| Page 6 of 14 |
|
|
 Posted: Fri, 18th Jul 2008 13:53 Post subject: |
|
 |
Last edited by Yondaime on Mon, 2nd Dec 2024 16:06; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hierofan
Banned
Posts: 3807
Location: Internets
|
| Posted: Sat, 19th Jul 2008 11:50 Post subject: |
|
|
holy shit , TDK made 66 mil in one day , breaking all previous records , next up is the weekend record at 151 mil (or 153) set by Spider-Crap 3
at least people are getting a good movie for their money's worth
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 19th Jul 2008 12:42 Post subject: |
|
|
I hope this movie makes a shitload of money. Nolan ftw
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cohen
Posts: 7155
Location: Rapture
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 19th Jul 2008 15:42 Post subject: |
|
|
Saw it on thursday night in imax at midnight. Amazing movie is amazing. Hoping to go see it again sometime soon.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zipfero
Posts: 8938
Location: White Shaft
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 19th Jul 2008 19:49 Post subject: |
|
|
Found a cam of it on usenet. It's real, the quality is abosutely horrible though.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Parallax_
VIP Member
Posts: 6422
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Sat, 19th Jul 2008 19:54 Post subject: |
|
|
A cam? 
Some people...
Get outta the house and go to the cinema!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Parallax_
VIP Member
Posts: 6422
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Sat, 19th Jul 2008 20:09 Post subject: |
|
|
Oh damn, I am so blind 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 19th Jul 2008 20:20 Post subject: |
|
|
if you watch a cam of this
lol@you
cockcockcockcockcockcockcockcockcockcockcockcock
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 19th Jul 2008 22:05 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tobycoaster
Harry Potter
Posts: 598
Location: Under the stairs
|
| Posted: Sat, 19th Jul 2008 22:42 Post subject: |
|
|
LOL
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 20th Jul 2008 00:49 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73214
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Sun, 20th Jul 2008 01:16 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phluxed
VIP Member
Posts: 4911
Location: Oakville, Ontario, Canada
|
| Posted: Sun, 20th Jul 2008 01:24 Post subject: |
|
|
This movie was perhaps the best movie I've ever seen. I am completely blown away.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 20th Jul 2008 01:25 Post subject: |
|
|
Heh #1 at IMDB... no doubt it'll drop, but it'll be interesting where it'll end up. Can't wait for thursday, stupid delayed premiere!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hierofan
Banned
Posts: 3807
Location: Internets
|
| Posted: Sun, 20th Jul 2008 06:23 Post subject: |
|
|
ya , like it owned like everything , but it surely won't stay there too long , but GG for TDK , speculation for Sat. boxoffice is like 66.7 mil , it didnt drop a dime , so that's like spectacular .
Nolan and Bale are like THE MONEY right now , if they make another1 it'll be a real bitch to script it and make it a worthy sequal , but the movie's budget wil be like almost twice of TDK and that could ruin it
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Parallax_
VIP Member
Posts: 6422
Location: Norway
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phluxed
VIP Member
Posts: 4911
Location: Oakville, Ontario, Canada
|
| Posted: Sun, 20th Jul 2008 11:15 Post subject: |
|
|
If it makes 140 mil this weekend, it almost paid for itself then? Thats fucking insane for such a big budget flick.
 Spoiler: |
Honestly, never been happier with a movies quality............................................ As for the next one, anyone else thing it'll be Catwoman?
Fox made that comment when he remade the suit, hes like "Are we talking rottweilers or chiwawas? ..... It'll stand up nicely to cats"
I think thats an indication we will see Catwoman next, then maybe Penguin or riddler... expect these 2 to do a few more. Nolan LOVES the franchise and Bale loves the character. I think the next one will be more to do with Batman's emotional aspects... as with Catwoman and Rachel gone |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 20th Jul 2008 11:34 Post subject: |
|
|
I hope his pro-IMAX campaign gets enough public attention to convince other producers to invest the money, even if they don't care about quality and just want to share the attention.
