Why do movies look so bland now?
>dvd vs. blu-ray remaster
digital
well they're called blurays so we gotta make them blue
>>224129569Is this the new Lord of War movie?
>>224129681Quite obviously.
>>224129692I thought it might have been AI
>>224129681Didn't even know that was a thing
I had to disable auto-tone, and go into my accessibility display settings to get the correct tone for my films.
>>224129569wasnt this guy's story basically over? What material is there for a sequel.I mean I know The real life character was released in a prisoner swap recently but surely he hasn't gone on any cinematic adventures since then
Are you fucking joking? A sequel? Another fucking sequel no one asked for man come on. Come the fuck on. Watch them do the same schtick with the bullet journey at the beginning.Add to this that 2027 is less than 2 months away and I’m fucking upset. Time is moving too fast and everything sucks now. Fuck you. Look at this list of releases for next year:• Children of Blood and Bone – January 14, 2027 (Fantasy adaptation of Tomi Adeyemi's novel)• Sonic the Hedgehog 4 – March 19, 2027 (Featuring Sonic, Amy, and a new technological rival)• Godzilla x Kong: Supernova – March 26, 2027 (MonsterVerse action sequel)• Spaceballs: The New One – April 2027• The Legend of Zelda – April 2027 (Live-action Nintendo adaptation directed by Wes Ball)• Star Wars: Starfighter – May 2027 (Standalone sci-fi adventure starring Ryan Gosling)• FAST – May 14, 2027 (Military action thriller written by Taylor Sheridan)Summer 2027• How to Train Your Dragon 2 (Live-action/Animated follow-up) – June 2027• Spider-Man: Beyond the Spider-Verse – June 18, 2027• Ocean's Eleven Prequel – June 25, 2027 (Directed by Bradley Cooper, starring Margot Robbie)• Shrek 5 – June 30, 2027 (Featuring the return of Mike Myers and original cast)• Man of Tomorrow – July 9, 2027 (DC Universe film)• A Quiet Place Part III – July 30, 2027• The Bluey Movie – August 2027Fall & Holiday 2027• The New Simpsons Movie – September 3, 2027• The Conjuring: First Communion – September 10, 2027• The Mummy: Book of the Dead – October 2027• Frozen III – November 24, 2027• Avengers: Secret Wars – December 17, 2027 (Climax of the Multiverse Saga)• The Lord of the Rings: The Hunt for Gollum – December 17, 2027ITS ALL SEQUELS AND WHATEVER REHASH FUCK YOU AAAAAAAAAAAA I HATE JEWS I HATE JEWS I HATE HOLLYWOOD AND I HATE THE PEOPLE WHO WATCH THIS SLOP
>>224129752Looks like their just doing some john wick knockoff but with a 20 year old movie
>>224129569Film vs DigitalReal sets vs CGI setsHalogen/Tungsten vs LEDSimple as that
>>224129772>Halogen/Tungsten vs LEDmost dubious point since LED color temperature is trivially easy to setit is 90% the film vs digital issue, but specifically RAW/LOG digital that leaves indecisive color graders with so much latitude they don't know what to do with it except make it look shitty.
>>224129772>>224129897digital video can be color graded to literally any color imaginable, they chose this color scheme intentionally
>>224129897>he doesn’t know the difference between a full spectrum of light and a single spectral peakShut the fuck up retard, it’s not about making a single shade of color, it’s about the fact that a glowing filament emits a continuous and complete spectrum beyond its peak. You literally have no idea how lights work, you have no idea how absorption/emission spectra work and you need to sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up. Ignoramus.
>>224129569he would be dead if he was still smoking after 22 years
>>224129702Considering ai is basically just an insane amount of gross Instagram filters layered on top of each other that does make sense
>>224129944shut the fuck up nerd
>>224129758Shreck 5 is probably the most watchable of this insanely bad lineup , that's so pathetic
Image is about lighting. Film is more sensitive and digital. Slop is brain death.
>>224129966Ive seen enough people smoking a pack a day until their death at old age (80s), cigs is like a drug that keeps you alive IF you keep on it, if you stop midway it's fucked but certain cases some just break the addiction/habbit and do a u-turn with healthier lifestyle. More often the former than the latter.
>>224129932right which why so many modern movies look like shit, whcih is an answer to OP's question. we're also don't notice all the good digital grades, just the ugly ones people will complain about. >>224129944lmao
>>224129897>>224129932>natural lights better spectrum>film captures better range of photons/light in all condition>they work in tandemGee, you're saying water isn't wet ?Keep sitting behind the screen with your shit edits and youtube videos.
>>224130078Post example of Good Digital Grade.
>>224130097idk what you're arguing at this point. you could literally shoot in direct sunlight and still choose to do a shitty ugly color grade
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ANmtY7XtwgTrailer is fine. Only thing that looks iffy here is Cage's hairline.
