TheMovieman

Just to piss of a small number of users, I completely support T&A... err... T&O.

PatD

In a way I agree with you. I hate when directors alter their back catalog of movies. However, between the main complaint in this thread and things like this:



^^ This stuff bugs me a hundred times more than fiddling with the color palette.

Solid Snake

There is no such thing as a right way for a movie to look "right" aside from personal preference. I don't mind films being filmed in the digital manner if manipulated well for it's look and of course it's own flaws (Fincher is one of the best w/ digital)

I still need to watch a lot more of those old Technicolor films from the 30s and 40s btw.

DonnachaOne

I've become very bored with the whinging about "Teal & Orange" in the last few years, not to mention how everyone presents their diatribe like they're the first person to notice.

You can come up with a ton of examples because there's a ton of films. It's that simple.

Has the use of Digital Intermediates led to artistic abuses? Most definitely. Does digital often fail to capture the true warmth of flesh tones? In my opinion, yes. But your claim that ubiquitous T&O is a symptom of digital color grading is rubbish. You cite The Dark Knight Rises several times, even though Christopher Nolan has emphatically never used a DI. One could even logically assume that, since Batman Begins had such a distinct coffee-colored palette and The Dark Knight so often a cool steel-and-blue look, The Dark Knight Rises would logically echo those styles.

Appreciate that filmmakers have, and always will, have personal styles that echo each other. If you don't like it, that's fine. You have a wealth of options.

JGaitan82

My issue with movies of the modern day is the endless reboots. I mean why remake Total Recall? Why reboot Spiderman? I am also tired of shakey cameras too. It worked well in Saving Private Ryan and in The Blair Witch Project. Like director Antoine Fuqua said in his Training Day Commentary "Shakey hand held camera work does not mean gritty".

Why So Blu?

I've only just heard about the whole T&O thing and one rarely notices unless that's what you're looking for. If you watch all of those flicks in motion as opposed to screen grabs you won't be able to tell 99% of the time. Granted, if you work in the DI industry or in a profession where you see shit like this on a daily basis then you will notice it.

DonnachaOne

$

$

Brand recognition means it's easier to sell.

I have less issues with remakes, reboots and new adaptations. Stories can be told in millions of ways, and good filmmakers can make great art from well-mined sources. If every movie was original, we wouldn't have adaptations of Total Recall or Spider-man to begin with. The Maltese Falcon we all love wasn't the first version. 1939's The Wizard of Oz wasn't the first, second, or even third attempt. But that's another conversation for another thread.

Troy Stiffler

Teal and orange does not bother me.

But speaking of modern audiences. The people who purchase tickets. I'm still waiting on the release of "Ass: The Movie". Followed by it's Oscar sweep.

Supermallet

If T&O is really so ubiquitous, my question is: Why? What is it about teal and orange that makes it so attractive to filmmakers throughout Hollywood? Why not another color palette? I can't imagine that the vast majority of filmmakers just landed on teal and orange by accident and without consulting any other directors.

Why So Blu?

I used to bang a girl named Teal.

Ash Ketchum

You're right, of course. Something shot well that uses the strengths of the chosen format (film, digital, whaterver) is going to look good and look right. I can cite TRANSFORMERS 3 in 3-D IMAX as an example. (Was that on film or digital? It was real IMAX at Sony's Lincoln Square theater in Manhattan.) COLLATERAL is an example of digital filmmaking where I thought the format was well-suited to the material, although I don't know if it was projected digitally or not. Was 2004 too soon for digital projection? I can't remember.

If I can rephrase my original point, it would be that I feel more comfortable watching movies shot and projected on film. I like seeing scratches, 'cause then I know it's a film. I confess I've seen plenty of films projected digitally that look just fine, but something always throws me off a little. Maybe it's a chemical thing. My body reacts more strongly in the presence of a chemical medium instead of a digital medium. If that makes any sense...

PopcornTreeCt

Someone needs to record a parody of Wiz Khalifa's "Black and Yellow" and change it to "Teal and Orange" with a bunch of movie clips. Somebody get working on that.

The Antipodean

Never noticed this before and while it's a bit monotonous really can't get that worked up. Find the trend of incomprehensible quick-cut action scenes far more annoying myself.

Solid Snake

I think 2004 may have a bit too early for Digital Projection. Did that start around 2008?

Yeah, Collateral is gorgeous w/ its look from the medium. Those cold shots look amazing.

I think for myself that it sticks out more is depending on the subject matter. Off the top of my head Public Enemies looked weird to me w/ the digital. At some points it looked well suited but...not overall.

