Will this shot ever be topped?

Will this shot ever be topped?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/T0kobbjpdUg
youtu.be/c_9iv9HwO5Q
youtu.be/1fAk0CObPE4
youtu.be/nsy7P48EL2o
icgmagazine.com/web/humanity-2-0/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

If Griffith was still alive he'd kill himself in jealousy

I can't even tell if I'm looking up or down at the car. Shit shot desu

Back to capeshit with you, kid

>not one of the flyover shots of LA

Both look like a foggy mess
Digital was a mistake

Based YIFY

this

BR2049 is capeshit

"No!"

This is what we call a "scene", which may or may not be composed of different shots as its basic subdivision

Yup. Literally looks like marvel capeshit.

u niggers are ass at picking shots

>Elvis scene

i liked the scene that went BRAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPP

I'm sure in the next pleb pandering flick that easily impressed videogame consuming plebs think is "kino" will have one

in fact based on your shot alone it'll be from ready player one considering your millennial riddled sensibility

KINO KINO KINO KINO KINO KINO

Gif version

Reminder that this low light shot can't be done without a digital camera

It was already topped by "You look like a good Joe"

>Not watching Blade Runner 2022

BASED VILLENEUVE

...

Reminder that a shot like this is nearly impossible to pull off with a film camera.

...

NO NO ITS KINO
BASED KINO
BASED DEAKINS BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW ANYONE ELSE BUT CHIVO

This is cool, but sadly all lost in digital color grading shit in post production.
I loved BR 2049 and I had no idea they used real buildings for shooting. You literally can't fucking tell. It all looks like homogenous cgi cancer just like any capeshit/star wars flick of the past 10 years.

God I love this film so much.

it was a timeskip you cuck

Fucking gorgeous

That was one of the worst shots in the movie. YOu could clearly tell it was a set. Fucking capeshit children ruining Sup Forums

The sound editing in this scene was fucking amazing

That's why it will Best Production Design but won't even be nominated for Best Cinematography

I dont think its got any oscar noms

>Wave machine

Reminder that this post is anti/tv/
The fan base of this movie is not locals

>set photo looks this good

What happened to your pasta saying only reddit tourists like a film during release and real Sup Forums oldfags stay for he torrent and trash the movie?

I'm still waiting faggot

...

this is fucking nuts

looks dishonest

What did he mean by this?

I want the fucking car apparently Peugeot built them one that actually drives

Is this a new epic meymey?

No idea

D E A K I N S
I
N
O

But it's true

It's still accurate. And your post in my image is 100% proof of that, anti Sup Forums scum.

The worst part however is this image where you pretend you're Sup Forums AFTER the fact that you made the other post. This is the fucking worst kind of dishonesty and now that you've confirmed that you're against the actual progress of a film on here is more than enough proof.

Compulsory viewing

youtu.be/T0kobbjpdUg
youtu.be/c_9iv9HwO5Q
youtu.be/1fAk0CObPE4
youtu.be/nsy7P48EL2o

Oh and you're a capeshitter. You are inauthentic to the fucking bone just like this movie.

Pathetic needing to use the archive and not just discuss the movie. You attack the poster but not the movie.

Then how is the vast majority of Sup Forums even now praising the film after seeing it for the first time torrented?

If you couldn't tell there was some models used, you're a pleb.

The buildings outside K's windows are also 1/3 scale models

what was the point of this scene though
like how did he not know his waifu was a product? or did he forget?

Everything you want to hear.

What's so great about this shot OP ?

Ofcourse he knew, he most probably saw that ad about a thousand times before. His awareness of her programming and being a corporate product is obvious in that scene where Joi tells him that she loves him and he replies "You don't have to say that"
But now the context is what's important, moments ago he realised that he is not special at all, had no childhood, is denied a fatherly figure he met, has no past or purpose and realises that all that "special" talk from Joi was a ruse. And that's the point where he chooses to deny both Wallace and the rebellion and make his first truly individual choice of his life by reuniting a father with his daughter and by that becoming special like he always wanted.

