It should be illegal to invoke Kubrick’s name.
How Kubrick Would Do It
yeah that’s exactly what he would have done
Mr. Spictastic
I shan't be watching
Arrogant prick
i hope you cry yourself to sleep every night because of it. it’s gonna be hilarious when God throws you into the lake of fire for your racism.
Them trying to convince people upcoming marvel movies aren't all generic capeshit is funny
People always eat it up when the directors say they’re “using real practical effects!”. Its either 5% of the effects or it’s there but covered up with so much CGI in post that they might as well have not done it at all.
"Kubrickesque," is a word some critics have been tossing around...
Fat neckbeards who sit on Anon Babble and jack off to tranime but sit and wonder why they can’t get girlfriends is funny
I don't think a Mexican guy would be in that kind of movie in the 60s
kubrickian aspects
God throws you into the lake of fire for your racism.
That's nothing compared to what God is going to do to Pablo's brother for being a tranny.
in 2025 Kubrick would've used the newest tech possible, cgi, greenscreen, shot on digital with the sharpest new lenses and made it all at his mansion in England
Kubrick would respect Kirby visually unlike all of these other retards
Any Anon Babble posters who can explain the point of using vintage lenses when they aren't shooting on film?
Kubrick helped on the technical side of Moonraker so I don't think it would matter to him if it isn't high art
trvth nvke
youtube.com
not a genius because I didn't like him as a person
That doesn't make sense
A genius could've done what Kubrick did without being a petulant asshole to everyone he knows.
Don't you realise that it was always Stanley's dream to direct a generic design-by-committee capeslop flick to try and reignite a dying genre for a billion-dollar mega-conglomerate?
"We only used practical effects!"
6 months after release, the vfx bts videos showcase an endless wall of greenscreen all over the set
Every. Fucking. Time
That's why they killed him.
Digital filmmaking and vfx work was becoming more and more accessible. It was only 5 years before Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow came out.
They knew that Kubrick would've jumped on that shit and started releasing his epics with relatively small budgets that would have embarrassed all of hollywood by their superior quality. He would've made his Napoleon epic for less than a million pounds and it would have been heralded as a masterpiece.
They couldn't risk that.
On the technical side.
But thats the thing, if Kubrick had been alive he would probably have pushed a lot of the technology and special effects like James Cameron did but he wouldn't write garbage like the Marvel movies.
What they did here is just stealing the visuals of 2001. They have no fucking shame.
Dont be a negative nancy dude. Start working out and seek some mental health to get out of your rut and atart turning your life around. I believe in you champ. Dont give up hope and for the love of God dont troon out.
They have enough money to convince Malick to do it himself
There is zero chance this movie does anything but pay vague lip service to a half realized aesthetic version of the 60s and the Silver Age of comics. Shant be watching
Actors should really never be heard from outside of the moments they're a director's meatpuppet
Today's CGI would have been a great tool for him, and he would probably micromanage every single aspect of the effects until is done right.
None of that marvel CGI slop outsourced to third world countries.
How do you even manage to say shit like this just for marketing.
I would be embarrassed.
I'm sure Kubrick would definitely approve of this framing and lighting.
The christcuck shows his final form
holy shit that looks terrible, student films look better
Its either 5% of the effects or it’s there but covered up with so much CGI in post that they might as well have not done it at all.
One behind the scenes video that made me incredibly angry was for the bridge scene in Spider-Man: No Way Home. They actually did crush cars and fling cars and set off explosions and destroy construction barrels and build a whole big destructible bridge set... and then 99% of it was just used as references for CGI so everything seen in the final movie is just CGI even though almost everything was really filmed with actual props.
within reason
All of that just means
yeah we have a good gimmick to justify an even lazier slop film
Someone please post that Brendan Fraser closing his eyes image, it's perfect for this but i always forget to save it.
They have aberrations and deformations that gives and gritiness often used to mitigate the clinical perfection of digital sensors and modern lenses.
Older lenses have less sharp optics but also use older tech antiglare coatings. Modern coatings are unnoticeable and the optics are arguably perfect. Older coatings give special effects on highlights. like a small bloom.
Some people use tifflen black mist filters on their lenses and the goal is the same.
Most tech works like that, in music production there are tape plugins simulators and saturation to give some grittiness that is lost in the new digital mediums.
Older lenses had simpler construction (fewer lens elements), which can cause different kinds of barrel distortions and more severe chromatic aberrations compared to newer lenses. Older lenses also typically had fewer (four or six) and non-curved aperture blades, which would create more distinctive diffraction spikes than you get with modern lenses. A lot of older lenses were designed to have a closer infinity focus, so the background and foreground would generally be more in focus. These aren't huge differences, though, but they are noticeable if you know how to look for them. Older lighting techniques and older film-stocks not being as color accurate as modern film-stocks (or digital) are more responsible for the distinctive look of older films, however.
He wouldn't approve of it, but they are clearly going for a "natural lighting" look there, like Kubrick used in Barry Lyndon. Kubrick was one of the few directors who knew how to make natural lighting look good.
Most miscast character in cinema
Pic rel would be a better Sue.
I fucking hate modern marvel more than anything.
That's a child
Should go to director jail just for saying that. But he’s probably going to go to directors jail soon when this shit flops hard. Losing to the fucking Minecraft movie will stay with this guy until he dies.
director jail
Dude is literally a skull and bones member. He's untouchable.
Would help if the dropped the awful color grading
still ends up looking like stale sterile digital slop
fucking faggots
I will never forgive Hollywood for underestimating the power of gaffers. Shit's been dire since they've unionized.
these niggas using necromancy
It should be illegal to invoke Kubrick’s name.
Do you realize how ridiculous you sound? Kubrick was just some guy. He wasn't a god.
Who's this, your little sister?
based stanley actors are prostitutes and should be treated with contempt
Google says she's almost 30 lol
And she looks way better than the whore they got to play Sue who's already hit the wall long ago.
Kubrick used candles because that’s what they had.
Yes, and the scene in is using a side table lamp because that's what they have. They are copying the idea without understanding the artistry.
Hacks love namedropping much better directors to give a certain “artistic” legitimacy to their hack work, but this is more prevalent in capeshit. Like when the Fant4stic guy said his movie was gonna be like a Cronenberg body horror.
Or when the chick who directed the FnaF film said it was inspired by Spielberg and Malick. Absolute batshit stuff.
Ok spic.