FirstLoveMovies

I just watched it. Such a beautiful movie!

Thanks ghost! I don't watch many movies these days, but I was very excited about this one, because of Nasuada's recommendation and because I used to be a fan of Irish music and even took a course of Irish Gaelic once (no success). I wasn't disappointed. Both content and quality is excellent, absolutely loved it! Did make me cry, though.

thanks you ghost for the movie but i think it need an external subtitles where they are speaking in English
I couldn't hear them well

but i think it need an external subtitles where they are speaking in English

Yes. Me too. Thanks God, there isn't much English in the movie.

I haven't watched it yet, but I know from experience that I have trouble with Irish English whether it is quiet or not. I am confident that a SDH track will eventually appear.

Since you say it is mostly Gaelic I should manage alright.

Since you say it is mostly Gaelic I should manage alright.

Yes, I would say about 90%.

BTW, can somebody explain why some directors prefer to shoot narrow-screen movies today? [REL] Les Malheurs de Sophie (2016) being another example.

No, I can't.

The Trouble with Being Born is another example.

mimzy wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 10:54 am BTW, can somebody explain why some directors prefer to shoot narrow-screen movies today?

Uh oh, talk about aspect ratios and I get excited. I do not know for certain but that won't stop me from making guesses.

In the 1950s when Americans fell in love with television, Hollywood needed a new gimmick to keep them going to the cinema. Thus was born CinemaScope, using anamorphic rather than spherical lenses. Aspect ratios could be 2.66, 2.55, or 2.35 instead of the traditional Academy 1.37. This new widescreen was heavily promoted and meant to appeal to people because it was DIFFERENT than television.

Not every film could afford a big budget and not all of them were large scale epics, so there were other options. It was found to be less expensive to shoot a film with 1.37 spherical lenses but then matte off the top and bottom to 1.85 or 1.66 (European). This still makes the image wider than television. People sometimes find different appealing.

Televisions are now all widescreen 1.78. So, Reason Number One for narrow films: It makes them look different than television now that television is wide!

Most movies these days are shot with digital cameras, and I will just guess that these three examples are digital with spherical lenses. If the cinematographer composes the image so that boom mikes and the like are outside the frame, then the entire 1.37 image can be used without matting to crop them out. Reason Number Two: we see the entire image rather than just a portion of it.

Ultimately however we need to ask the directors why they chose these narrower aspect ratios. For all three movies mentioned the directors are Generation X or early Millennial, so maybe (Reason Number Three) they are nostalgic for the "lost" Television aspect ratio of their childhoods?

This is the same age range of some people paying high prices for vintage VHS tapes of their favorite movies like "Ghostbusters" or "Back to the Future". Both of those have widely available less expensive higher quality disc versions. Those collectors surely have those versions also. Nostalgia is a crazy thing!

THANK YOU MIMZY for mentioning Les Malheurs de Sophie (2016), because that is one I do not think I had heard of and that I will now get. THANK YOU GHOST for your Release just two days before I joined FLM!

ghost wrote: Sun Jun 19, 2022 10:17 pm Finally!

I love you Ghost...
It's still the best movie for me who I have seen this year in Cinema (but still can cry that the Girl was not at the world premiere because she has a positive Corona test )