Alexandros Angelopoulos Apostolos

Jonathan Hoffman, writing on a Jewish News blog, says Brexit won’t happen. http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/why-brexit-wont-happen/ Very intriguing scenario.

Indeed? Where? I have never seen anything of such sort anywhere around here. Except for that Mark Dunn post. Really? What exactly should I be banned for? I’m intrigued. You know it very well that it is just because I annoy you and not because of anything I’ve said or done. What a vile, condescending attitude condensed in this evil sentence. As if I haven’t done it and keep doing it, always thanked everyone who kindly replied to me in the most sincerest of terms, yet not nearly as much as I wanted, and partly because I didn’t want to flood the forum with innumerable Thank you! posts. Instead, I always thought that a click on the green arrow would be interpred as such. Oh, dear, what vileness... It is just disgusting. This is another thing I knew would happen: you thinking my question was a jab at the “evil Germans” and the relationship between Greece and Germany. When in fact it was no such thing. But I let you fall into your own pit with pleasure.

Oh, look. Who is offensive now? :) I was just actually waiting for this to happen. I asked a simple question (which I knew would be interpreted as “Don’t you just hate that awful Merkel woman?”, but said nothing to stop it, intentionally) and there you go not being able to restrain yourself and answer politely to what was a polite, non-ironic question – it was just a request for more information from simple curiosity. If you are already criticizing one side, you might as well, to at least appear to be fair, do so to the other. I wasn’t offensive to David. Whoever got it that way (and, yet again, I knew it would happen, together with the morality, ethics, and politeness policing, but intentionally didn’t say anything to stop the misinterpretation) – got it wrong. I was rubbed the wrong way because I thought that he sometimes intentionally, out of that same irritation you feel, answers me in the most condescending way. That happens in probably about 0.5 % of his answers to be, but I tend to interpret it as if it’s 99.5 %. Which is my mistake. Though, now, I am intrigued by this “I am irritated by your content”. That’s an interesting one.

But is that your problem? Why didn’t you learn another language?

Are you annoyed by Angela Merkel?

How about this? It's from an article from 2014. Perhaps it was already posted here somewhere. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/hollywood-salaries-revealed-movie-stars-737321

People really hate it if it’s homework. don’t they. Or perhaps they just need to point out that it’s homework. I wonder why that is? Does it bother you that much?

:D :lol: That really made me laugh. But, now come to think of it, perhaps I did at one time somewhere bump onto a whisper of separatism (in modern times), but perhaps I’m just imagining things.

This hit me like a ton of bricks when I first read it months ago. :blink: There is such a thing as American separatism? :o I thought that no American would ever want a break-up of the union.

Wait! Don’t roll your eyes just yet! I know that many of you will think: “Oh, no! Not another Woody Allen thread! For God’s sake!” But this is not about Woody Allen; it is much more about Eigil Bryld (just in case you didn’t know, it seems that, as per the IPA notation on Wikipedia article, his name is pronounced, approximately, EYE-ghill BRILL) and how this will all turn out visually. And, it seems from the photos, it will look great! Many articles in the last few days state that these are the first photos http://deadline.com/2016/08/crisis-in-six-scenes-photos-woody-allen-miley-cyrus-elaine-may-amazon-1201810941/ but these were released a bit before http://www.woodyallenpages.com/2016/08/crisis-six-scenes-first-images-features-woody-allen-miley-cyrus-elaine-may/ It looks stunning. Or perhaps that’s just my impression because I wasn’t expecting anything special visually, thinking that this was just a short mini-series with perhaps not lot of a budget. (Though, yeah, money doesn’t always equal stunning visuals.) Here is the trailer: From the House of Cards – cold, dark, bleak – to a total opposite (yes, I realize that is a pleonasm) for Eigil. IMDb isn’t showing how this was shot: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4354616/ I’m hoping for a brief write-up in the American Cinematographer. :) P. S. By the way, have you seen it? Lo and behold, the colourist is Joe Gawler, of Midnight in Paris and To Rome with Love fame.

So that Arri Alexa IMAX is not an altogether different camera? I just clicked on that link and that onto the main page of the film on IMDb and oh, my! All that steely teal. That greyness. That lead-colour everywhere. Couldn’t they have picked any other colour scheme... It seems as if movies with such topics just write themselves in terms of lighting and visuals by default in those terribly bleak colours. Coupled with digital sharpness, I can only assume I will hate it.

Oh, look, I replied before I saw this. :) This is another one of common but completely wrong views – the other being that I’m a big fan of Vittorio Storaro’s cinematography – about why I posted about certain matters around here, but I decided long ago not to enter into any explanations about what I actually said, because, sadly, I understood long ago that it will just entangle the matters even more and people will leave with the attitude they had before having understood nothing of what I said. Somehow I just got on the wrong foot with you ever since I first asked about that warmth in Woody Allen’s films, and even though I thought that, for a brief period in the last few months, our exchanges here much improved in attitude, now I realize that I was perhaps wrong. I just bug you a lot, don’t I. Rub you the wrong way. Or maybe I’m projecting. Because, let’s be honest, I do often come upon a post of yours that does irritate me, because I often have the impression of this deadpan, expressionless, dry attitude peppered with a little bit of ego and know-it-all superiority. Though one can’t quite reconcile that superiority with you helping a ton of people with your 20,000 posts, or how ever many there are now. Or perhaps one can, by saying that’s precisely where you draw your superiority from, by explaining everything to anyone and showcasing how much you know. I just couldn’t resist saying that. I don’t mean it in a mean way, but just had to put it out out there, because now that I said it, perhaps it will irritate me less or not at all. I guess that photo of yours with that look contributes a bit to this impression.

