Film vs Red (lighthearted)

[John Holland]

Yes it is Nate , but just guessing wont be on a screen by end of year .

[Nate Downes]

Yes it is Nate , but just guessing wont be on a screen by end of year .

I guess as such, but knowing at least 1 title for a RED camera is 1 more than I had before now, isn't it?

 

I myself loved the piece, and yes, I do understand German, and know the movie it is from, so I turned the sound off rather than get the juxposition.

[Max Jacoby]

To pick up on what Michael said, this is the second time I have seen this very clip with a different set of subtitles. I suppose it's funny if you don't understand German, but if you do, it does become a bit disturbing, because obviously the subtitles and dialogue have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

[Tim Terner]

To max and Michael, I really don't think was intended for German speaking viewers, but to the non german speakers it was quite hilarious. Appreciate the post Stuart

[Guest]

I'm not even talking about the clip! Jeez. I saw it yesterday at reduser and loved it.

 

I'm talking about the convenient target that "Jannard" and "Red" make for chemical film lovers here. They have become the de facto boogymen for anti-digital people. My point was, once this 4K+ technology saturates the cinema industry, who will be the boogyman?

 

Digital "cinema" saturated the low end indie film scene a long time ago. I haven't heard of any stampede at the major Hollywood studios to buy Red cameras. Why didn't they all order last year? You mean to tell me that the guys shooting corporate videos know some thing they don't?

 

 

To pick up on what Michael said, this is the second time I have seen this very clip with a different set of subtitles. I suppose it's funny if you don't understand German, but if you do, it does become a bit disturbing, because obviously the subtitles and dialogue have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

 

Bah. Come on Max, you have a typical European response, it's like you don't get American humour or some thing? Next you'll tell me the Three Stooges are not funny :blink:

 

When you say: "obviously the subtitles and dialogue have absolutely nothing to do with each other." YES, that is exactly the point, that's why it's funny.

 

Don't make me come over there....Luxembourg is the only NATO country that Canada out spends on the military :D

 

R,

[Brad Grimmett]

I thought it was great Stuart , you must remember that Americans dont get sarcasm or anything subtle , just look at the rubbish so called comedies we get to watch released over here. :(

How dare you sir! Well, maybe you're kinda right.... But at least a few of us yanks managed to laugh! I thought the clip was hilarious. I wish we could all just laugh and not read 50 layers deep into every single thing that has the word Red in it.

[Chris Keth]

HI-larious! In all honesty, I relish the tasteless humor. One of the funnier things I have ever seen is Basil Fawlty totally f-ing up his own orders of "Don't mention the war!" when Germans were in his hotel.

 

 

Thanks, Stuart!

[Freya Black]

I thought it was great Stuart , you must remember that Americans dont get sarcasm or anything subtle , just look at the rubbish so called comedies we get to watch released over here. :(

 

I thought it was okay but I thought this one was done better:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OctFXZOUbWc

 

The trick is of course to get the subtitles to match as closely as possible to the facial expressions and what is going on. I've never seen Torchwood but it made me giggle.

 

Theres loads of these downfall parodies tho. It makes me wonder who started it.

 

Downfall is a great film. It shows the nazis as real people which might make people criticise it for being too sympathetic but it annoys me when people just show them as demonic monsters as I believe they were ordinary people who did terrible, terrible, terrible things and that is the true lesson we need to learn about the nazis. By putting them in the box of other we avoid facing up to the true horror of what happened.

 

Downfall is well worth watching.

 

love

 

Freya

[Max Jacoby]

Don't make me come over there....Luxembourg is the only NATO country that Canada out spends on the military :D

Damn right! I need tanks for my next film and the Luxi army doesn't have any!

[Andy_Alderslade]

How dare you sir! Well, maybe you're kinda right.... But at least a few of us yanks managed to laugh!

 

John Cleese was on the TV the other night commenting how the US back lash to Monty Python and the Life of Brian was the most motivated and it seemed related to the fact US audiences feel unconfortable watching men dressing-up/impersonating woman!

 

Don't they understand its an ox-bridge tradition!

[Michael Lehnert]

Well, I'm certainly sorry to have upset you, Michael, by posting this link. However, I have to say that perhaps you are taking it a little too seriously.

