>DUDE LOOK HOW GOOD WE ARE AT CINEMATOGRAPHY AND CHOREOGRAPHY LMAO
When will this "epin one take" meme end? Total self conscious immersion breaker. Any time it happens you can practically feel the director breathing down your neck smugly waiting to hear your impressed words of approval.
Any time this was used and it didn't just come across like an IMDB "fedora tip" moment?
Other notable distracting examples:
Children Of Men
True Detective episode 4.
Boogie Nights
That Fargo season 1 episode
The Revenant (predicted)
>>63611347
hello reddit
>>63611347
hello reddit
>>63611347
You memeing autist shitlord
Go fuck your anime pillow until you get hungry and yell at your mom to make you mac and cheese.
>>63611347
the fuck are you on about?
why do I still come to this shithole
It was actually done really well in Birdman. You don't even think about it when you watch the film. If you want a meme one-take movie check out Victoria.
>>63611347
You missed the point of the one take thing.
>>63611347
it's part of the obnoxious "realism" trend which is basically capeshit for pretentious asshats. movies that are "based on true events", dramatized documentaries, and pseudointellectuals thrillers shot with grainy cinematography are all branches of the genre.
storytelling should be allowed to be a bit abstract, but stories based in the real world mostly have to be shot for max "realism" now.
>>63611347
hello reddit
>>63611428
because you want to forget about all those times your dad fucked you bareback in the ass
>>63611347
>someone does something skilful or interesting in a piece of art
>chorus of pseudo-intellectuals accuse the artist of being a showoff because they're insecure
every time
>>63611347
It's like that because it's a movie about plays you dumb twat
Russian Ark was actually filmed in one take. Check it out.
>hurrr how dare artists care about the look of their film?!
>every film should be shot like a Marvel Studios production and everything should look bland and uninteresting and just tell the story efficiently with no nuance or subtext REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>63611492
and Victoria
>>63611347
Hes a good director. Your opinion don't matter.
>>63611445
This.
>>63611347
>The Revenant (predicted)
Oh come on
>>63611462
roflmao +0.5 for the laugh +0.5 for the epic burn
>>63611347
>wants to whine about cinematography
>posts a photo representing mise-en-scene, lightning, and set design instead
>>63611347
Hellooooo, Reddddiiiiitt!@!!!!! XWDDDDD
>>63611595
>trying this hard
are you a fucking retard? i just googled 'birdman' and put the first picture that popped up
long takes are the best, fuck off
>>63611506
Making your shot complicated and long for the sake if it being complicated and long is just immersion breaking masturbation. If It actually worked in service of the film rather than just coming across like a self conscious monument to the film maker's great skill then it wouldn't be a problem.
If you start to notice the length of the shot then you've failed. Avengers did exactly the same kind of gimmicky memery if I recall. Can't speak to the more recent capeshits since Avengers 1 is where I jumped off the train.
>>63611674
Hello IMDB.
>>63611700
long takes are the opposite of immersion-breaking you fucking pleb. You only notice the length of the shots because you are looking for something to complain about
>>63611347
Watch Hitchcock's Rope, OP.
>>63611595
lighting is cinematography you dumb fucking idiot. holy fucking shit.
>>63611674
This. The long takes in creed were amazing
>>63611792
>long takes are the opposite of immersion-breaking you fucking pleb
Done right. Done wrong they simply come across as masturbatory grandstanding. The film dissolves away before your eyes and all you're left with is an image of the director tipping his "film buff" hat and waiting for applause.
If it actually worked to draw you into the scene rather than distance you by making it so obvious you're watching something contrived and constructed then it would be okay.
>>63611370
>>63611383
>>63611415
christ, at least banepost or something
>>63611347
Victoria
I agree OP. Although the Boogie Nights one was bad, PTA learned his lesson. There's an incredibly long one-shot in Magnolia, but it's so well-done you may not even realize that it's a one-shot, and it serves a narrative purpose of introducing a set that itself is labyrinthine. It happens when the quiz boy and his dad first get to the studio.
>>63613653
Here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDMdzg_QmxM
Victoria completely misses the point of long takes, then again it's made by germans, what else could be expected.
