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

361–370 of 424 posts

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#361

Post by k__ »

whartung wrote: post #312
k__ wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Ah, yes, of course

What I meant is that software is interactive, while a video, for example, is not, it's static in the sense that it will always played in the same way.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#362

Post by chiph »

morkalork wrote: post #279
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…

All the interior sets of imperial ships, especially the crashed one in S1 were absolutely gorgeous. The shiny black glass surfaces, analogue controls, blinking lights and fixtures everywhere were just wow. I can't remember the last time I saw such a well done rendition of "sleek retro-futuristic" aesthetic.

Part of the design esthetic is that nothing is labeled. How do people know that the 2nd switch from the right opens communications? I think that in the Empire you have to be a fast learner.

Or else.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#363

Post by nprateem »

meowface wrote: post #3

The cinematography, editing, writing, and overall feel of this show far exceed any Star Wars movie I've seen. I had long since written off the Star Wars franchise as a shameless cash grab since the original movies but they proved they could do something cool with it. I'd definitely watch a new movie if it were handled by the same team that made Andor. Prequel, sequel, side story, or re-telling of the originals.

[Spoiler-ish] It's just a shame the show largely fails to build emotional connection with the characters. When bad things happened I mostly felt nothing.

The other thing that has always plagued SW is the fact they can travel through hyperspace, have the tech to destroy planets, but largely lack CCTV, autopilot, effective homing missiles, HD displays, etc. It's a weird mix of 70s tech and super sci-fi.

It's like, if you were leading a rebellion, would you have your secret base rigged with remotely detonated explosives, or need to go back and cackhandedly manually destroy your comms, etc?

Suspension of disbelief is stretched to breaking point sometimes.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#364

Post by Reefersleep »

troupo wrote: post #196
apples_oranges wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 …

> Should I really try Andor after all the bad stuff Disney made? Andor (at least Season 1) is very slow, boring, suffers from "static heads talking at each other" cinematography of modern movies [1], main character is just not a great actor. All that said, it's definitely worth a watch: - most, if not all, major characters (apart from the protagonist) are very compelling, chew through every scene they are in, and are…

I prefer good static heads vs poor walking and talking. Didn't notice the prior to be a problem in Andor.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#365

Post by epolanski »

meowface wrote: post #3

The cinematography, editing, writing, and overall feel of this show far exceed any Star Wars movie I've seen. I had long since written off the Star Wars franchise as a shameless cash grab since the original movies but they proved they could do something cool with it. I'd definitely watch a new movie if it were handled by the same team that made Andor. Prequel, sequel, side story, or re-telling of the originals.

I gave it a try, and it wasn't bad indeed, but honestly I have too much fatigue towards all this repetitive milking of IPs to keep my interest up.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#367

Post by ahoka »

gsich wrote: post #294
arccy wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

No, even a standard 30-33cm pizza is barely enough for 1 person depending on hungry state.

A regular pizza of that size have about 2000 kcal of energy and an average male would need 2500 kcal a day (less for women), so unless you only have a single meal a day, which is unlikely, then it must be enough.

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#368

Post by ghaff »

jimbokun wrote: post #335
ghaff wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certainly one of the great series. I think a lot of 60s sitcoms probably age less well.

Just FYI, MASH was 70s into early 80s, not 60s.

Very aware of that. And probably 70s hold up better than 60s but with a little bit of research could probably come up with cringeworthy 70s and 80s examples to (of which MASH is certainly not one).

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#369

Post by krapp »

gmueckl wrote: post #359
krapp wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, plenty of "science fiction" has telepaths and psionics, especially from the 1970s and 80s. Star Trek had it since the original series. If your standard for what science fiction is us The Expanse then almost all of what's considered science fiction is fantasy.

Even the Expanse has fantastical elements like the protomolecule and the Epstein drive. The difference is that it is closer to classic science fiction authors like Asimov, Clarke or Niven in that this body of work tries hard to keep some grounding in extrapolated scientific models. Star Wars doesn't even claim to attempt this. It is a world of entirely made up rules and places for the sake of the story. There is noth…

Most science fiction is closer to Star Wars than The Expanse, and Star Wars is more grounded in plausible reality than Star Trek, which no one tags as "science fantasy." If Andor didn't have "Star Wars" branding, I don't think anyone would have a problem considering it science fiction in the grand tradition of a lot of MilSF.

I'm not saying the distinction doesn't exist - The Hobbit isn't SF and Ringworld isn't high fantasy, but I am saying that between the extremes, it's mostly just vibes. There is no objective reason not to consider Star Wars science fiction, some people just find the space wizards too silly (while having a bookshelf full of "The author's barely disguised fetish or hyperfixation but In Spaaaaace.")

Re: Cinematography of “Andor”

#370

Post by mystifyingpoi »

poisonborz wrote: post #231
mystifyingpoi wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's wrong with light sabers? It's just a weapon with some useful properties (like bouncing back blaster shots). Finn used it fine for a sec, so it's proven that the user doesn't need to be trained at all in anything really. The Force though... yeah, as much as I'm a big fan of SW, the whole concept leans way too hard into soft magic territory, at least to my taste.

For one the technology for such a saber far surpasses and stands out from anything else in the Empire. But more importantly it requires the same superhuman Jedi magic to be useful (swinging to bounce blaster shots). It works as a ritual weapon / in climatic battles, but modern SW overuses it (as the Jedis in general).

> But more importantly it requires the same superhuman Jedi magic to be useful

No, Finn used it fine in defense when fighting a trooper in TFA. It is useful even without the Force. We can only blame sequels for that :P

Although yeah, when compared to other weapons at the time, they seem overpowered, I agree, never thought of that.

Post reply on HN