Is this the only person who can save DC in this moment?
>>67374850
Ridley scott is the one true savior of the DCucks
>ripping off based cuaron
fuck this hack
cohen brothers should have made watchmen
>implying any self-respecting director would do capeshit
>>67375156
How did he rip him off?
>>67375818
Stole his style and cinematographer
>>67375871
>"stole"
All three of them are close friends, and Lubezki is respected enough to be able to choose his own projects.
>>67375961
The long take thing was definitely cuaron's vision started with y tu mama tambien, i've heard him talk about certain movies that influenced his look
>>67376049
Malick and The Thin Red Line heavily influenced both Cuaron and Inaritu.
>>67375160
i wouldve watched the terry gilliam version honestly
>>67376499
He talks about this mexican movie with long takes I remember, it's about a teacher from the 70s I think
Malick def wasn't the first to do that
>>67376552
If we're just talking about long takes, we can go back to 30s German cinema.
>>67376552
Malick's style isn't long takes, are you retarded?
who gives a fuck? Its just super hero movies for kids
>>67376623
Of course but this is more in tune with his style and more y tu mama tambien, wish I could remember the name of it. Think it was in the extras for y tu actually
He also meet lubezki when he was like 18
>>67374850
>Is this the only person who can save DC in this moment?
He has openly called capeshit cultural genocide, I doubt he would agree to be involved desu.
>>67375160
>cohen brothers
>brothers
check your privilege pls
>>67376652
I know, he's more wandering, docu style. Still wasn't the first
should've been more clear
>>67376745
>Still wasn't the first
Every style has been done before, is that really your point?
>>67376777
Basically, but my initial point was that cuaron/libeling brought it into the mainstream with children of men and inarritu just aped it
>>67376856
Shit, lubezki* not libeling
>>67376745
Malick established his style in the 70s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKGXc_Re-9E
>>67376898
Malick's style has changed radically from the 70s
>>67376856
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgSqCf6rafA
This came out before Children of Men, and was a much more popular film. Who really brought the style into the mainstream?
>>67374850
George Miller.
>>67376918
No it hasn't. His first film is very different from the rest of his oeuvre, but Days of Heaven is very much similar to everything else he's done.
IS IT TOO LATE NOW TO SAY SORRY
just go wild and let Todd Solondz direct a DC movie
FUCK OFF WITH THIS MEME DIRECTOR I DON'T WANT A SCENE IN WHICH SUPERMAN IS STANDING ALONE IN THE FORREST THINKING ABOUT HIS LIFE FOR 2 HOURS WITHOUT SPEAKING A WORD
>>67377002
Find me a low angle, wide lens Steadicam shot focused almost entirely on the actor in Days of Heaven and I'll start eating grass
>>67377139
>Find me a low angle, wide lens Steadicam shot focused almost entirely on the actor in Days of Heaven
A style isn't just a single type of shot. What a fucking ridiculous argument. There isn't any such shot in The New World, yet you wouldn't say that that film is aesthetically dissimilar to the rest of his work.
>>67377284
>A style isn't just a single type of shot.
Then what are you talking about, the editing? How Malick's films have gradually become less narrative focused? How he's shifted from period films to contemporary semi-autobiographical works?
>>67377284
>There isn't any such shot in The New World,
Hmm?
>>67377025
SORRY, PLEASE, COME BACK?
>>67377445
Contemporary settings like 17th century America and 1950s Texas? Less narrative focused, as if there's less of a narrative throughline in The New World and The Thin Red Line than there is in Days of Heaven?
>Hmm?
Are you going to find an example?
>>67377715
Do you know that he's made To the Wonder and Knight of Cups as well?
>Are you going to find an example?
I found at least two. Find me just one shot in Days of Heaven like these.
>>67377851
Suck a dick
I expect an apology
>>67377962
>no Steadicam
>no wide angle lens
>no response to his stylistic evolution detailed here >>67377445
I know it's easy to /thread your own argumentespecially when you post from your ghetto phone :^)
>>67378070
>no steadicam
A rudimentary form of stedicam was literally invented for Days of Heaven.
>no wide angle lens
The first New World shot you posted wasn't shot with a wide angle lense. There were also technical restrictions in the 70s that aren't present in the current day, and a single stylistic choice doesn't make the entire work dissimilar.
>no response to his stylistic evolution
Half of the form was invented during Days of Heaven, the second half during his next film, The Thin Red Line. Hardly a slow shift.
>>67375156
"based cuaron" ripped off malick
lubezki himself said several times that the style that has made him famous was fruit of his partneship with terry. they both developed it
