Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Captain America

J

Jed Shepherd

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2011
Messages
83
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Brisbane, Australia
So i saw this film in 2d the other night and notice some scenes had backgrounds with frozen digital noise. As in it was there but not flickering like the noise on the actors. Did anyone else notice this and is it possibly something to do with the post 3d conversion or something? One scene the enters my mind is when Captain America is sitting inside a run down building and Carter enters to talk to him, she crosses in front of a smashed up bar and i noticed it there.

The cinema I was at uses 2K Texas Instruments projectors, and it was a dcp being played so im not sure if it was something to do with the projector in any way but i just thought I would post incase I was going crazy haha.

PS. Stay until after the credits, as with most Marvel movies lately.
 
Captain America was heavily post-processed, especially in the scenes where the hero is short and skinny.
They had to retouch many scenes by hand, frame-by-frame.
 
Didn't stay awake long enough to notice. I thought this movie was just plain bad. I really wanted to like it and didn't at all. SO many problems with the story, including how did he learn to fight, drive a motorcycle, plane, etc. just from getting in the "make me a hunk" machine. WEAK writing throughout, imo.
 
Kevin Wild said:
Didn't stay awake long enough to notice. I thought this movie was just plain bad. I really wanted to like it and didn't at all. SO many problems with the story, including how did he learn to fight, drive a motorcycle, plane, etc. just from getting in the "make me a hunk" machine. WEAK writing throughout, imo.
Click to expand...

...But the scene where he, as super-skinny, get's inside that machine-thingy and comes out moments later as a extremely super-buff - that didn't require any suspension of disbelief... ;D
 
Last edited:
I really enjoyed the movie. It was fun. That's all I expected out of it.

Regarding his fighting skills, he had gotten beat up a lot as a skinny weakling. He had gone through basic training, and I thought it was clear that there were large gaps in time between some scenes where perhaps he had practiced fighting more, shooting more, and maybe even took pilot lessons.
 
Ha ha...that's a LOT to assume, Steven! Leaving that much unexplained is bad storytelling to me. After all, this is an ORIGIN story! It's supposed to be all about where he got his powers and how he became who he is. I thought it was WEAK. Other than making him big & macho, they did very little to explain any "super hero powers" at all.

Here's another: Did anyone even understand the bad guys' little crystal of power or whatever that was? I mean...I still don't even know what happened to him at the end and why he suddenly flew up into the sky. That was BAD writing, in my opinion. I actually thought the directing wasn't very good either.
 
Just imagine inserting a training montage! It works for practically every other movie and we've all seen it a million times before anyhow. I haven't seen Captain America yet but I'd guess he must have gone through plenty of training montages "in real life" anyway.
 
Kevin Wild said:
Ha ha...that's a LOT to assume, Steven! Leaving that much unexplained is bad storytelling to me. After all, this is an ORIGIN story! It's supposed to be all about where he got his powers and how he became who he is. I thought it was WEAK. Other than making him big & macho, they did very little to explain any "super hero powers" at all.

Here's another: Did anyone even understand the bad guys' little crystal of power or whatever that was? I mean...I still don't even know what happened to him at the end and why he suddenly flew up into the sky. That was BAD writing, in my opinion. I actually thought the directing wasn't very good either.
Click to expand...

I believe that will be revealed in The Avengers. There was also a hint in Thor ;)
 
Kevin Wild said:
Ha ha...that's a LOT to assume, Steven! Leaving that much unexplained is bad storytelling to me. After all, this is an ORIGIN story! It's supposed to be all about where he got his powers and how he became who he is. I thought it was WEAK. Other than making him big & macho, they did very little to explain any "super hero powers" at all.

Here's another: Did anyone even understand the bad guys' little crystal of power or whatever that was? I mean...I still don't even know what happened to him at the end and why he suddenly flew up into the sky. That was BAD writing, in my opinion. I actually thought the directing wasn't very good either.
Click to expand...
It is a lot to assume... but, I think it's a valid story choice. The makers had to weigh whether they show more training or more fighting the Red Skull. Personally, I'd rather see more fighting the Red Skull. The idea of watching him train sounds kind of boring to me. And to me it seems like he wasn't really fighting all that great, necessarily. I think super strength and super speed would make even an untrained fighter pretty much able to make anyone look silly.

I did like how they showed him running out of control right after he got the super soldier syrum. Kind of showed that he needed to learn a bit.

