Yeah, I had to stop watching it at the 143 min. mark. After that scene, it was unwatchable.Agow95 said:
OT: This almost screams, "Look at me! See how much better my shots are compared to theirs."
Dark Knight Rises Cinematographer Bashes The Avengers
- Thread starter The Wooster
- Start date
OT: This almost screams, "Look at me! See how much better my shots are compared to theirs."
Personally I'm in a hate-enjoy position with TDKR, the movie IMO was pretty weak compared to Batman begins and The Dark Knight, but not enough to make it a bad movie, still, there were a couple of scenes and events that just made me really hate it, and what made even more pissed is that one of them could be EASILY fixed with a little bit more attention to the acting, and that's
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILERSPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILERSPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
Talia's death, it's not the way she dies, or anything, it's the acting in that moment, it was awful, that **** of a whore of an actress seemes like a 9 years old faking a death scene, she's talking in pain and all of a sudden she lets her head hang and bang she's dead, it was just as bad as that fight between Daredevil and Elektra in the playground
ENNNNNNND OF SPOOOOOOILER
The ending wasn't to my liking either, because it failed to give closure, that could be fixed with a new movie following the "Nolan cannon", but the way it ended, it just created a bigger question and no valid answers, seemed like a TV show that got canceled in the worst moment it could end (I'm looking at you Deadwood, you got canceled in the middle of a conflict for fuck's sake!)
The Avengers on the other hand, it was a blockbuster but that's all, it was nice and fun all the way, but it didn't add no big drama nor anything. But hey, it didn't even attempt to, it just wanted to be like, surprise, the COMIC BOOKS, and that he did. So yeah, maybe the "awful" camera shots were there for a reason, to make you feel like you're watching a comic book, which is the way you should.
I know, Batman isn't shot that way because Nolan wanted a different feel, something less comic book and more "real", and it did work. What didn't work, for me, in TDKR were other things.
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILERSPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILERSPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
Talia's death, it's not the way she dies, or anything, it's the acting in that moment, it was awful, that **** of a whore of an actress seemes like a 9 years old faking a death scene, she's talking in pain and all of a sudden she lets her head hang and bang she's dead, it was just as bad as that fight between Daredevil and Elektra in the playground
ENNNNNNND OF SPOOOOOOILER
The ending wasn't to my liking either, because it failed to give closure, that could be fixed with a new movie following the "Nolan cannon", but the way it ended, it just created a bigger question and no valid answers, seemed like a TV show that got canceled in the worst moment it could end (I'm looking at you Deadwood, you got canceled in the middle of a conflict for fuck's sake!)
The Avengers on the other hand, it was a blockbuster but that's all, it was nice and fun all the way, but it didn't add no big drama nor anything. But hey, it didn't even attempt to, it just wanted to be like, surprise, the COMIC BOOKS, and that he did. So yeah, maybe the "awful" camera shots were there for a reason, to make you feel like you're watching a comic book, which is the way you should.
I know, Batman isn't shot that way because Nolan wanted a different feel, something less comic book and more "real", and it did work. What didn't work, for me, in TDKR were other things.
I came into this thread genuinely interested in what this guy had to say. Then I saw his name and started laughing.
I really disagree. Snobs in any field, even if it is their own are unbearable. Usually they're so convinced that their way is the bet way that they'll refuse to believe that other ways are more efficient.OhJohnNo said:
As a programmer, I deal with these arseholes every day.
While Mr Pfister is entitled to his opinion, which I won't argue (though I do disagree), there is a little thing called professional courtesy.
Going out of your way to point at one of your peers and say "they suck, they're a sell-out" mid-interview is a pretty tactless act on his part, especially when he went after what's perceived to be his competition without any provocation or prompting from the interviewer. I guess I just expected a little more class from a man of his status.
(btw, is it my imagination, or does 'Mr Pfister' not sound like the name of a '90s techno-club act? From Germany?)
Going out of your way to point at one of your peers and say "they suck, they're a sell-out" mid-interview is a pretty tactless act on his part, especially when he went after what's perceived to be his competition without any provocation or prompting from the interviewer. I guess I just expected a little more class from a man of his status.
(btw, is it my imagination, or does 'Mr Pfister' not sound like the name of a '90s techno-club act? From Germany?)
None of which has anything to do with cinematography, which is what he was referencing.TheKasp said:
People seem to be assuming that this guy is jealous that The Avengers was a more popular movie, but to me it simply sounds like a professional commenting on an aspect of his craft. As a cinematographer, he is obviously going to look at films in a completely different way, noticing things that would be easily missed by Joe Public. I can sympathise, my friends often refuse to watch movies with me now because as a Film/TV writer I call out all the obvious story crutches that most people are happy to ignore. Once you have devoted a certain amount of your life to one particular aspect of a craft, it is hard to look at the big picture without focusing on your speciality.
While it is generally considered bad form in the industry to bad mouth someone else's work, this has almost certainly been taken out of context and there are probably a number of circumstances surrounding this discussion that haven't been revealed to the public.
You're just mad that Dark Knight Rises was just good compared to The Avengers being THE LITERAL GREATEST SUPERHERO MOVIE OF ALL TIME.
dint like the movie because of one camera angle??? this has to be a joke. what does he expect? that every movie must be realistic or what?
i think he is just jealous that it cashed in as well as batman.
i think he is just jealous that it cashed in as well as batman.
From memory (DRK is a bit hazy for me as well), those scenes were largely about showing off the augmented leg, which gets into the murky territory of whether or not the Director insisted on having those shots, in which case the DoP has to go with it and make sure it looks as good as possible. Without being on set, it's impossible to know.TheKasp said:
I'm certainly no cinematographer, but I would imagine that the emphasis on the leg was to show the artificial means that Bruce was using to convince himself that he was back on his A Game; not realising that the real obstacle he needed to overcome was spiritual.
Not that I necessarily think that's a good enough reason, just a possible explanation. DKR had had a LOT of problems, but judged solely on the visual aspect I feel it was a far better film than The Avengers.
Pretty much all that needs to be said. If you're an artist and take your work seriously (as I'd imagine Mr. Pfister does), then you're going to look at similar art (in this case cinematography and all that that entails) with more of a critical eye and greater understanding of the other artists' choices than the standard viewer. Why assume that Mr. Pfister is trolling, jealous, bitter, or trying to start a flame war when he may just like a different style of cinematography than what was used in The Avengers (and, as a result, was taken out of the film by his intimate knowledge of his field)?OhJohnNo said:
Has no one else here seen a film where, for whatever reason, you got hung up on a particular detail or aspect of the film that completely took you out of the film? I don't see why a guy who works on films isn't also allowed to have that happen to him (especially if he wanted to enjoy the film).
No. Realistically not but he does have a point. A couple of shots come to mind that just drew me out of the film instead of keeping me there. In particular, when Tony and Bruce are working in the lab and the end of their conversation is shot from really far away. It just shoved me out of the scene altogether.Agow95 said:
Poor guy. His professional deformation is preventing him from enjoying a good and fun movie. All he can see are camera angles and all he can do is fuss over them, missing so much. Also, it's ironic that he states how everything is about the story and storytelling then focuses soley on his own field...
The Avengers was 2 hours of pure escapist nonsense. Twaddle, but grade A twaddle.
Batman took itself a touch too seriously at times.
Thus, on an enjoyment level, Avengers wins out. If I want to watch something intellectual and challenging, I'll watch 'The Wire.
Batman took itself a touch too seriously at times.
Thus, on an enjoyment level, Avengers wins out. If I want to watch something intellectual and challenging, I'll watch 'The Wire.