the time had a lead singer called Damien Rice - and what became of them all - sank into obscurity no doubt!" Dan Hegarty, 2FM 2006 (with tongue firmly in cheek)
User avatar
Mully
 
Posts: 2839
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 12:00 am
Location: mcr, over on the mainland

Re: Cinema Paradiso

Postby Mully » Wed Jan 13, 2010 9:14 am

The Diving Bell & The Butterfly.

Story of the Elle Magazine editor who damages his neck after a stroke & is only able to communicate via blinking his one working eye. He goes on to write his novel with his one working eye.

The film is told, physically, from his point of view, the camera showing us what he sees. This coupled with the narration of his thoughts made for quite the interesting experience as I watched it with headphones on.
"The band that is now the core of BELL X1 but at the time had a lead singer called Damien Rice - and what became of them all - sank into obscurity no doubt!" Dan Hegarty, 2FM 2006 (with tongue firmly in cheek)
User avatar
Mully
 
Posts: 2839
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 12:00 am
Location: mcr, over on the mainland

Re: Cinema Paradiso

Postby pigography » Thu Jan 14, 2010 5:35 am

Mully wrote:I'm really torn on this new 3D lark ... As you say, most of the animation is pointing at the screen or falling away from the screen. I'd hope that the immersive side of things is the way its going to go. Pixar seem to have side stepped the pointiness of 3D, as always with Pixar, the story is king.

As for Avatar itself, I was bored after about 30mins ... Sorry.
I just didn't care about the people, the tribe etc. Yes, the Photorealism is fantasic, outrageously so, but the 3D side of things added nothing for me. I'm not sure if this going to be the norm in 18mths time ... Remember the budget required is huge (I can't see the studios throwing that kind of money around for such a poor return) & I can see us only getting cheap knock offs, similar to post-Matrix 10yrs ago.


I think Avatar is just a stepping stone for future multi-dimensional cinematography, particularly in non-animated films. Cinematography has been pretty consistent for the past number of decades. This new technology suggests new possibilities for advancement in cinematography.

Having said that, I don't think 3D will be the new standard, if only because of those damn glasses. I doubt that those who normally wear glasses enjoy, let alone find it comfortable, having to wear glasses on top of glasses. Only kids think wearing the glasses is fun, which is why I think 3D may thrive in children's animation. Pixar animation is more geared towards adults, so I can see why 3D is a non-issue with them.

But I'm thinking of the possibility of something beyond 3D, something along the lines of the outrageous photorealism you spoke of - ex: photorealism in documentaries would be quite the eye-opener. Sure Avatar cost $300 million, but it's a first and the first ones always cost ridiculous amounts of money. You're probably right; you will see cheap knock offs for the next few years but its popularity will eventually wane, and then hopefully we'll move to the next level of multi-dimensional films, whatever they may be. I'm just excited about the technology and seeing where it may take us.
"Cos every moment is a Bell X1 moment" - Rocky
Pigography = Sylvia
User avatar
pigography
 
Posts: 985
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:43 pm
Location: On the wrong incline - Toronto

Re: Cinema Paradiso

Postby Mully » Thu Jan 14, 2010 9:19 am

pigography wrote:
I think Avatar is just a stepping stone for future multi-dimensional cinematography, particularly in non-animated films. Cinematography has been pretty consistent for the past number of decades. This new technology suggests new possibilities for advancement in cinematography.

Having said that, I don't think 3D will be the new standard, if only because of those damn glasses. I doubt that those who normally wear glasses enjoy, let alone find it comfortable, having to wear glasses on top of glasses. Only kids think wearing the glasses is fun, which is why I think 3D may thrive in children's animation. Pixar animation is more geared towards adults, so I can see why 3D is a non-issue with them.

But I'm thinking of the possibility of something beyond 3D, something along the lines of the outrageous photorealism you spoke of - ex: photorealism in documentaries would be quite the eye-opener. Sure Avatar cost $300 million, but it's a first and the first ones always cost ridiculous amounts of money. You're probably right; you will see cheap knock offs for the next few years but its popularity will eventually wane, and then hopefully we'll move to the next level of multi-dimensional films, whatever they may be. I'm just excited about the technology and seeing where it may take us.


I can't argue with that, in the right hands, the future so bright I gotta wear 3D shades.

