... have any of you studied cinematography?
People are saying that AVP-R has no visual style, that it looks cheap, that AVP looked epic etc.
This movie looks a zillion times better than the last installment visually.
AVP looked dull. The angles didn't suck. They passed. But there was no imagination, no flair, and really bad lighting.
AVP-R, though, perhaps due to Pearl, looks great. Dynamic colors (nice use of red and blue), the angles look dynamic.
Now, for one minute overlook the supposed pred bias. Now look at this picture.
Cheap, right? Dull, boring angles, no lighting, some may even say the alien looks like crud.
Now, the after to the before.
The angle looks great, the lighting gives it more mystique and flair, and the designs look better to those who didn't like them before.
Even somebody with the most fundamental knowledge of cinematography knows which is better.
Whereas AVP had:
Boring stuff. Face on, we see man in suit.
Where's the mysterious lighting, the creative angles? Dude, this is a predator. Make it look GOOD.
If this one looks good to you, it is because it has a queen in it.
Understand? Yes?
OK. Quiz.
Q. What kind of visual style does AVP-R have?(Psst.
A. A good one.)