elephant

Started by gjg 4 REEL, September 23, 2003, 01:45:14 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
User actions

82

#180
February 26, 2004, 12:15:07 PM
GAHHHHH Stop being morons.. either research it or something..

Anamorphic widescreen doesn't mean it is WIDESCREEN.. its a feature of a dvd.. Just like a anamorphic lens squeezes the image onto the film.. there is a squeeze that is happening on the dvd as well.  It is a higher resolution transfer that happens during the telecine stage.
"We're all one thing, Lieutenant. That's what I've come to realize. Like cells in a body. 'Cept we can't see the body. The way fish can't see the ocean. And so we envy each other. Hurt each other. Hate each other. How silly is that? A heart cell hating a lung cell"

SoNowThen

#181
February 26, 2004, 12:34:12 PM
Anamorphic is.

Widescreen is widescreen, something different. Something can be called an Anamorphic transfer, but doesn't need the Widescreen tacked on there...

Cos it AIN'T!!!
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

82

#182
February 26, 2004, 12:55:07 PM
Quote from: SoNowThenAnamorphic is.

Widescreen is widescreen, something different. Something can be called an Anamorphic transfer, but doesn't need the Widescreen tacked on there...

Cos it AIN'T!!!


NGAH!  It's the standard.  They don't have a "Anamorphic Transfer" seal.. ONLY "Anamorphic Widescreen"
"We're all one thing, Lieutenant. That's what I've come to realize. Like cells in a body. 'Cept we can't see the body. The way fish can't see the ocean. And so we envy each other. Hurt each other. Hate each other. How silly is that? A heart cell hating a lung cell"

SoNowThen

#183
February 26, 2004, 01:01:48 PM
Are you sure?


I'm not, so I'll end up taking your word for it. But whenever people talk about old Criterion dvds they'd like to see with proper transfers, they always say just plain old "anamorphic"...
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

Pubrick

#184
April 25, 2004, 05:41:28 AM
so they just released it here.

i don't think i've ever been so enthralled by a movie's sound. it does the job usually covered by editing, cos there are no cutaways here. sound is the new CGI, and this was a slap in the face to me about how sonically brilliant a film could be.

i definitely wish it would get more recognition. what happened to school shootings anyway? was that just a fad? u know what i'm talking about, there was a period several years ago when that was the big craze. now i don't hear about them at all.
under the paving stones.

cine

#185
April 25, 2004, 11:45:00 AM
I think the novelty has worn off.... ?

El Duderino

#186
April 25, 2004, 12:40:10 PM
I agree with you completely Pubrick, there's no moment in the movie where you can just get up and leave (which i was contemplating because i REALLY had to pee). although the movie was brilliant, i thought they could have had a better ending. i also really like how the movie is mostly shot with steadicam, that added effect and also the use of the Bethoven songs (in the trailer and in the movie).
Did I just get cock-blocked by Bob Saget?

El Duderino

#187
April 27, 2004, 07:41:07 PM


i just preordered.....very excited. anyone know if there's commentary?
Did I just get cock-blocked by Bob Saget?

Tictacbk

#188
April 27, 2004, 09:14:54 PM
As long as this thread is being brought back from the depths...


I found elephant to be a terribly disappointing film.  Granted the suspense it generated was amazing and most of the steadicam shots were cool, I just don't think Van Sant did a great job with anything else.  I didn't find the film worthwhile.  I felt disconnected and bored throughout a lot of it, and it presented nothing even close to a normal day at school.  Also all the weird homo-eroticism and the nazi films and shootemup videogames i found to be very unnecessary.

RegularKarate

#189
April 27, 2004, 09:39:36 PM
yes, but did you read the rest of this thread?

I didn't think so

Tictacbk

#190
April 27, 2004, 10:58:06 PM
uh....yea i did?

Weird. Oh

#191
April 28, 2004, 03:31:30 AM
Quote from: Chest RockwellIt's probably already been asked, but I'm not in the mood to flip through 12 pages to find it, or search, but can someone tell me why it's named 'Elephant'? I saw the movie and I saw no elephants!  :-D

There is at least one Elephant I noticed in the film. Just watched it on dvd. (There is a full screen and widescreen option, 12 minute making of and full trailor.). Anyhow, in the scene where the killer is playing Moonlight Sonata and the camera does a 360 degree  pan around the room, there is a sketch of an elephant. I don't know if it means anything but I noticed it.

I was really expecting a lot out of this because of what I read on here. I thought it was well done and the camera work was great. The only problem I saw with the film was that it cheated in the sense that there was only superficial reasoning supplied . By that I mean that it seems as those Van Sant did try to point out a few possible factors in the murders. Like the crap being thrown at the kid, or the video shootup game, or the easy accesibility to mail-order guns (I thought you could only get brides that way  :wink: ). I think actually it would have been better to if he had omitted the names and left the audience completely unaware of who these kids were.
The more arguments you win, the fewer friends you will have.

RegularKarate

#192
April 28, 2004, 01:19:39 PM
Quote from: Tictacbkuh....yea i did?

um... are you asking me if you did?  

If I had to guess, I'd say "no".  Because all your issues with the film are discussed throughout the rest of this thread and if you had, I would think you would have more to think about or comment on.

But, maybe you did read it and just forgot (it's a lot to read, I understand)

coffeebeetle

#193
April 29, 2004, 01:55:40 PM
Chest, here's the reason why it's called Elephant:

There's an old fable that relates the story of three blind men standing around an elephant.  They each feel a different part of the elephant (i.e. the trunk, the leg, the tusk, etc.) and each come up with a different name for what they've felt.  These school shootings can be viewed in much the same way: because there are so many reasons for why it happened and so many different viewpoints of the tragedy, we're all basically blind men grasping for an answer as to why the killing took place.

I hope that made sense.
more than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. one path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. the other, to total extinction. let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.
woody allen (side effects - 1980)

Pubrick

#194
April 30, 2004, 06:39:32 AM
if ur still unsure, Chest, be sure to read the other 4 times it's been explained in this thread.
under the paving stones.
Print
Go Up Pages 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
User actions