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 :)

Michael Mann’s Public Enemies

At first I saw this trailer online and I thought it just looked terrible. However, I saw the trailer on the big screen today and I was blown away by how GREAT it looked. The sharpness and focus looked fantastic on the big screen.

I knew Micheal Mann wouldn't make a movie that looked bad.
 
Evin Grant said:
It does look much better on the big screen but I wouldn't say it matches the period of the movie.
Click to expand...

Everyone wants to make a fiction.

That supposed to be we should do when we are making a movie.

To match something doesn't matter at all in this case.

No movie can match any "reality" or any "period".

It's all about a fiction.

And only an artist should make decision what acquisition tool have to be chosen.

Also that's in "an ideal" world.

But sometimes are coming a production "rats" and making own decisions.

Hope that was not in the case with "Public Enemies".
 
Did i read a past post on here correctly.......did someone say Michael used the Sony EX1 along with the F23?!?!?!? How do you match those 2 cameras and why on earth would Michael use a prosumer HD cam on such a big production like Public Enemies?????

Really though, how do you match a prosumer HD cam to that of a 2/3in cam? Wouldnt it look way different?
 
I agree with Mike, I find it hard to believe he would use an EX1 for this project. I would be interested to see some proof to back up that information.
 
IanCarleton said:
I agree with Mike, I find it hard to believe he would use an EX1 for this project. I would be interested to see some proof to back up that information.
Click to expand...

I don't see why he wouldn't use it as a B camera to pick up shots here and there, in the right places you would never even notice it.

Clint Eastwood cut some HDV into Letters from iwo Jima and I have no idea which shots they are.
 
The cynic in me tends to ask questions like:

Wouldn't Sony Corporation be inclined to offer ridiculous compensations to big name directors for using their equipment?
And:
How much of an offer would it take to 'turn' these big name directors over to video?

I'm not saying that's what happened in the case of Mann. But there are many angles to this other than just the final look.
 
i saw this trailer on the big screen again yesterday and it was full of fail.

so many "video moments." it baffles my mind as to why Mann would degrade his images by using lackluster prosumer cams on a huge film like this.
 
Tom said:
i saw this trailer on the big screen again yesterday and it was full of fail.

so many "video moments." it baffles my mind as to why Mann would degrade his images by using lackluster prosumer cams on a huge film like this.
Click to expand...

Since when did a Sony CineAlta F23 become a prosumer camera?
 
They were also shooting with little handheld prosumer cams, which I'm guessing were responsible for some of the worst video moments in the trailer.
 
Tom said:
They were also shooting with little handheld prosumer cams, which I'm guessing were responsible for some of the worst video moments in the trailer.
Click to expand...
Do you have a link to that information?
 
sp_depp_080529_ssv.jpg


there are a lot of links showing the production using stock prosumer HD cams. i don't have them handy right now.
 
I thought overall the trailer looked good; there were many nice shots in restaurants, etc. that looked very filmic despite using 2/3" cameras -- probably because they were all long-lensed close-ups. The dynamic range of the F23 looked good too.

It's just the occasional "video-ish" shots that jump out, either from the long shutter time during fast motion, or the prosumer HD stuff (I only saw a couple of those.)

It's was a bit ironic to see the trailer for "Star Trek" shot in 35mm anamorphic and then the trailer for "Public Enemies" shot in HD -- a sci-fi movie using old-school technology and a period movie shot in digital. But then, maybe that's what is interesting about both of them.
 
I heard they used EX1 or so.
 
CraigWB said:
I don't see why he wouldn't use it as a B camera to pick up shots here and there, in the right places you would never even notice it.

Clint Eastwood cut some HDV into Letters from iwo Jima and I have no idea which shots they are.
Click to expand...


They enclosed Z1s in some metal boxes and infantry of extras run with these boxes and they didnt told them that inside is camera for more authenticity.
 
Impagliazzo said:
I really don't get you guys.

So Cinematography choices are only limited to pristine crystal clear images?

Surprised I didn't see any movie shot on RED rated at ISO 800 the whole time.

Grain, noise whatever... It's texture, it suits some stories very well.

Check these full size, the grittiness of the grain looks fabulous:
http://outnow.ch/Movies/2004/Collateral/Posters/004833/
http://outnow.ch/Movies/2009/PublicEnemies/Posters/014180/
Click to expand...
agreed... there is a place for noise and there is a place for grain... what fun is it to have your goal as a DP or director to get your cinematography to the point that people no longer notice the cinematography.. it's all part of the film experience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top