Old movies look better.
They just do.

imagine how much time it take so set up all that just for this shot. and the extras, the horses, who's buying them lunch? yikes you know george lucas tried to do this and got cucked by a sandstorm, so he switched to superior cgi.

your fired

Current movies just need more time and we'll look back on them as being beautiful. Nobody thought Lawrence of Arabia looked good when it came out, everyone preferred movies shot on Hollywood sets

>>213351989
Exclusivity in filmmaking is actually a good thing

great as it is, i still think there is a matte painting edited in (which i think makes it more impressive as lean is able to blur the lines between the painting and the real)

>>213351917 (OP)
Are the distant tents a matte painting?

>>213352087
doubt. old matte painting inserts required a stable and locked camera,I don't think they could achieve it with a camera dollying in.

Bring back 70mm film, Technicolor and matte paintings.

>>213352260
they'd need to open up a whole factory to bring back technicolor.

>>213351917 (OP)
Can anyone fucking explain to me why films today completely disregard lighting and audio? Never in my life imagined I had to turn on subtitles for English films.

>>213352260
>>213352302
But Roger Deakins and David Lynch always said film and digital makes no difference.

>>213352312
Brain drain. Technology has made us blind in the old ways.

Soul is gone and it's never coming back

>>213351917 (OP)
Film is the equivalent of 8k and the sound mixing was better because they prioritized the dialog audio. Old movies also have more color depth because modern trash reduces the colors to make CGI easier

Back then, filmmaking was about capturing something, capturing a performance, an atmosphere, or a staged scenario. Today people "produce" the movie out of nothing. Whatever problem they have they fix it in post, CG certain things, use filters to hide mistakes and that's it. I agree it's cheaper, more practical, but then you lose what makes the thing incredible in the first place, it's not a spectacle anymore.

I can imagine a remake of Fitzcarraldo where they CGI the ship up the mountain, ridiculous

>>213352043
This.

>>213351917 (OP)
what is this AI slop?

>>213352647
>Film is the equivalent of 8k
If I understand correctly it's actually better than 8k because the film grain isn't laid out identically in every frame.

>and the sound mixing was better because they prioritized the dialog audio.
we need to go back (or add subtitles)

>Old movies also have more color depth because modern trash reduces the colors to make CGI easier
I hope this improves as the technology improves, but who knows?

>>213352302
Is that within the budget of a major motion picture? They already spend 20 million on actors so maybe opening a technicolor factory would be worth it?

>>213352503
Jack Cardiff was out of his mind in the late 40s to early 50s

Aye. CGI and green/blue screen are cancer.

>>213351917 (OP)
>>213352260
>>213352333
>>213352503
I love how all these film reel images look on my SVGA monitor!

>>213352931
>Is that within the budget of a major motion picture? They already spend 20 million on actors so maybe opening a technicolor factory would be worth it?
I don't know but I would guess it would be more than 20 millions and would never be profitable for the very few special projects that would go for it. it wasn't profitable by 1977, imagine 2025.

>>213352785
>I can imagine a remake of Fitzcarraldo where they CGI the ship up the mountain, ridiculous

If it were a deliberate parody about grossly overworking a CGI team to try and make it as perfect as possible, mirroring the struggles in the story of the original film and the story of the creation of the original film, it could work. But it wouldn't be Fitzcarraldo it would be it's own thing.

>>213352503
What flick is this ?

>>213354351
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_ZoHN0spaU

>>213354351
It’s AI slop.

>>213354433
>anon sees a film so pretty he thinks it's ai slop
Lameo

>>213352312
for me its the lighting
how the fuck is this not a solved thing
why am I looking at movies where I literally cant see whats on the fucking screen

>>213354396
thanks

>>213354433
thanks

>>213354396
>Although Gardner was raised Baptist, at the end of her life she said she had no religion.[36][37][38] Christianity never played a positive role in her life, according to biographers and Gardner, in her autobiography Ava: My Story. Her friend Zoe Sallis, who met her on the set of The Bible: In the Beginning... when Gardner was living with John Huston in Puerto Vallarta, said Gardner always seemed unconcerned about religion.[38] When Sallis asked her about religion once, Gardner replied, "It's not anything Christian".[38] Another factor that contributed to this outlook was the death of Gardner's father in her youth. She said, "Nobody wanted to know Daddy when he was dying. He was so alone. He was scared. I could see the fear in his eyes when he was smiling. I went to see the preacher, the guy who'd baptized me. I begged him to come and visit Daddy, just to talk to him, you know? Give him a blessing or something. But he never did. He never came. God, I hated him. Cold-arse bastards like that ought to...I don't know...they should be in some other racket, I know that. I had no time for religion after that. I never prayed. I never said another prayer. Not like I meant it anyway.".[38] Concerning politics, Gardner was a lifelong Democrat, and she supported Adlai Stevenson II in the 1952 United States presidential election.[16][39]

>Gardner was a staunch supporter of civil rights for African Americans throughout her life. As a child growing up in North Carolina, she would often sit with African American children in segregated parts of movie theaters. Her personal assistant, Rene Jordan, was African American, and Gardner would often take her to clubs that were for whites only. She supported Henry A. Wallace of the Progressive Party, whose campaign in 1948 for the presidential election sought racial equality and desegregation.[40]

>She became a member of the NAACP in August 1968.[41]

why are women like this

>>213352312
laziness and entitlement

>>213351917 (OP)
>>213352503
Please recommend me some kinos where you REALLY feel the blood, sweat and tears it took to make the film (pic related).

Movies had soul before 2012 or so, because it was just so hard to make/capture anything.
>>213352785
This as well.
>>213354433
It's sad that there's going to be a generation of people who believe that only llms and computers can create anything creative or beautiful looking.

>>213352312
>anyone fucking explain to me why films today completely disregard lighting and audio?
I don't know about lighting. It's just people aren't as talented as previous generations. Also cameras nowadays can look great in practical lighting, which motivates people's laziness. Back when film was king, you need so many studio lights to get a shot.

In terms of audio, I think a lot of those problems arise from theater mix vs digital mix. Films nowadays are often mixed exclusively for theaters and never mixed again

>>213352025
more shooting time, maybe.

>>213354919
>Please recommend me some kinos where you REALLY feel the blood, sweat and tears it took to make the film (pic related).
Fitzcarraldo

>>213352503
All of this can be recreated with AI

Why do the old Twilight Zones in black and white look so good?

>>213354973
Shouldn’t take you long to prove it

Remastered.

>>213351917 (OP)
This director's cut was the only thing to scratch the itch after seeing Lawrence. Yeah the dialogue isn't nearly as good but it has some of the same timbre as a David Lean epic.

>>213352312
lots of modern directors lack vision and taste. if you lack that how could you possibly have a visually excellent film?

>>213355134
I'd legit like to see a cut of Lawrence of Arabia that was in 4:3 and had that AI upscaling, just to get a look at how bad it was.

>>213352503
>>213354351
https://ia601701.us.archive.org/10/items/pandora-and-the-flying-dutchman-1951_20240704/Pandora%20and%20the%20Flying%20Dutchman%20%281951%29.mp4

>>213352087
>>213352205
no, it isnt a matte painting

>>213352503
I liked this film

>>213355813
Exclusive leak