I spot a gap in the market ... Perscription 3D glasses. Get thee to the patent office !!
"The band that is now the core of BELL X1 but at the time had a lead singer called Damien Rice - and what became of them all - sank into obscurity no doubt!" Dan Hegarty, 2FM 2006 (with tongue firmly in cheek)
User avatar
Mully
 
Posts: 2839
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 12:00 am
Location: mcr, over on the mainland

Re: Cinema Paradiso

Postby Eoin » Thu Jan 14, 2010 4:56 pm

pigography wrote: I doubt that those who normally wear glasses enjoy, let alone find it comfortable, having to wear glasses on top of glasses.


Honestly, they didn't really bother me.

It's going to be slower to catch on than colour TV or stereo audio, but I'd be surprised if 3D film didn't become the standard sooner or later. Depth perception adds a whole extra... eh, dimension.

Commerical 3D HD TV sets will be arriving on the market this year. 3D televisions that don't require the use of glasses will possibly follow in a year or two. Though I'm not thoroughly convinced that having to remain stationary is any less annoying that having 3D glasses on.
User avatar
Eoin
 
Posts: 2989
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 12:40 am

Re: Cinema Paradiso

Postby Rocky » Fri Jan 15, 2010 4:14 pm

Mully wrote:The Diving Bell & The Butterfly.

Story of the Elle Magazine editor who damages his neck after a stroke & is only able to communicate via blinking his one working eye. He goes on to write his novel with his one working eye.

The film is told, physically, from his point of view, the camera showing us what he sees. This coupled with the narration of his thoughts made for quite the interesting experience as I watched it with headphones on.


That's a really good film. Read the book too which is a beautiful piece of work
All over the place, from the popular culture to the propaganda system, there is constant pressure to make people feel that they are helpless, that the only role they can have is to ratify decisions and to consume. - Noam Chomsky
User avatar
Rocky
 
Posts: 1733
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 9:43 pm
Location: Somerville, MA

Re: Cinema Paradiso

Postby Nathalie » Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:03 am

if you liked the actor, Mathieu Amalric, you should see Comment je me suis disputé (ma vie sexuelle) which you could translate as "how i had an argument (my sexual life)". Very very parisian, about love, literature and philosophy. but there's an irish :wink: in it as his character's called Paul Dedalus.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0115928/
And by the time we stand on our own two feet, we're standing there alone.
User avatar
Nathalie
 
Posts: 4283
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Brian Road, Marino, D3

Re: Cinema Paradiso

Postby Mully » Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:04 pm

Nathalie wrote:if you liked the actor, Mathieu Amalric, you should see Comment je me suis disputé (ma vie sexuelle) which you could translate as "how i had an argument (my sexual life)". Very very parisian, about love, literature and philosophy. but there's an irish :wink: in it as his character's called Paul Dedalus.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0115928/


I like the sound of that, I've put it on my lovefilm wishlist ... & now I play the waiting game !
"The band that is now the core of BELL X1 but at the time had a lead singer called Damien Rice - and what became of them all - sank into obscurity no doubt!" Dan Hegarty, 2FM 2006 (with tongue firmly in cheek)
User avatar
Mully
 
Posts: 2839
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 12:00 am
Location: mcr, over on the mainland

Re: Cinema Paradiso

Postby lilac*mess » Wed Feb 24, 2010 8:31 pm

I'm finding the trailers for Alice in Wonderland borderline upsetting; Depp, Bonham-Carter and lots of eyeliner... what a fucking surprise. And somehow obvious, uninspired remakes cheapen the original. It is a shame.
remember your raincoat
User avatar
lilac*mess
 
Posts: 1482
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 3:21 pm

Re: Cinema Paradiso

Postby Mully » Wed Feb 24, 2010 11:20 pm

lilac*mess wrote:I'm finding the trailers for Alice in Wonderland borderline upsetting; Depp, Bonham-Carter and lots of eyeliner... what a fucking surprise. And somehow obvious, uninspired remakes cheapen the original. It is a shame.


Burton has been upsetting me for years at this stage, Depp too.

Although with some cinemas refusing to show it, it might be be too upsetting for you.
"The band that is now the core of BELL X1 but at the time had a lead singer called Damien Rice - and what became of them all - sank into obscurity no doubt!" Dan Hegarty, 2FM 2006 (with tongue firmly in cheek)
User avatar
Mully
 
Posts: 2839
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 12:00 am
Location: mcr, over on the mainland

Previous

Return to The BellyBoard

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron