Sure he described the movie as 'appalling' (which was his exact phrase) but he was mainly referring to the cinematography since that was the only reason he gave. Him being a DP, cinematography is everything of course. Though I'll say it clearly myself, I'd happily watch Transcendence again (which wasn't great) over The Avengers which ticked every cliche in the box. Oh and of course it was horrible to look at.Ruth wrote: He also said he thought the film was appalling, which makes me think cinematography wasn't the only thing he didn't like. So cinematography aside (I also thought it was quite generic), the Avengers would still stomp Transcendence mercilessly. Some candies also look great in their packaging then you open it and see what a piece of vomit it is. Same can apply to Transcendence.
I'm not a blind Marvel fangirl, I'm just stating the obvious. Karma can be a total bitch.
Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015)
Posts: 635
Joined:
November 2014
Wally should have never made those comments public. Imagine if Joss said that about The Dark Knight Rises or Moneyball
Edit this pretty much confirms Doctor Strange is not the post credits and slash film said it hints torwards Infity War
Edit this pretty much confirms Doctor Strange is not the post credits and slash film said it hints torwards Infity War
I didn't think McGarvey's work was that much of a problem, it was the nonsensical angles that puzzled me.
That's likely what Wally was referring to. It's a really odd mix of partly cinematic and partly a TV aesthetic.
Then again, that's the same guy who seems to think digital film is like morally beneath him ... and he made Transcendence.
Then again, that's the same guy who seems to think digital film is like morally beneath him ... and he made Transcendence.
I'd also float the suggestion that McGarvey is just as good a cinematographer as him.
m4st4 wrote:Lizzie Olsen rises.
Really? I think he's more inconsistent. Atonement is probably his best work, but then he does something like Fifty Shades, which was rather bland-looking.ArmandFancypants wrote:I'd also float the suggestion that McGarvey is just as good a cinematographer as him.
Though, I think a lot of the faults in Avengers, at least visually, fall on Whedon's shoulders.
Last edited by Cilogy on April 10th, 2015, 11:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
Posts: 8437
Joined:
August 2012
It's highly unprofessional and makes his effort at Transcendence look even more hilarious. But hey, if that's what he prefers..
Posts: 635
Joined:
November 2014
Even if the cinematography is horrible you don't make public statements like that. It just looks bad on him.
This thing's less than a month away and I'm just a little excited. And I have a problem with that.
The only thing about this that I can't wait to see is Ultron (who looks like he has the potential one of the best comic book villains in a long time).
The only thing about this that I can't wait to see is Ultron (who looks like he has the potential one of the best comic book villains in a long time).
Last edited by Bacon on April 10th, 2015, 1:30 pm, edited 2 times in total.