 

 

Heyhey, don't be Stuart, as I am not upset in an emotional way, and certainly not by you. In fact, my comments aren't in any way directed at you for posting this. BBC's Bonekickers is upsetting and wants me trash White City's programming department. Or the look of Torchwood is..., or the quality of too many DVD Ultimate Editions sold today are... ;)

 

I just deplore the way some people now seem needy to go in order to "contribute" to this old shoe of a "cine vs video" debate I grew sick before most young members here were born; no, wait, it's now just "RED vs cine-film" (all formats, all stocks, all ever, or so) lead by people who I occassionally wonder if they've ever been on a production for real or shot a film from A to Z themselves (Hitler is soo right in respect to his mum :rolleyes: :P ).

 

And in light and context of this stupid uninformed debate that recently brought out the worst in many members here (including me <_< :( !), to see this clip that makes use of a serious tidbit out of a by itself rather controversial film, and then subtitle a scene with second-class puns seemingly stolen off this forum's recent threads while the German original deals with heavy slaughtering issues, well, I really can't heartily laugh with or at that. And it's not just about the German language, it's also about the characters depicted here in a realistic way.

 

Well, maybe it is indeed my "European Angle", namely the consciousness of total destruction and slaughter one gets still constantly faced with here in Europe, and the precarious right-wing swing in many Euro-countries now, and the too easy-going approach to Hitler/Reich "merchandising" in many levels of society (from BritArt painters to Nazi Yokel jokes to people finding Third Reich society orders "cool" and "required again today") that makes this less funny here than somewhere in Dubai or sunny California. In that respect, I won't give up that angle, because if people do, their children might live through such poop again - and such poop will eventually happen again (as it did since '45), just somewhere else, and slightly different.

 

Now, imagine someone would take a CNN 9/11 clip, or a scene out of Nic Cage's "World Trade Center", and then dub it on impact of AA11 and UA175 with: "Finally Jim Jannard found a way to hammer down the message to filmshooters that their stronghold really is coming down", or a scene from the Hiroshima bombing and subtitle: "The new Red firmware update really has a pulverising effect on resolution detail"... or a gas chamber/shower gasing sequence from "Schindler's List" with the dub: "the only way to resolve the Red vs Cine debate is to clean up the misinformation and make a clean slate"... sure, I can see huge positive feedback on YouTube Comments, but I guess some would start to think twice when the "boat sinks closer to home sentiments"...

 

Nazi-Germany wasn't a cracker joke and the "film vs video" debate isn't the Wannsee-Conference. And Chaplin, Brooks and John Cleese (for Monty Python or Fawlty Towers) weren't using it for pointless puns on nonsense, but to make great satire (a.k.a. politically-messaged humour with intent) in order to cope with their contemporary and personal issues in relation to the Holocaust, Nazism and World War II.

There's a big quality difference there, and it's a pity people no longer get that. I guess that's why Chaplin regretted having shot "The Great Dictator" after seeing the film reels shot by the US 80th Infantry after liberating KZ Buchenwald.

Can't really find any of that in having Hitler speak for a film chain gone AWOL, and Stalin's RED Army standing for "Jannard's hords". It's an unmotivated juxtaposition, and kinda lacking taste...

 

Now, many will say "fu** taste, it's funny", and that's fine with me! I personally have abyssal humour that even makes British Black Humour lovers go puke, so I respect that. But then I would hope that they say they like tasteless humour (nothing wrong with that) instead of uplifting this clip with cinematic or historic comparisons that don't stand ground.

I had a fair share of cadaverous confrontations while shooting documentaries on this planet of ours, so for me, this joke isn't doing a home-run.

 

Have a great 4th July week-end, and CU monday,

 

-Michael

[Michael Lehnert]

Oh, and for me, my participation in the cine/RED/xK nonsense ends here, despite the happy temptations some users pose to my (though little) experience.

 

Until someone shows me a full RED-shot motion picture with non-degradational post chain with a digital projection or adequate film-out on a big screen and supplies me with production notes and technical data on the project, even an AC article or other white paper, I will not entertain it either as a cinematic device comparable to a 35 or 65mm camera, nor a mere prosumer camcorder which it ain't either!

 

Likewise, I hope some "digitalians" here refresh their historic knowledge of the industry and read their beloved spec sheet sceptically plus critically question corporate outreach material (viral marketing, brochures, promotional videos) before indulging in their wet dreams when posting.

 

Around 1+ year ago, forum members were permanently banned because they coined and used the term "Japanozoom" here for low-priced big-zoomed Super 8 cameras for the hobbyist end of the early 1980s mass-market. It was deemed "racist" and hence objectionable.

Now, we have personal slander and insults and technical inacuracies exchanged here on a daily basis as if this were normal civil and professional behaviour in the real world - no one gets even told off by the moderation team! Maybe something to think about for those bearing responsibilities here...

