Why doesn't Nolan edit those out and fucking try again? Does he only do one take of each scene?

Why doesn't Nolan edit those out and fucking try again? Does he only do one take of each scene?

Other urls found in this thread:

hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/comic-con-christopher-nolan-makes-721097
digitalspy.com/movies/news/a565665/morgan-freeman-christopher-nolan-david-fincher-are-very-different/
youtu.be/Yqvbv-SB4bg?t=30
youtube.com/watch?v=_hoXNXSpmng
youtube.com/watch?v=SFxQ-EdFl_M
youtube.com/watch?v=pfmkRi_tr9c
youtube.com/watch?v=lzHs9cJ4Bao
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

>people don't stumble

He does. That's why actors love him. Do one take and you're done. That's why you have Cotillard doing her terrible death scene in TDKR. She had one shot at that and fucked it up

Why would actors love playing russian roulette with their careers?

I guess that explains the fucking extra smiling in the trailer for dunkirk

They just do. Besides, it's frustrating as fuck to redo a take 50 times and demotivates them. It also motivates them to do it -right- the first time and have more pressure.
It's smart, it's good, although only ever doing one take even if it sucked... is suicide, obviously.

It's better (for an actor, easier to do at the very least) than kubrick or fincher, both do/did like 50+ takes of any given scene and it's not like cotillard lost her career after tdkr, so there's that

Underrated

your career is bolstered the minute you're cast in one of thse big budget blockbusters (not to mention the cash)

It's not as if the viewing public has such refined critical taste that they write off actors who give a bad performance in a few scenes, a lot of famous actors are crap

There's even an interview with nolan about that. I'm too lazy to google it, but you should be able to find it. He's gloating and everything.

You actually like doing more work?

>It's either one take or 50

You do up to 10 takes if it's a complicated scene or just 3-5 and be done with it like a sane human being

>implying there wouldn't be at least one guy there not scared or accepting what's about to happen

bravo nolan

I though sadboys were a millenial thing

...

Remember this is WW1 and they don't even know what planes are. He might be mistakenly happy when he sees one for the first time.

If the first one is shit, yeah I'll do it again

Well, if you put your mind to it and idealize it as a reality he might aswell be reacting like most people do when they get nervious...
but again, that behaviour seems a little off becouse he gets down smiling and putting his hands in his partners acting kinda protective.

Are you trolling nigger?

>american education

HE CHOSE THESE TAKES BECAUSE HE PREFERRED THEM OVER SMOOTH TRANSITIONS, IT ADDS TO WHATEVER REALISM HE IS TRYING TO DESPERATELY JAM INTO A FANTASTICAL STORY ABOUT A GUY DRESSED AS A BAT YOU DUMB FUCK

>Does he only do one take of each scene?

close

>He also described Nolan's process. "We moved fast. Two, three takes and we moved on."

hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/comic-con-christopher-nolan-makes-721097

"Chris Nolan is quick. Huge movie, but he's going through it quickly. Three takes, he's irritated if he has to do four."

digitalspy.com/movies/news/a565665/morgan-freeman-christopher-nolan-david-fincher-are-very-different/

it frequently shows, especially in editing and the coverage of scenes. in all of his movies there are weird, awkward scene transitions because that was the footage they had.

one of his favorite tricks is to re-use close-ups at the end of a scene as a sort of 'buffer' to create a transition where he doesn't have to cut on a line. this happens in batman begins in the first scene between cillain murphy and tom wilkinson and in the dark knight in the hospital scene with joker and two-face. it's incredibly jarring -- it's literally the same take used twice in the same scene at different times.

people compare this guy to kubrick.

What's wrong with the upper picture??

dude trips

youtu.be/Yqvbv-SB4bg?t=30

>Remember this is WW1 and they don't even know what planes are.

>Entire cast and crew grows increasingly nervous as Nolan makes movies exponentially faster, until he is finally directing film at the speed of light
>Eventually directs a theoretically infinite amount of films every second
>Wipes out Earth

Thanks, Nolan.

Honestly, I like the mistakes like that in his films. I think it gives the characters, and by extension the film, character.

HAH and George Lucas had 10 days to do dozens of pick up shots (getting Hayden to stand here and there so editor can properly insert close ups in certain scenes) yet Lucas missed ONE shot of Anakin at the window so the editor had to use reverse Anakin looking into the window (cos they only had him looking away) thus you can tell this is a reverse shot cos Anakin blinks in reverse

>0:54 minutes into the video
youtube.com/watch?v=_hoXNXSpmng

An user the other day called Lucas lazy for doing this... yet I told him Lucas organized dozens of pick up shots and possibly missed this scene to include more Hayden for the editor to work with.

