PUT YOUR BEARD IN MY MOUTH
NASA
Interview Vampire Daily
tumblr dot com
roma★
Xuebing Du
$LAYYYTER
official daine visual archive
izzy's playlists!
if i look back, i am lost
Fai_Ryy
EXPECTATIONS
d e v o n
shark vs the universe
𓃗
No title available
No title available
❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
One Nice Bug Per Day
hello vonnie
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Japan
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Brazil
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Brazil
seen from Brazil
seen from United States
seen from Greece
seen from United States
seen from Canada
seen from Chile
seen from United States
@polkadotshowercap
unfortunate truth of reality is that oftentimes 15 year olds will say/do/believe some stupid bullshit because they are 15 but telling them that they believe that because they are 15 is probably the most counterproductive thing in the entire universe
“oh no, my audience has begun to guess the big twists of my story and are accurately predicting what will happen!”
incorrect response: write the rest of the story to be as twisty, shocking and counter to expectations as possible, regardless of whether this is a logical or satisfying way for the plot to go
correct response:
can someone elaborate on the “make hoax” and “post angry tweet about “leak”“ part. i’m stupid and don’t understand things
sure!
(you’re not stupid. I posted this thinking it would amuse a handful of mutuals who all knew the context and that would be about it, so I didn’t think about providing any other explanation. I had no idea it would spread this far.)
I’ll start from the very beginning just to be thorough. so this is Alex Hirsch, creator and head writer of Gravity Falls, a show which had a big focus on mystery, conspiracies, codes and ciphers, etc. the whole plot is kicked off by one of the main characters finding a mysterious old journal in the woods, which detailed all kinds of weird and supernatural things, but then ended abruptly with the author saying they had to hide the journal because they were being watched. the central driving mystery of the show, therefore, was the question of who wrote the journal and what happened to them.
now, the thing about Gravity Falls is that, while it must be said that the writers weren’t always quite as sure of their plans as we tend to like to think they are, it is very much a fair play mystery, with legitimate clues to what was going on. but the writers were caught off guard by how quickly the show attracted a dedicated audience, including a lot of people outside the primary presumed demographic, who started solving the clues faster than expected. so some of the fans were able to correctly guess who the author was before it was revealed in the show, and the theory started spreading. this put the writers in something of a panic, because this was THE mystery that the whole story revolved around, with ¾ of the show building up to the dramatic reveal in the middle of season 2. they wanted it to be a mystery that could be figured out, sure, but they weren’t prepared for people to solve it so far in advance of when it was planned to be revealed, which would have really taken away from the big moment. they weren’t going to change the main story itself, but having been caught unaware by how much attention the fans were paying, they wanted to up the ante and make the mystery more complex to solve going forward–but first they needed to buy some time and throw the fandom off the scent for a little longer.
hence, Alex’s plan as described above. they whipped up a fake shot that appears to give away the identity of the author as being another character in the show, put it on a screen in the studio as if it was a real animation frame, took a picture of it, and ‘leaked’ it online. it was initially decided to be a hoax (albeit, I think, presumed to be a hoax originating from outside the production team), until Alex posted this tweet:
…before quickly deleting it (though not so quickly that it didn’t get seen, of course).
it worked well enough to distract most people for a while, and wasn’t revealed as a hoax until a year later, when an episode aired that definitively proved that the supposed screenshot could never have happened, at which point Alex owned up to the whole thing as seen in the tweet above. by then the episode with the real reveal wasn’t far off, and while people did still work it out ahead of time, it was more of an “OH MY GOD I KNEW IT!” moment than a “booooooring, we’ve known that for ages” moment, which of course was what the writers wanted all along.
personally I find this a fascinating approach to dealing with the problem of spoilers, because it doesn’t affect the story itself at all; if you watch Gravity Falls today–or if you were watching it when it aired without any significant contact with the fandom–you’d never know about it. ultimately, the problem the writers were facing wasn’t that some people might guess the answer to the mystery–they never wanted to make it completely impossible to predict–so much as it was that they hadn’t designed the story to stand up to so many people working on the puzzle together, which resulted in a sort of total output of puzzle-solving ability that far outstripped the capability of any one solo human being. so their solution is something that’s very much targeted toward delaying that group problem-solving, without actually affecting the experience of any individual person watching the show.
plus, it’s very in keeping with the overall tone of the show.
and now you know!
if your audience guesses the ending of your story
don’t:
change the ending
do:
gaslight them
You know technology literacy is dying because I saw this meme with 76k likes
F11 the full screen button? You’re scared of the full screen button? F10?? It opens the menu bar???