>>63614013
The first half of Victoria was really good.
>>63611347
Didn't some Noé film have almost exactly the same shot?
>>63614537
Enter The Void had the meme lights too
>>63611700
>>63611700
>If you start to notice the length of the shot then you've failed
>20 minute shot in Hunger of Fass talking
I think the trend is getting a little tired by now, sure, but
>thinking immersion breaking is a problem
>in a magical realism commentary on its own medium
>using the word "immersion" outside the context of video games at all
Come on, son.
>not posting the goat one take movie
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kp8wcV3GjW0
>>63614917
It ended up descending into silly bullshit.
What did you guys like about Victoria aside from its technical merits? I thought it was a relatively bad movie that impresses people with a gimmick like boyhood did but I'd like to hear a good defense senpai
>>63611347
+++++ I'm glad people are starting to speak out against meme cinematography. It has destroyed cinema pretty much.
>>63611963
>>63613653
Long takes are boring as fuck. They tend to frame their character in the center, making a totally boring shot that is only interesting due to its length. Long takes are the epitome of white kids joining film school for the first time.
>>63616232
The girl was cute and the strobing lights at the start made it seem like it was going to be art until it turned into some bad before sunrise crap and then turned again into some cliche crime movie.
Post a movie with great cinematography OP
>>63611492
I like that OP is such a pleb that he only listed the IMDb examples he knows (because he's actually from there) and not Russian Ark. Which is probably worse than all the ones this faggot listed because Sokurov spent so much time and resources in rehearsing his big single take that he forgot to pay attention to the sound in post-production (never mind the awful, shallow story) with the end result being that the movie sounds like all the dialogue and sounds were recorded in a week in his bathroom. I wonder what Tarkovsky would've thought of his protege resorting to this kind of gimmick in his films - probably would've called his film trash of the highest order and berated him (with a leash) for being a pleb.
>>63616536
I didn't mention it because I haven't watched it. It always sounded like the "techical exercise" kind of movie that would piss me off.
>>63616613
>I didn't mention it because I haven't watched it.
Maybe you should and then form your own opinion, you memer?
>>63616515
When cinematography is good, you should not notice. Richardson is a good one, he is a cinematographers cinematographer. No one ever sees his movies and gushes about the lights and shots. They are just totally immersed in the director's epic storytelling.
>>63611419
>yelling at your mom
Sounds like a good way to lose your GBP's desu
You should have to take an IQ test before you post on this board. People like OP would be filtered out instantly and sent back to reddit completely fixing /tv/
>>63616536
Russian Ark and Cannes-core in general is utter garbage, I agree that Tarkovsky would hate it
>>63616747
>he has such a boring and bland visual style no one gives a shit about him
OK.
>>63616714
>Maybe you should and then form your own opinion, you memer?
When there is already enough information on the surface level for me to be able to tell that I hate it then watching it would just be a waste of time. I could use those 2 hours to watch something that I didn't already know my opinion on.
>>63616747
Asthetic as fuck, even the curly headed guy is like "damn!"
>>63616823
>I could use those 2 hours to watch something that I didn't already know my opinion on.
Like a Tarantino flick?
>complaining about mis en scene
>call it cinematography
?
>>63616856
No. I already know my opinion on every movie Tarantino will make for the rest of his career. It's all hot fanwank trash.
>>63616956
Then why did you post this >>63616747?
>>63611859
terrible, boring film. the apex of gimmickry.
>>63616998
I didn't. Django Unchained was fucking terrible. I assume that was one of my enemies trying to discredit me.
>>63617051
Schizophrenia is a serious condition, anon. Have you got it checked out?
Major key right here. Calling OP a faggot is a key to success. Follow me anons on the journey through more success. I promise you. Bless up. Another one.
I really hated this movie.
>>63617421
So did all fans of cinema. It's the type of film only made for film critics to chuckle to each other about how "clever" it is. No one will ever make a great film because they saw Birdman.
>>63617051
Then why don't you answer the question here
>>63616515
>>63617711
Jaws - Spielberg.