@Ash: Finally got to getting some of those books you listed for me a while back, they were cheap..so it's good for me at this time in my life. Easy Riders, Raging Bulls is very engrossing of a read.

Paul_SD

Draven hit on it earlier. 99% of movies are about people. And skin tones generally fall within an orange spectrum. The direct complimentary colors of these fall within a blue inching into green spectrum.



and yes, part of this is so that figures will 'pop' against the background.
And frankly I find that obnoxious and insulting.
Here's another way to think of it- Does anyone here like seeing edge enhancement on transfers? Part of the reason it is there is to make the image 'pop'- especially on smaller, less resolved displays. In essence, the video has been dumbed down so that the image will make more of an impact, especially in lesser circumstances (i.e. a smaller, lower res display).
To me, this is the same principle, except the vehicle here is color.

For people that can't see it, or aren't bothered by it, I say you are very fortunate. Sadly, this hits me like a ton of bricks. It passed the point of parody some time ago and now it just makes me sick and sad for the state of films today. I was serious when I said I felt bad for today's generation growing up with film after film sharing this singular, monotonous aesthetic- because I remember what films generally looked like for most of my life- and it was beautiful
here are three random films from the 60's, 70's and 80's



and here's one more example of why I despise this look.
On the left is a frame from Chinatown as it would naturally look.
On the right is an approximation of how the same shot would likely look today if it were intended to be 'modern'.



Again, if you can't see much of a difference between the two- you're very lucky. Because it sure seems like the vast majority of films I see these days look much closer to the right than the left.
In other words, affected artificiality rules the day.

Draven

See...in that example, the left version looks a LOT more "teal and orange" than the right. The image on the right looks almost Matrix-y green hued.

And that's because you've got an orange colored person against a blue colored sky.

Paul_SD

That's a quirk and dirty example for illustrative purposes. I'll leave it to others to judge if I'm way off base there based on the other examples I've given.
In general, while you're correct that the unmolested cap better shows blue and orange- the blues in older films leaned to the red/violet end-
When people talk about teal these days, it's blues that are pushing more towards yellow/green. Often now the highlights are pulled this way too (look at the example of the three different films on the right in the bottom row below).

here's another example that you can compare and contrast.
each row across contains 3 different films in each example (except for two shots from the newly graded Thelma & Louise that are side by side).
I didn't spend any time cherry picking any of these. I pretty much grabbed a bunch of examples from the appropriate eras and this is what you get.
Try not to get hung up on shading (darks and lights) which may make it appear there's more variety than there is. Instead look at the spectrum of hues (colors) between the two. Look at the variety (or lack thereof) of Blues, yellows, oranges, greens, and reds.

Pizza

I like it when it's used right. It's like loving and/or hating black & white movies. I happen to love black & white and find it to be powerful. A lot people refuse watch a black & white movie. I remember the parents of a girl I once dated hating Young Frankenstein and finding it cheap because it was B&W. They couldn't or didn't want to connect the dots to why it was shot that way.
For most, it's not a T&O or B&W world but the movies are not reality or meant to be. It's about capturing the right emotion and flavor in telling a viewpoint.

RichC2

That last set is like dull to the point of drab versus slightly overzealous.

Solid Snake

talking about T and O. I really loved Drive's use of it. I'm sure it was on purpose too cuz it looks so goddamn gorgeous.

Paul_SD

Which calls to mind how often people would reject a proper calibration of their displays in favor of a hyper saturated/ artificially sweetened look.
Correct would often look drab in comparison to how much content they see that is constantly being pushed and pulled into cartoonish extremes.
You see it often enough and I suppose it becomes the new 'natural'. Which I guess explains why only a few of us are bothered by this.

DeanoBKN

Even after this thread, I still don't notice anything.

Mike86

I can notice it a bit more when it's pointed out but it still doesn't bother me. I wouldn't even think of it while watching a film. Staring at screen grabs that point it out is a bit different to me than seeing it in action while watching a film. As long as it doesn't distract during the film I don't have a problem with it. It seems like bitching just for the sake of doing so to me.

Lt Ripley

It doesn't bother me on new films. On older films that I have seen countless times and then a remaster comes out and it looks like shit, it bothers me. Cameron should be kicked in the jaw for what he did to Aliens.

Draven

No, this is the standard "teal and orange" screencap - nothing yellow or green here:



Now I'm not even sure what you are saying. You want movies to be more drab? A lot of movies use teal and orange for contrast, especially bright and colorful movies. But plenty of them don't too, especially if the setting doesn't call for it.

So...what's the problem again? No movies should use a perfectly logical type of color treatment?