Hindi Medium Film Video Free
Tommye Hope
The Medium (Thai: ร่างทรง Rang Song, literally: Mediumship) is a 2021 Thai-South Korean mockumentary supernatural folk horror film[2] co-written and produced by Na Hong-jin and directed by Banjong Pisanthanakun. It is a co-production of Thailand's GDH 559 and South Korea's Showbox.[3] The film premiered at the 25th Bucheon International Fantastic Film Festival on 11 July 2021.[4] It was theatrically released in South Korea on 14 July 2021.[5] It was selected as the Thai entry for the Best International Feature Film at the 94th Academy Awards[6] but was not nominated.
The film was judged the best feature film at the 25th Bucheon International Fantastic Film Festival and was awarded the Bucheon Choice Award for the best film.[7] On the box office front as per Korean Film Council data, it is ranked 15th among all the films released in the year 2021 in South Korea, with gross of US$7.35 million and 831,126 admissions, as of 26 September 2021.[8] It is the 6th highest-grossing Korean film of 2021.[1]
A documentary crew travels to the Isan region of Thailand to interview Nim, a medium/shaman who claims to be possessed by the spirit of Ba Yan, a local goddess. She had been chosen to be Ba Yan's host after her sister, Noi, refused to accept the role and converted to Christianity.
The Medium is sold by Finecut for the upcoming European Film Market and the film's rights had been already acquired by The Jokers for future theatrical release in France,[12] and by Koch Films to German-speaking territories.[13] As of September, Shudder had acquired the overall streaming rights and it will stream in the US on October 14.[14]
In Asia, the film has been licensed to Edko Films for Macau and Hong Kong (22 September 2021), MovieCloud for Taiwan (25 August 2021), Synca Creations for Japan (29 July 2022), to Encore Films for Malaysia (2 December 2021) and Indonesia (20 October 2021), Golden Village for Singapore (12 August 2021), M Pictures for Cambodia (26 November 2021) and Laos (6 January 2022) and Lumix Media for Vietnam (19 November 2021).[13]
The film was released on 14 July 2021, on 1403 screens.[1] According to the integrated computer network for movie theater admissions by the Korea Film Council (KoFiC), the film ranked at first place at the Korean box office on opening day by collecting 129,917 audiences, surpassing the audiences of Black Widow. On the 4th day of release, it became the highest-grossing film in the horror genre by surpassing US$2.67 million gross. The cumulative audience of the film stands at 403,019 as of 17 July 2021.[16]
According to Korean Film Council (KOFIC) data, it is in 6th place among all the Korean films released in the year 2021, with gross of US$7.32 million and 831,126 admissions, as of 26 September 2021.[1]
Jo Yeon-kyung of JTBC Entertainment News rated the film with 4 out of 5 stars and wrote that the film has a dense narrative, and the sequences of worship and scenes of exorcism are combined with Thailand's unique culture to generate newness. Describing the scary parts of the film, Yeon-kyung wrote, "The scariest thing is that the closer you get to the ending, the more you are getting used to the huge scene unfolding before your eyes. Of course, the level of understanding and impact may vary depending on the individual audience."[18]
Seo Jeong-won writing for Maeil Business praised the performance of Narilya Gunmong Konket and opined, "I am so immersed in acting that I have to worry about the trauma that can occur." Warning the audience about some portions of the film that showed cannibalism, animal cruelty, self-harm, and incest, Jeong-won wrote that they are careful as they might find it cruel. But in Jeong-won's opinion those were essential to narrative.[19]
Choi Young-joo of CBS No Cut News wrote that the film directed in the form of found footage, has a documentary character. Writing about the shamanic beliefs of the Isan region that not only humans but also everything in nature has a soul. Any action committed by ancestors became a curse and was passed down to posterity, in the context of the film it is the character Ming. Young-joo with respect to that belief wrote, "The Medium is a movie that makes you experience with your whole body that there are horror movies because there are human beings." Young-joo pointed out that in the film all the evils that humans can commit were in some way described, and although it was shown to portray human evil, it did come to mind as to how far and how it would be shown.[21]
I have come to digital from film. Medium format and 35mm. Shooting film I was always looking for less grain and sharper images, hence the larger format. Most people who shot film were in the same boat.