 

-Michael

[Matthew W. Phillips]

Around 2 years ago, forum members were permanently banned because they coined and used the term "Japanozoom" here for low-priced big-zoomed Super 8 cameras for the hobbyist end of the early 1980s mass-market. It was deemed "racist" and hence objectionable.

Now, we have personal slander and insults and technical inacuracies exchanged here on a daily basis as if this were normal civil and professional behaviour in the real world - no one gets even told off by the moderation team! Maybe something to think about for those bearing responsibilities here...

 

Michael, now you know I have all the respect in the world for you. But the above quote, I happen to disagree with. I see nothing wrong with the moderation teams job here. I think that if this forum starts "tightening up" then we'll end up with a REDuser type of environment which is not what this site needs. Also, I don't see what in the world is wrong with the term "Japanozoom." It sounds a bit silly, perhaps, but not racist in the least. I wouldn't think it would be wrong to refer to an American Super 8 camera as "Amerozoom."

 

As far as inaccuracies, I think those should be corrected. Not by banning people or editing posts but by simply appending accurate information. We don't need to be like Reduser with their Goebbels style of moderation. Sorry to use that comparison, but it seems appropriate given the subject matter of this thread. ;)

[Michael Lehnert]

Sorry for not making myself clear:

 

- a while ago, people got banned because of terms like "Japanozoom" re. as racist - which I too (like you) wasn't able to fully comprehend as absolutely necessary from the moderation. Yet it happened. "Film is dead" threads got closed after it became clear they became personal and professionally pointless.

 

- today, we have even really clear-cut insults being exchanged, and every thread seems to descend negatively at one time into Red ps. Cine. Like David, I dislike to see this tendency at all, let alone increase (which it did just over the past 8 days).

Yet no moderation effort whatsover. If so proactive then, why not now? I find the current quality of exchange here increasingly corrosive to the professional community that makes ciny.com so welcoming and a great place to be. Even though I only participate since last year, I first discovered it in 2004, and have been reading it ardently since. That's why I care.

 

- Rest assured, Matthew, that me too am not interested in draconian moderation reprimanding everyone for typing "yaiks", but it's ridiculous that David or Stephen or even myself have to remind users to use their full first and last name, and that personal insults become a bit too easy to go off one's lip in the climate some threads descend into (and I am not excluding myself here - me too got into angry moods here). I think a kind remark here and there to keep the moodswings at bay from a moderator would help. I am not talking about banning or editing or deleting, like on other forums.

 

- BTW, I do not participate on RedUser because I don't wanna suffer a heart attack in my 30s, really! That forum is a good example how I would not like ciny.com to become. That's why I post this now in respect to this place - out of respect for this place.

 

Hope that clarified my post, Matthew. Cheers, -ML

[Tim O'Connor]

I thought it was great Stuart , you must remember that Americans dont get sarcasm or anything subtle , just look at the rubbish so called comedies we get to watch released over here. :(

 

 

Yeah, but at least you get to watch them in English instead of in German. Oops, was that sarcasm?

 

This is a fascinating clip. I found myself laughing (because it is so well done) and thinking how I have declined to participate in producing similar

productions that made superficial jokes by utilizing material that shouldn't be thrown around lightly. Yes, that is the juxtapositiion many

of you mention, but I agree with Michael that people who laugh at this and perhaps don't consider some of the ramifications of this type of joke

would be upset if they saw a 9/11 clip used in this manner.

 

I laughed and yet I disaprove. Does that make me a hypocrite? No, I'm being honest in reporting that my reaction is something human but that

we have to be aware of when to reprove ourselves.

 

Now, I'm not being Joe politically correct but I remember watching the Mel Brooks movie "To Be or Not To Be" (a remake I believe of an Ernst Lubitch

film) in which he depicted people in Nazi uniforms running with big clown feet. It was funny but it made me wonder if perhaps it somehow diluted the evil of the Nazis by making fun of them this way. On the other hand, I'm sure that such humor is extremely helpful in certain situations, such as when

the British started calling the Nazis "Huns", referring to Germans having Hunnic ancestry and thus being an attack on the notion of the racial purity/superiority of the Nazi nation.

 

Also, I think that it's extremely wise, as another poster wrote, to depict how regular, quite human people can do monstrous things, rather than portray history's villains as all monsters. Sometimes they are but most are people who went with the flow and that was the wrong way. I've taught acting for many years and I've often discussed with beginning actors that it's okay for them to portray the "bad guy" as he sees himself, i.e. often a good guy with a great idea.

