dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Apr 17, 2016 5:09:13 GMT -5
Who was responsible for starting the lie about there being an almost complete cut? Was it Donner himself? I never heard 90%. I knew the Brando stuff was the holy grail, because of the rights issue- plus the DP jump (because there was a magazine that had the pics to that sequence)... but I had a hunch that all the big action beats Donner directed got onscreen- it wasn't until the entertainment tonight clip with the statue of liberty and Supes punching Non, did I imagine maybe more got shot- Sadly, I was right. What I didn't expect was for Lois' closeups NOT to be shot with the depowering scene. Was a giant bummer for the bookend Honeymoon haven scenes not to have been shot after all (the one without a screentest is funnier)- anyhow, the RDC to me was a disappointment because of the lack of Donner footage- but secondly was the editing which made it inferior in ways to the Lester theatrical/ ABC version. In the 1978 Making Of STM book by Michael Petrou there is an instance where Donner, Salkind and Spengler go to Washington to check out the then relatively new IMAX technology.Shooting had already begun but they were still experimenting with different filming techniques. I always wondered where that shot of the villains approaching and crashing into the roof of the white house came from. Was it stock footage that any WB movie production could use....or was it lensed by Donner and his crew when they went to Washington for this IMAX demo?! And if so......was any other Washington DC footage shot by Donner. Or was that White House shot done by Lester's crew......seems like a heck of a production budget waste.....send a film crew from London to Washington.....just to get one shot of the White House!
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Apr 7, 2016 12:28:21 GMT -5
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Apr 3, 2016 4:48:01 GMT -5
great list and agree A huge fan of Horner's Another 48 Hours(check it out if you have not) Also Silvestri's Predator 2 soundtrack. Gotta say William's E.T is somewhere in there too.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Apr 3, 2016 4:25:09 GMT -5
If the outline for SR 2 is real (or real enough), then it would have been interesting to see that question pushed even more, if another Kryptonian came and 'solved' the worlds problems that Supes avoided by not getting too involved politically. (How the screenplay would have pulled this off without veering into SIV oversimplification of the world, I have no idea). I agree that there are some great iconic moments in Singer's superhero films- SR had a few of them, but I do think the visual area is where Snyder is a bit stronger than Singer. But, given the choice between being better with believable stories vs. great visuals, I'll go with the better story director. Singer's superhero films always seem to have a great emotional core, but never 'cheats' on emotion imo. Even with some of his films I was less impressed with (Valkyrie, Jack the Giant Killer), his films are never sentimental. I would have to agree. I never feel like he overdoes it and pulls those emotional cords too much. It tends to feel more natural. I think it's because Singer approaches things logically and intellectually first. He's not going to go too low brow or hammy of blatantly sentimental as you said. I think Snyders films have more flare--specifically more comic book flare--but I think Singer can frame a shot just as good. Snyder likes to push the stronger color palate and contrasts and maybe use filters and desaturation more than Singer. Snyder shoots action better too. But when it comes to dramatic moments Singer frames them fer better. He's not going to do something stupid...like use shaky cam in a quiet scene on the Kent farm. It's interesting that the "new superhero comes to solve all the worlds problems" angle was the storyline for Grant Morrisons first Justice League comic book arc in 1997. The Hyperclan shows up and begins to solves the problems of hunger, crime, pollution, etc. The world looks at the Justice League and wonders what the heck they're good for. Yes. Actually re-looking at MOS..... there is the Oil Rig scene where that over-structure/scaffold is about to collapse onto the chopper. Supes intervenes and holds it back....and it is cool the way he jumps forward to latch onto it. BUT What is interesting is that Snyder decides to focus his camera on Cavill's abs/pecs(he did the same for the Spartans in 300) as he is straining to hold the scaffold up......instead of doing a close up on the reaction of the guys in the chopper....in fact there is NO SHOT of the reaction in the guys in the chopper!!!. The irony of this is that Snyder and Goyer sold MOS on how the world reacts to an alien like Supes!!! Compare that to STM where you get the reactions from the folks on the streets when Supes saves Lois's chopper,the Pilots in AirForce One, the kids in the School bus,the Train driver who looks back to see Supes lying on the railway track ect. Lester got this too in SII and III. Loved the reactions in SIII when Supes welds the rupture in the oil tanker.... a look of amazement and bewilderment from the crew. Completely missing from MOS(ok apart from the school bus into the river....which funnily enough is why i think it is the best "saving" scene in the flick IMHO) Without those reactions for the victims,onlookers ect ect you are missing an incredibly vital element of what makes Supes a special character. Singer also understood this and applied it brilliantly for the Plane saving scene with the applause/reactions of the people in the stadium,Daily Planet,the bar where Jimmy is drinking and the passengers on the plane.Unfortunately he was not consistent with this approach for the rest of the flick..........you do get the reactions from the crowd when Supes saves Kitty.....the onlookers look zombified...lol......the same zombie type look from the people watching on the peer when Supes falls back down to earth.There was a missed opportunity at the end when Supes finally recovers in hospital and flies out(off camera). The film had already established that there was a massive crowd outside the hospital which was very cool. They could have had the reaction of that crowd to Supes flying out of the hospital which IMHO would have had a much bigger emotional payoff (rather than the nurse discovering that Supes has sneaked out without anyone noticing --lol) Snyder on the other hand just does not understand this concept of action and reaction at all(maybe there is some in BvS)....but somehow I doubt it
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Apr 3, 2016 3:55:24 GMT -5
Thanks for the link.
