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

341–350 of 424 posts

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#341

Post by jimbokun »

iainmerrick wrote: post #65

To address this interview specifically, rather than just gushing about how great Andor is-- One point Nuyens makes in a few different ways is that they used a variety of tools and techniques at every stage. People often have simplistic, extreme viewpoints like "modern CGI can do anything" or "CGI looks fake and weightless, practical effects are better". But here's somebody with a big part in making a fantastic-lookin…

Watching it I felt like watching something that had been filmed on location, even though I knew that was impossible.

Like they actually took the actors to Coruscant to shoot scenes. Felt so much more lived in than Coruscant in the prequels.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#342

Post by jimbokun »

twodave wrote: post #99
captainbland wrote: post #44

The main thing that impressed me about Andor is how they managed to make the Stormtroopers seem like a genuinely intimidating force rather than just a rabble of goons in costumes. It goes to show how much they elevated the believability of Star Wars in Andor.

I agree. Especially in the originals, everything just sort of “works out” for the protagonist(s). The bad guys don’t aim well, fly well or really do anything great. And that’s fine because that is era of cinema Star Wars came from. In Andor the empire is smart, calculated, deadly and just plain scary—nearly to a visceral degree, if you allow yourself to be absorbed into the story. And despite how good Andor (and Rogu…

One aspect I didn't realize though watching it as a kid is they only escape the Death Star because Vader WANTS them to escape. So he can follow them back to the Secret Rebel Base.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#343

Post by mrunkel »

atoav wrote: post #199
WD-42 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought it worked in the original trilogy because it was much more subtle, but still powerful. You watch Luke struggle to harness it over the span of 3 movies. In the recent Disney movies (Andor being the exception) it’s like they gave everyone the force, everyone is a super hero, it’s bombastic and annoying.

This is btw. what I hate with so many modern RPGs, you are a nobody but within 5 minutes of playing you are already extremely awesome and look like a shiny knight on a white horse. Let me run around with a rock and a stick for the first hour. Then give me a sword that looks cheap but I will cherish it. Then take it away. Let me earn it when I am awesome in the end. To many games treat you like a toddler that wants sh…

Check out the Kingdom Come Deliverance series.

Sure, you'll be a badass at the end, but you're going to earn it. :)

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#344

Post by divbzero »

apples_oranges wrote: post #31
meowface wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I watched it for the first time immediately after finishing Andor. Definitely better than the other Star Wars films but definitely not as good as Andor. (I'm aware the showrunner of Andor co-wrote Rogue One, but Andor really seems like a different tier.)

You guys are excluding the George Lucas movies from discussion right? In my opinion nothing ever came even close and I gave up on SW after the second Kylo Ren movie. Rouge one was cool though, also first episodes of Mandalorian.. Should I really try Andor after all the bad stuff Disney made? A few days ago I watched the new LILO and Stitch and that was great, so maybe good people still work at Disney …

If you thought Rogue One was cool, then yes you should definitely try Andor.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#345

Post by fsloth »

peeters wrote: post #315
fsloth wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 rea…

Interesting, I would not consider mood and story descriptive of sci-fi at all. Rather sci-fi adds speculative and fantastic elements to a world still populated by humans / beings of relatable psychology.

And once you have relatable psychology you also get politics and weaponization of information (what the show was mostly about) - political thriller. Agree, those elements were damn good ones. And I loved the utilization of WW 2 analogues - French resistance, Spanish civil war, Wansee conference etc etc

I would say the show was very _grounded_ in that the high stakes were about humans doing human things.

What sets Andor apart is _excellence_ and (partly budget driven) restraint.

Not only was the acting superb, the script was intelligent.

But then the attention to visual detail was next level as well. The sets and costumes were mind blowingly good. For example I was convinced they had to had found some real life location for the Ghorman plaza (nope, built set + CGI). I would love to have a plaza like that. Not many shows have so good fictional architecture you would love to see the real thing.

So I was totally impressed with the show. But in my books it’s still sci-fi. It’s probably the best recent serialized sci-fi show in the last decade along with the Expanse.

If I’m reading between the lines what you are saying is that ”Andor is actually intelligent and high quality art … sci-fi can’t be high quality art”? I’m exaggerating to make a point.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#347

Post by bazoom42 »

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…

> when they want to change something, it's almost like they just do it?

Film production at this level have a lot of process. There are many teams and the director or showrunner acts as “product owner”. The crew is very hierachical and specialized with clearly defined turfs. Pre-production is iterative but when shooting starts it is waterfall - it is incredibly expensive to make small changes after shooting have started. Digital has made it somewhat more iterative since you can “fix it in post” but this still has its limits. You can remove a beard and add a spaceship but you cannot fix bad acting or bad lines.

Film production is definitely not just letting the creatives run wild. Any idea has a price tag attached and will ultimately have to be approved by the accounting team. And film production tend to have a hard deadline and no possibility of patch updated.

Software development is a lot easier since you can keep developing iteratively.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#349

Post by RataNova »

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…

Everyone knows their role, but also trusts others to own theirs

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#350

Post by RataNova »

munificent wrote: post #157
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…

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…

Game dev sits in that weird middle ground where you have the unpredictability of a player interacting with the system and the high production demands of film. You can't just duct-tape a level together and hope no one notices
Post reply on HN