...and small time rental house in Copenhagen.
That the clock didn't make sense.... I was waiting for that to show up.
I think that little detail almost deserves its own thread, because its touching a subject that humans in general could benefit a lot from understanding or working out.
To me "doesn't make sense" means that there is something I can feel on an intuitive level is true, but I do not have the language to put it into human words.
It brings on the whole idea of how a 1 dimensional being can't understand a 2 dimensional that can't understand a 3 dimensional that can't understand....
But I willing to accept and entertain the idea, it just feels right.
Do we need to find out, to prove it? I'm not sure we do... I think sometimes the proof itself will almost magically appear simply from accepting it.
Energy on its most basic level holds much more secrets than we currently know or understand.
I think it's always important to remember that all movies will have a crowd of fans and a crowd of haters. That's just how it goes... a natural form of balance. And when the love is at its highest, the haters will pound it more.
I don't really care for the science fact in this movie... who really cares to be honest? You were there to watch a piece of fiction and if you are to enjoy any movie fully you have to subject yourself fully to its premise regardless of how far fetched the idea is.... otherwise, why would we watch horror movies or movies like Transformers?
The pace was pretty remarkable. I tried not to consciously notice too much about the movie as I was seeing it, but one thing I did notice was how nice the pace was.
There was no unnecessary dilly dally. It was straight to the point and tight in the editing.
I find it hard to discuss the structure, mainly because we have no verified evidence of ANY sort that can tell us wether or not it could happen as it did. Frankly I don't give a hoot to real life science, because science only understands a fraction of what is out there, so who are they to say anyways? Science can't even help not messing up the world as it is right now...
But from a fictional point of view, I found it to connect rather well through the ages. I mean, the time dialation wasn't too messed up that I couldn't accept the idea... again, put yourself into the premise of the movie and enjoy it.
About the sound... from what I've heard, it seems to vary from theatre to theatre. Maybe even from person to person.... we are not all the same and respond to sound as well as sight in different ways. One will person will pick up subtle nuances, while others will here a blob of incoherent sounds.
I found that the sound was very good at involving me in the movie. At some point I found myself grabbing my seat because the floor was actually rumbling during one of the more intense scenes.... now that's a treat!
The same goes for the dialogue issues or non-issues. I imagine that being in a situation like that myself, I would have trouble hearing clearly what my co-pilot was saying and that made it more "real" to me.
The whole film thing.
We are on the verge of the death of film, and that's a tough place to be. So much is coming out of Hollywood that is crispy and clear... for once it was to see sci-fi movie that was more organic in its look. The teal and orange look wasn't overused and the general lighting scheme was pleasant, even the few times where the natural hotspots due to the intense light coming from the source in space.
But what I like the most about films like Inception and Interstellar is how you can play around with the ending after the movie was over.
In Inception we see the spinning top as Cobb had finally returned home, and the last millisecond we see it make a small jud like it's about to topple, but we don't see it topple.... so was it all in his head?
The same thing can be said about Interstellar.
Until reading this article I was set on it being an ending ending.... you know, not too much fuss. But I can totally accept the fact that Cooper is dead and all this was last neurons firing in his brain.
I think that premise gets easier to understand if you have ever tried psychedelics and coming close to the concept of ego-death, since what happens during a trip of mushrooms fx. is that you starve the brain from blood.
In my world that would mimic sort of what it would be like to actually die.
I know I had plenty of flashbacks during those 4 hours of fun as well as floating around in outerspace...
I liked it for the exact opposite reasons.... The lack of detail felt much more organic that those oversharpned things coming out of hollywppd these days.
I absolutely love the lighting and grading. Every single bit of it....
And ofcourse I was busy been sucked in instead of pixelpeeping a movie in the theatre. Seriously, even when you work in this business why would you spend time looking for whats wrong? Just enjoy the damn thing..... In opposition I felt like the story of Gravity was so damn BORING and her character immensely annoying that I didnt get to enjoy the visuals. But I recall them being not as fantastic as Interstellars.
Makes good sense...... someone totally unrelated to the film industry, once taught me that wisdom is teached from the bottom up.
If there's one thing you can't learn from old timers, it's about how you achieve today what they achieved "back then".
It's almost as stupid as the whole "oh we gotta save film" debate that Scorsese was part of as well...
Old timers always try to maintain some kind of status quo because they like what is, rather than accept what is coming. Of course their way of doing movies will fade away... it's called progression and that's the way it should be.
In 20 years, the young generation of that time will look back at today and try to argue that we all have to keep LED lights in the streets. And they wont even mention sodium...
So yeah.... movement, motivation, techniques and so on, those things are almost inherant to human nature, because in most cases they will try to act as how you'd react in the given situation. If you go out and make movies and are succesfull in using those techniques the right way that compliments the film, then people will begin to notice you as a cinematographer.
Unless ofcourse you just happen to know the right people...... that little detail can never be underestimated. Nepotism is a bitch, and unfortunately works very well.
Skyfall was shot mainly with one camera..... Lucy was shot mainly with one camera, some of the action sequences was even shot single cam.
If you are a lighting wiz I would stick to having more rigging options. With a two camera setup you need to plan more and maybe place the lights higher to allow for cams to frame and you might end up with compromising the light.
And he's damn good at it. His scenes always have that eerie surrealism to them and the style is just perfect.
I love when build sets can accomplish this kind of feel.