• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

    Read BEFORE posting Trades & Request

The Film Video Essay Thread

But Skyfall is fantastically colourful, isn't it? Me no understand. 
Totally get the point about a dull day - but you can fix some of that in grading, can't you, just like a photo?
 
dangermouse said:
But Skyfall is fantastically colourful, isn't it? Me no understand.
Click to expand...

I've had the discussion before about not liking Skyfall. I illustrated it with these four screen shots...

8859270546_46f8e40dfe_o.jpg


...two are tinted shots from the earliest days of silent film before colour film was invented and two are from the modern movie 'Skyfall'. I just like things to look real for certain types of films. Bond takes place ostensibly in the real world, so shouldn't look like a crazy fantasy film that takes place on an alien planet.

dangermouse said:
Totally get the point about a dull day - but you can fix some of that in grading, can't you, just like a photo?
Click to expand...

If a colourist is very skilled and has the time to get every shot right, then yes, they probably can cover up all the mistakes of the rest of the film crew... but given that they will always be doing that job at the last minute, when high-pressure movie deadlines are at the peak, chances are it's gonna look bad. I just think that video misplaces the problem.

But to be brief, it's mostly down to personnal taste. I generally like the oldskool realistic looking films from the 70s/80s and that guy clearly prefers the hyper-saturated modern movie look.
 
I see what you mean - but is that digital colour grading? It looks more to me like the lighting choice. My impression of Skyfall is a lot of natural colour and lighting (and lots of contrast). But I don't get too hung up on colour. For example fanmixes which say "entire film recoloured" get a meh from me, so perhaps I'm not the best judge... :)
 
^ In the case of Skyfall, I think it's both - on my first viewing, I too was repeatedly distracted by how over-designed the visuals were, as if Sam Mendes was more interested in collecting stills for a coffee table book of James Bond-themed photography than telling an espionage adventure story.

In the case of the MCU, I suspect the generally "normal" color tones are meant to help bring the various characters and their worlds into a coherent whole, much as each movie features a similarly light and quippy tone. But I agree, color grading generally doesn't bother me, unless it's dramatically at odds with the content of the movie itself (see: the gross brown smudge covering Superman Returns).
 
Some interesting German cinema history in this one:
 
baileym43 said:
holy hell . . . . speaking of color grading....  (no one was speaking of color grading)


this guy talks about the Marvel movies' color levels.
a huuuuge touching point for our members here.
and he demonstrates a level adjustment right there while recording and it feels like your eyes relax when he's done.
truly amazing stuff and absolute ZERO surprise to many of our guys here.
(i also like how he gives a brief nod to the other vidEssayist about the Marvel film-scores.)

(i'll try to remember to embed the vid when i get home. done)
Click to expand...

Just want to say this video is mostly bullshit. Color grading is a complex art form in and of itself and this dude boils it down to "copy and paste from film to film," not to mention he doesn't real seem to understand that whether a movie is shot on film or digital doesn't really affect the grade that much. Not to say I completely disagree with him, I tend to prefer more contrasty saturated looks myself, but to blankly call all the Marvel films ugly and to not really have the wherewithal to back up that claim just annoys me. And of course there's no such thing as a "correct" color grade, it's all down to stylistic preference. Honestly I don't think the guy completely knows what he's talking about (I mean seriously, guy thinks color grading was invented in 2000), which is fair, as it's a complicated subject.

TM2YC said:
If a colourist is very skilled and has the time to get every shot right, then yes, they probably can cover up all the mistakes of the rest of the film crew... but given that they will always be doing that job at the last minute, when high-pressure movie deadlines are at the peak, chances are it's gonna look bad. I just think that video misplaces the problem.
Click to expand...

I'd say most professional colorists would be able to easily fix a dull looking day, and typically there is enough time allowed for them to make changes as such. I think in this particular instance the dull day was very much a purposeful choice by the director/DP. This is heroes fighting each other. You don't want a bright sunny day (nor do you necessarily want it rainy - this isn't BvS, we're having some fun too). As well the whole idea of the Civil War is shades of grey. So I think that idea is, with good reason, reflected in the color palette of the scene.
 
here's one that i haven't really thought about but will probably pay more attention to in the future.
the title sequence.


it's a buzzfeed-ish top 10 list, but look past the easy digest and there is some pretty good info there.