very interesting although a lot of it is already well known. Interesting regarding Kidder's contacts. I wonder if Lester had Kidder with her contacts(wheras Donner forbade her from wearing them) as she does look different. I see that Donner did not mention that it was Lester who came up with the idea to take SII's ending and affix it to Part I! Thing is that we know Donner's version of this story. Just wish Lester would open up and spill the beans from his perspective.
Also if you read the comments section there is a chap named Rick Drew.....he claims to have worked on the Calgary sequences.
There is also another poster(Steven) who sets of a mini debate by claiming MOS and BvS are superior to STM! The backlash is interesting!
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Apr 2, 2016 19:00:34 GMT -5
SR's character and relationship stuff was fantastic. Luthor's real estate and Supes versus the big rock (and little else) was lame. Sometimes there is a certain rythm and spontaneity between actors (and how the director handle the actors) that cannot be coached or taught. Donner knew how to inspire Reeve and Kidder(and Reeve and Kidder had a very organic chemistry in how they interacted with each other). Lester knew how to coax other subtle attributes out of these two too. The evidence is there in Supes IV where the absence of either Donner (or Lester) leaves that natural chemistry between Reeve and Kidder as the only anchor that holds their interactions together (but barely.)Fourie's inability to inspire either Reeve or Kidder is pretty obvious and ultimately those Reeve/Kidder Supes IV scenes have a worn out charm. And it's what you have with Supes' Returns. The idea is there but not the execution. IMHO Routh(as Superman) and Bosworth just did not click. Routh's (as Clark) interactions with Bosworth where better.....but then Lois's character(as derived from Donnerverse) was to ignore/dismiss Clark at every turn hence making Routh's and Bosworth's lack of chemistry easier to pull off. I could put it down to the script too. Lois: "So Clark..how does it feel to be back" Clark: "Well you know it's kinda like riding a bike....well you know.... whatever!" That exchange made me cringe when I first saw it and repeated viewing have not helped. Either Supes Returns got bogged down in trying(and failing) to mimic the first 3 Reeve films or it's actors just did not have that organic spark between each other(and Singer did not know how to inspire chemistry between them). On a separate note: I do wonder at times if the likes of SR and MOS are simply too rushed in terms of story evolution(drafts) and development. From script to screen for STM was the best part of 3.5 long years(July 1975 to December 1978). Superman Returns was barely 2 years(July 2004 to June 2006). Man Of Steel is also 2 years(2011 to 2013)---Snyder was hired in 2010 with no script!. STM(and SII) took far longer to develop than either SR or MOS but that extra time shows in the quality of the story telling. On Edit: SIII went into development in late 1981/early 82'. Compared to the first 2 flicks ...SIII had less preparation time and we all know the result. So if there is a lesson to be deduced from this.....diminishing time has an effect on substance.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Apr 2, 2016 17:57:49 GMT -5
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Apr 2, 2016 4:04:36 GMT -5
I have still not seen BvS!(hopefully get round to it this weekend.)
regarding the other films:
I think personal age,intellectual awareness, cultural exposure and the cinematic era itself all combine and come into play:
1981:
Saw STM and SII as a first time viewing back to back aged 7 and was blown away completely.
I had already seen Star Wars and Empire back to back a month or 2 before(also as a first time viewing) so that's the quality that my 6 year old mind was comparing against.
