Lordmandeep Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 It is cool, would have been cooler had they not plastered that shot on every trailer. True but when that scene was in the trailers the hype exploded like crazy. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dashrendar44 Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 (edited) I do agree with this. Anyone seen serenity? Remember that beginning never ending cut on the ship? Why couldn't Weadon apply that sort of filming technique on Avengers. It's amazing how he did so much with a small budget on that film yet with 5 times the budget he didn't improve THAT much. I'll never understand how CGI cost so much on certain films yet you get films like District 9 that have amazing CGI throughout with a fraction of the budget. If anyone can explain this to me id be grateful. On top of my head, Blomkamp is CG savvy. He's a CG artist just like Gareth Edwards so he knows exactly how to frame things (Using storyboards in pre-production to accurately determine which effect suit the shot better to ease post-production) and how to make it look realistic to blend CG elements seamlessly with practical effect. He shot in natural locations in poor Johannesburg's ghettos to provide a cheaper background and keep the budget low without having to build a lot of sets. Shooting in SA is obviously cheaper than shooting in USA, less taxes, cheaper wages and no guild to oversee work hours overload. He used a small shooting crew in a guerilla mode as the movie was shot mostly handheld to emulate a documentary style to reduce costs. He did several CG tests and a short (Alive In Joburg) prior to the movie to provide an efficient model how to shoot the full length feature in terms of tone/style/VFX. Also, he was supposed to shoot Halo produced by Peter Jackson and made similar pre-production tests courtesy of WETA digital, when it didn't pan out he re-used those tests and design for D9 development (cf. the exosuit mecha). The fact that WETA is based in NZ (and other local SA VFX companies) brings down the VFX costs as they're cheaper than NA based ILM. A blockbuster got several shooting crews running in parrallel on several locations and built sets in studios with million dollars worth of camera rigs and set-ups that need to be supervised. While plenty of different VFX companies are working on the movie to complete those big set pieces and meet the binding deadlines. That cost a lot to pay all those people. Edited September 16, 2014 by dashrendar44 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kvikk Lunsj Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 It was rude for him to say it and came across as pure jealousy seeing as TA had just sweeped the box office records. It's like he thought people actually gave a shit about his opinion.You don't see the likes of Cameron, Spielberg or even Bay trashing other directors work, it's unprofessional. Actually Cameron has trashed other directors work. He is a major dick. http://screenrant.com/james-cameron-battleship-movie-board-game-benm-95714/ http://collider.com/piranha-3d-mark-canton-james-cameron/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lordmandeep Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 However Cameron viewpoint were valid. Wally reeked of elitist snobbery. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Empire Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 Yeah, Transcedence was a big pile of shit, but that doesn't mean he isn't allowed to criticize other movie's cinematography. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kvikk Lunsj Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 However Cameron viewpoint were valid. Wally reeked of elitist snobbery. Cameron is just being prick like he always is. He thinks he is better then everybody else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Futurist Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 Cameron is just being prick like he always is. He thinks he is better then everybody else.He kinda is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kvikk Lunsj Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 He kinda is. No he is not. Making movies does not make you better then everybody else. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Jedi Master 007 Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 No he is not. Making movies does not make you better then everybody else. I think Futurist meant that he is better than everyone else in the movie industry. Either way, that statement was totally wrong. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Jedi Master 007 Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 However Cameron viewpoint were valid. Wally reeked of elitist snobbery. No, Cameron's viewpoints were just as wrong as Wally's. Who the hell is Cameron to complain about overusing 3D for your film? He converted freaking Titanic to 3D and re-released it. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichWS Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 (edited) I wrote a post somewhere a few months back about how an old roommate of mine (who himself is an aspiring cinematographer) had a friend who worked with Pfister on a commercial shoot. Apparently, the guy IS a pretentious douche. Doesn't mean he isn't a terrific DP. Maybe he should just stick to that. Edited September 16, 2014 by RichWS 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kvikk Lunsj Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 I wrote a post somewhere a few months back about how an old roommate of mine (who himself is an aspiring cinematography) had a friend who worked with Pfister on a commercial shoot. Apparently, the guy IS a pretentious douche. Doesn't mean he isn't a terrific DP. Maybe he should just stick to that. I have a feeling there are a lot pretentious douche in hollywood. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Futurist Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 Yep, pfister is a pretentious douche and that s a fact, he got lucky by crossing path with Nolan and that s it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Futurist Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 (edited) I have a feeling there are a lot pretentious douche in hollywood.To,succeed in Hollywood, you must have a massive ego, if you don t believe in yourself, nobody will in the town. Being pretentious comes with the territory.Hollywood is a permanent bloodbath and clash of egos, there s a lot of candidates but very few chosen ones. Edited September 16, 2014 by The Futurist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Jedi Master 007 Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 Yep, pfister is a pretentious douche and that s a fact, he got lucky by crossing path with Nolan and that s it.What proof do you have that his success as a DP was based on luck and not skill? Transcendence was a bad film, yes, but that doesn't mean Pfister is a bad DP or that Nolan's the only reason Pfister is in the business. It is possible to be a great DP and an awful filmmaker. I'm not denying that Pfister owes a lot to Nolan, but I find it ridiculous to argue that the guy got to where he's at based on pure luck. Maybe if you analyzed his cinematography in Transcendsnce and proved it was subpar, you would have an argument. But you didn't; instead, you just through out a baseless statement. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolioD1 Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 there seems to be a weird attitude that people in the film industry aren't allowed to shit-talk others. that's dumb. I fucking wish they'd do it all the time. they do it a lot more in the music industry and it's more fun. Seamus McGarvey needs to release his own diss track. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noctis Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 Pfister is a little arrogant sometimes. I remember him boasting that the director of Potter once asked him to be the cinematographer and he declined. Ok? Good for you. And good for the series, too. Bruno Delbonnel and Eduardo Serra were both better than you. However, what's wrong with him criticising the cinematography of The Avengers? It's not appalling but it definitely looks like a TV movie. That doesn't make him pretentious, but Whedon's response was brilliant. Such a sweet response that it made Pfister look like a douche. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Marston Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 don't get the big deal. I don't agree with him but he is entitled to his opinion. It is not like he said the movie sucked. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 (edited) In the end, he won an Oscar for his work so he knows his shit. And he's a brilliant cinematographer: TDK, TDKR and especially Inception showed that. Maybe he's not that good of a director (yet), but it doesn't change the fact that people are butthurt when they hear something bad about a movie they like. Avengers had A LOT of problems and cinematography wasn't the worst one, not even by far. But again, I'm no professional like Pfister is. Looking at the comments for the article, you can see only fanboys talking shit about how successful TA was without having absolutely no clue about how things work. Edited September 16, 2014 by James 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Jedi Master 007 Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 In the end, he won an Oscar for his work so he knows his shit. And he's a brilliant cinematographer: TDK, TDKR and especially Inception showed that. Maybe he's not that good of a director (yet), but it doesn't change the fact that people are butthurt when they hear something bad about a movie they like. Avengers had A LOT of problems and cinematography wasn't the worst one, not even by far. But again, I'm no professional like Pfister is. Looking at the comments for the article, you can see only fanboys talking shit about how successful TA was without having absolutely no clue about how things work.This. Those who arguing that Pfister is a pretentious douche with no talent just sound like butthurt fans who dislike the fact that he called out their favorite property. That doesn't change the fact that Pfister is pretentious and is a jerk, but to argue that he lacks in talent is insane. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
