Yeah, the second one was practically ruined by a million camera cuts in every action scene of the movie. I didn't even get the shitty Yahoo player to work, but I'm hoping this movie is good. I certainly liked the first one.Teh Hamburglar said:i've never seen the first two except for the last 20 minutes of the 2nd Bourne movie. The ****ing spastic camera-quick shots of the car scene made me nauseous. It was like Chris Nolan fight scene times 1000.
Solo said:Also, Ultimatum, bud.
Teh Hamburglar said:i've never seen the first two except for the last 20 minutes of the 2nd Bourne movie. The ****ing spastic camera-quick shots of the car scene made me nauseous. It was like Chris Nolan fight scene times 1000.
Solo said:Can someone else please bitch about Greengrass' style? I dont think enough of you have in this thread. Its the way he likes to shoot his films, and it doesnt appear to be changing soon. Get over it. I think the style worked great for Supremacy, and United 93 wouldnt have been the same great film it was if the hectic, documentary style shooting wasnt present.
Solo said:Can someone else please bitch about the crazy gadgets and retarded villains of the Bond movies? I dont think enough of you have in this thread. Its the way the producers like to make the films, and it doesnt appear to be changing soon. Get over it. I think the style worked great for Thunderball, and Die Another Day wouldn't have been the same if that loony style wasnt present.
temp said:
:lol Holy crap.temp said:
madara said:I love these movies, I could watch them all day. Do you get the same vibe with books and are there alot in this series?
temp said:
temp said:
Mashing said:I don't have a problem with teh documentary style camera movement, but I DO get bothered by the quick cuts. Why doesn't he like holding an action shot for more than 2 seconds?
Solo said:Why does Peter Jackson like to abuse slow-mo like a 2 dollar hooker? Who knows!? Its called personal style, or lack thereof.
Peter Jackson?!Solo said:Why does Peter Jackson like to abuse slow-mo like a 2 dollar hooker? Who knows!? Its called personal style, or lack thereof.
Prime crotch said:Peter Jackson?!
whytemyke said:Are the cuts and editing really going to keep anyone from seeing this who wants to?
So you're saying that because the movies are good in regards to plot or acting or overall storytelling that it's impossible to complain about another part of the movie.Solo said:Uh, what? The Bond movies were in the shitter, and deserved to bitched out by any self respecting fan. The Bourne movies, on the other hand, have both been great, so people bitching over shit like this is pointless.
Basically, your point would be valid if I was bitching about, say, the cinematography of CR, which I haven't.
Solo said:No, all Im saying that with all the shit we get that passes for action/thriller movies these days, do we really need to tear down the few franchises that, for the most part, get it right?
Now, perhaps I dont have a grasp on how bad some of you found the camera work, as I never saw the film in theatres, only on DVD, so I'll concede that. Perhaps the big screen would make this movie seem unwatchable.
So, no but yes? Anyway, if you were saying that people constantly complaining about the shaky cam was annoying then that would be understandable, but defending something using the fact that everything else is good is sort of stupid. I mean, like you said, it does add sort of a real, documentary feel to the movie, but I think they could probably keep that and still tone it down a bit.Solo said:No, all Im saying that with all the shit we get that passes for action/thriller movies these days, do we really need to tear down the few franchises that, for the most part, get it right?
Now, perhaps I dont have a grasp on how bad some of you found the camera work, as I never saw the film in theatres, only on DVD, so I'll concede that. Perhaps the big screen would make this movie seem unwatchable.
Kabuki Waq said:Peter Jackson hate is always welcome tho.
temp said:So, no but yes? Anyway, if you were saying that people constantly complaining about the shaky cam was annoying then that would be understandable, but defending something using the fact that everything else is good is sort of stupid. I mean, like you said, it does add sort of a real, documentary feel to the movie, but I think they could probably keep that and still tone it down a bit.
No but slow motion? I would associate a lot of things to Peter Jackson like B-movie director but slow-mo?Solo said:Did I misspell his name?
Tamanon said:Hopefully the director bought a tripod for this one.
Solo said:Why does Peter Jackson like to abuse slow-mo like a 2 dollar hooker? Who knows!? Its called personal style, or lack thereof.
Prime crotch said:No but slow motion? I would associate a lot of things to Peter Jackson like B-movie director but slow-mo?
Are you the backwards man? Snyder's use of slow-mo was very effective and stylish. Jackson's is cheesy and lame.Timbuktu said:When you talk about abusing slow-mo, I'd think of Snyder and his 300. That's abusing, not Jackson.
I saw every movie by him except King Kong, even Bad Taste and I don't recall any slow motion abuse. You talk like if he was John Woo or something.Solo said:Did you see any of the LOTR movies or King Kong?