i do like a good title sequence.  i don't like a plain screen image just showing text and can barely tolerate text flying around or popping up endlessly.  something cool to watch before the movie gets started, i love that.

one thing as a kid i always HATED though was the animated title sequence only to dissolve away or hard cut to a real life setting or actors.  when the title sequence had eight year old me completely jazzed for a cool cartoon then having it quickly taken away with more boring real life crap.  no thanks Greece, screw you One Crazy Summer and don't even get me started with you Pink Panther (i was ready for a feature length Pink Panther cartoon, but oh no kid, go back to your Hanna Barbera and Disney shorts).
 
baileym43 said:
here's one that i haven't really thought about but will probably pay more attention to in the future.
the title sequence.

Click to expand...

List fails without SE7EN.

 
TMBTM said:
I didn't see a thread for videos about editing in general (?)

So here's the first one.
Add more when you see some.
(and of course there will be spoilers, so be warned)

Click to expand...


Awesome video essay! Those are some heinous editing choices indeed. :D
 
just stumbled upon this one about...  The History of the Mockbuster! *echos off* buster, uster, ster, er, r....


it's informative, it's entertaining.  it's infotainment !


edit:  yes, the dude's glasses get more and more crooked as the video goes on.

2nd edit: ok, i keep watching more and more of this guy's essays and he's becoming less "entertaining" but no less informative.
less entertaining in that he uses one front on shot while he gives a lecture.  but he has graphics that zip around and the camera moves back and forth to follow that.
he still talks about some pretty interesting stuff that expands beyond just film making and into stuff even marginally related to movies.
 
http://https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXpiRzumrVY[/video]

Lots of great points!
 
Agree some great points but the giant elephant in the room of his argument is 'Superman' (1978). Superman's arc in that is also an unchanging starts-good--->ends-good, yet we love that portrayal/movie.
 
TM2YC said:
Agree some great points but the giant elephant in the room of his argument is 'Superman' (1978). Superman's arc in that is also an unchanging starts-good--->ends-good, yet we love that portrayal/movie.
Click to expand...

I think the difference imo is Cavill's performance is static, while Reeve's is dynamic.  

Cavill's plays essentially the same character from point A to Z, and his quest for identity and purpose lacks a certain amount of impact due to the energy/direction of his performance.  And while Reeve's arc is almost identical to Cavill's, because he plays three different personas through the movie, his character and arc feels far more compelling and engaging.
 
TM2YC said:
Agree some great points but the giant elephant in the room of his argument is 'Superman' (1978). Superman's arc in that is also an unchanging starts-good--->ends-good, yet we love that portrayal/movie.
Click to expand...

Superman: The Movie is such a bloody sacred cow. Reeve is great, as is Williams' score, but the movie overall is crap, with a nonexistent story, a pathetic villain, a love interest just barely feistier than Returns' Bosworth, and good grief is it also dull.

However: unlike Man of Steel, Superman: The Movie at least doesn't pretend to be a weighty examination of Clark's psyche or place on the good/evil scale. It's an episodic Supes origin story, with a focus on wacky hijinks once Clark gets his cape.
 
Gaith said:
Superman: The Movie is such a bloody sacred cow.
... and good grief is it also dull.
Click to expand...

Disagree 110%.

It is still thoroughly entertaining.  Watched it easily a couple of dozen of times over the years, never grow bored of it.  I have introduced it to my daughter and her friends, an entirely different generation, and they have all loved it.

Yes, it is dated and somewhat flawed, but it has wonderful spirit, energy and magic.
I still believe a man can fly.  :)
 
I will not stand for any badmouthing of Gene Hackman.

And I don't even have a dog in this fight.
 
i didn't really like that essay about Bats vs Supes because it was being to generic.
"they are bad characters and it's poor scripting."
ok, how so specifically, site some examples within the movie.  and they just don't do it.  
then i watched another one that Youtube suggested from that one.


i feel it's better, not just because it's longer, but the essayist sites specific examples within the movie, and also compares it to a non-superhero movie, Indiana Jones (Raiders).
then at the end goes through and provides reasoning on how the movie could have been improved with simple throwaway dialog.
 
Folding Ideas just did another fantastic video essay. This time on The Triumph of the Will. The infamous 1934 Nazi propaganda film.

 
Oh, I thought that ^ was going to be a video explaining why 'Arrival' is a bad movie. Shame.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom