Wing Commander mentioned

The rest of the article is not bad.

For example, he asserts, rightly so, that the best duels are on eps 1, 5 and 6.
 
The article is a reasonable review of EP3. The mentin of WC is not a good one. The acting on WC is much better than EP3.
 
Delance said:
The rest of the article is not bad.

For example, he asserts, rightly so, that the best duels are on eps 1, 5 and 6.
Click to expand...

There I quite agree with you. For some reason my friends do not agree that the light sabre duel in Episode 1 was any good. I personally thought it was one of the best, the whole Obi-wan having to wait trapped in the heat doors while Darth Maul duked it out with his master was quite intense. In my opinion anyway...
 
For some reason, ever since 2000 directors decided that the best way to show a fight or battle scene was to use fast close up shots of the camera moving like crazy so you can't even figure out what's happening. That's freaking annoying. Gladiator show signs like that. The battle begins well, but turns into a mess. EP2 and EP3 suffers from this. There's no interesting duels there. I found one exception to this the "Chronicles of Narnia" movie, where the fight between Peter and Jadis to be well filmed. It's odd that a fight between a kid and a pale witch on a kid's movie would rank so well, but hey, at least you could understand what was going on. Tilda Swildon did a terrific job, fighting with elegance. Of course she's no Darth Maul.

Take the duel between Anakin and Dooku on EP3 and compare with the fight between Luke and Vader on ROTJ. Even the setting is similar. But it just isn't engaging at all.
 
Delance said:
For some reason, ever since 2000 directors decided that the best way to show a fight or battle scene was to use fast close up shots of the camera moving like crazy so you can't even figure out what's happening.
Click to expand...

This all started about the time of Saving Private Ryan. In that film, shakey hand-held cameras were used to give the impression of watching a reel that had been filmed by on a battlefield 60 years ago. Thats the same reason for the washed out color and stuff. However, the jitteriness comes more from the fact that they also started to drop the "framerate" to do this as well to mimic the slower speed of the old cameras. It's particularly distracting in films like Gladiator like you said.
 
AD said:
This all started about the time of Saving Private Ryan. In that film, shakey hand-held cameras were used to give the impression of watching a reel that had been filmed by on a battlefield 60 years ago. Thats the same reason for the washed out color and stuff. However, the jitteriness comes more from the fact that they also started to drop the "framerate" to do this as well to mimic the slower speed of the old cameras. It's particularly distracting in films like Gladiator like you said.
Click to expand...

Like Mission Impossible: 3 that I saw the other day. Of course it gets the point accross that its chaotic, but it sure as hell is annoying.
 
Lord-Flasheart said:
Like Mission Impossible: 3 that I saw the other day. Of course it gets the point accross that its chaotic, but it sure as hell is annoying.
Click to expand...


Yeah. I watched it the other day with my wife. We liked it. But it's true that, atleast until the end of the warehouse/ industrial assault it was almost headache inducing.
,
On a funny note, we couldnt help laughing in the opening scene. *EVERY* freaking shot change - within the *Same* scene - the amount of blood under Ethan Hunts nose changed. One second there's lots, then none, than half as much as before, then none again, then lots again... Seriously, that is the absolute worst craftsmanship I've seen in a big budget film in a while. And of course it was exascerbated by the fact that its on a BIG screen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top