>>63617421
*grabs him by the throat*
back off!
![The-Great-Beauty-Movie-Poster-Large[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/4m7LTwH.jpg "The-Great-Beauty-Movie-Poster-Large[1].jpg")
>>63611347
I totally agree with you.
>>63611700
How exactly, in ways that Birdman or whatever else you listed failed to achieve, do you make long takes work in service of the film?
I don't think you have an answer to that because your critique has no thought to it. You just notice it's there and that annoys you for some arbitrary reason. You think every single little thing in a film production has to add some thematic value to the plot? To be honest it does work that way for Birdman as the long takes very much give it a theatrical play kind of edge to it. To me, long takes are one of the best ways to immerse me in a film, or a scene for that matter. It makes it seem much more real and like there's much less moviemaking trickery behind the scenes, in a way what you can see in a long take often tends to be much closer to what you could see if you were in the film in person.
>>63611383
>>63611415
>>63611454
>>63611625
>>63616790
Hello Reddit!
>>63611347
don't forget the "woah so epic" episode of game of thrones that had a tracking shot. terrible.
That episode of Always Sunny in Philadelphia is the only piece of cinema to do the long take gimmick well. Prove me wrong.
>>63617805
>posts a Soreasstino flick
>>63611347
long takes in artsy/drama-movies are sometimes annoying like this, especially if they are overused to the point where you think the director is obsessed with them.
HOWEVER, long-takes in fight-scenes or action-scenes never get old. I wouldn't care if the director were sitting next to me in the theater whispering in my ear "impressed yet?" - I would still love the one-take-boxing-match from Creed >>63611674
But honestly I dont even think about directors looking for praise when I see action movies, because it's a fucking action movie. If a director wants praise they do not make an action movie.
one take fight scene:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79ditPebZ8g
>>63618240
>t. teenager
i'll take good editing over a good tracking shot any day of the week
>>63618240
>especially if they are overused to the point where you think the director is obsessed with them
Steve McQueen does this
>>63618240
>>63618300
>>63618318
What do you think about people like Tarkovsky, Tarr or Angelopoulos whose entire style consists of long takes?
>>63618115
Do you know the name or episode number?
>>63618446
There's a difference between flashy long takes and slow, meditative ones. One evokes an atmosphere and immerses, the other is masturbation.
>>63618616
>creating excitement is masturbation
>>63618240
>Ronin.webm
they don't really film like that anymore, do they? I wouldn't call those "long takes" though. Just steadier and longer than what you usually see nowadays.
It looks like the kind of takes they used to use for older action movies like 70s james bond
>>63618701
"Entertainment" scenes in general are masturbation.
>>63618968
I tried masturbating to the hospital scene in Werckmeister Harmonies, but I kept thinking about the whale.
>>63618446
I think it can be distracting, especially when they try to force something that is almost always done with multiple cuts (for example, two people sitting across from each-other at a table while talking) in one long take. It ends up just looking stupid and makes you wonder "why did they think it would be a good idea to not just use cuts here?"
The worst I saw was a movie where 2 people were talking at a table like I said and the camera would keep panning back and forth to each character as he was talking. It was retarded, anyone know what movie I'm talking about?
>>63613808
Magnolia was shit
>>63619136
The fedoraman crawls out of his pit to grace us with more of his video game induced ramblings.
>>63611347
>>DUDE LOOK HOW GOOD WE ARE AT CINEMATOGRAPHY AND CHOREOGRAPHY LMAO
You sound violently retarded, seek a cliff.
>When will this "epin one take" meme end? Total self conscious immersion breaker.
Actually it would help with immersion. You're also watching a film, you piece of shit, not playing your nintendos.
Just admit you're angry about the director being a spic, stop hurting that protobrain of yours trying to produce actual film discussion.
creed too.
>>63611449
>le trend
Shut the fuck up, you goddamn mongoloid. Not everything you dislike is a trend or a meme.
You have the analytical skills of a sea urchin.
