Marvel film 'cinematography

>Marvel film 'cinematography

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHH AAHAH

Other urls found in this thread:

vine.co/v/OhunjWZaIz1
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

>We can't afford an airport

...

I think HEAT was the last Hollywood production to film at airport, after that nope for security/safety risks.

if you told me this was a screenshot from Agents of SHIELD i would believe you

There's been a lot of Civil War threads today. Is someone upset about something?

Yeah the Avengers films don't really look like films, they're shot to look like TV-show episodes.

Wonder why

even stuff like Lees Hulk
Del Toro's Blade II

look more cinematic

then again Lee and Toro are auteurs and had sort a free reign over material.

HAHA WHAT A GREEN SCREEN MARK

>1080p
>black bars
dropped

AHAHAHAHA HOLY SHIT LOOK AT THEIR FEET

Okay, I'm looking. What's the next step of your master plan?

why are ironmans legs so juicy?

>they're shot to look like TV-show episodes.
for sure

it's pretty much inconceivable to me that these films get the amount of critical acclaim that they do when they've consistently been the least cinematic blockbusters of the 21st century

the only Marvel films that deserve any recognition are Iron Man, Iron Man 3, Captain America: The First Avenger, and Guardians of the Galaxy

Kek.

Serously How many CGI studios were involved on this?

It can't be THIS inconsistent.

R U S S O
U
S
S
O

best scene in action history, dcucks literally traumatized by how good it is

Iron man 3 was shit, but you are right about the others.

You know whaty is funny? the Mockumentary about what Thor was doing during Civil war Looked less like a TV show.

What the actual fuck?

That's pretty obvious and shitty green screen.

Yeah those efforts do look cinematic (GOTG maybe not so, but IM and First Avenger yes)

If you look at framing/blocking in Whedon's Avengers it is very TV-like, reminds me of watching TV-shows in 4:3 CRT and I guess it'd be fine if it even looked good.

Films like Meek's Cutoff, Lynch's Twin Peaks, Elephant, Mommy take advantage of the actual aspect ratio and look great.

These just look pretty uninspired..

asdasdasd

HOSPITAL ON GUERRERO STREET

I liked Carpoolers

is this real ?

Why does the ground look like it hasn't rendered

>shadow on the right is at a different angle

Holy shit how did they miss this?

>Elizabeth Olsen's tits tho

But anyway, these movies are for kids---they don't care about cgi continuity.

>It's a DCucks attempting to trigger Marvelkinoseurs by nitpicking stupid shit that was still done five thousand times better than their 26% rated flicks and succeeding episode

JUST

and, even the Russo Civil War looks quite like made for TV-series.

Hard to believe these films get so much praise. Fury Road looks majestic in comparison, and that's not comparing the blocking and framing in action set pieces..

>MarvelCucks defend this

...

>Iron man 3 was shit
i liked it, but that's not the point. it's a legitimately well-made blockbuster film, regardless of whether you like the script or not. Shane Black can direct circles around the other hacks Paramount/Disney/Marvel have hired. maybe Taika Waititi will deliver some quality with Thor: Ragnarok.

it probably has a lot to do with the assembly line-esque production schedule these films are made on. i wouldn't be surprised to find out that producers hold a lot of power on set, too.

Thats because Civil War has a bland filter. It has no film filter at all.

Both BvS and Fury Road have a great color contrast for its scenes but Civil War just looks so amaturish with no color effect

OOh OOH! TELL ME QUICK!
WHAT DOES CIA SAY WHEN ANT MAN GOES GIANT???

HUH? HUUUUH?!!
WHAT IS IT? WHAT DOES HE CALL HIM?

DC film 'cinematography'

Damaged!!!!!!

it looks much better than anything from a Marvel flick

Damn, this proves BvS was a good movie.

That was a nice shot from the extended cut

Large man?

>thread is about Marvel
>user talks about DC

everytime

You can make film look 'cinematic' without heavy color correction, color gradients. Simple by not using uninspired blocking/framing that belongs to soap TVs (fast, easy, mindless) and some creativity with cinematography.

I mean I instantly associated all of these screenshots with some TV-show, they just look amateurish.

This. It's like they just shot it on a Canon DSLR and forgot about colour grading.

Dc 'cinamatography'

>PS2 Cinematography

FTFY

It looks great. It's not suppose to look realistic. It's Oniric, the whole point of making him look dreamy and legendary in that sequence while the famous people talked about if he was a god was to put farther expand the difference between How people SEE superman, and how Clark Kent was just a normal guy calling his mother at night when he doubts himself. PRetty good use of visuals.

But my guess is that you thought it looks like that cuz bad CGI?

Pic related, they are not suppose to look real. You idiots are too used to TV shows

DCdrones will defend this.

At least BvS tried, instead of being completely soulless. I mean goddamn the pic in OP is just so fucking bland

Monster is a great film, moron. You may have heard of it - it's what won Charlize Theron her Oscar, after all. Or do you not watch films other than capeshit?

I know. There is no good blocking or cinematic quality at all

BvS had a lot of good high angles, low angles, mid shots, wide shots where the characters stood in a certain way to make them look powerful on screen.