It tickles his faux movie buff sensibilities. He'll go on facebook/twitter/socialmedia site#223 and prattle on about how much of a discerning viewer he is then log into /vg/

but it doesn't look good
i don't care if it was hard to make

Normie brains react positively to orange and tile digital coloring.

>digital coloring
That entire shot is done completely in-camera

...

>mfw all these 1080p rips with sub 8000 bitrate

Prove it wasn't 'enhanced'. The glow looks fake as shit.

Us patricians am I right?

Why are pleb so easily impressed?

Ok but why is that important?

This is a set photo look at the lighting, and the last scene used a wave machine im sure it was as natural as possible it's pretty dark nothing heavy to grade or digitally color anyways and they built real models of the cars

Because every shot in the film is primarily made in-camera, like this icgmagazine.com/web/humanity-2-0/

Im dum, enlighten me please.

>Visually, the scene posed a particular challenge for Deakins. “It’s supposed to be dark, so I didn’t want to put lights outside the craft but we still needed to see where we were and to see the action involved.We decided to go for it. We said let’s just make it sothe lights coming from the vehicle itself are the light sources, creating pools of light surrounded by complete darkness. I think this effect makes the scene more scary but it was also quite scary for me.”

> Not unironically paying $20 on iTunes for a 4k version to support the movie.
It's too bad Sup Forums is too poor to actually patronage the kino it likes.

Because a digital camera can work in extremely low light conditions and still pick up all the details needed, while a film camera needs far more light in the scene for such a scene to work, otherwise it would just be a grainy completely dark frame.

Right, thanks.
Who uses film nowadays anyway?

it's a webrip
4kHDR will be available January 16th

Is 20 bucks a lot of money in your third world country, daniel?

4k UHD is already being sold online.

uhh... no

I don't care if they had actual lights and a fog machine on set, they still fucked it up in post-production. That particular type of shit-tier cgi bloom is added to almost every shitty movie nowadays, and it looks like dogshit every single time.

It's not bloom? Do you even know what bloom is?

The effect your probably thinking is bloom is from the water(they used real water) filling scene and it gets misty when thrown around so much

>almost 3 hours long
>still want more

fuck, i loved this movie

Fucking terrible taste

you don't know what you're talking about. literally your entire argument is
>ugh, all movies have bad CGI nowadays. reddit told me so
>ugh, all movies have orange and teal oversaturation. this is bad because reddit told me so
>this movie has bright colors that looks like CGI and looks orange and teal. This is bad, because someone told me so

The whole scene is the most kino we've seen in ages. The editing is masterful. The setting is perfectly used. The soundtrack.

KINO

You must be blind to not see the difference between real light and cgi bulshit. It hasn't improved since Sky Captain.
Dank memes. Upvoted.

You're a ding dong, br0. If you're in the USA, it's on VUDU.

Hmmmmm this is a set photo

Are you retarded?

OH NO I CAN SEE BLOOM ON THESE CARS HEADLIGHTS FAKE NEWS!!!

This proves their point though because the blacks aren't true enough they are blueish

This is a very good question. Why does it matter? Gear fags will tell you anything that pushes the technology to its limits automatically makes the film K I N O. I think a composition has to say a lot more than just being technologically impressive. The audience doesn't see that, and thinking of the gear involved in the film is good if you wanna make films, but it might take you out of the film. It's one thing to be impressed by the artists craft, and through that there's a window to that artists mind. But what else can be said about the composition? Does it have a lot of depth? As in, is there a lot going on on multiple fields of distance, i.e. The foreground, middle ground and background? Is it visually striking, in its use of placing objects or landscapes into patterns or shapes, while simultaneously telling a story? A shot that can do all of that is stimulating.

dat deakins deakodedikotography (virtually impossible to do with a film camera)

>plebs are actually impressed by this
>when the original is more impressive on a technical level

...

Heres the last shot plebs like OP praised

Can you even read?

He allowed himself to forget, like how he allowed himself to believe he was real for a moment.

So is OP's pic, retard. It's graded, CGI spew, done in post production

post a good shot then, user, instead of shitposting

...

>men small
>woman big