 

Some people say aw can't anybody make a joke without it being a moral, social, earthshaking issue? That's a good question but I feel that I often see

an erosion of people's sensitivity to the plight of others when certain vehicles are accepted without thought because of the entertainment they bring.

 

For example, there was a song that I found upsetting and I asked a gal that I knew how could she dance to it. Now, she was not dancing as some form of prayer, she was dancing to it in nightclubs like to any other dance tune. I said don't the lyrics bother you? She said that she didn't listen to them and didn't know what they were. By the way, they were not hard to hear and were in her native language.

 

There was in fact on YouTube last year a spoof that combined "300" with "United 93". It was extremely well done. I think that it might have been a bunch of industry people looking to make a show reel. How many homemade spoofs have mock aircraft setups in which to shoot?

 

Well, it was funny but horrible. It also stopped being funny once I realized that the clip was using part of the plot of "United 93" (which is using part of the

9/11 story) to make a movie spoof! Oh those kooky terrorists!

 

Hey, it's great to show that you're a skilled filmmaker but I've seen too many films in which it's so expedient to use or misuse material for the filmmaker's benefit at the expense of crossing certain lines that I find objectionable and which I think result in a deterioration of people having an ability to empathize with others.

 

We have a duality to us. This piece had me laughing really hard but it's exactly that capacity to be selective about what we let slide that can let us go down the path of others who, as a previous poster wrote, were ordinary people who went down the wrong path.

 

Yeah, yeah, I know "it's only a joke." It is and it isn't. The duality that is in us is in what we see as well.

[Saul Rodgar]

Now, imagine someone would take a CNN 9/11 clip, or a scene out of Nic Cage's "World Trade Center", and then dub it on impact of AA11 and UA175 with: "Finally Jim Jannard found a way to hammer down the message to filmshooters that their stronghold really is coming down", or a scene from the Hiroshima bombing and subtitle: "The new Red firmware update really has a pulverising effect on resolution detail"... or a gas chamber/shower gasing sequence from "Schindler's List" with the dub: "the only way to resolve the Red vs Cine debate is to clean up the misinformation and make a clean slate"... sure, I can see huge positive feedback on YouTube Comments, but I guess some would start to think twice when the "boat sinks closer to home sentiments"...

 

-Michael

 

Gotta give it to the man: point well made!

[Tom Lowe]

Now, we have personal slander and insults and technical inacuracies exchanged here on a daily basis as if this were normal civil and professional behaviour in the real world - no one gets even told off by the moderation team! Maybe something to think about for those bearing responsibilities here...

-Michael

 

Michael, you are the ONLY person on this whole board I have seen using ad-hominem and personal attacks to undercut people's arguments about technology and cameras. You've done it to me twice, this week.

 

I doesn't bother me, but you of all people should not be pointing fingers! Haha.

[Andy_Alderslade]

Yes, that is the juxtapositiion many

of you mention, but I agree with Michael that people who laugh at this and perhaps don't consider some of the ramifications of this type of joke

would be upset if they saw a 9/11 clip used in this manner.

 

I can't help feeling people are getting a little over-excited about what was a very amusing but perhaps forgettable joke, and perhaps reading a little to much into it.

 

And everyone brings up the taste issue, 9/11 etc, well the clip isn't actually using real footage from the second world war or the holocaust, its using footage from a film, a dramatization of the characters that existed, characters which have already been mocked, characterized and buffooned millions of times before hand; as they should be - for such is the importance of satire.

 

Pulling 9/11 into the discussion is absolutely pointless, its a whole different issue - for starters there are no clear 'characters' only blurry faces on CCTV, many of the conspirators have not been caught and brought to justice (legal justice) and the fog of conspiracy and cover-up regarding how it happened, why it happened, the absolute incompetence of it all, is still looming to this day.

 

AND satire is important, humor is the best way to come to terms with the atrocities and absurdities of this planet, if it be the poems of Sigfried Sassoon, The Great Dictator, Monty Python (though personally I can't bare it) or some of the little sketches posted on You Tube.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_y8zKz1cZ_Y

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jxLB6sntSw...feature=related

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdEy8rchDyI...feature=related

 

[K Borowski]

AND satire is important, humor is the best way to come to terms with the atrocities and absurdities of this planet, if it be the poems of Sigfried Sassoon, The Great Dictator, Monty Python (though personally I can't bare it) or some of the little sketches posted on You Tube.