David, flop is a word that doesn’t immediately require box office as a collocation. Furthermore, I think that I never even mentioned the financial success in my post as a criterion of value. I said quite another thing. And even mentioned that I liked his most-hated show, Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip. I hate this selective picking of something I haven’t even said, complete disregard of what I did, and then jetting off with a view someone previously had as if a discussion never took place. Sorkin, in the views of many, used to be highly regarded, and then, to the dismay of many of those many, turned out to be a one-trick pony with a weird compulsion of writing the same thing again and again. Something, some might say, he has in common with Woody Allen.

It’s in the script. First it gets written as such, and then they shoot it as such. That is one of Sorkin’s trademarks, the so-called walk-and-talk.

All flops. Which is why I’m saying that he hasn’t been hailed since at least The West Wing, and even perhaps since Sports Night. And this comes from someone who actually liked Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip, with all of its flaws, and of the most reviled shows he wrote. He has made of himself a screenwriter who does behind-the-scenes shows (Sports Night, The West Wing, Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip, The Newsroom), which end up being all the same, and which tend to be full of long, talky, babbles and tons of tracking shots. Tracking shot! Tracking shot! Tracking shot! One after the other. He also tends to write them all himself, is known for not being able to collaborate with his writers’ room, which then all ends in conflict and people quit. Then he also tends to politicize his shows via an ongoing debate between two main characters. Steve Jobs seems to be a continuation of the thing he started with The Social Network: dramatization of a biography of a tech giant. I think lack of variety in his writing is the main thing I would object to. I’m sure I could find same-y-ness in his scripts’ structures if I had the time and will.

Sorkin? But hasn’t Sorkin been a yesteryear writer since, I don’t know, at least The West Wing? :blink:

I was wondering if a smartphone’s camera sensor has a 4:3 aspect ratio, does that mean that mean that one should switch from the default 16:9 ratio in order to use the sensor fully? A kind of a “D’oh!” question, but more important, I was wondering how much of the sensor’s area then does the phone use in the 16:9 aspect ratio?

I was wondering does anybody have any idea when Vittorio might pop up in the American Cinematographer to talk about this? When does the magazine come out? Tenth day of the month or something like that? I have the impression that previously this page http://theasc.com/magazine_includes/index.php showed the current month and the two following ones, but now it is the current month times two and the following month. Or perhaps my impression is wrong.

Is simple forbidden? :unsure:

In case you missed this thread, I thought I put it in the spotlight here: http://liftgammagain.com/forum/index.php?threads/the-definitive-orange-teal-blockbuster-look-thread-let%E2%80%99s-do-it.7231/ It’s one of those things in filmmaking that seem to never get old. P. S. Sorry for the title. It again got cut off, and I have no idea how. I meant to say: Orange & Teal: A Colourist’s Guide.

I think this is the Web page: https://www.syntheticaperture.com/products/color-finesse-3-0-pi-for-mac

Has any one of you had experiences with the Color Finesse plugin from Synthetic Aperture, which can simulate the effect of various filters?

The film got a mention on a colourists’ forum: http://liftgammagain.com/forum/index.php?threads/the-love-witch-2016.7165/

Which filter manufacturers are especially well regarded in movie industry applications?

So I’d like to know this: are there any particular scenes or films which in your view effectively used warming filters? But not only the warming ones, like 81 or 85, but also straw, antique suede, gold, coral, tobacco, or similar. And it also doesn’t have to be a particularly effective, but just something that you liked. Two, are there any cinematographers today who really like the filter look and use them even though you can do a lot in postproduction? Or any cinematographers of the past who loved to use them. Or a cinematographer who is particularly associated with a filter or liked to use a certain kind. And three, I was reading one of David Mullen’s posts yesterday where he says that what he does sometimes to achieve a warming effect is to use a blue filter, shoot a greyscale with it, then drop it for the scene, and then send a note to the colourist with a “pale yellow/golden look” message. So I was wondering, David – or anybody else who does a similar kind of thing – have you compared that look with a look of a filter the use of which would give a similar result? What’s the difference (apart from it, obviously, not being possible to remove the filter effect in postproduction)? P. S. I only saw a Cokin gold filter, and that’s for still photography. Any other producers? P. P. S. This might sound baffling, but would it be a terrible thing if there were a CTO lens filter? It would look awful? I was just thinking if, say, I was shooting something at 6500 K natural lighting, would it be possible to turn such a light into a 3000 K-ish sunset light with the use of such filter. It would probably kill a lot of other colours or something...