Civil War had none of the basic principles of lining up a shot

Looks like the ground to me chum.

Monster's legit good

Berlin International Film Festival
2004 | 2 wins including: Best Actress (Competition)
2004 | Golden Berlin Bear

Independent Spirit Awards
2004 | 2 wins including: Best First Feature
2004 | Nominee: Best First Screenplay

>a-at least is g-good right?

>Good is now 'bad' quality.
What the fuck is wrong with your brains

DC hired a director with at least one award-winning film under their belt to helm one of their tentpole features and you're comparing it to Marvel hiring two no-name TV directors whose biggest claim to fame is filming like thirty episodes of fucking "Community"

I don't think you have any idea what you're talking about

>hiring comedy writers and a girl with one decent film
wtf Marv- what?

>at least

What? A good movie is a good thing.

How else are they gonna deliver all the great quips™

Iron Man was shot on film if I recall correctly, pretty good looking without too much flashy CGI and a non-tv director in charge of it.

Now Jon Favreau made The Jungle Book, which has some of the best CG out there, whereas Marvel came up with... that.

Looks boring as shit

Who has ever complimented Marvel's cinematography?
It's like talking about Michael Phelps' dick size.

>DCdrones will defend this
>they actually defended this
kek, enjoy your anti-patriarchy quips

i love this part. he's just standing there as the news footage plays in the background and he's thinking "aww yiss my plan worked'

DC cinematography

Such subtle imagry

it's like everyone who praises them forgets that film is a visual medium

I appreciate that DC let Snyder do his work and give auteur a chance. At least his films have thematic consistency (as in Snyder's filmography has, narratives, visual motifs, themes) and they're at least interesting enough because of it. Not that I don't dig Iron Man, but it's a standalone film in modern Marvel.

I really liked the Guillermo del Toro Blade II and Lee's Hulk again, because they let director do their thing with it.

Like someone said, producers probably have a lot of say in how Marvel films play out.

And it was a decent film, yeah. and Jon's Jungle Book was a good adaptation and a film. Surprisingly dark for a Disney film, don't you think?

There was something magical about the first set of MCU movies.

The hell happened?

Paramount.

Looks like Marvel needs to go back to film school

>yfw this is now DC cinematography AND Disney cinematography because of Rogue One.

you'd be surprised how many people aren't aware of the imagery and what it means. we here on Sup Forums keep talking about this but other people don't give a shit. you'd never find a scene like this in the mcu. daredevil, maybe but not the mcu.

...

Is he supposed to be standing on something

no one's ever claimed Snyder's work is subtle, but what's interesting about it is that despite how apparently heavy-handed the imagery is, you can still interpret it in a number of thematically consistent, thought-provoking ways.

If that was a marvel shot he would be looking at the camera and it would be an American shot

He is meant to be floating. See op's pic

I wish i had a better picture. But yes, youa re right.

Even in that shot though?

There are plenty of beautiful films that are terrible movies.

save it my friend, it's all yours ;^)

I was blind but now I see

ON THE EDGE

but there aren't very many great films that aren't, in some way, visually compelling. interesting how that dichotomy works.

In BvS, Gotham City seems to be right next to Metropolis. Is this canon?

What the fuck was this scene about?

>you'd never find a scene like this in the mcu.
Thank God.

Shot on location

Marvel cucks wouldn't know about that. Hell, they didn't even build a minor set for the airport, top kek

Vision I'm Scarlet Witch

The opening of the BvS incorporates all the basic filmmaking techniques yet it is so powerful

>Camera set up high looking down on Batman to resemble POV of Superman
>Camera set up as a low angle to resemble POV of Batman looking at Superman
>Camera placed over the shoulder of Batman
>Camera placed over the shoulder of Superman
>Incorporating mid shots, wide shots depending on the mood that these characters are feeling

You see this type of cinematography in a lot of westerns because it is an old filmmaking technique yet it just works so well when you have very powerful characters like Batman and Superman on screen.

>B- but DC!
Every time.

in the DCEU they're across a bay from each other - "sister cities", if you will. in the comics, they've been all over the place. Gotham is often either Chicago or New York, Metropolis is often Washington DC or Los Angeles.

That's pretty legendary though.

Notice that when seen as a savior he is compred with Sun gods (Apollo, Jesus) but when batman (the ubermensch) see him we see lightning, the very same thing that Lex uses to create Doomsday (and Victor Frankenstein used to create Adam), Lex talks about Prometheus and the fire of the gods, as lightning is usually a thing of gods of "power", power being a them for both superman and lex feeling powerless.

It's a shame everything else about it us so shallow.

Nah, in the DCEU they're an hour away by boat, seemingly to bring the universe in closer

No idea where Midway city exists in universe, but must be relatively close to Gotham considering Bruce goes after Joker relatively quickly

>muh realism in superhero movies

neck yourself DCuck

vine.co/v/OhunjWZaIz1

All memes aside, this is a perfect camera shot, representing the main eye target in center, 2 people by his side, 1 guy standing on the far left so that part of the image isnt left to be bare.

It is simple filmmaking

>fight a war
>0 casualties
>Old man falls and breaks hip
>Lose

Such is life in MCU