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 :)

Thoughts after seeing CHE

He saw something and judged it but it has a context and serves a purpose and one very important question is to deduce whether or not it is intentional or the cause of some technical limitation of the instrument on which it was captured.

Some people who were actually "There" said they noticed the same footage being used in the seperate sections and couldnt for the life of them understand why it looked different. Is that not a clue written in glaring neon and blinking "Its intentional"

The "News" sends shock waves through the community and people get alarmed as if it was a catastrophy thats why I offer another point of view, whether it is closer to the truth or not time will tell, but that is my right and I exersize it. I do not see it as off topic. The subject is one thing and the impact another. I am adressing the latter.

We have all seen footage from other productions for example "Cold Storage" and that clearly demonstrates the capabilities of the camera in a proffesional situation.

Che was a "RADICAL" and by many considered a "HERITIC". To treat the subject ( No matter what the tool ) like a slick Hollywood Production would perhaps not have conveyed the "RAW-VITALITY" of this Historical Character and his Legacy.


DogDay
 
10s said:
If I were Jannard, I'd just shell out a few million and make a low budget film that ends all questions. Buy a great screenplay, hire a good producer & director and get David Mullens to Dp it. If the story is good, marketing also, it'll pay for itself.
Click to expand...

It's a nice idea, but no producer in America, including Steven Soderbergh, knows how to break even, much less make money, on 7 figure features. If Jim Jannard could figure out how to do it, or was inclined to look beyond the usual suspects of indie film, that would be a bigger and rarer achievement than the camera.

For starters, a "great screenplay" is the absolute worst place to begin, because if you've found a script that the funders, the producers and everyone in the production office loves, then it's a movie that the public has already seen dozens of times before. Best run for cover.
 
Obviously SS likes sometime "a dirty" shot in his movies.

Almost each movie has something that "the schooler" DP would always complain.

Remind TRAFFIC and the shots done over the border in Mexico.

It is about his artistic decision and style but not about "a bad" RED camera or him as an operator/DP.

In 4 and 1/2 movie about Cuban revolution, a lot of fights and jungle guerrilla you cannot expect all

the time a nice ol' school cinematograpy.

I am totally sure that SS did not want to make a Hollywood type of cinematography at all.

It's not there any Offhollywood aesthetic it's more about anti-Hollywood aesthetic.

Look at a movie duration, it's almost 5 hours with an intermission.

This decision is not made in any Hollywood manner.

DSCN3569.jpg

Even logo of the film has a dirty design aesthetic.

It's just my reading SS signs before I will see the film.

BTW also I do have all Soderbergh's films in my DVD collection.

DSCN3583.jpg

CHE press in recycled paper bag.

cheticket.jpg

Invitation for Che party in Villa Murano.
 
jpp said:
For starters, a "great screenplay" is the absolute worst place to begin, because if you've found a script that the funders, the producers and everyone in the production office loves, then it's a movie that the public has already seen dozens of times before. Best run for cover.
Click to expand...
What?
 
Some peoples defensiveness and closed eyes towards the camera on this forum always makes me chuckle. The camera is not the 2nd comming of Christ, it is not as good as film, D21, F23, F35, genesis or dalsa.

What it is, is a kick ass camera for the price. It works well for the price and has the added value of small improvements with new builds. All of this is great and the reason I have paid the money to buy one. Face the limits of the camera and learn to work with them. Your footage will be better if you take off the red blinders.
 
Finner said:
Some peoples defensiveness and closed eyes towards the camera on this forum always makes me chuckle. The camera is not the 2nd comming of Christ, it is not as good as film, D21, F23, F35, genesis or dalsa.
Click to expand...

Dude... Come on. Not being a slack-jawed fanboy and trying to look at things on an even keel is a good thing. Playing devil's advocate every once in awhile is a good thing. But global generalizations like this do about as much good as the "defensiveness and closed eyes."

I assume you have personally shot critical tests with all of the cameras you list above compared to RED? So you can give us your test results and how you came to these conclusions?

I have been on the crew of critical tests with RED and several of the cameras you list above. And the opinions of the DPs on those stages vary pretty dramatically from your broad generalization.

Keepin' it real.

Lucas
-----
ASSIMILATE, inc.
LA, CA, USA
 
aaand here we go again...
 
luki said:
I assume you have personally shot critical tests with all of the cameras you list above compared to RED? So you can give us your test results and how you came to these conclusions?
Click to expand...