My film experiences were mixed. I never really liked the look of printed color films, they always look contrived and unnatural to me. I wound up hand coloring b&w prints, liking them better. Projected slides were nice to look at. I like b&w prints a lot. Something about them appealed to me. They seemed pure and in their unnatural way, natural.
People are hanging on to film and I'm mystified as to why. I read 6x6 medium format film equals a 80MP digital sensor. I shot 6x6. I now have D800 Nikon, Fuji XPro2 and a few Sigmas (DP1, SD1 and SQQ). I'm happy with the results of all of these. I get results and high ISOs that I could never touch with film.
Where does this 80MP number come from and does anyone believe it? As a matter of fact, I got 8x10s using my first 8MP Nikon that blow away anything I could produce using film. B&W with no grain and fantastic detail.
It is, of course, an endless debate, when it widens beyond the precise question of equivalent MPS in MF film. On the equation of the two, I have seen it demonstrated (such as 6x9 negs = 150 mps), but I'll leave it to more techy people to answer. Of course, what does that really matter to film lovers? We never pursued mps or their equivalent the way that digital fans do.
But you expanded the question to film vs. digital, and did so on a film board, so being obviously provocative--which is fine; I like provocation. Regarding that, I think some of it isn't "hanging on" to film, but rather "returning to" film (at least that's my experience).
Since then, 90+% of my photography has been film. I laugh at my failed rolls and ruined development--and love it--and continue to shoot and develop, and feel as if I've rediscovered photography all over again.
I love my best film shots in ways I never felt about my best digital images. For me, "authenticity" is about psychological truth. I just feel that film, despite (or because of) its obvious limitations, reveals more aesthetic truth.
Film, being an analog format, can be scanned at any resolution you want. Conceivably, a high powered microscope could "scan" a medium format negative and produce a digital image of thousands of megabytes, showing a detailed view of individual film grains.
I think you are asking if a film negative can resolve more detail than an 80MP digital camera sensor. The answer is yes, no, maybe, and it depends. The camera and lens matter to some extent. The film type matters a great deal. The developer and developing process both affect film resolving power. Of course, on the digital side, camera and lens matter too. Sensor design matters. Raw versus jpg output matters.
I think it misses the point to worry about the MP equivalent of film versus digital sensors. I almost never like a photo simply because of it's resolution. HCB produced some rather low resolution photos by today's standards and he's considered quite the artist. Ansel Adams produced some very high resolution photos and he's considered quite the artist. I can produce very high resolution photos... and nobody considers me an artist.
These days you have access to amazing tools to explore color negative (print) film, and I keep getting amazed by the results. Without any labs in the way, I am in love with the medium. I love the colors, the process, the delayed gratification, and ultimately - the results.
Basically, it comes down to doing good work. If you want 80MP scans out of your film negatives - go and get quality 80MP scans. The consumer photo industry never really delivered quality services in meaningful volume, so it's up to "prosumers" to do it properly.
The samples above don't even scratch the surface, as I don't chase resolution, 5000 pixels per side is my practical limit and I mostly shoot handheld. But I can easily see 80MP scans made from slower fine-grained films shot on a tripod with good glass, because fine-grain films offer up to 80 line pairs per mm (lp/mm) of resolution (Velvia, Ektar), which translates to 80*56=4480x4480 line pairs for 6x6 negative, i.e. 8960x8960pixels which is indeed, about 80MP.
I am not saying that film is capable of delivering better results than digital. I am saying that beyond certain point, image quality does not matter. Both modern film & digital are currently comfortably beyond that point, so it comes down to "style" of making an image.
Simple for me:- my audience prefer it, especially in some contexts. My personal theory is that almost everyone recognises the idiom/look, and they feel comfortable with that - maybe because things like films were on Kodachrome for ages.
That's not to say I don't like the facility and output of digital. One of the issues with digital tends to be that there is no real idiom or "look", or it's very fragmented because individual style and post-processing. There's also some types of digital output that make me cringe (the over-processed hyper-real stuff), and the film output helps avoid that, especially with the graceful handling of highlights (technically I find it a pain having to guard the highlights so carefully with digital).
aa06259810