>>4225242I can add some examples if u like.
I just wanted some peoples perspectives before they start fixating on my few examples.
I think a good example would be anything from Darren Aronofsky. Everything he makes has this raw feeling to it, and hes being creative rather than focusing on perfect looking high res shots.
awkward shots that drags in the viewer
look at PI. super cheap black and white film, and it pulls off more than what 99.9% of Netflix films are able to pull off.
You can even look at 2000s budget over the top Japanese movies, and they do so much "wrong" but the rest is cinematic.
I also enjoy much of Tarantino's early stuff look wise.
look at this still from the wrestler. It doesn't look anything like what people use as an example of cinematic. Yet it comes off as... cinematic.
>>4225243I think many movies these days are like that, but how many good movies do we get? its all made by film students. not creative people, but students who pass their course no matter what.
>>4225248You're nailing it.
but with that aside. there must be a way, right?
>>4225249exactly. and every YouTube who talks about cinematic stuff ends up going right back to the easiest to use high res camera they own.