Producers from the entertainment industry like to rant against piracy, it's time for them to realize how grainy some Blu-Ray movies look and how bad most 'Loudness-War' CDs sound. People expect some quality for their money but if the product uses only a fraction of the medium's quality capacity, why should they spend a lot of money on it?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 20th Jul 2008 13:03 Post subject: |
|
|
So far, there really is now alternative to film but in a few years HD cameras could easily replace film in term of quality. Hell, even today a digital HD video is indistinguishable from film on a 2-3 meter screen.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nouseforaname
Über-VIP Member
Posts: 21306
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phluxed
VIP Member
Posts: 4911
Location: Oakville, Ontario, Canada
|
| Posted: Mon, 21st Jul 2008 01:40 Post subject: |
|
|
And a movie that actually deserves its popularity... I just wish like a string of good movies would be really popular. People would then develop a smidgen of taste and bad movies would stop being made.
Guys like Michael Bay would be GONEZO!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73214
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Mon, 21st Jul 2008 01:59 Post subject: |
|
|
| liansk wrote: | | So far, there really is now alternative to film but in a few years HD cameras could easily replace film in term of quality. Hell, even today a digital HD video is indistinguishable from film on a 2-3 meter screen. |
Watch a night time scene on a digital camera, then say this again. Seriously, nothing digital so far, and certainly nothing in the foreseeable future, can compete with film. They certainly come close on some occasions, but lack completely on others. Plus, film has the potential to hold much more information than currently could be used. That's how you have old movies look great on blurays. With digital, even if shot on relatively large resolution for today's standards, in 30-50 years, there will be no magical way of making them look on the then standard video requirements. With digital it is "what you see is what you get," you can't improve the telecine machine and process and get better quality.
There are two technologies pushing to remove film as the filming standard - digital shit and IMAX cameras (which will become much more popular due to TDK's success). One is (for now) shit, the other masterpiece...
... The shit will probably win. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WaldoJ
VIP Member
Posts: 32678
|
| Posted: Tue, 22nd Jul 2008 00:19 Post subject: |
|
|
ish all about lighting tho. If it's lit well you can get it to look nice in hd and on film
Quality isn't an issue. They're moving on up in the digi world. Yahup.
Quality won't be a problem. Nah-ah.
You can shoot in film and your movie will look like shit. You can shoot in digi and you movie iwll look like shit. If you got people who know how to use a camera and how to light scenery... then you won't have a problem. and it will look good.
Lighting is crucial. 
I dislike it how people say this and say that. Film is expensive and you get stressed producers and bitchy directors when you waste time on screen (money goes up). Digi is cheap as dirt and your producers and directors will be lazy bums who dun care what you do cause they can always buy a tape or two if you fuck up. And that's where the big problems is. Shoot times become longer, post becomes longer, production becomes longer. You'll end up paying your crew the money you would've paid for film.
Quality will be the same on both if you got an amazing dop. 
It's just different work ethic.
You get poor performance 70% of the time in a digi film.
TDK was awsum tho.
| Sin317 wrote: | | I win, you lose. Or Go fuck yourself. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phluxed
VIP Member
Posts: 4911
Location: Oakville, Ontario, Canada
|
| Posted: Tue, 22nd Jul 2008 00:24 Post subject: |
|
|
| WaldoJ wrote: | ish all about lighting tho. If it's lit well you can get it to look nice in hd and on film
Quality isn't an issue. They're moving on up in the digi world. Yahup.
Quality won't be a problem. Nah-ah.
You can shoot in film and your movie will look like shit. You can shoot in digi and you movie iwll look like shit. If you got people who know how to use a camera and how to light scenery... then you won't have a problem. and it will look good.
Lighting is crucial.
I dislike it how people say this and say that. Film is expensive and you get stressed producers and bitchy directors when you waste time on screen (money goes up). Digi is cheap as dirt and your producers and directors will be lazy bums who dun care what you do cause they can always buy a tape or two if you fuck up. And that's where the big problems is. Shoot times become longer, post becomes longer, production becomes longer. You'll end up paying your crew the money you would've paid for film.
Quality will be the same on both if you got an amazing dop.
It's just different work ethic.
You get poor performance 70% of the time in a digi film.
TDK was awsum tho. |
Lighting is the difference between amateur and professional.
Watch a high school film, a college film and then a studio film. Camera angles are VERY simple to master and often, the high school will be the best angle shooting because its freshest in their memories and its what theyre looking for the the most. You'll see angles taper off quite a bit in college because they just get all these neat tools, like Booms and Studio lights and backdrops and outdoor reflecters etc to get lighting right and they forget that good angles and framing are important.
A good studio film has experts in all of these areas and you can tell its a professional movie, and the medium actually makes little to no difference.
So I agree with you 100% |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wawrzul
Posts: 2336
Location: Cracow, Poland
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 6 of 14 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
