Jump to content

CJohn

DUNKIRK WEEKEND THREAD | ABSOLUTELY NO SPOILERS | Official estimates Dunkirk 50.5M, GT 30.3M, SMH 22M, Apes 20.4M, Val 17M | Wonder Woman is the new summer champ with 389M total | Summer Sale is Live!

Recommended Posts



24 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said:

can't believe i'm in a christoper nolan ow thread and his movie isn't the reason people are getting banned.

God Nolan's power is dwindling.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Barnack said:

Always hard to distinguish the actual work from the draw factor (say John Williams box office track record is out of this world, but that does not mean that is name is a big draw) for producer/director and other people not on screen but he is certainly up there.

 

He is the most well paid I think with still getting those giant 20m + 20% of the first dollar gross type of deal, over 100m paycheck for a movie, outside Cameron (specially in China) and maybe Dicaprio (maybe Dunkirk will not do the Revenant business despite much better reviews, pre-built audience for the massive historical event and an much easier watch).

 

I'm sure Spielberg gets a similar deal on big tentpoles, he made a shit ton of money from Jurassic Park and I imagine he'll be getting a similar deal for Ready Player One, for smaller scale projects like The Papers, I'm sure he takes a lower salary

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



2 minutes ago, Chaz said:

I don't get the opinion of Apes being slow. I was enthralled from start to finish.

 

All these posts about Apes beeing slow and depressing make me even more excited for when it FINALLY comes out in 2 weeks here. I want my apes movies dark and gloomy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Blaze Heatnix said:

I'll be watching Dunkirk soon...Can't wait!

 

 

Same, hoping to catch it tomorrow night.

35 minutes ago, The Futurist said:

Tom Hardy's eye brows were the most spectacular aspect of the film.

The way they reacted perfectly to what was happenning in a given scene was amazing.

Nolan is truly the spectacle director of our time, he knows what will look spectacular on 70mm.

Thats a God given talent.

 

I heard  1 commentator saying he was reprising his "Bane" role from that other nolan film. lol

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



18 minutes ago, Chaz said:

I don't get the opinion of Apes being slow. I was enthralled from start to finish.

 

My guess is that "slow" means "didn't have many action sequences" and "took its time developing characters." I'd say it's more "deliberate" or "methodical" than "slow" - it takes its time getting where it's going, but it does so with purpose in every scene.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites





He's not to everyone's taste but I'm always curious to hear what FilmCritHulk thinks of new releases. Seems he liked Dunkirk quite a bit:

 

Edited by Hatebox
Link to comment
Share on other sites



1 hour ago, The Futurist said:

Dunkirk looks like shit and is not epic at all because of Nolan s adamant refusal to use modern technology. Most war films of the past are most spectacular.

 

Agreed. IMAX shots looked way better in the 1950s.

 

 

Edited by Hatebox
  • Like 1
  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Saw some tweets saying that any Dunkirk backlash is just people being "edgy." I loved the movie but generally hate that sentiment. It's a major blockbuster release getting praise, bound to be some dispute. Bad way of engaging about movies.

 

That said it is absolutely, 100 percent, completely certain that Futurist didn't see the movie. He picked this newest gimmick to be his latest thing two weeks ago and has been auto generating the same post ever since. Not worth engaging. 

  • Like 4
  • Astonished 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites









1 hour ago, The Futurist said:

Dunkirk looks like shit and is not epic at all because of Nolan s adamant refusal to use modern technology.

 

Nolan still had like 700 VFX shot on Interstellar and the movie won best visual effects, it is very relative to the days it is low now, but that is the same amount than the very epic Master And Commander movie used, it is more than the very epic Titanic, it is much more than the little 240 VFX shot Armageddon and other old Bay movie used.

 

Dark knight rises had CGI faces instead of make up:

http://media.indiatimes.in/media/content/2015/Apr/darkknight_1430290171.jpg

 

The Joker hanging out in a green room:

http://www.enfilme.com/img/content/5c4044b4197ec3edfbb084b6f5a2df9038.jpg

 

Phantom menace today would be held as people going crazy with miniature and practical effect (it had much less CGI than force awaken, phantom menace had more physical miniature model made than all the original trilogy movie together) :

https://www.google.ca/search?q=phantom+menace+practical+effects&rlz=1C1CHBF_enCA733CA734&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjr8YSfh5vVAhUI9YMKHWAPCncQ_AUICigB&biw=1866&bih=1060

http://www.slashfilm.com/star-wars-prequels-miniatures/

 

And that was considered CGI heavy back in the day.

 

If Private Ryan battle could felt epic with 1996 technology I'm not sure why it could not with Nolan using much more modern technology than them.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites





3 minutes ago, grey ghost said:

So is Nolan the first movie this summer to defy SUPERHERO LAW? :insane:

 

And there was also Baby Driver. :kitschjob:

 

Could this be...

 

STAR DIRECTOR LAW MIXED WITH TOMATO LAW!!! :ohmygod::ohmygod::ohmygod:

Technically both made CBMs so maybe if you've done a well liked CBM/superhero + Tomato Law.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.