Originally published at: http://boingboing.net/2016/01/25/fury-road-is-still-comprehensi.html
…
1 Like
I would imagine MM:FR works best because the entire film is shot center frame. Quick action like that is easily tracked when your head doesn’t have to move around the frame constantly.
3 Likes
Also: less reliance on dialog (that you can’t follow at that speed), and more telling-by-showing. So, in a sense, more “visual.”
4 Likes
Pretty light on plot too, innit? “There and back again” feels like the gist of it. Not to diminish the quality of Fury Road’s shot planning, execution and editing, but I’m sure being the one most likely to be understandable without sound helps a lot in being understandable without sound and sped up.
I tried to watch the Resident Evil one in the corner and, apart from a few zombie fight scenes I did find I could understand enough to be bored by the clichés well before the end.
Also, funny that Hot Fuzz is in the article as the film with the second shortest average sequence length. I’m guessing it’s because of the many very-quick-cut parody montages, which are pretty funny and not at all the “let’s hide incompetent action with sheer speed” kind of thing we’d expect.
2 Likes
That one is timescale-invariant, looks similar regardless to how fast you’re playing it.
am i the only one that didn’t think fury road was as great as everyone was gushing? i mean, from a stunt and cinematography perspective it was great, but the plot was just meh.
2 Likes
I for one miss the days of long sweeping shots and scenes like you would see in a Kurosawa film. Too many directors these days at seem to think the more camera changes you can cram into any one scene the more it conveys “action”.
I haven’t yet seen MM:FR so I can’t speak to if it’s any better than its contemporaries but I’m intrigued.
I agree. It was like watching fireworks: fun while it lasts, but no lasting impression.
The continual high praise for the movie is also outlandish… even high speed playback proves how awesome this movie is!! High fives for everyone!
I feel like, in addition to other reason other people have mentioned, Fury Road works so well like this since it is by nature very light on dialogue and indoor shots. The entire movie’s a chase scene. Not that that a bad thing, just that it lends it a bit of an unfair advantage, if you;re just trying to compare editing.
Yeah, it automatically has a few unfair advantages in this particular competition. Huge, wide-open outdoor landscapes, and a there-and-back-again car chase, with remarkably little dialogue, no red herrings or subtle plot twists, even garish makeup to identify good guys vs bad guys at a glance. It’s practically a silent movie in some regards… or at any rate would work perfectly as one. I’d pay ca$h money to see it presented that way, with a live band scoring the flick.
That said, I’m one of those that does think the movie was all that. Easily my favorite movie of last year, by a wide margin. Favorite of the last several years, come to think of it.
3 Likes
If you want a good cinematography and a good plot, go see two movies.
A lot of the shots are wide, that way the amount of movement per frame change is smaller and less jarring compared to close ups of people talking where you are switching back and forth. Something like 2001 might actually be better sped up…
1 Like
Anything by Darren Aronofsky fits that bill. Of course I guess it’s relative to what you think a good plot is.
Coen brothers too.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
