Monday, July 4, 2005
Member since:
March 2002
March 2002
Hopefully he is going for a global release for the DVD as done before.
Tuesday, July 5, 2005
Member since:
May 2004
May 2004
i dont think it was for the ratio, which, by the way, is the Spielberg Standart.
Tuesday, July 5, 2005
Member since:
March 2002
March 2002
It means flaws to the eyes of the viewer. In my case, I felt there were flaws when it came to science and physics. Many of the effects were created to dazel the audience, but had many of them been down to reality, they simply would have never happened in the real world. Even the driving the mini-van down a freeway of stalled vehicles I found to be a technical flaw, because in reality, it simply would never happen. And for all of you who live in the big cities, you know exactly what I mean. Unless you have a 4-wheel drive, there is no way in hell you're driving anywhere on a loaded freeway.
Tuesday, July 5, 2005
Member since:
March 2002
March 2002
I liked the way all the stopped cars were perfectly spaced on the freeways and roads so that Cruise could easily navigate through them.
Spielberg has shot most of his films in the last decade or two at 1.85:1. That way the films can either be cropped (matted) top and/or bottom for a wider viewing or cropped (matted) at the sides for pan-and-scan viewing, and either way not a lot will be lost.
John
Spielberg has shot most of his films in the last decade or two at 1.85:1. That way the films can either be cropped (matted) top and/or bottom for a wider viewing or cropped (matted) at the sides for pan-and-scan viewing, and either way not a lot will be lost.
John
Wednesday, July 6, 2005
Member since:
March 2002
March 2002
I have to say there where some great shots in this as well. Like the long scene were they are driving away on the freeway and the girl is screaming. That was nicely done with how the camera moved around the car ect.