Yet hearing Nolan who doesn't do ANY pick up shots nor hardly any multiple takes (God help a reshoot) now THAT really surprises me...

What the hell is blinking in reverse?

>I think it gives the characters
yeah but the fucking bad death scene in TDKR isn't given her character user... it instead is making her look like a pathetic actress.

youtube.com/watch?v=SFxQ-EdFl_M

Tobey Maguire?

Seems like a realistic thing.

>one of his favorite tricks is to re-use close-ups at the end of a scene as a sort of 'buffer' to create a transition where he doesn't have to cut on a line. this happens in batman begins in the first scene between cillain murphy and tom wilkinson and in the dark knight in the hospital scene with joker and two-face. it's incredibly jarring -- it's literally the same take used twice in the same scene at different times.

I'm trying to spot them but I can't. Maybe I'm too stupid.

youtube.com/watch?v=pfmkRi_tr9c

youtube.com/watch?v=lzHs9cJ4Bao

Yeah, I know this guy is smiling but it isn't hard to imagine shell shock.

...

>Dunsmirk

Didn't they just slide across a fucking building on a zipline and drop on to GRAVEL at that point? Why don't you edit our your thoughts before committing them to a post.

>Why doesn't Nolan edit those out and fucking try again? Does he only do one take of each scene?

I assume it's to keep his reputation of being able to deliver profitable films within a budget. Although interestingly, since this brought up Kubrick: Kubrick astutely mentioned that the cheapest part of production is doing a few more takes (it also helped that Kubrick used Documentary sized crews, so even if a film took 180 shooting days it still cost half as much as any of his contemporaries).

I assume it saves time in Post-Production to have less coverage, because it forces you to make editing decisions faster. Kind of like how Vincent Gallo dealt with the flashed filmstock on The Brown Bunny.

For the opposite of that approach, look at Baz Lurhman who would deliberately leave out close ups of his stars so his producers would be forced to add "pick up shoots" so Lurhman could... well I don't know what he was hoping to achieve, if you come to the set unprepared, you shouldn't be directing

Says someone who's never been on a film set. You want to know why you do 50 takes (which is rare, even for Kubrick Koobrick)? look at the long take in Touch of Evil, not the first shot, I mean the one in the apartment, or any of the long takes in the Magnificent Ambersons. Beautiful choreography, but the blocking, the physicality feels stiff because the actors are conscious of hitting their marks. Doing more takes gives you more room in the editing suite while at the same time the hitting of marks becomes autonomous and non-conscious for the actors, it becomes a habit so they can add more nuance.

(hillybilly voice) he went and DUN it boys!

Wait, is that what you guys are complaining about? The guy has momentum from the wire, and his feet drags when landing on the loose gravel?
That's a movie mistake? Seems perfectly logical to me.

It's not the actors choice, also it can be hard for an actor to know how well it looked. The actor could think it was awful and it turns out it looked amazing.

Do you really, really believe that Nolan approached the second guy before the filming and said "hey, fall down after you land so it looks more realistic"? Hasn't browsing Sup Forums made you realise how careless and completely inattentive to details he is?

Because they do what thier agent tells them.

This. Actors are on the whole quite a validation seeking bunch and often project onto the director as a kind of father figure.
An actor could be thinking they did a shit job but if Christopher BRAVO Nolan tells them it looked good, it must have looked good. Right? And even if they still disagree, they are contractors, they are paid to do a job, they are paid to realize the director's vision. If they don't like it and aren't the producer, there really isn't enough time to contest it.

DUDE PREQUELS WERE BAD LMAO
this is pure 'kin-o

0:54 eh? Literally no one would have picked that up because it's almost from his back. Even if they didn't put in the shot at all it's not like it would have made or broken the scene, it just smooths the transition from the WIDE to the CLOSE UP.

Normally your eyeslids close rapidly then slowly peel away... I think that's the order anyway?
Point, there is a particular pattern to how your eyes open and close, and it looks weird when you run footage in reverse.

>doesn't storyboard
>doesn't use 2nd unit director

oh it shows

oh come on, even if this was a fact, its a movie. this isnt shit we understand because the audience has never been in this situation. So even if its an authentic reation it still looks like a stupid smile. Things need to be delivered as the audience should precieve it, or else it will be a huge distraction.

What the fuck?
I thought informative threads on Sup Forums were a thing of the past.

bump

Why make shit perfect when humans sperg almost every day?

Nolan did a fantastic fucking job for not making everything perfectly perfect perfectly, it's paradoxicality to always make shit perfect.

In the TDKR case, he didn't even have to reshoot it, he just had to edit it out. I cringe every time I see it.

>American education

gh