Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

"Side Effects"

Randall Weatherington

Randall Weatherington

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2011
Messages
244
Reaction score
2
Points
18
Saw a quick BTS promo for "Side Effects" over the weekend.
Definitely saw a RED brick battery. Assume it was attached to an Epic, although it was pointed straight away from the BTS camera, and obscurred by the battery.
Anybody know more about REDs involvement on this movie?
 
Just saw Side Effects yesterday at the ArcLight. There are quite a number of very low key shots, particularly of Jude Law's character during the second act, that really put the chroma characteristic in the shadows front and center. It's a more subtle and darker look than most features explore. In a proper theatrical presentation it works quite well - presumably as Soderberg intended - it will be interesting to see what a home video grade of some of those scenes will look like.

Great script, great direction and excellent performances from the leads all expertly woven together by Soderberg. Other directors may have higher profiles, but Soderberg just tells stories very well - which is the director's job after all - bringing out the power of the story and keeping his actors on target. Narrative filmmaking at its finest.

Bravura.

Cheers - #19
 
I felt the story fell way short. Right as the momentum picked up it died instantly. Cinematography was ok IMO. I thought a lot of the shoots needed more DOF. Overall an ok flick for $6.
 
Leland Haushalter said:
I felt the story fell way short. Right as the momentum picked up it died instantly. Cinematography was ok IMO. I thought a lot of the shoots needed more DOF. Overall an ok flick for $6.
Click to expand...

I really liked the shallow focus, thought it supported the story point of how the characters lived in a world disconnected from the rest of the world, how they had their own warped morality, etc.

I get your point that the narrative arc did not follow convention and you have every right to your opinion. For me, the looser structure and willingness to let the story unfold at its natural pace was a plus.

Cheers - #19
 
I'll second that. I enjoyed the looser structure - felt it made the film less predictable and had me wondering what was going to happen next!

Kegan
 
Is it just me, or did Side Effects look pretty terrible visually..? Lots of blown out highlights (usually windows in the background), lots of shots go in and out of focus (might have been on purpose for the idea that she's crazy, but it looked like a mistake), the whole thing feels very video (a lot of shots feel like 30fps, color/white balance looks gross and conflicting), etc.

It almost looks like someone who usually shoots on film got an Epic thrown in their hands. Film naturally makes conflicting color temperatures looks pleasing, but it takes careful planning (and color correction in post) when it comes to lighting for a digital sensor...
 
Have you seen his other films?

Daniel Soderberg said:
Is it just me, or did Side Effects look pretty terrible visually..? Lots of blown out highlights (usually windows in the background), lots of shots go in and out of focus (might have been on purpose for the idea that she's crazy, but it looked like a mistake), the whole thing feels very video (a lot of shots feel like 30fps, color/white balance looks gross and conflicting), etc.

It almost looks like someone who usually shoots on film got an Epic thrown in their hands. Film naturally makes conflicting color temperatures looks pleasing, but it takes careful planning (and color correction in post) when it comes to lighting for a digital sensor...
Click to expand...
 
I actually really liked the film, Soderbergh did a great job. It seemed to me like the whole movie had pretty noticeable diffusion but I think it fit well. There were some moments were it looked like 30p I dont know why but other than that I found it very enjoyable.
 
Daniel Soderberg said:
Soderbergh's? Or the DP's?
Click to expand...

DP Peter Andrews is Steven Soderbergh. He also often cutting his own pictures by himself. I've heard that "too video" complaint since, well, Che and The Informant!. Then it only got "worse" for some people with movies like Contagion, Haywire and Magic Mike (remember beach daylight scenes with the "old faded photo" grade?). Personally I have zero problems with his cinematography choices and using available light as long as I'm interested in the story, I'm not always obsessed with classic neutral "film look" myself, only sometimes.

It's too bad he's retiring after Liberace biopic "Behind the Candelabra", though. Something tells me he'd sport Dragon just fine with his filmmaking style. It's harder to get completely clipped blown out "electronic video" look with huge latitude and lowlight sensitivity :). Actually if he's not too busy now, maybe Red guys could ask him politely to film some demo reels to test Dragon's powers. It can be Channing Tatum dancing with The Milk Girls, while ABC Song is playing in background or Matt Damon in old fashioned glasses shooting fireworks at a dry lake in Nevada, or something else, anything. Just make sure he's not grading it by himself, hehe. Just kidding.

Carlos Reyes said:
There were some moments were it looked like 30p I dont know why but other than that I found it very enjoyable.
Click to expand...

That's interesting, because Soderbergh publicly dissed all post-24p HFR as "weird and video-looking" in some recent interview. That's ironic.
 
Since the unifying themes of the film are the dark fog of depression, lying and killing for personal gain, the naked avarice of Big Pharma and the people that are complicit in treating human beings as sources of profit I found the palette appropriate. Moreover, as noted above, Soderberg has made a number of movies with a more naturalistic, less glamourous style.

Sure looked like 24fps to me, especially on pans so I guess that's one of those eye of the beholder things.

Cheers - #19
 
Blair S. Paulsen said:
Since the unifying themes of the film are the dark fog of depression, lying and killing for personal gain, the naked avarice of Big Pharma and the people that are complicit in treating human beings as sources of profit I found the palette appropriate. Moreover, as noted above, Soderberg has made a number of movies with a more naturalistic, less glamourous style.

Sure looked like 24fps to me, especially on pans so I guess that's one of those eye of the beholder things.

Cheers - #19
Click to expand...

Agree completely. Haha definitely looked like 24p just that the motion blur seemed different in some shots, nothing crazy reminded me of 24p, was just curious if anyone else noticed.
 
Carlos Reyes said:
Agree completely. Haha definitely looked like 24p just that the motion blur seemed different in some shots, nothing crazy reminded me of 24p, was just curious if anyone else noticed.
Click to expand...

That's interesting you noticed it too Carlos. It seemed to feel like 30p on some of the wider shots if I remember correctly.
 
Daniel Soderberg said:
That's interesting you noticed it too Carlos. It seemed to feel like 30p on some of the wider shots if I remember correctly.
Click to expand...

I meant to say "nothing crazy reminded me of 30p" so yeah I noticed it. Curious as to what caused that!
 
Anyone know what lenses he shot on? His last two movies were Hawk anamorphics but this one was 1.85 so i am guessing not those. Still, the bokeh was gorgeous.
 
drew sandoval said:
Anyone know what lenses he shot on? His last two movies were Hawk anamorphics but this one was 1.85 so i am guessing not those. Still, the bokeh was gorgeous.
Click to expand...

I'm bumping this older thread because I too am curious about which lenses he used.

I also want to chime in having just seen this. What a terrific film. Excellent script, very nicely directed and acted. And his cinematography was excellent as well as his editing. Maybe I didn't quite agree with every choice he made, but they were valid choices. And I particularly like his framing and coverage. I'm not a fan of all of his work, but I sure hate to see him go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top