SDL, on 13 March 2012 - 11:28 AM, said:
Just enjoy it, and if you think it looks good, great then say so. It really isn't that hard. Some people like a Picasso, some find Monet interesting, others think they are both big wanks, there really doesn't have to be a set of criteria and rules to decide what you like surely?
When I re-read the opening post I see it includes these words:
...have been steadily watching quite a few movies, and been quite taken aback by the sheer picture quality on some of them. thought perhaps a good topic of a thread - if not done already. Maybe some place to share some movies have watched and just gone wow with regard the picture quality on the big screen...
Am not sure whether this means going wow wow wow wow
throughout the movie. or just wow
with one or more scenes.
As I say, blu-ray picture quality for a recently produced movie should routinely be very good. Why a subset of movies should wow with "sheer picture quality" is still unclear to me. Are we perhaps talking exaggerated contrast, and/or oversaturated colours throughout the movie? Is it beautiful mountain scenery? A wonderful sunrise? Realistic animation? Outstanding special effects? What exactly is the "wow factor" that has grabbed the viewer's attention???
If asked to explain why I thought Avatar 3D was "wow" visually for much of the footage I could mention:
Creation of imaginative fauna and flora on the alien world of Pandora. Flawless, expressive animation of the human-like race (N'avi) and of the alien fauna, including exhilirating flight scenes (N'avi riding Ikran), made more impressive in 3D. Use of sterescopic cameras to create 3D in the non-animated parts of the movie (the real life 3D is not a post-production simulation and in parts provides a sense of depth that is both powerful and detailed). Realistic and seamless integration of animation and real-life material (more successful than some parts of King Kong (2005)).
Edited by MLXXX, 13 March 2012 - 07:18 PM.