I do remember having a slight hokey feeling regarding one of the interior Krypton sequences(the set of Jorel's laboratory)---it seemed a bit LEGOey(lol) compared to some of those sets from Star Wars(even though they had the same production designer--John Barry--not that I knew that --lol) Not that it mattered.....Brando's send off speech("son becomes the father" ect ect) and John William's music more than nullified that sensation!.
Bear in mind that in terms of Super Hero stuff on TV at that time.....I was already familiar with Bixby's Hulk and Carter's Wonder Woman. I had also seen Hammond's Spidey(The Dragon's Challenge) just before STM and SII. It probably amplified just how amazing STM and SII were (compared to those mid budget TV super hero series) One thing that used to irk me with the 70's Hulk,Wonder Woman and Spidey(I loved all 3 by the way) was that that they spent a considerable time in their disguises(Banner,Diana and Parker).....and I used to get itchy...just waiting for them to turn into their super hero alter egos(lol). So when watching STM and SII for the first time I was amazed at just how much time Clark spent as Superman!
And the moment when Supes flies onto the flag pole to confront Zod is etched into my memory....the crowd applauded( a sparse one at that for the double bill).
Saw SII again theatrically in 1982 and this time the cinema was packed.....and the place exploded for the flag pole come back.
Now even at that time I was already familiar with the great epic disaster flicks (Poisedon Adventure,Airport,Earthquake ect ect) that were rerunning on TV. At that point...when it came to fantastical epic destruction.....those disaster flicks embodied what was cinematically possible. But Star Wars and Superman seemed to be on a whole new level technically......it's what helped them to stand out for the crowd. It is not Snyder's fault that his Man Of Steel has to compare with a slurry of other cinematic VFX extravaganzas.
I remember the trailers in between that STM and SII double bill quite well for some reason. Arthur,American Warewolf In London, Excalibur and something called Raiders Of The Lost Ark(lol).
So yeah...all in all a personal cinematic high which has never been topped.
The novelty value of STM and SII only eroded for me as I watched them over and over with the advent of home video (1983 onwards). So I lost interest in them for a while just through over exposure( as opposed to them being of bad quality)
For Superman Returns.
They actually played the Williams' Krypton theme music as a kind of overture prior to the film beginning. Anyone else get this?
As for the flick itself....it just felt flat for me. I did enjoy the scene where Luthor's guys give Supe's a good beating.....if the rest of the film had been on that dramatic level...it could have been something. But pretty forgettable for me....I do have it on DVD and Blu Ray though and have seen a few times over. My opinion has not changed. Good eye candy but little else.
Man Of Steel. Wheras Superman Returns had a good heart with no charisma I felt Man Of Steel had no heart but more (yet shallow)charisma. I did get it on Blu Ray( a very good transfer by the way) and whilst I do enjoy the fight sequences it just feels flat.
Could go into far more depth but not yet.
My 2 cents.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Mar 26, 2016 3:31:57 GMT -5
It's just so frustrating. They're trying to make Superman relatable when the answer is right in their face. They just don't get him. The boyscout thing may be a problem for some people but even that can be fixed. He might be a boyscout but even a boyscout can get angry sometimes. It's the fact that he knows he's got to hold back that anger or else he can cause even worse problems that gives him depth. Most people get angry they go and punch a bag of hit a ball. Superman could crack a mountain. That's a lot to consider. Hard to feel for Snyder's superman when he's this godlike being with a chiseled face zero percent body fat a good job and a hot girlfriend and he's still Debbie downer. Especially when people have REAL problems out there. People who have lost their homes to forclosure. People who are sick with cancer. I use to be down on Lois and Clark but at least Dean Cains superman didn't mope all th time and when he did it was for reasons people could relate too. I can't relate to losing a dad to intentionally walking into a tornado and just standing there in it but I can relate to having a dad get sick and die from it. Absolutely. There are 2 types of restraint that need to be applied here. One....as you say is affiliated with the character....the ability to hold back and keep any excess in check. The other is the cinematic type of restraint.Unfortunately we are in an era where cinematic over-indulgences are the norm(cities being leveled,explosions every 2 seconds,CGI monsters of every denomination ect ect). This is encapsulated in that diner scene in MOS when Clark rams the bullie's truck through street lightpoles/logs. Over the top and definitely not relatable as a reaction.Snyder would probably justify it by saying it was ironic humour or something. The fact is that he as a director could not restrain himself ("Hey...ramming a truck through some street light poles is awesome!") And as you correctly say....the same situation arises with Pa Kent's demise in the tornado.I understand they needed something different to Donner's/Ford's heart attack but a tornado was well in excess of what was required and again it's not something that the average Jo could comprehend. So yeah they need to re-assess how they interpret how the audience interprets Superman/Clark Kent!.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Mar 25, 2016 19:31:15 GMT -5
