Cinematography of “Andor”
Digital darkness, HDR, and muddled sound
- Several commenters complain that modern digital workflows encourage under-lighting: creators can see the monitor and push exposure too low, leading to very dark images that don’t work in bright living rooms or on mediocre TVs.
- Others suspect grading is optimized for HDR/OLED, leaving SDR/LCD viewers with crushed blacks and low detail. Some tweak TV gamma/tone-mapping to make Andor watchable.
- Dialogue intelligibility is a parallel gripe: many now rely on subtitles even with good hearing and speakers; a few felt Andor’s mix in particular sounded oddly 2.0-like even on surround setups. Others report no problems, suggesting strong device‑dependence.
Cinematography, sets, and visual style
- Widespread admiration for Andor’s look: framing, depth of field, and especially its dense, tactile production design (Imperial interiors, Ferrix, Narkina 5, Coruscant).
- Discussion of mixed techniques: big practical sets, miniatures, matte/painted backdrops, limited LED wall use, and CGI “enhancement” rather than replacement. Many praise this hybrid, artisanal approach over all‑CG environments.
- Anamorphic lenses and intentional edge softness/vignetting are noted; some love the aesthetic, others find peripheral blur and chromatic aberration distracting in 4K.
- People notice the effort to avoid reflections of crew on glossy Imperial surfaces and the abundance of working, touchable props to ground background actors.
Tone, themes, and place in Star Wars
- Strong consensus from many that Andor (often paired with Rogue One) is top‑tier Star Wars, sometimes ranked above the original trilogy, sometimes just below it but clearly above prequels/sequels and most Disney TV.
- The show is repeatedly framed as “barely Star Wars”: a political thriller/spy drama in a sci‑fi setting, with almost no Jedi or Force, focusing on bureaucracy, colonialism, surveillance, prisons, and incremental fascism.
- Others argue its impact relies heavily on existing lore; without knowledge of the Empire, Death Star, or Mon Mothma, they feel the stakes and sacrifices land less strongly.
Structure, pacing, and characters
- Many praise the three‑episode arc structure, prison storyline, and climactic Ferrix funeral as some of the best TV in years. Others find it slow, padded, or emotionally distant, with “static talking heads” and side plots (e.g., crashed TIE/Yavin forest sequence) feeling like filler.
- Debate over whether it’s a “masterpiece”: some say nearly every scene earns its place; detractors see a thin overarching narrative decorated with brilliantly executed but loosely connected set‑pieces.
Budgets, business, and production process
- Reported budget (~$650M for two seasons) is seen as huge but well‑spent compared with other big but cheaper‑looking genre shows. Some doubt Disney will fund another project at this level for a “side character.”
- Discussion of how streaming shows “pay for themselves” (subscriptions vs. view time), and why cost‑capping and cancellations are common despite apparent popularity.
- Several comments compare film production to software development: highly planned, hierarchical, deadline‑driven, with “fix it in post” limits and a single creative authority vs. the often-chaotic, endlessly patchable nature of software.
Reactions to the article itself
- A few readers criticize the article’s layout: promotional stills feel randomly placed, repeatedly captioned, and only loosely related to the specific scenes and lens choices being discussed.
- Others find the interview valuable exactly for highlighting how many tools (wireless gear, VFX, practical sets, varied lenses) are blended, and how much coordination and pre‑viz is required to achieve Andor’s grounded, cinematic look.