I looked it up out of sheer curiosityEat_box wrote:I actually bothered to watch the RoboGeisha trailer.
wut
I need to watch this as soon as possible
Movies
-
Miss Starseed
- Posts: 7469
- Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 5:13 pm
- Location: butts
Went to see Alice in Wonderland in theaters. It was already out of theaters.
So we debated - is it better to have Nightmare on Elm Street possibly ruined for us, or Shrek? Both of which had already been dragged through the mud and tarnished anyways. We decided on Shrek.
Meh, it was enjoyable. Would have prefered to have spent less cheddar on it, but what can you do? The ending was fucked up though.
So we debated - is it better to have Nightmare on Elm Street possibly ruined for us, or Shrek? Both of which had already been dragged through the mud and tarnished anyways. We decided on Shrek.
Meh, it was enjoyable. Would have prefered to have spent less cheddar on it, but what can you do? The ending was fucked up though.
So Hollywood Video is closing. I hate seeing all of the video stores closing.
But I bought 5 movies for $40. I got:
The Godfather
Memento
Ed Wood
The Little Mermaid
Fantasia 2000.
But FUCK ME Fantasia 2000 is scratched to hell and doesn't work, gonna try to return it today.
But I bought 5 movies for $40. I got:
The Godfather
Memento
Ed Wood
The Little Mermaid
Fantasia 2000.
But FUCK ME Fantasia 2000 is scratched to hell and doesn't work, gonna try to return it today.
Myk wrote:Xabyrn is cool in my books.
-
TheOtherMC
- Posts: 3503
- Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 4:55 pm
- Location: Oppressing spacenoids.
-
TheOtherMC
- Posts: 3503
- Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 4:55 pm
- Location: Oppressing spacenoids.
-
Bear Police
- Posts: 2274
- Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 2:59 am
- Contact:
Y tu Mama Tambien
I posted this review on another forum
This is the third film by Alfonso Cuaron that I've seen, the other two being Children Of Men, amazing, and The Prisoner of Azkaban, which I hardly remember and should probably rewatch knowing that he directed it. The cinematography in Children and Y Tu Mama is astounding. In that respect, I think Cuaron and Paul Thomas Anderson are making some of the most beautifully shot movies right now, both using extremely long takes. Where PTA will use very cinematic smooth, sweeping movements, Cuaron treats the camera like another character, looking from face to face as characters talk, following characters as they move around and not being afraid to leave others out of the frame, leaving the characters altogether, mid scene, only to meet back up with them before the shot is over.
The story has been done before (think Kids, but far less nihilistic and mean spirited, meaning even though I didn't particularly like the characters, I didn't want them to die), and a lot of the ideas are similar to those of On The Road. One really interesting thing the film does, though, is while the kids are doing drugs, having sex, making jokes, they are constantly surrounded by the harsh political climate of Mexico. Set anywhere else, the film would just be a silly coming of age story, but because that juxtaposition of wealthy hedonists and struggling peasants, the film completely transcends that whole category.
And then some kid was like, in response to my comments on the cinematography, "You mean what every cameraman does?" So here is a further clarification of that part.
Not at all. With my first example, instead of doing what is in so many films, even great films, where an actor delivers lines, then it cuts to the actor next to them, or actors talk for a couple seconds together then it cuts to another angle of them talking, Cuaron keeps the camera looking for person to person for incredible lengths of time, which creates loads of tension and drama because of how realistic it feels.
In the second example, sometimes characters will be having a conversation and one will leave and instead of cutting to that person leaving, creating a whole new scene separate from the conversation, Cuaron just keeps the camera running, making the transition fluid and real. The conversation never ends, the camera just walks to a the next point of interest.
The last example, and the one I find the most incredible, involves abandoning all characters, exploring the space the characters are in, and then coming back to the characters in a completely different way, all while in the same shot. One great example of this in Y Tu Mama Tambien is when Luisa is crying in her room before the boys pick her up. In a single shot, she cries, hears the door, leaves the house (and the camera), the camera explores her house before coming to a halt at a window, where we see Luisa meeting the boys at their car, packing her bags into the car, and leaving. I wish I could find a youtube video of this, because I can't really put into words how enthralling this scene is, since it is all due to the powerful camera work.
I posted this review on another forum
This is the third film by Alfonso Cuaron that I've seen, the other two being Children Of Men, amazing, and The Prisoner of Azkaban, which I hardly remember and should probably rewatch knowing that he directed it. The cinematography in Children and Y Tu Mama is astounding. In that respect, I think Cuaron and Paul Thomas Anderson are making some of the most beautifully shot movies right now, both using extremely long takes. Where PTA will use very cinematic smooth, sweeping movements, Cuaron treats the camera like another character, looking from face to face as characters talk, following characters as they move around and not being afraid to leave others out of the frame, leaving the characters altogether, mid scene, only to meet back up with them before the shot is over.
The story has been done before (think Kids, but far less nihilistic and mean spirited, meaning even though I didn't particularly like the characters, I didn't want them to die), and a lot of the ideas are similar to those of On The Road. One really interesting thing the film does, though, is while the kids are doing drugs, having sex, making jokes, they are constantly surrounded by the harsh political climate of Mexico. Set anywhere else, the film would just be a silly coming of age story, but because that juxtaposition of wealthy hedonists and struggling peasants, the film completely transcends that whole category.
And then some kid was like, in response to my comments on the cinematography, "You mean what every cameraman does?" So here is a further clarification of that part.
Not at all. With my first example, instead of doing what is in so many films, even great films, where an actor delivers lines, then it cuts to the actor next to them, or actors talk for a couple seconds together then it cuts to another angle of them talking, Cuaron keeps the camera looking for person to person for incredible lengths of time, which creates loads of tension and drama because of how realistic it feels.
In the second example, sometimes characters will be having a conversation and one will leave and instead of cutting to that person leaving, creating a whole new scene separate from the conversation, Cuaron just keeps the camera running, making the transition fluid and real. The conversation never ends, the camera just walks to a the next point of interest.
The last example, and the one I find the most incredible, involves abandoning all characters, exploring the space the characters are in, and then coming back to the characters in a completely different way, all while in the same shot. One great example of this in Y Tu Mama Tambien is when Luisa is crying in her room before the boys pick her up. In a single shot, she cries, hears the door, leaves the house (and the camera), the camera explores her house before coming to a halt at a window, where we see Luisa meeting the boys at their car, packing her bags into the car, and leaving. I wish I could find a youtube video of this, because I can't really put into words how enthralling this scene is, since it is all due to the powerful camera work.