>>63619195
>Actually it would help with immersion
Artificial immersion is ironically the most immersion breaking thing possible. It is the concept of immersion and engagment put through the chris pratt reddit meme gangam style filter. It's like every frame is a fresh new meme and they're hitting you with them 24 times a second.
>>63611700
>Making your shot complicated and long for the sake if it being complicated and long is just immersion breaking masturbation
Seeking "immersion" for the sake of immersion is just videogamer pandering garbage. Also go talk about complicated scenes to Scorsese and call him a fuckup for directing Goodfellas.
My god, you're a fucking piece of shit.
>>63619278
You sound like a meme.
>>63616420
>They tend to frame their character in the center
Is this the anti-cinema discussion thread? Where our misconceptions of film theory are so completely and irreparably fucked, we actually argue in opposites?
How did you manage to get to this point, garbage boy?
>>63611449
>>63611347
IT WAS DONE AS A TRIBUTE TO GODARD BECAUSE INARRITU LIKES GODARD
BREATHLESS CAME OUT IN 1960 THIS ISNT A TREND
I HATE YOU FUCKING REDDITOR ENTRY LEVEL SHITHEADS
>>63616338
Replying to your own bullshit doesn't make it any more relevant or worth reading, you rat fuck.
>>63611347
It's so dense.
>>63618565
charlie work
>>63616789
It's ok. I'll get them back with some proper dicking. It never fails.
We're all gonna make it, pham.
>>63616956
Nice blanket statement, shitdick. This pretty much shows how worth it it's to read your hot opinions.
>>63611766
God tier episode
>>63619324
The Goodfellas one is actually good since the thrill and excitement it conveys works in service of the themes and characters. It's not just a bunch of pointless complicated shit thrown in there purely to be "impressive". An example of a bad one would be true detective where it's just flashy crap there only for it's own sake.
>>63611347
I liked the filming I just thought that the movie itself was kind of dumb
>>63617593
>I didn't get anything out of it, it must be pretentious trash.
And the fact that you didn't get anything out of it and are vehemently trying to ad-hominem it into ridicule is why your opinions are a joke, and you should never be listened to.
>>63619278
what the fuck is "artificial immersion"? You literally just made that term up. The whole meaning of immersion is to make the viewer feel engrossed in the inherently-artificial content of the movie. "Artificial immersion" makes no sense; you're either actually immersed or you aren't.
>>63618115
>That episode of Always Sunny in Philadelphia is the only piece of cinema
It's time to stop posting.
>>63619517
>It's not just a bunch of pointless complicated shit thrown in there purely to be "impressive".
Neither is this movie, it serves the urgency of the plot rather well. You're poorly equipped to have this discussion, perhaps you should stop.
>>63619558
You can do immersion properly or you can go for sleazy cheap immersion through gimmick techniques. It's like the difference between having a genuinely erotic scene. You can have it subtle and sexy through the performances and writing or you can just pay a whore to whip her fake tits out. That is the Lubezki approach.
It's good for anything that's an impressive feat, like a fight scene
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXIpgg58xDg
All the mad Birdman fanboys.. movie was shit. Hard to make? Probably, still shit though.
>hurr durr u must lovee avengarsss
Fucking plebs. Birdman is the reddiest movie of all time, right above Gravity. Both Shit.
>>63619694
>You can do immersion properly or you can go for sleazy cheap immersion through gimmick techniques.
Stop saying "immersion", you fat joke. You're so clearly from /v/ it hurts to read.
>>63619763
I've been actively battling against video game culture for the last 10 years of my life. Nice try though.
>>63619708
>Hannah
>>63619708
See this just stinks of gimmick laden IMDB fedoracore.
>>63619753
>lol y'all just mad, ha ha
So we're pretty much done here, aren't we?
What an attention-seeking retard.
>>63619500
this
/film/ can't come soon enough
>>63619278
Meme meme meme meme meme meme, meme meme meme meme meme meme. Meme meme, meme: meme.
>>63619278
>>63619694
there is no such thing as immersion that is not actually immersive. If the director tried to make the shot immersive and failed, then you don't call it "artificial immersion", you call it a bad shot
>>63619278
Spot the /v/irgin: the post.
