|
|
Post by kuatorises on Mar 30, 2017 14:45:38 GMT
Can anyone explain to me why the special effects in their movies are so fake looking? A lot of it has to do with the desaturated color grading. Whenever you overindulge in color correction or alteration it makes your FX look all the more fake. Most studios have yet to learn this. I don't know if that's true or not. I've never heard that. Where did you hear that? That is interesting. This scene doesn't look particularly dark and I still can't stand the effects. Something about the way they move in casually go through buildings just looks so fake to me. It's also pretty boring. |
|
|
|
Post by thenewnexus on Mar 30, 2017 16:07:45 GMT
What the hell are those flying creatures ? I fear another DCEU rotten bomb heading our way Does not look good but maybe it will at least be better than Dark knight Rises,BVS was atleast able to do that and MOS totally destroys TDKR |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2017 19:08:09 GMT
A lot of it has to do with the desaturated color grading. Whenever you overindulge in color correction or alteration it makes your FX look all the more fake. Most studios have yet to learn this. I don't know if that's true or not. I've never heard that. Where did you hear that? That is interesting. This scene doesn't look particularly dark and I still can't stand the effects. Something about the way they move in casually go through buildings just looks so fake to me. It's also pretty boring. I was reading a lot about color grading and its various forms (like desaturation and orange teal color timing) last year when I started to get irritated with its overuse in modern movies. One of the things I learned is that when you make the picture excessively stylized with digital coloring the brain/eye registers everything as being less real. I forget all the technical explanations but it's one reason why the FX look so bad in Snyder's movies. I'm sure there are other reasons though as well. The scene you linked looks fake to me because of how cartoony their quick movements are. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2017 19:09:56 GMT
What the hell are those flying creatures ? I fear another DCEU rotten bomb heading our way Does not look good but maybe it will at least be better than Dark knight Rises,BVS was atleast able to do that and MOS totally destroys TDKR TDKR > MoS and BvS The cinematography alone makes it so. |
|
|
|
Post by thenewnexus on Mar 30, 2017 19:24:05 GMT
Oh come on,I guess BVS say that,but in what World is TDKR a better film than MOS?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2017 21:52:51 GMT
Oh come on,I guess BVS say that,but in what World is TDKR a better film than MOS? My world. MoS is a self indulgent mess: a twenty minute intro on Krypton leads to almost no character development for adult Clark in Act One and Act Three quickly devolves into a destruction montage that would make Michael Bay cringe. Also the green screens are obvious, the cinematography is ugly and the performances are weak. just my opinion though I suppose. You are entitled to yours as well. |
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Apr 1, 2017 22:11:49 GMT
looks garbage.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Apr 4, 2017 11:43:43 GMT
I don't think it can be worse than BvS since Snyder is undoubtedly on a tighter leash and there'll be less Eisenberg.
That said, any expectation higher than "bad" is probably too high.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Apr 4, 2017 16:24:23 GMT
What the hell are those flying creatures ? I fear another DCEU rotten bomb heading our way Nah, JL has more color, seems to have better action and seems to have more levity. Plus it has Aquaman and no annoying Luthor. Those alone should make it quite better than BvS. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2017 18:21:45 GMT
Oh come on,I guess BVS say that,but in what World is TDKR a better film than MOS? My world. MoS is a self indulgent mess: a twenty minute intro on Krypton leads to almost no character development for adult Clark in Act One and Act Three quickly devolves into a destruction montage that would make Michael Bay cringe. Also the green screens are obvious, the cinematography is ugly and the performances are weak. just my opinion though I suppose. You are entitled to yours as well. Honestly, we didn't need to spend ANY time on Krypton again. Everyone knows the story. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2017 17:06:35 GMT
My world. MoS is a self indulgent mess: a twenty minute intro on Krypton leads to almost no character development for adult Clark in Act One and Act Three quickly devolves into a destruction montage that would make Michael Bay cringe. Also the green screens are obvious, the cinematography is ugly and the performances are weak. just my opinion though I suppose. You are entitled to yours as well. Honestly, we didn't need to spend ANY time on Krypton again. Everyone knows the story. Also, Superman is the protagonist not his father, so it made no sense to have such a long prologue focusing on Jor El. We should have found out about Krypton through Clark, learned it as he learned it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2017 17:13:42 GMT
Honestly, we didn't need to spend ANY time on Krypton again. Everyone knows the story. Also, Superman is the protagonist not his father, so it made no sense to have such a long prologue focusing on Jor El. We should have found out about Krypton through Clark, learned it as he learned it. Exactly. Man of Steel had so many problems it's not even funny. It's a great study of "how to not make a superhero movie," though. |
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Apr 8, 2017 1:13:08 GMT
Honestly, we didn't need to spend ANY time on Krypton again. Everyone knows the story. Also, Superman is the protagonist not his father, so it made no sense to have such a long prologue focusing on Jor El. We should have found out about Krypton through Clark, learned it as he learned it. You're right. In all honesty, the movie should have started, at least, on the fishing boat. With the boat "crashing" into the wave. Make it that Johnathan never tells him about the pod and that he's traveling the world working odd jobs to "find himself". Something tells him to investigate the ship when the soldiers talk about it*. Make that key a good luck charm he's had since he was a baby. Only the audience would know he's alien because they know Superman. *Or even make it some guys talking about something out there screwing up their GPS. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2017 21:12:38 GMT
Also, Superman is the protagonist not his father, so it made no sense to have such a long prologue focusing on Jor El. We should have found out about Krypton through Clark, learned it as he learned it. You're right. In all honesty, the movie should have started, at least, on the fishing boat. With the boat "crashing" into the wave. Make it that Johnathan never tells him about the pod and that he's traveling the world working odd jobs to "find himself". Something tells him to investigate the ship when the soldiers talk about it*. Make that key a good luck charm he's had since he was a baby. Only the audience would know he's alien because they know Superman. *Or even make it some guys talking about something out there screwing up their GPS. Exactly. That would've worked so much better. Adult Clark's role in act one is so minimal it barely feels like a story. |
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Apr 8, 2017 21:44:00 GMT
You're right. In all honesty, the movie should have started, at least, on the fishing boat. With the boat "crashing" into the wave. Make it that Johnathan never tells him about the pod and that he's traveling the world working odd jobs to "find himself". Something tells him to investigate the ship when the soldiers talk about it*. Make that key a good luck charm he's had since he was a baby. Only the audience would know he's alien because they know Superman. *Or even make it some guys talking about something out there screwing up their GPS. Exactly. That would've worked so much better. Adult Clark's role in act one is so minimal it barely feels like a story. All the flashbacks can go, also. There doesn't need to be a Jonathan Kent actor in the movie. Them going to the grave and talking about him told us all we needed to know. It seemed more that the flashbacks were there only to give Ma and Pa more screen time. I know the x-ray vision is suppose to be foreshadow and a pay-off with Zod, but that doesn't have to be that type of thing. Just show Zod being overwhelmed by his senses then Kal's explanation of it. Other things that needed to be cut was Lois's investigation into Clark. Put the part about him needing a job earlier into the movie and add him to the Daily Planet scenes. They made Lois a bigger character than she needed to be. |
|
