what's the most technically impressive film ever made? picrelated
>movie takes place in 2027
Nice to see we're right on schedule, minus the infertility part
>>70950595
keep your fingers crossed we might still get it
>>70950595
No, the movie came out in 2007. It takes place in like 2027 or something.
>>70952237
Did I miss something or are you retarded?
For it's time, I would say 2001 A Space Odyssey or Blade Runner, but overall I have to agree with OP.
Why didn't they show the baby coming out of the dudes pee hole?
Birdman
>>70950470
Forgive my plebiness, what made this technically impressive? The single take action scenes?
>>70952484
That, as well as the impressive set design and damn near flawless special effects.
>>70952484
i'd say the combination of single takes and the special effects.
regardless of if you enjoyed it or not it was an absolutely great visual experience
>>70952484
yeah i dont understand this either
i would have to say jurassic park, especially considering when it came out
>>70952512
>impressive set design
I'll have to rewatch it, I liked the set design but I didn't remember anything being so amazing it made me think it was amazing. I liked the minimalistic approach to the science fiction elements though, it was really fitting. The historical references were great too.
I did like the special effects though, they were also used sparingly and we're appropriately low key
>>70950470
Cuarón is based at technical achievements.
>>70952781
Why the fuck doesn't he get money for more movies? Everything he does makes bank and is loved by critics.
Not the most but the movie Sorcerer has some great special effects done through a horrifying process that nearly bankrupted Friedkin.
>>70950470
>Clive Owen's love interest letting herself get shot by the dude on the bike
Was there a specific reason why she didn't just duck down?
>>70952858
>love interest
She was his ex-wife.
>>70950470
Fury Road
>>70950470
This movie is a huge pile of pretentious shit.
>>70952874
It's almost 3am here and I haven't seen the movie in a while
>>70952829
I absolutely love CoM, but Gravity did lack in the writing, acting, and casting department (except the voice of Ed Harris, he can literally do no wrong).
To answer your question though, I think Alfonso Cuarón (and his brother) just takes his sweet, sweet time writing and refining screenplays.
I'm looking forward to his next project whenever that is, that's for sure.
>>70950470
You're all plebs. The answers probably 'Intolerance: Love's Struggle Through the Ages,' which was made nearly 100 years ago and still has the biggest sets ever constructed for a movie, or one of Jackie Chan's bigger spectacle movies, maybe Police Story 3. Nobody can replicate what Jackie Chan and his team are willing to do without lame computer effects and cutting that are barely half as fun to watch.
>>70952905
What the actual fuck. You're like on a whole another level of plebiness.
I mean, I can understand if someone calls a Terrence Malick movie pretentious even though I disagree, but Children Of Men? Like what the fuck.
test
>>70952905
>children of men
> pretentious
Literally what the actual fuck man, do you know what that word means?
Even if you don't try to look into any of the meaning of it all, it's still a great action movie.
>>70952417
I wish I saw 2001 in a theater. It caters to it so much.
>>70952905
here ya go, kiddo.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=definition+of+pretentious
>>70952858
That part of the scene did seem very awkward,like they were all siting still just watching the motobike in front of them.
>>70950470
based off a comic ... nah
>>70953102
It was based off a book you retard.
>this thread
Are you guys serious? Am I being memed here?
I mean the movies mentioned here are technically impressive, yeah, but they're not the MOST impressive.
Pic related is my pick, I think there are more technically impressive movies than this one out there but I can't really think of a single one right now.
>>70953265
Aside from the 15 minutes worth of alchemist's tower stuff there's nothing too amazing there. I do love that tower though.
THX1138 is still an amazing looking movie.
>>70953265
>but they're not the MOST impressive.
always assume hyperbole.
this thread is basically just "post films that are technically impressive"