>>224130005No, it isn't at all. You're fucking delusional if you sincerely believe that.
>>224130136Post example of Good Digital Color Grade.
>>224129569Idk, they both honestly look good, and the trailer looks promising.
>>224129569Why are you such a disingenuous cocksucker?
>>224130193looks like a videogame
>>224130193wowza the same ugly generic framing, lens choice, and blocking that's in every other pop culture woah moment trash these days. inspiring filmmaking.
>>224130180The Great Beauty
>>224129569higher resolution/digital blends everything in the shot instead of having sharper or more defined edges between the characters and background of the scene. Also effects the color grading.
>>224130188is the sequel taking place on neptune? cause that's the only way it would "look good"
>>224130229that was shot on film, silly
>>224130232>everything looks like mush because the editors are indian and don't know how to bring proper contrast out of a shot, and because the set dressers and lighters are karens and GTA mimicking nigs these days.FTFY
>>224130216>>224130225>>224130244>none of this means anythingImpressive.
>>224130193I mean, it's at least a step up from the drab colours we usually get. It looks like an early 2000's music video like Darude Sandstormhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6120QOlsfU&pp=ygUQZGFydWRlIHNhbmRzdG9ybQ%3D%3Dbut I'll take it.
>>224130229It's captured on 35mm film, mofo.Im still waiting for a film shot digital with good color grading.
>>224130260You're either a teenager or some kind of stunted and naive manchild, or a shill. There's no other rational excuse for this kind of sycophantic, obtuse thinking.
>>224130255Graded digitally, you dumb fuck. But if it's shot digitally that you want, take any of the newer Sorrentino works.
>>224130271Don't worry, Fruitiger Aero Aesthetics is coming back these days.
>>224130106>>224130180Drive>>224130292>But if it's shot digitally that you wantthat's exactly what we are talking about here, read the thread
>>224130306You asked for color grading, dumbass. But again, you can take any newer Sorrentino work; most of them if not all were shot digitally. You may also look up what Deakins and Lubezki have been doing, you filthy plebeian.
>>224130292>graded digitallyAll the shits graded heavily in digital because they only have this little to do with, hence it's all looking like shit because the source is shit. Old film gives you more range to fuck around with, some of us here is saying film vs digital is the cause of shit these days and you keep keyhole the arguement to "deegital color grading is the cause" when the real reason is digital film have lesser range to fuck in color grading process. Y O U D U M B F U C K
fwiw, color grading in general ends up bad when it's a crutch for lackluster cinematography. If what you capture in camera is excellent to begin with, you run the risk of going overboard
>>224129569Movies aren't designed to be shot photographically anymore. They're shot flat and neutral and have their look finished digitally in post.
>>224129758You are terminally online and should get off the internet. Permanently>>224130260 same goes for you.Why respond?
>>224130344The "cause of shit" is the aesthetic preference for what in another realm is known as iPhone face.
>>224130306I wouldn't say Drive is good example cause that movie is horrible in dark scenes due to digital unable to capture all the details in the shadow. I know there is a small list of good looking movies shot in digital but its a real small number.
>>224130380I’ve been traveling the last few days for work and I’m shitposting from the airport. Here’s a cigar I smoked earlier today, shit was so cash. My life is vastly superior to yours and I’m gonna go home and get some pussy tonight unlike you
>>224130395>horrible in dark scenes due to digital unable to capture all the details in the shadowbeing able to capture details in shadow is not inherently what makes a good picture.
>>224130356This. Exactly this.If you have good shots lined up naturally you dont need to fuck around too much "deeegitally" with color grading or crayon chewing like some anon here, the point in, digital camera still got some ways to go before it fully replaces over film, its not that digital is bad, it's not there yet.
>>224130225Stop pretending it all looks drab and blue like in the OP you malding little niggerfaggot
>>224129569They realized casting overtly ethically diverse actors all the time looks unappealing on screen. So instead of casting more white people, they just dim the entire screen and put a shitty color palette over it. So the audience is still annoyed, and their eyes still hurt, but they've been hypnotized into thinking it's a post-production issue rather than a political issue.
>>224130413Okay, now.
>>224130444Looks like the house pilot episode
>>224130344Old film and modern LOG are at best equal in terms of DR, but in terms of COLOR, modern digital formats capture such a wide gamut that there is absolutely more room to fuck around with color grading. And the whole point made here >>224129897 was that there's so much room to fuck around that if there's no strong intent behind the cinematography, the colorist/director/whoever the fuck is involved with deciding the grade in post can easily fall into the trap of "make it blue"
>>224130428>being able to capture details in shadow is not inherently what makes a good picture.Depends, but in Sin City for example it's full digital and go crazy with post process made it iconic. Drive not so much, it just felt cheap. The only thing iconic about Drive is the jacket and the people who relates the Gooseling character
>>224130413Did you really put that BLACKED labeled thing in your mouth, you cocksmoker?