This is a pretty scathing review from the Guardian...one of the UK's biggest papers(beware--it does have spoilers!) But the opening paragraph is not holding back: Like a big, wet glob of fetid bird droppings tumbling down from the sky, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice has landed with an audible splat. It’s been almost three years since director Zack Snyder revealed the project at San Diego Comic-Con and in those years, the multimillion-dollar hype machine has been slowed only periodically by rumblings that something was amiss with the film. Amid splashy trailer releases and return trips to Comic-Con there’s been a steady drumbeat of skepticism in the background. How bad could it be? Well, it turns out, pretty bad. www.theguardian.com/film/2016/mar/25/review-batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Mar 25, 2016 19:24:16 GMT -5
They need to let the character open up and show a fuller range of emotions. Even if he's an outside he's raised human. He feels just like the rest of us. They've confused outsider with alien too much. Being alien or outcast doesn't make him relatable. The feelings he has makes him relatable. Most of the best Supermen were ones we could relate to because of the performances and the everyday stuff they had to deal with. In STM Clark couldn't get the girl because she was hanging around the quarterback. In Lois & Clark Clark moves to the big city and spends his first night in a rathole apartment. That's everyday stuff. Everyday problems that we all go through. It wasn't about "oh the world hates me because I'm from space." Yeah he's from space but he grew up here just like the rest of us. Great point.....very well said. I think you have got to the core of the problem right there. It's interesting that Cavill implied that Reeve's Clark drew too much attention to himself because he was clumsy. In fact Reeve's Clark is dismissed(by Lois), berated and bossed around(by Perry) and pretty much ignored(by other Daily Planet journalists)....everyday problems indeed.....and the reason why Reeve said that his Clark was relatable to the audience and to Reeve himself.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Mar 25, 2016 19:14:04 GMT -5
Well we know they won't reboot. Maybe they'll hand the directing reigns over to someone else if they do solo sequels to MOS but I wouldn't be surprised if they pull an Incredible Hulk and use Superman to headline the Justice League movies. An ensemble can cover for each other more and Superman might be easier to pull off there since so much of the focus won't be on him. Now he will be front and center in those films but like I said it won't be all abot him Batmans getting solo films ASAP. And I bet we see a solo Batman film before we see another solo Superman film. He's already the most popular character and Batfleck is getting almost universal praise for BVS. Most people are saying Cavill as Snyderman is pretty good to just ok at best. People aren't exactly raving. heck Gadot's Wonder Woman is getting more talk. I think it is an incredible testament to Reeve that he left such an indelible mark on the Supes image/mythos that subsequent actors are having trouble breaking free from that albatross. Cavill admitted as much at Comic Con. The likes of Spidey and Batman are easier characters to step into (for new actors coming in--like Affleck or Garfield/Holland)......the masks play a big part there. Supes is different in that regard. His face is completely exposed---no Head Gears or Masks to obfuscate his facial expressions. This is where Reeve excelled(as well as other areas). It's why poor old Cavill has his work cut out....no matter how good the scripts are. As for reboots......it needs to be given to a director who is inspired ,not just reverential or generic.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Mar 25, 2016 18:58:54 GMT -5
I am surprised that the US never got double bills for these big event movies. Supes I was already a 2.5 year old movie by 1981.....but thanks to the fact that home video was very much in it's infancy(or practically non-exsistant).... a film could be re- released in cinemas and still have legs years after it's original theatrical debut. Impossible to happen now. I gather that Supes I came out on VHS(with that sped up /cut up edit) in the US way back in early 1980.....but very few people would have had access to it at that time. It actually got released on VHS in the UK in 1981(in it's full theatrical edit) As a double bill Supes I and II were fantastic entertainment...especially for a first time viewing of either movie. Regarding DOJ Everything Metallo predicted seems to becoming true: www.latimes.com/entertainment/herocomplex/la-et-hc-batman-superman-review-roundup-20160324-story.htmlIt seems it is quite bad........if it's special effects were worse....it might even be in Supes IV territory. LOL. It was obvious from the trailers. True batman is the more popular character so WB will want to promote him hard because he'd get the most interest but trailers always lead with the best stuff. Afflecks