Computers are so scary what if I accidentally hit F12 in a steam game and it takes a screenshot. What if I press shift + F12 while in word and accidentally save my document 😖
If you had to learn what the F keys on your computer do through me reblogging this post, then I'm glad you did. Computer literacy is not a skill that gets taught anymore, and it is absolutely one that needs to be taught in order to be learned. Don't ever feel bad for not knowing something, but ☝️ don't ever stop learning learning about your environment, the tools you use, and especially the people around you
Never stop learning+ Never stop sharing what you learned
@teaboot idk if you saw this one
OH MMY GOD
I love going viral on tumblr.com. It’s like if you stood in a field and said some of the stupidest shit a human being is capable of and then like fifty thousand crows attacked you
Don’t do this to me
my brother in christ you made the post
Caw Caw
Well modern camera equipment can almost see in the dark so what do you even need lighting for?
i just gotta real quick make sure that youre joking. you are joking, right?
I’m not joking. Do you understand the ISO value system as it relates to film?
im not arguing that you cant film in the dark without special lighting (obviously you can), im saying you shouldnt. im arguing with the second half of your statement. the lighting in the first picture is very purposeful and enhances the horror of the film. they didnt get into the editing room and go “oh darn, we forgot to shine a light on the guy hiding in the shadows!” jaws was made scarier because you could rarely see the shark, so your brain invented the scariest possibility. you can just… see the whole man in the second picture. having a flat shot where the lighting doesnt even draw in the viewers eye to anything (much less obscure something thats supposed to give the movie tension and anticipation) looks fucking boring and adds nothing
thats what we need lighting for
One of these is much more visually appealing than the other
Lighting in film, and especially horror is so *so* important to the tension in the scene, it’s a significant part of visual storytelling, and the cinematographer/DOP (director of photography) should’ve picked up on that.
It’s particularly embarrassing in comparison to the original material, as with digital/modern technology, you can literally see how the shot looks while you’re shooting.
This should’ve also been sorted in comp and fixed well before distribution.
As already pointed out, the lighting values have no depth to them, thus creating a very flat scene (this is one of the first design principles we are taught in design for animation/film- if I had handed in a lighting shot or concept anything like this, I would’ve failed the module).
If you take the shots and put them into greyscale, you can see this a lot clearer.
In the original Halloween shot, we can see a high range of value (how bright or dark something is)- the lighting is brightest on Jamie Lee Curtis, the viewer’s eye is drawn to her first- we can see her emotions clearly and gain sympathy for her character. Then we are drawn into the darkest value, creating dread, and this is fulfilled and heightened with the contrasting (and next highest) value of Michael’s mask.
In the modern shot, all the values are within a similar range (mid-greys), and there is no proper depth in value- making the tension within the shot fall flat (not ideal for horror).
In fact, the highest value in this shot is the fire in the background- which is where the eye is drawn to first. The background. Not the action. So instead of feeling empathy or dread, we are focusing on the wrong details.
And yes, while it could be said from a film analysis POV that the flatness of the shot ‘puts the characters on the same fighting ground/level of power in the shot,’ I’m not going to give them the benefit.
To top it off, the use of colour in the modern shot highlights the errors in lighting. Whilst sharing the blue/orange colour scheme of the original shot, everything is blue except the one area of contrast, the orange fire. So once again, we are drawn to none of the action and instead the background.
With a very small edit in compositing and lighting to match the original Halloween, the feeling (and focus) of the shot is completely changed. The shot has higher contrast and range of values- the focus is on Curtis, while Michael feels more foreboding in the darkness. The contrast puts the characters on opposite sides- good vs evil, telling a narrative in contrast to the unedited shot.
These effects could’ve easily been achieved by adding a key light on Curtis and rim lighting on Michael in production, and if necessary, editing value depth in comp to enhance the raw footage.
TLDR: Digital filmmakers still need to know traditional film and design theory- just because you have good actors, cameras and composition, does not mean you can forgo basic film craft. The aim of cinematography is to enhance the narrative, not restrict it.
ultimately… who cares if cameras can see in the dark? we’re not making movies for cameras.
it’s amazing how women are able to navigate crowded rooms without ever touching a palm to a man’s lower back
-> listening to a jaunty country style song -> hear the lyrics wrong -> pause. frown. go back a few seconds to relisten -> hears the same fucked up lyrics -> check the actual lyrics to see what it ACTUALLY says
-> oh!
the idea that every summer will be as hot if not hotter than this for the rest of my life is unbearable i need to (remembers suicide jokes are bad for my mental health) murder an oil executive
Give me less "being kind requires zero effort" and more "being kind is worth the effort it takes."
Eva Stratt:
"Stratt didn't care about Grace, she only kept him around because he was the tertiary science officer!"
Next up someone is going to claim that the Narnia series isn't kids books.
Kids books is probably not the best way to word it, you can enjoy them at every age, including your childhood, as you get older you may find new truths in them, but they're still good for any age.
"It would have been easier if you'd just said yes."
original
