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

261–270 of 424 posts

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#261

Post by monocasa »

MangoToupe wrote: post #240
cluckindan wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you seen the amount of changes George Lucas did when editing the prequel trilogy of Star Wars? They were digitally composing individual actor performances within a shot.

Isn't Lucas known for being an outlier in the industry in his devotion to post-production editing? I honestly don't know. But I am unsure that other production teams are capable of pulling this off and shipping on schedule with the same aptitude.

He pioneered that modern post production heavy flow for blockbusters, and everything listed is pretty common in that niche.

Honestly it's almost more notable these days when that kind of stuff doesn't happen.

You're basically paying more money to decouple and delay decisions as much as possible.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#262

Post by ozim »

cluckindan wrote: post #192
ozim wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Have you seen the amount of changes George Lucas did when editing the prequel trilogy of Star Wars? They were digitally composing individual actor performances within a shot.

Greedo shooting first didn’t make empire good guys just Han less of a bad boy. ;)

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#263

Post by mcv »

boppo1 wrote: post #62
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…

>5 seasons Thank god. There's not enough meat on the bone, the writing would never have been good enough to support this. We need more excellent, tightly spun stories.

I was actually hoping for 4 seasons. Considering how they put 4 different, excellent stories in season 1. Season basically told a single story (the Ghorman massacre) spread out over 4 years. There were many moments where I'd hoped they'd dive a bit deeper into some other aspects, like what would become of the Maya Pei Brigade, the stolen TIE Avenger, other missions where we see Andor grow into the expert spy that he's clearly become. And of course more about how they bring the various parts of the rebellion together, the move to Yavin, etc.

I think there was more than enough room to fill at least another season. Maybe two.

But hey, I'm more than happy we got this much.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#264

Post by mcv »

andrepd wrote: post #73
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…

The originals are also very mid-tier, especially the last one. It survives on nostalgia mostly.

Return of the Jedi does have the most important scene in all of Star Wars: the confrontation between Luke and the Emperor. The rest of the movie has plenty of shortcomings, but that scene more than redeems it.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#265

Post by toyg »

twoodfin wrote: post #200
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.

My main (mild) criticism of the now-complete Andor->Rogue One arc is that it only put its toe into the waters of the Death Star. Giving that concept a thematic heft well beyond its Flash-Gordon-supervillain origins appeared “fully armed and operational” in the story, but in the end it barely rises to subtext.

But there is no conflict, no interest, in exploring a building site. What are you going to talk about, contractors installing pipes? How they get the best canteen food?

It's actually better for the Death Star to be unseen, so that its full horror can only be imagined - and hence, becoming greater - in our minds.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#266

Post by MangoToupe »

monocasa wrote: post #261
MangoToupe wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't Lucas known for being an outlier in the industry in his devotion to post-production editing? I honestly don't know. But I am unsure that other production teams are capable of pulling this off and shipping on schedule with the same aptitude.

He pioneered that modern post production heavy flow for blockbusters, and everything listed is pretty common in that niche. Honestly it's almost more notable these days when that kind of stuff doesn't happen. You're basically paying more money to decouple and delay decisions as much as possible.

I've also heard this practice blamed for enabling a decade of "bad cgi"—visuals are reworked and reworked until time runs out, and in a rush they ship visuals that are worse than in movies 20 years ago. Explicitly: it's not the artist, it's a production pipeline failure. And indeed, it's easy finding marvel movies whose CGI looks closer to that of a video game than Lucas's prequels. Heck, even the sequel movies fall into this category.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#267

Post by iainmerrick »

BLKNSLVR wrote: post #111
rendall wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I felt like The Mandalorian was a step above its nearest best of Star Wars TV. Andor is a step above that.

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…

I watched two or three episodes of The Mandalorian and was very underwhelmed. Childishly simplistic plot, but much too violent to be a kid’s show. (Although now I say that, I guess the original movies are both childish and violent.)

There’s a bit where the main character very obviously levels up and gets to choose a power-up. Then he sees somebody else with a different power-up and goes “wow, I should get one of those”. That confirmed to me that it wanted to be a videogame rather than a serious drama.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#268

Post by whatnow37373 »

nicoburns wrote: post #5

If you haven't watched Andor and you are at all open to sci-fi then I would urge you to consider giving a go. The writing, acting, and cinematography are all excellent, and IMO it is a very strong contender for the best TV show released in the last few years.

It’s not sci-fi though. If Star Wars is sci-fi then Jurassic Park is a biology documentary.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#269

Post by cortesoft »

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.

Is this really true anymore? I feel like people release software now expecting to continue to patch it repeatedly, so there isn't a push to get it perfect the first time.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#270

Post by margalabargala »

gsich wrote: post #149
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…

>two pizza teams 1 person teams?

[flagged]
Post reply on HN