>>63619800
>I've been actively battling against video game culture for the last 10 years of my life.
lol
>>63620035
>If the director tried to make the shot immersive and failed, then you don't call it "artificial immersion", you call it a bad shot
I call it artificial when people without a cinematic education get tricked into being immersed. If you ask a builder to fix your bathroom wall and he does some bullshit job where it will hold together just long enough for him to get paid and leave town your wall hasn't been fixed, even if you think it may have been, when an expert comes and tells you that the wall in fact is still broken, and that the "fixing" job that you'd thought had occurred was only an artificial one.
>>63620007
hey faggot!
/film/ is NEVER coming!
http://catalog.neet.tv/stats.html
>>63620130
That is not how it works with art/entertainment. You can actually prove without any doubt that a builder did a poor job fixing your bathroom wall, but if you think something is not immersive while other people do, then there is no way to "prove" to the world that it isn't immersive since that's only your own interpretation. Basically, your idea rests on the notion that your own opinions are infallible
>>63620429
>Basically, your idea rests on the notion that your own opinions are infallible
Anybody who doesn't believe that is a weak piece of shit. You should never compromise your beliefs. If you were the stronger man then you will come out on top. If you come out on bottom then you didn't deserve to live anyway. I have more devotion to my cause then any one else on this board so I will never be toppled. I will always be here arguing longer then any of my enemies.
>>63620528
well that's just like, your opinion, man
>>63611383
>>63611415
>>63611454
>>63611625
>>63618067
Can Hiro filter this word already? Its gets annoying as hell
>>63620528
>I will always be here arguing longer then any of my enemies.
No you won't.
>>63611347
>Children Of Men
I remember some fucking article on AV club arguing this years back and it was bullshit then and now. The continuous shot during the forest scene in the car really sold the overwhelming feeling of being caught in a sudden unexpected attack with no chance to process it beyond just reacting on instinct and made the death of Julianne Moore's character seem shocking in a real-life, delayed reaction kind of way that I don't really see how you could achieve otherwise. No one should care that some asshole wannabe directors/cinematographers "found it distracting" (ie. got butthurt they couldn't pull something like that off or wouldn't be creative enough to think of it - "oh but that's just flash, real cinematography serves the story and comes from the heart" - fuck off)
>>63622503
The car scene is good. The scene through the battle at the end of the movie is bad.
>>63622555
I don't really have as strong opinions on that one but do you have any complaints about it besides that it was distracting to the small section of the audience that finds that sort of thing unnecessarily flashy? How would more cuts have made it better?
If I was a cinematographer the only thing going through my mind when watching a long shot is all the other ways I could have shot it. Long shots all tend to have the same feeling (usually urgency or chaos). I wouldn't say long shots themselves are bad, but limiting yourself to long shots with a character always centered in the frame as this anon mentioned >>63616420 is disappointing when you consider the limitless ways the scene potentially could've have been shot.
>>63611347
What Fargo season 1 episode?
>>63623146
Cinematographers are the biggest douches in the biz. Now that reddit made them a meme I expect it's going to get a lost worse.
>>63623662
>Cinematographers are the biggest douches in the biz.
Why?
>>63611674
Wait, was -this- the long take everyone creamed their pants over in Creed? Or does it keep going past the end of the webm? Because otherwise this take is simple as fuck.
>>63621047
It'd be nice, wouldn't it?
>>63611347
Children of men did it right.
But i fucking hated it in goodfellas. Felt like the most forced shit I've ever seen, with the main character waiving for us to follow, saying hi to everyone, and all the extras are just too perfectly in sync with everything that's going on.
>>63624621
thats a tiny clip of it. The entire match is filmed in one take that lasts probably around 5 minutes, ending in round 2 (each round is 2 minutes).
Video:
http://www.nytimes.com/video/movies/100000004072961/anatomy-of-a-scene-creed.html
>inb4 director has a nigga voice
>>63624069
Ummm maybe because they're smug as hell? They think they're so fucking smart and talented just because they get to hold the camera. Fucking douche bags
>>63620167
is this image supposed to prove something? /film/ is already confirmed, get over it.