 

Andy, you beat me to the punch with "The Great Dictator", of course, I think that was before news of the attrocities of Hitler came to light in full force.

 

I laughed pretty hard when I watched this film. Who can't laugh at the parallels drawn between the Nazi command structure and that of a feature film! I also like the tactical planning necessary to ensure that they would get the dailies the next day. "My Fuhrer, we have a problem. There's a scratch down the entire negative!" Hahaha

 

I also liked this line a great deal: "Digital cameras, my grandmother's got one, you know. That doesn't make her the next Steven fu cking Spielburg!"

 

Don't think Spielburg would be laughing at this video though. I think there're some valid points that, considering the serious nature of this film, and the lack of dubbed over German lines to go with the dialogue, that this video is a little too comical of a satire for a scene depicting one of the darkest points in recorded human history.

 

Michael, since Americans don't use the term "Bollocks", I would say that this is probably the work of one of your countrymen, who have a lot more to take personally about the nazis than your average American does.

 

If every slight against film were this light-hearted, I wouldn't take pro-digital jabs against film nearly so bad, so keep 'em comin' you Red guys. Brilliant!

[Brad Grimmett]

- a while ago, people got banned because of terms like "Japanozoom" re. as racist - which I too (like you) wasn't able to fully comprehend as absolutely necessary from the moderation. Yet it happened. "Film is dead" threads got closed after it became clear they became personal and professionally pointless.

I was unaware that anyone was banned because of that, but I tend to think there may have been other reasons besides just that one thing. In any case, this was probably before we had moderators here. Back then Tim was the only one doing moderation. And he had plenty of other things to worry about, so if he made a mistake or two I think he can be easily forgiven. Now we have a handful of people that are moderators in different forums. For example, I'm a moderator in a few forums, but not Red.

- today, we have even really clear-cut insults being exchanged, and every thread seems to descend negatively at one time into Red ps. Cine. Like David, I dislike to see this tendency at all, let alone increase (which it did just over the past 8 days).

Yet no moderation effort whatsover. If so proactive then, why not now?

Like I said above, we have moderators now, and the extent of the moderation will vary a bit depending on who the moderator is. I think the "hands off" type of moderation is good. It allows people to say what they're really thinking, good or bad, without having to worry that their post will be deleted, just like in the real world, where you can't erase what you've said. A nice side effect is that when people make nasty comments or insults, their true colors are displayed publicly, and they get to live with what they've written whether they want to or not.

[Michael Lehnert]

Hi Brad, (sorry for coming back to this with delay)

 

thanks for the clarification of your approach, which is absolutely fine with me!

 

It's very much appreciated,

 

-Michael

[Serge Teulon]

It allows people to say what they're really thinking, good or bad, without having to worry that their post will be deleted, just like in the real world, where you can't erase what you've said. A nice side effect is that when people make nasty comments or insults, their true colors are displayed publicly, and they get to live with what they've written whether they want to or not.

 

It makes ppl think before they post!

 

Comedy allows us to let the barriers down and spread light on the mistakes and atrocities that we (humans) have committed.

By saying that we can't make a comedy moment out of something that is also serious means that we can't learn from these mistakes and grow......surely that is the point.

[Stephen Williams]

It makes ppl think before they post!

 

Hi,

 

Sustaining members can delete their posts!

 

I sugested to someone who only posts in the Red forum, that he might want to become a sustaining member. As yet he has not taken up the offer :P

 

Stephen

[John Sprung]

Now, imagine someone would take a CNN 9/11 clip, or a scene out of Nic Cage's "World Trade Center", and then dub it ....

Well, I have seen an animated bin Laden spoof on TV here. It's supposed to be out-takes from one of his videos. Personally, I have no problem with that.

 

The time to make light of these things falls between the time when they're too recent and painful, and the time when they're forgotten, and nobody gets who the angry little man with the little moustache is. Some people are still in the first time, unfortunately many are already in the third time.

 

 

 

-- J.S.

[John Sprung]

I though it was hilarious... it's the juxtaposition of the trivialness of commercial filmmaking over the biggest horror of the 20th century that makes it funny.

Well, perhaps the second biggest horror of the 20th century. A good case can be made that Stalin killed more people and used more hours of slave labor. But his crimes were more dispersed in time and space, better concealed, and most important, he was on our side.

 

One little item from a PBS documentary last night -- When the Soviets liberated some of the camps on the Eastern front, they merely replaced Hitler's prisoners with their own. Operations continued as before, just under new management.

 

 

 

-- J.S.