Not the dalsa or F35 but all the others yes. I know the image of the dalsa has all others beat but is a beast to use and the F35 is pretty much a genesis. So all in all I feel comfortable with the statement. The dynamic range of all the cameras I mentioned have easily 2 stops or more dynamic range then the red. When your already in the 1080 zone DR has a much bigger effect on image quality then resolution.

So that is how I came to that conclusion. If you rate image alone those cameras have red beat. Factor in price, ease of use and many other things then red becomes a clear winner. Unless of course if you are talking post where red becomes a whole mess but hopefully with red opening the door soon that will change.
 
Lukas snap out of it ... The level of late night pithy banter has been enhanced as of late. I feel out done with that Slack-Jawed Fan-Boy crack, Now if you can out do yourself and say it in Latin...Wow, that would really make my day...

DogDay
 
americanalien said:
yes, this is correct. Everyone knows the smartest thing is to get the worst screenplay you can find and throw a hundred million dollars at it. Also, the Tom Hanks and Julia Roberts of this world are attracted to poorly drawn characters and weak stories.
Click to expand...

You could make that argument, but it's not what I had in mind.

Agcohn: my point was that when a screenplay is readily accessible to and liked by large of numbers of people, particularly producers and funders, it's a good indication that the material is full of cliches, that the movie has been made a million times before and that its commercial prospects are dismal if it's made on a low budget because people have already seen it more grandly produced elsewhere, many times.

Genuinely original material tends not to be instantly comprehensible in script form, which is one reason there are so few originally conceived American movies around.
 
This is that critical point where a thread can either go downhill into a shit-throwing competition or uphill into a thoughtful discussion. I know Daren and Lukas would take the proper route... but everybody else be careful how you reply! :)
 
jpp said:
You could make that argument, but it's not what I had in mind.

Agcohn: my point was that when a screenplay is readily accessible to and liked by large of numbers of people, particularly producers and funders, it's a good indication that the material is full of cliches, that the movie been made a million times before and that its commercial prospects are dismal if it's made on a low budget because people have already seen it more grandly produced elsewhere.

Genuinely original material tends not to be instantly comprehensible in script form, which is one reason there are so few originally conceived American movies around.
Click to expand...
What about the term "great screenplay" do you not understand? By default, great screenplays are not full of cliches, nor are are they incomprehensible in script form.

Anyways, why does a script have to be original to be great? A great screenplay can take a well traveled path, yet make you forget that it is unoriginal.
 
agcohn said:
What about the term "great screenplay" do you not understand? By default, great screenplays are not full of cliches, nor are are they incomprehensible in script form.
Click to expand...

Okay, I'll spell it out. By "great screenplay" I mean what people in this business consider a "great screenplay", which is a script full of cliches.

It's called "irony", and that irony is firmly grounded in the realities of the business. There's a reason the same movies get made over and over again, and why so many low budget films offer nothing which can't be found, better produced, in Hollywood or on network TV.
 
Finner said:
So that is how I came to that conclusion. If you rate image alone those cameras have red beat.
Click to expand...

That's a subjective opinion. I prefer the look of red to dalsa, genesis, f23, and d21 because it has a more pleasing quality. f23, dalsa, and d21 are in my subjective opinion, harsh and not very pleasing.
 
The "irony" of this thread is that one of the broad responses to "the film looked less than perfect" was "yeah? Well... SCREENPLAY!!!"

Just saying. It's funny.

Congratulations on your film, Matt. Thanks for posting grounded Che feedback here.
 
Brook Willard said:
The "irony" of this thread is that one of the broad responses to "the film looked less than perfect" was "yeah? Well... SCREENPLAY!!!"

Just saying. It's funny.
Click to expand...

And the deeper irony is, CHE is getting panned for its screenplay!
 
jpp, my idea is simply to get a RED movie out there that is artistically, technically and financially correct/successful. Hollywood is a business that is nervous, they respect repeated $uccess. RED still needs to prove itself. With all due respect, the SS film doesn't really help RED out the way a more traditional film could have. We already saw Dalsa with the Mel Gibson Apocalytco (sp?) show it's abilities. I'm sure there are plenty of RED productions occuring currently, I'm just not up on them. Let's hope a blockbuster is on the way. This will help indies with nervous distributors...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top