Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cinematography of “Andor”

pushing-pixels.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 424 posts

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#311

Post by storus »

colordrops wrote: post #160
BLKNSLVR wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm on both sides of the fence with early Mandalorian. I need to watch it again until it jumps the shark because I don't know how early it did that. The latter episodes were incredibly laboured, with the narrative being spelt out, as if to a child, by various characters. I think it may have always been like that, but the look and feel overwhelmed the ridiculous dialogue for a while. If they were more clever with the…

Mandalorian started out strong and got progressively worse with each episode. Don't even bother with season 3.

I had that feeling with Andor - Season 1 was great, Season 2 was... not sure how to even name it, it was like a completely different show.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#312

Post by whartung »

k__ wrote: post #186
munificent wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A big part of the difference is the timelines and scale. When you ship a piece of software, it's often expected to be usable by a million people reliably for years. In film and video production, you're duct taping shit together to get it to stay in one piece just long enough to get the shot and get the film out the door. You're fixing shit in post because you were in a hurry on set. It's a sort of barely controlled c…

This. Music, film, and text are static. Software is dynamic.

To be pedantic, requirements are dynamic. Software is a reflection of that.

However, the fact that software can readily embrace dynamism, can make it a self fulfilling prophecy.

But back when games were shipped on CD or burned into ROM cartridges, it was much more of a ship it and it’s DONE process and culture.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#313

Post by jimbokun »

xorcist wrote: post #132

What I don't understand is how film crews can work together when they are larger than two pizza teams? And when they want to change something, it's almost like they just do it? Surely they have to file a ticket with the Product Owner first? And why don't they wait until the current sprint is done before doing things that clearly belongs to the next one? Why do the producer run around speaking in precise terms when he…

Seems a little closer to the process Jobs and Ive had at Apple.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#314

Post by kranke155 »

xorcist wrote: post #132

What I don't understand is how film crews can work together when they are larger than two pizza teams? And when they want to change something, it's almost like they just do it? Surely they have to file a ticket with the Product Owner first? And why don't they wait until the current sprint is done before doing things that clearly belongs to the next one? Why do the producer run around speaking in precise terms when he…

This sometimes happens.

But a lot of movies are terrible because this doesn’t happen.

The truth about the world is that it’s poorly managed, and competent people don’t always rise to the top of complex organisations.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#315

Post by peeters »

fsloth wrote: post #258
peeters wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you are at all open to sci-fi That is to say, a sci-fi setting . Andor would not be correctly put in the sci-fi genre, rather in the political thriller genre.

I'm not sure why some plots would be off-limits in sci-fi genre? Isn't setting limits antithesis to the whole idea of sci-fi?

I guess like with all categorization, genres are reductive generalizations. And I'm saying the sci-fi generalization is much less descriptive of Andor than the political thriller generalization is. You could transplant Andor to WWII historical fiction and it would be less of a change than changing the mood and story to fit what most people's preconceived notions of sci-fi is.

I guess in short, I'm saying that you really don't have to be open to the sci fi genre to enjoy Andor.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#316

Post by kranke155 »

wizardforhire wrote: post #230
xorcist wrote: post #132

What I don't understand is how film crews can work together when they are larger than two pizza teams? And when they want to change something, it's almost like they just do it? Surely they have to file a ticket with the Product Owner first? And why don't they wait until the current sprint is done before doing things that clearly belongs to the next one? Why do the producer run around speaking in precise terms when he…

Film sets can seem enigmatic, the pacing, the language, the decorum. Film has over a hundred years of cultural development that manifests on set as set etiquette. Combined with mature unions that actively and heavily defend their trades. It can seem ridiculous and wasteful to the uninitiated… and indy productions split off constantly to try and reinvent the wheel only for individuals later in their career to converge…

Anyone who’s worked on a smaller set understands why a bigger set makes sense.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#317

Post by kranke155 »

carrychains wrote: post #57
mcv wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Andor is by far the best Star Wars. Rogue One is very good, and the only movie that's in the same league as the originals, but Andor is so much better. I don't think we'll see anything on the same level as Andor again; they already cut the original plans from 5 seasons to 2; it's simply too expensive and costs too much time to do it this well. But I do hope that future Star Wars shows will try to follow at least some…

That "cut" happened before they even started working on the show. Despite the original thought of 5 seasons, it was essentially planned for 2 seasons right from the start.

From Gilroy’s own telling, it happened during the filming of Season 1 in Scotland? That seems to be what he told Happy Sad Confused on their recent interview.

