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

161–170 of 424 posts

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#161

Post by isleyaardvark »

chiph wrote: post #35

What has impressed me is that in all the Imperial scenes - they have a lot of polished surfaces (floor, control panels, etc) and you never see a reflection of crew or film equipment. I'm sure most of this is the result of good planning before filming but also the amount of effort put in post-production to remove any it. As a physical media guy, I'm happy that Disney decided to release season 1 on 4k UHD. And I hope t…

I love how there are a lot of reflections in windows, makes it look more real.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#162

Post by esafak »

goalieca wrote: post #159
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…

The shot, once made, is forever unless you do an expensive reshoot. Software bugs happen and people have low expectations for bugs even in highly scaling software like YouTube.

Haven't you heard of "We'll fix it in post"?

Given the way things are, whole movies are going to be made in post...

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#164

Post by isleyaardvark »

kriro wrote: post #112
belval wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the opposite for me. I could not be more burnt out on StarWars, when they introduced the force in season 2 I rolled my eyes and it somewhat took me out of it. The main downside of watching Andor is that you have your brain nagging you about eposide 7 making everything that you are watching pointless (the new republic is obliterated after 20-30 years). I have friends that I can't convince to watch it because they…

And this is exactly where I disagree. Andor does not stand very well on its own outside of SW (and that takes it from great tier to very good for me with the other minor squibbles that I have). If you don't know the lore, things will be less clear and the writing will feel strange at times. FWIW, I have recommended this show to many friends who never watched anything SW, they mostly liked it but found some things odd…

The crashed tie episode was part of the larger theme in the series to show the progression/evolution of the Rebellion over the years (and why there was the reveal that it took place on Yavin). That said I agree the execution could've been better.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#165

Post by plemer »

goalieca wrote: post #159
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…

The shot, once made, is forever unless you do an expensive reshoot. Software bugs happen and people have low expectations for bugs even in highly scaling software like YouTube.

But that’s where “we’ll get it post” comes in. The shot is just the starting point.

That said, directors shoot v differently - some will do literal hundreds of takes and still do plenty of post, others will shoot max three takes and send to edit.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#166

Post by fernandopj »

meowface wrote: post #145
mtillman wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Loved Andor. Unlikely Gilroy would do more Star Wars and if he did, he probably wouldn’t be given another $650M for a side character. Season 2 was $290 and that was after their budget was capped by Iger, they tried to spend more. Source: https://screenrant.com/andor-budget-confirmed/

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.

Andor S2 was around $350M and most likely paid for itself and some. [1]

> On the other hand, I guess it's still a business, at the end of the day.

You're right, in the sense that Andor was an exception regarding every other SW show on Disney+ for the past 4 years. All had high production costs and seems like Andor is the only one which recouped itself. Acolyte was a spectacular viewship failure.

So the business logic would be to cap costs, most likely in half for now on. I don't have high expectations of Disney learning the right lessons from Andor & Tony.

[1] https://www.thewrap.com/star-wars-andor-revenue-disney-plus/

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#167

Post by ahartmetz »

wslh wrote: post #130
ahartmetz wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And by far the coolest looking spaceships ever seen in any medium. The production design was incredible. At least X-Wings, TIE Fighters, Corellian Corvettes, Imperial Shuttles and Star Destroyers. Not a fan of the Millennium Falcon tbh.

The TIE Avenger starship [1] in the series seems incredible. I cannot find the official toy. [1] https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/TIE_Avenger

Yes indeed, looks really damn cool.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#168

Post by lolinder »

goalieca wrote: post #159
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…

The shot, once made, is forever unless you do an expensive reshoot. Software bugs happen and people have low expectations for bugs even in highly scaling software like YouTube.

Aside from what others have pointed out about fixability in post: People have pretty low expectations for most shots in most films. Every film has many mistakes in it that film buffs have fun cataloguing and no one else ever notices. Part of the art of filmmaking is knowing what must be fixed and what can be ignored, which is awfully similar to the job of a product manager.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#169

Post by hammock »

parsimo2010 wrote: post #124

Andor is shot beautifully but it has a major issue that has plagued an increasing amount of shows recently. It is way too dark. The creators knew it was going straight to streaming and was never shown in theaters. I can’t watch the show in the daytime because even with my blinds down and curtains drawn the window in my living room washes out half of the scenes. Some very important things happened in the dark (it bein…

I finished season 2 yesterday and was actually thinking how refreshing it was that andor WASNT too dark. It has some dark scenes sure but I really it’s not nearly as bad as most shows these days

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#170

Post by fernandopj »

ghaff wrote: post #133
Spooky23 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you 100%. I found it interesting that in this particular circle of kids, they rate the attack of the clones much higher, as the animated series is kind of a “Star Wars home” to them. Any way you cut it, it’s really cool how people consume them in different ways, and there’s enough material that over time we can just discard garbage like 8 hours of walking through the desert.

Attack of the Clones is IMO not bad. Had Phantom Menace (and Jar Jar) not poisoned the well so to speak, I'm not sure the prequel trilogy would be as vilified as it is. Have never watched the animated series.

Personally, I rate the midichlorians much higher as poison than Jar Jar, who could be safely ignored in subsequent movies anyway.
Post reply on HN