John Holland Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 Sorry Mr Biswas you are very wrong and really dont understand anything about making motion pictures what ever they are shot on ! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seba Vuye Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 Movie was ok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaan Aslam Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 What the **(obscenity removed)**. Do they not sell a sense of humor at film tools any more? Christ alive. Regardless, I thought the cinematography overall was pretty swell, with casino INT.'s being mind blowing. The quality of the light was amazing, from the soft wash over the walk ways to the slight blow outs over each table. I also think the color was spot on. And the silhouettes were amazing. I thought the last shot of (was it Javier Bardem's character?) walking being silhouetted by the burning house was bold as hell. If anything, I think they propelled the iconic nature of Bond so much more. As far as the story, I thought the pacing was off. And I didn't like that right when they catch Bardem, the previous forty minutes of the film are more or less useless. No one has brought up why they thought the cinematography was horrible or "hideous". Could some, namely the poster, expound? And before I'm called a fan boy, eat a bag of dicks. I'm not, I just want to see why certain people thought so. A healthy conversation. I didn't go through 17 years of god awful schooling to all of a sudden not expound on my standing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now