batman had more cool stuff to do more cool gear and Affleck had to more to work with in terms of motivation and performance. Like I said the guys a fan AND he had something to prove after Daredevil. If you cast your mind back to the original 1978 trailer for STM........how little of the movie was revealed....Krypton being destroyed,just a quick shot of Reeve flying in the Fortress of Solitude and then the the final shot of Supes hovering above earth. Fair enough...it was a different cinematic era but even by the standards of the time the original STM 1978 trailer was beautifully discreet. That approach might actually help flicks like Terminator Genysis,The Force Awakens or Dawn Of Justice.......but the producers are so concerned with ensuring that their investment is recouped with interest....that they chuck all the best parts of the upcoming flick.....into the trailers! This is interesting.....the cast of DOJ(Cavill,Adams,Gadot and Snyder) respond to the overly critical reception from the media thus far: www.polygon.com/2016/3/25/11303850/batman-v-superman-reviews-reaction
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Mar 25, 2016 5:32:48 GMT -5
I don't think there was ever a double-bill Superman & Superman II here in the U.S.- pity, I would have loved that. (Especially since I'd read the original plan was for BOTH to be playing separately on first release.... which would have been weird, but the thinking I was told was that an audience member would go to one theatre, see part one, then go right to the other theatre for part two as a brand new release. In hindsight I think it was more rumor than anything else- but since the Salkinds were doing something fairly experimental at the time.... who knows? It's - to my knowledge - never been done before, nor since.) I am surprised that the US never got double bills for these big event movies. Supes I was already a 2.5 year old movie by 1981.....but thanks to the fact that home video was very much in it's infancy(or practically non-exsistant).... a film could be re- released in cinemas and still have legs years after it's original theatrical debut. Impossible to happen now. I gather that Supes I came out on VHS(with that sped up /cut up edit) in the US way back in early 1980.....but very few people would have had access to it at that time. It actually got released on VHS in the UK in 1981(in it's full theatrical edit) As a double bill Supes I and II were fantastic entertainment...especially for a first time viewing of either movie. Regarding DOJ Everything Metallo predicted seems to becoming true: www.latimes.com/entertainment/herocomplex/la-et-hc-batman-superman-review-roundup-20160324-story.htmlIt seems it is quite bad........if it's special effects were worse....it might even be in Supes IV territory.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Mar 24, 2016 19:11:53 GMT -5
The reviews are mixed at best. Some people love it some hate it but most are somewhere in the middle. There's good things (even some great things) in the movie but on the whole it's got various problems with storytelling, structure, pacing, characters, motivations, etc. Some of the visuals are being praised though. It's pretty much what a lot of people expected. It just sounds overstuffed. It did suprise me that some of the guys at collider who loved man of steel were mixed on BvS. At the end of the day it's going to open huge despite all that. Now the question is will it have legs despite all of that? One of those reviewer's in the link i gave earlier said something interesting: That none of the actors looked like they were enjoying the experience. This is my main criticism of Snyder.....his flicks just feel flat (for me) no matter how much eye-candy he puts up on the screen.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Mar 24, 2016 19:07:42 GMT -5
regarding going head to head: Back in 1981 Supes I and II were being shown together as part of a double bill at our local EMI(ABC) chain: At the same time another local cinema was showing Spiderman:The Dragon's Challenge: I actually saw the Dragon's Challenge first(because the Supes I and II double bill was sold out) Then got round to the Supes I and II double bill a few days later(blew my mind )
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Mar 23, 2016 13:10:57 GMT -5
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Mar 3, 2016 15:28:56 GMT -5
Gotta agree with both you chaps regarding Snyder. if you watch the following teaser(just released a few hours ago) you will see Snyder's penchant for people smashing through buildings remains unchanged. www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqsDwASsGN8
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Feb 12, 2016 13:29:56 GMT -5
Just watched the trailer. Personally I was never a fan of Nolan's Batman fight scenes(except the ones with Bane)....from what little can be seen of batman's chops in this trailer....think I prefer Snyder's fight choreography. BUT(and I said this in a previous post) the problem with the narrative with DOJ is that we have already seen Supes get smashed about by Zod,Faora and co in Man Of Steel. So seeing Batman whoop Supe's in this flick WILL impress stylistically......but emotionally ....we have already seen it before. But I withhold my proper judgment until I have seen the movie. Agree with Metallo that Affleck is impressive with dialogue in some of these trailers....so there is hope.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Feb 5, 2016 18:46:40 GMT -5
