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

171–180 of 424 posts

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#171

Post by mhh__ »

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…

Software projects don't usually have the luxury of a violent but intuitive dictator running the thing. Obviously a mega budget tv show is going to be run from afar most of the time.

Software can be like this, e.g. if you were building a small team to do something you cared about it would probably be more like a 3* kitchen than support team inside IBM or something.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#172

Post by hammock »

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.

Plus the Deathtroopers, the navy seals of storm troopers

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#173

Post by ozim »

esafak wrote: post #162
goalieca wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

When someone is fixing it in postprod most of complexity of the initial shot is gone never to be seen again. It is not like they fix some colors on the scene and then last scene of the movie suddenly changes to something different :D

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#174

Post by imbnwa »

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…

>When you ship a piece of software, it's often expected to be usable by a million people reliably for years.

And what specifically, comparatively, has modern corporate software production organization contributed to to this point?

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#175

Post by monocularvision »

andrepd wrote: post #74
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…

> Massive real sets with CGI enhancements; sometimes green screens This is the definition of the Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy, and they're still some of the best-looking films I've ever seen, far surpassing the modern UE slop.

We watched the original trilogy a couple months back with our kids and we were all so impressed by how they looked. And it wasn’t an “impressive for their age” but legitimately looked better than modern day films.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#176

Post by e3bc54b2 »

lucideer wrote: post #42
ghaff wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For quite a while, the further the films/series are separated from the original trilogy, the better they seem to be.

Ironically Andor is one of the closest to A New Hope narratively.

It is one of the reasons I love Andor so much. Rogue One was so good that it elevated a A New Hope and Andor in turn (especially after S2) elevates Rogue One in similar fashion. The movie/show on their own are some of the greatest, but they don't limit their achievements to themselves and like a rising tide lift whoever they connect to. It is really really hard to pull that off, and people in Andor somehow managed that twice.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#177

Post by hammock »

sdenton4 wrote: post #120
Kon5ole wrote: post #86

Andor + Rogue one are my favourites from the franchise. It tells a story that the 50 year olds that grew up with SW can appreciate for its depth and intrigue as well as connection to the original films, but leaving the hallowed originals mostly alone. I wish the crew behind it would be allowed to continue the story until the fall of the emperor, so we could get the whole "rise and fall of the empire" story told with…

Hmmm, rise of the empire you say? So a long hard look at a faltering parliamentary system, gradually usurped by an authoritarian and his team of goons... Doesn't sound very relatable for today's audiences.

[flagged]

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#178

Post by bombcar »

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…

Another thing is that the jobs are very defined and regimented - not that the person doing A1 couldn’t do a bunch of the other things, but he knows exactly what he is doing and not what others may be doing.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#179

Post by sho_hn »

lucideer wrote: post #150
ghaff wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It ties in but isn't really part of the main storyline except incidentally. You could say the same thing about Rogue One though the tie-in is even stronger in that case. The Mandalorian is pretty separate other than baby yoda.

It's not part of the main storyline of Luke's journey as an individual & the Jedi order but it is a very big part of one of the main storylines of a ragtag bunch of rebels sticking it to the empire. A storyline which I'd argue was strongest in A New Hope & the initial trilogy & was weakened by the increased focus on individual storylines in the anakin & rey trilogies.

I'd say this is giving the Anakin trilogy an unfair shake: While I don't enjoy watching the prequels much for being clumsy films, you have to hand it to Lucas for trying to significantly expand his space opera by adding in galactical politics, etc. Any thrust to make Star Wars about ideology and governance (and specifically parliamentary democracy vs. facism) really came from the prequels, and arguably you couldn't have Andor without their template just as much as A New Hope delivers the plot hooks for its premise. In retrospect, while its flowering may be Andor, it's the prequels that gave the franchise a bigger signature and message than just being a family drama. Taken together they now make Star Wars about something, which I think it never really had before. "What's that star war about?" is something you can answer now.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#180

Post by gmueckl »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #52
iainmerrick wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know, I still really value the original trilogy. It’s just very, very different in some crucial ways. One aspect that’s really striking when you see Andor is how little the Jedi and the Force have to do with it; which highlights how central they are to the original trilogy. ( Rogue One does a pretty deft job of bridging those worlds, eg with Donnie Yen’s character.) And the Force was a big part of the charm o…

"The Force" never sat well with me. It was the one weird supernatural thing in the Star Wars universe that pushed the whole franchise into "magic" territory. The less Force, the better in my opinion. Save super-powers for comic-book movies.

Star Wars was never science fiction. It has always been treated as fantasy with space ships by its creators. The nature of its setting is really much closer to Harry Potter than e.g. the Expanse.
Post reply on HN