Is it just me...
Or did The Washington Post exterior "street" set look incredibly fake? It seemed well below Spielberg's usual standards.
shareYeah it was horrible. So was alot of the acting, but I can't stand all these movies of recent years where every exterior scene looks fake with unrealistic lighting and obvious green screen bs. Take you out of the movie.
sharethankfully for me i dont look for fakeness , and therdefore dont find it.
I'm willing to bet you see "fake" when it isnt even there
same with the acting really
you have to help them to help you . The acting was fine.
You'd have to be blind not to see the fake backgrounds and fake lighting. Maybe you're too young to remember old movies.
sharewell , if you take that mentality to its logical extreme, your never gonna be "in" the movie becasue you kniow at the end of the day you're sitting in your armchair.
like i said, help them to help you ,
This movie was entirely about dialogue , the backgrounds and lighting mean nothing.
You could enjoy it just as much with blindfold ion
I guess you've never listened to the radio , been to a theatre , or read a book.
Na, your wrong. I like all those things. I prefer older movies. The Post wasn't very good and was full of feminist/SJW bullshit and horrible extras. Meryl Streep is washed up and merely plays herself. The OP agrees how extremely fake looking it was. Compare to something like the Godfather.
share