In any event, I'm just trying to say that I enjoyed the movie, but, that's coming from a guy who loved comic books as a kid. Of the movies this summer, I liked X-Men First Class most, followed closely by Captain America, and then with Thor a few notches behind. All time, I think Captain America falls in the middle quality of modern comic book movies with The Watchmen, Batman Begins, the Dark Knight, X-Men 2, and Iron Man being at the top. I never even bothered seeing the Punisher, Daredevil, Ghost Rider, and Cat Woman -- they looked bad.
 
panavision genesis, and a scene (underwater submarineshot) on alexa. there is another thread on how the vfx ppl who worked on it found 1080p really limiting for what they had to do, and made a lot of extra work for them.
 
I saw that on FXguide.com...I don't think the entire film was shot on Genesis. The article led me to believe that all the "skinny Steve" shotswere done on the Genesis....for some reason. I mean, okay, so they didn't shoot RED. That's their perogative. They didn't (really) shoot on the Alexa. Or SI2K. Or F35. Or D21. Why they shot on Genesis in this day and age....I have no idea. Especially for shots that would need reframing and cropping.
 
Eren Ozkural said:
I saw that on FXguide.com...I don't think the entire film was shot on Genesis. The article led me to believe that all the "skinny Steve" shotswere done on the Genesis....for some reason. I mean, okay, so they didn't shoot RED. That's their perogative. They didn't (really) shoot on the Alexa. Or SI2K. Or F35. Or D21. Why they shot on Genesis in this day and age....I have no idea. Especially for shots that would need reframing and cropping.
Click to expand...

This info is from IMDB:

Camera

Arri Alexa
Arriflex 235, Panavision Primo Lenses
Arriflex 435, Panavision Primo Lenses
Canon EOS 5D Mark II, Canon Lenses
Panavision Genesis HD Camera, Panavision Primo Lenses
Panavision Panaflex Millennium XL, Panavision Primo Lenses

Laboratory

EFilm (digital intermediate)

Film negative format (mm/video inches)

35 mm (Kodak Vision2 200T 5217, Vision3 500T 5219)
Video (HDTV)

Cinematographic process

Digital Intermediate (master format)
HDCAM SR (1080p/24) (source format)
Super 35 (source format) (some scenes)

Printed film format

35 mm (anamorphic)
D-Cinema (3-D version)

Aspect ratio

2.35 : 1
 
I know Craig. Still, the people behind this project are some of film making's best artists, technicians and craftsmen. Plus as a studio Marvel doesn't have a track record of using the Genesis AFAIK. Surely someone, somewhere along this very talented chain would have thought "wait, these are very complex VFX shots...and we want to use a 7 year old digital cinema camera that shoots less than DCP spec 2K res...in shots that will be cropped and reframed...and have it match film? Let's give Arri/RED/Sony a call..."
 
I personally thought the look of the film was perfect for the material, and by the time the movie really got going I wasn't even looking for digital noise or what have you. I noticed early on it was certainly softer than most films you'll see shot on RED or ALEXA, but again, I think it fit the material. Johnston stated they wanted it to feel as 1940's as possible, which is why they refrained (entirely, I think) from using telephoto lenses. We all love RED, but dare I say it may have been too sharp for the movie.

Then again, I haven't *fully* been convinced yet that 1080p isn't good enough for cinema, so I think I'm in the minority here. ;)

(please don't hit me, Jim. At least not the face.)
 
I liked the film. Enough story (I did not need a big explanation about the crystal, that would ahve been boring), and plenty of action, cool WWII setting and The Red Skull. Fun stuff.

I did not however enjoy the 3d. After 20 minutes, it's like I'm watching a 2d movie. Why bother with the picture window 3d look? It doesn't add anythinng IMO.

And when there was an opportunity to really use the 3d like the shield being thrown at you, they cut it short. That's no fun.
 
Eric Rodemann said:
And when there was an opportunity to really use the 3d like the shield being thrown at you, they cut it short. That's no fun.
Click to expand...

While I agree, unfortunately if they did it even ONCE the entire internet world erupt with "THEY USED IT AS A GIMMICK WHAT A JOKE"
 
Oh the look of the film was lovely. I believe Joe Johnston talked about sticking to wide lenses in an interview he did with /Film or AICN. Wonderful stuff. I just found their choice of a digital cinema camera used SPECIFICALLY for complex VFX shots was odd. Why create all that extra work? And as we know, you can be as sharp and clean as you want and degrade the image from there. Not as easy to do it the other way round...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top