Totally forgot the one where Clark walks with Lois after work ends- and she goes to the ladies' room and Clark continues to go to the elevator and the guy in the elevator goes, 'going UP! UP!'.... wonderful! (Not to mention.... what an incredible size set that was- from all those offices to being thorough into the restroom AND the elevator) The thing that I didn't quite get until later on to make these shots even more impressive is all the work needed to constantly keep the moving camera in focus as well. There's no 'autofocus' mode on the cameras (even if there were- like on the home vid cam or the ipad, a movement would make it go in/out of focus).... so I can't imagine all the prep (not to mention messed up takes) for each of these. If Donner had been able to complete the film his way, can only imagine how inventive the camera techniques would have been for the metro fight and the Niagara sequence. When one looks at the storyboards for some of the stuff for STM/SII, the footage that shows up really goes so far beyond that, amazing. Movie making is like human combustion--lots of minds and ideas coming together and collaborating for the common good. Donner had Unsworth,Barry,Bowie and Veevers for STM and they all sadly passed away not long after it was theatrically released in early 1979. So how that would have affected Donner's depiction of SII(had he been allowed to complete it in 1979) is unknown. It also makes me wonder how Lester would have accommodated the above talents had they not passed away. Food for thought. Correction: Veevers died in 1983(aged 76) so would have been available for SII in 1979(under either Lester or Donner)
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Feb 5, 2016 18:36:18 GMT -5
Metallothat is the best one yet....seriously does Lou Ferrigno actually age?! How about Supes chillin' with Uncle Ben:
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Feb 4, 2016 15:22:40 GMT -5
Later on, thinking of adding threads dissecting (why not?) the sequences that Donner/Baird did in more detail and comparing with Donner/Thau for analysis. Anyhow: Basically, it pretty much looks like (in simple terms) Donner shot from every angle possible for many of the sequences- but Baird chose the best combination to make these flow for maximum impact.... and from different character's povs most of the time. Staged in a way most of the time that would not feel like it was shot for tv (Donner did tv for a long time) but with very clever shots- shooting off reflection, moving along with characters (but NOT shakicam), etc. Anyhow, more later... STM is choc a block with lengthy 1 time takes.
1)Brando's "Father becomes the son "speech. 2)Ford's "one thing I know I that you are here for a reason" speech. 3)East and Thaxter "goodbye" talk in the wheat fields 4)The panning shot from behind East and Thaxter when they hug(+ John William's music) is one of my personal faves. 5)Reeve and Kidder walking through Daily Planet 6)Kidder waving good bye to Supes after "can you read my mind" all the way until Reeve takes Louis out for hamburger......this is a phenomenal shot. Reeves acting is superb here.....playing "fumbling" Clark, Clark wanting to reveal his identity and back to "fumbling" Clark again.....all in one take. Brilliant.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Feb 4, 2016 15:00:36 GMT -5
I stand humbled and corrected- You're 1000% right- Donner had NO CGI to fix any mistakes during a one-take, whereas there's even home software nowadays that can 'sew' and 'stitch' multiple takes together, even without CGI. Good point, good point, Dejan!
No need to feel humbled or corrected CAM!
I remember reading the old making of the Superman The Movie book by Michael Petrou. Petrou, by accident , just happened to waltz right through one of those shots in the Daily Planet (whilst they were filming)causing Donner to get stressed out.
No doubt Donner took time to assemble his shots but the quality that resulted from that equation(sacrificing time for cinematic integrity) is the reason why young and old alike happily sauntered through the The Superman The Movie section of the WonderCon last year!.....nearly 37 later.
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Feb 4, 2016 14:18:19 GMT -5
Nice one Metallo:
I'll raise ya:
Catwoman and Banner:
|
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 823
|
Post by dejan on Feb 2, 2016 12:56:39 GMT -5
I loved that shot in Avengers, too, even if it went by a little fast (and a little CGI-ey). Avengers 2 I liked that Whedon attempted more 'ambitious' filmmaking, but after hearing his comment that he's going back to just 'shooting what he needs', makes me somewhat glad that the guys who did Captain America 2 are taking over for the next Avengers film... Oh there is no comparison between Supes The Movie "one take" shots and the Avengers. STM oners are true physical "in camera" 1 take shots with no optical/CGI enhancements. The Avengers all in one shots are only made possible by CGI. Thats the thing with STM as far as I am concerned. I think you can almost feel the struggle to accomplish those shots wheras the slick and easy CGI cut and paste jobs that we are so accustomed to seeing now are very stylish.......but you don't sense like it was a struggle for the likes of Snyder or Whedon to create them.
|
|