He realised that everything, absolutely everything in Star Wars needs to be designed, that it took ages to do, and that it would be forever to make 5 seasons. So he pitched to Diego to only make one more.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#318

Post by peeters »

modeless wrote: post #156
peeters wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They did a really good job tying Andor into Rogue One, but yeah Andor is just far better in terms of pacing, etc. And because they have to rush the plot in R1 (meet Jyn, she doesn't care about the rebellion, oops never mind now she's leading the rebellion) it ends up seeming much shallower emotionally. They also seemed to have to have a bit of fan service. Rogue One was my favourite Star Wars production before Andor,…

If by fan service you mean the scene where Darth Vader is at his most terrifying in the whole franchise, I think it was handled perfectly.

Not referring to that actually, I think that was actually a great bridge to Ep 4 that helps put the story in context for casual fans.

More the presence of the Force and Jedi lore. They were so close to not having that be part of Rogue One but were still forced to include the mystical super beings in some way. Andor was able to fully detach from that baggage, focusing on the little people doing their part. And when they did bring in the Force healer in the second season, it was exactly how you'd expect average people to respond to a mystical power that you didn't directly witness. Hope, faith, skepticism, denial, rejection.

As far as Vader goes...it does make you wonder if he's just toying with Obi-Wan when he meets him like 3 days later...

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#319

Post by physicles »

toyg wrote: post #256
meowface wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On one hand I want to say "fuck it, let them have whatever the fuck they want", given they should've known how well-received the show is by critics and viewers alike and how they should consider it basically the savior of the Star Wars brand. On the other hand, I guess it's still a business, at the end of the day.

> the savior of the Star Wars brand I think Rogue One is the best Star Wars ever and Andor is in the same vein. But. The savior of the Star Wars brand is always going to be the latest lightsaber-fest for 10-year-olds. That creates customer loyalty that will survive forever. Those kids then grow up and get to bitch about the new lightsaber-fest, and to fawn over the artsy drama.

Did customer loyalty survive the latest round of terrible movies and TV shows? I’ve long since written off anything Star Wars, except maybe the Mandelorian (didn’t watch season 2 though) and Andor.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#320

Post by echelon »

crazygringo wrote: post #291
xorcist wrote: post #132

What I don't understand is how film crews can work together when they are larger than two pizza teams? And when they want to change something, it's almost like they just do it? Surely they have to file a ticket with the Product Owner first? And why don't they wait until the current sprint is done before doing things that clearly belongs to the next one? Why do the producer run around speaking in precise terms when he…

Perhaps you're confusing planning with execution. All the things you're describing -- in the spirit of tickets, sprints, etc. -- do happen. They're called pre-production. It takes years (months if you're lucky) to set up how everything will run on set. Producers have a huge list of actionables (tickets), and there is constant iteration (sprints) of parts of the script, of what the film's visual look will be, the tone…

> You seem to be under the impression that film production is somehow more individually empowering or trusting than software development. It's not.

It's sad that tens of thousands of kids attend film school, yet there are too few roles of autonomy for them.

The "Hollywood" system only makes a few thousand film and tv productions of scale per year. There are way more people with visions and ideas and dreams, and they're all left to wither on the vine.

How many Chris Nolans, Stanley Kubricks, and Ridley Scotts have we lost to the rat race?

I think this is the biggest potential for AI. Suddenly all of those directors and dreamers who couldn't { hack, struggle, nepo } their way to the top of the pyramid can pursue their vision.

YouTube and TikTok have been huge enablers of creativity. They're a much fairer and wider platform for enablement and distribution, and already today's youth are setting this target as their new generational dream.

We're likely about to see a film industry that resembles the gaming, publishing, and music industries. Studios will exist for large scale "AAA" fare, but individual auteurs and small teams will be able to make their mark. Steam Greenlight, Bandcamp, Wattpad, and Medium for the director. It's like what the DAW did for music production - no more need to spend tens of thousands to book a studio - except even more orders of magnitude in cost reduction.

We've needed studios for two things historically: (1) distribution (2) financing. YouTube and streaming solved #1, and Gen AI puts film [1] squarely within the "ramen budget" of college students. So pillar #2 is about to fall.

[1] I don't mean low budget films. Gen AI will give directors the VFX to achieve expansive science fiction and fantasy visions, exotic locales, and a stunningly beautiful cast (that most audiences prefer to watch).

Post reply on HN