Quote:
Originally Posted by cornbread_1788
Well digital is made for documentaries, well at least in my mind, so you can capture tons of footage on a small budget. When I see a digital film for the most part, it looks soo cheap even though the film itself can cost over $100 million. Rock of Ages, as an example, cost $75 million to make, but it looks so cheap and artificial and there was a ton of smearing and digital noise throughout the film. I know its based off a play and everything, but it lacked the realism and grunge I wanted with this film. If it was shot on Super 35 with the chunky grain it would have made me enjoyed the film more (That and not have Diego & Hough cast in the film....UGH!) and gave it edge that a film about rock & roll should have. Instead, it felt like I was watching a candy commercial with a ton of pop sensibilities, which would be fine if it wasn't a film about ROCK!!!!! Adam Shankman be shamed!
|
That film wasn't about rock; it was about hair metal, which is pop pretending to be rock. That film was so bad, I stopped watching Breaking Bad after watching it. Cranston should be ashamed of himself.