>>224130499Kek, made me laugh.
>>224130395>I wouldn't say Drive is good example cause that movie is horrible in dark scenes due to digital unable to capture all the details in the shadow.it's the exact opposite, digital has way more dynamic range in the shadows than film does. you have no idea what you're talking about.
>>224130499Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, but you will always be a fucking faggot
>>224130106Most of the shit Villeneuve makes is shot digitally and the photography is praised, with grading being a component of that
>>224130558I'm not the one trying to impress while doxxing my hairless fingers holding a cigar that says BLACKED on it.
>>224130584Prisoners looks stunning.
>teal and orangeIt's a deliberate choice and I fucking hate it. It's not a hidden conspiracy, they literally write guide son how to get this "cinematic" look. Where the world is green for some reason. https://www.cinema-luts.com/teal-and-orange/#For the WHY did this look took off?>digitial outputs a grey washed out look>can color correct it to anything>easiest way is to just slap a tint to it and call it a day>teal-orange are opposites and some stupid theory took hold that the best visuals are teal-orange>video games to movies, everything gets the teal-orange look>grey washed out also makes cgi blend together (But everything blends together because of low contrast)Doing the opposite takes effort, so low effort means outputing faster. Would an exec be okay with a film being delayed because they're color tweaking?
>>224130604I have lots of mid digital hair, just not in the thumbs.You are indeed a faggot though and I did more today than you’ve probably done in a month. Im a god compared to you
>>224130670A god at sucking on BLACKED labeled objects.
>>224129569Digital always looks flatter for some reason, and I'm not sure how much of that is the lens choice in this case. I think a lot of bad color grading is just to help make digital look more cinematic. To be fair, I don't think the original film looks that great either.>>224130193Is this shot supposed to be good or are you just picking it out for the colors? Looks kinda crap either way.
>>224130656And this is a 2014 article discussing why every film is teal and orange now. The default is the backgrounds and sets are either a grey washed out or blueish green (teal). Look at the timeline and this lines up perfectly with the adoption of digital cameras. They were still using 35mm film all the way to 2009, and the films looked good, but 2010 and 2011 was the turning point where digital became the dominant. And then once dominant these trends took hold. The early digital film adopters had to compete with 35mm film, so at least tried to look half-decent. https://priceonomics.com/why-every-movie-looks-sort-of-orange-and-blue/
everything is computer
>>224130693I’m a god at living life, faggot. You think I’m “terminally online” because I’m shitposting on here when in reality I’m traveling, making money and getting laid while smoking cigars in the mountains and you’re sitting here accusing me of being too much of a shitposter just go back to Reddshit bro this place is for adults
>>224130729You're a god at living like the average Tinder whore.
>>224130772I guess it doesn’t count getting pussy when you’re married but it is what it is
>>224129758>bothering to look up current year movies in the first placeshiggydiggy
>>224130413most pathetic post i've seen on here in a long time
>>224130695>Digital always looks flatter for some reason, and I'm not sure how much of that is the lens choice in this case. I think a lot of bad color grading is just to help make digital look more cinematic. To be fair, I don't think the original film looks that great either.Here's a random shot from a WWE promo. Youtube and most instagram videos look similar and they're all digital. They have stronger contrast, and match reality more than the baffling and strange looking "cinematic" look.My other feeling is that while cinema often had a more moody and shadowy look, they had difficulty distinguishing a "film" from a social media video. Social media video is digital, but it is also set to defaults that tries to look natural to most people. So cinema went crazy and doubled down on filters and tints, and created this bafflingly ugly washed out grey look that I despise. I am fine with cinema dying if this is the trash we put out.
>>224130812I was accused of being terminally online when in reality I’m terminally based, I’m literally a smug Pepe blowing cigar smoke in your fucking basedjak face.And allow me to reiterate - fuck Jews and fuck Hollywood and all garbage sequels coming out next year
>>224129752he had a lavish prison time spent in expensive hotels and doing weapon deals for usa all that time, and now he's doing weapon deals for Russia again
>>224130861Keep sucking on BLACKED labeled objects, dude.
>>224130193uninspired but passable is not aspirational
>>224130890Can you stop thinking about nigger dicks for even 5 seconds? You’re terminally obsessed
>>224130900not aspirational is also not the same thing as bad btw
>>224129569As much I liked lord of war, I wish it had something of a plot.It really doesn't. It's just random things happening to the protagonist.
That teaser for Lords of War looks like a generic action flick.
Even when they properly shoot a flic on film it ends up looking like garbage for whatever reason these days.
>>224130954>nigger dicksIs that what you're imagining when sucking on BLACKED labeled objects?
>>224130413The most easy thing today is to get a pussy
