That jargon is also largely outdated. The examples of “shot” and “sequence” are holdovers from film, which is a strictly linear medium. But it has been taken over by the technology of video, which is a random-access medium. So what appears to be a shot might be many composited shots, or even partly synthesized. And even apparent sequence can be changed upon playback, or even done probabilistically.
They seem to be a bit popular in the US also…
I just find them boring, Really, really boring.
I saw the most recent Star Trek movie last night which was just terribly, terribly, bad with Captain Kirk actually pretending to be a cowboy on a motorbike. I think I may actually have chewed my fist in embarrassment,
Superhero shit is shit. Be it in comics or cinema.
Call me an elitist, Whatever., I’m done with that shit. I thought it was over when the Watchmen comic came out “oh look, they just pulled the rug from under the fetish gear. It’s over!” but no, Here it still is thirty fucking years later.
Stop it. Please.
2 Likes
Read it how ever you like. But a fair lot of people I know, and an awful lot of the reviews are reading it as I’ve stated. And nitpicking the particulars and broad strokes doesn’t address my central contention. They adapted a work widely perceived as sexist, and in order to fix the widely perceived as sexist part, added a story line that could widely be perceived as sexist. And some T&A. That’s not a company that’s seeking to target a broad audience, or fans in general. That is a company that is at the very least clueless. Or looking to target somebody fairly specific.Its a clear and avoidable problem. They could have dodged this a thousand simple ways.
See above. When a leading creative for a company, at a some what major press event for that company, responds to criticism like a meathead starting a bar fight something is off.
Its not just film students who know and understand that terminology. I get what you’re saying but I think its generally clearer to use the commonly used terms for this sort of thing. Especially given that that guys shtick is sort of “film school by internet”. He’s rather explicitly attempting to teach you about film. So its less like explaining to clients or coworkers in another field, than it is like introducing graphic design to potential graphic design students. Using and explainging the terminology is part and parcel of what he’s doing. Its not like he needs to define and explain mise en scene, which is common enough but its meaning isn’t immediately clear. That said I think he’s trying to get at something a bit more complex than “shot” or “sequence”. Both are often use to discuss pure visuals as well as units of a given film. So I can see what he’s going for clarity wise. So I’d tend to think it goes the other way. Lay people won’t care about the difference. But it’s entirely likely I would be confused or misunderstand if he had use the more limited terms.
Yeah no. In terms of raw, hand on, technical practice you have a slight point. In that a given shot might not involve an actual camera shooting anything. But the language is still used, and the concept is still there, you;ve basically just added on top of it. Jargon wise and technique wise. For eg. multiple composited shots (not a particularly new thing BTW), would be refereed to as a “composite shot”, and you are fundamentally using multiple single shots to assemble one resulting shot in the final product. But when analyzing afterwards, you know what we and that guy are doing. In terms of theory and analysis the language is still “shot” and “sequence”. A single uncut run of moving image is still refereed to as a “shot”. An image taken from long distance is still a “long shot”, and one from closer is still a “medium shot”. Regardless of what you’re shooting on. And collection of these that function together as a unit but do not necessarily constitute a scene are refereed to as a “sequence” (short for “sequence of shots”). “Scene” is as much a script/story telling concept as it is a sort of visual block. But a series of “shots”, “sequences” and whatever other units you decide to granularly describe that tell a contained element of story are a Scene. But multiple scenes can likewise form a sequence in themselves.
Get what I’m saying? Its all still valid, particularly as terms for critical analysis. Since that’s concerned with breaking down the on screen results, not how or what it was shot on.
Non-linear editing, compositing, CG etc all also pre-date the broad adoption of video to Cinema as a shooting medium. And film is still commonly used for shooting. Yes these days it gets digitized first. But there were insane non-digital non-linear editing devices used for 100% film based production back in the day.
2 Likes
If you are not a teen, who cares that you don’t think it’s any good. Making a movie aimed at 13yo boys is not, in and of itself, a bad thing. There’s very little difference between wanting to dodge controversy and wanting to shut something down.
1 Like
ah. That further context does lend more weight to your point. I was just going off the one video you linked. Which was quite accessible—he doesn’t get too bogged down in academic pedantry.
Yeah like I said, I get what he’s on about. And the use of “moment” underlines the fact that its less about how they’re technically constructed visually and more about all the little bits playing off each other and how they effect the audience. Its helps point out that he’s talking about audio, and slow motion, and camera angle, and music crammed together with tremendous attention to detail. For about 12 seconds, and everything becomes more haphazard till the next go round.
In the end Zak Snyder doesn’t seem to want to make movies. He seems to want to make comic book splash pages. Its all about stringing together single striking images combined with sound, however you can, irregardless of the context or utility. I often get the feeling he’d actually prefer if nothing was moving. If he could just hold up pictures and play a song. Its very weird.
2 Likes
The petition was started by Abdullah Coldwater from Alexandria, Egypt. Sounds to me like a character out of a Thomas Pynchon novel.
4 Likes
You know what makes this even more ridiculous?
Warner Brothers, until recently, owned Rotten Tomatoes (and still owns a minority share in it).
If RT was going to be biased, you’d expect it to go the other way.
5 Likes
Turns out “Coldwater” is a reference to A Song of Ice and Fire. Abdullah’s Twitter is more or less dedicated to Game of Thrones. Oddly, many of his GoT tweets appear to express sentiments that are contrary to those of the gamergate/alt-right/douchebag rights thing, e.g. expressing admiration for strong female characters. But I may be wrong about that.
I always loved Harley because she was uniquely not jerk-off material. RIP.
2 Likes
4 Likes
…I really need to see that version. I’ve only seen the musical.
1 Like
(Though the TV series that spun off from this a few years later was better, since it didn’t take itself quite as seriously.)
Well there were lot of serials including 2 Batman ones, Captain America and Captain Marvel. Commando Cody if you wanna count him as a superhero. They are fun to watch if not always great cinema.
ETA there was the Superman vs. The Molemen movie from that era but I kinda thought the discussion was geared to the modern incarnation of things.
“Modern” is in the eye of the beholder, sonny.
2 Likes
We can’t forget 1975’s Superman: The Musical
4 Likes
You must see it. I think it’s the best version. Besides Zero Mostel and Gene Wilder, there’s Kenneth Mars, Christopher Hewett (long before Mr. Belvadere fame), and the fabulous Dick Shawn.
4 Likes
Though we really really want to…
1 Like
Most of us, but not in Brunswick, Germany, where you can see a production of it on September 24th, for just 17.50 €!
1 Like
Did everyone forget Italian Spiderman?
Also now there’s this:
7 Likes
