Point Break

[Tom Hamilton]

Just saw Point Break in 3D, what an astonishingly well-shot adrenalin rush.

Huge congrats to Peter Collister ASC!!!

 

[Michael Hastings]

I went to see it in part because Peter used one of our video housings for shooting in Venezuela - in spite of the movie getting pretty poor reviews - which I just don't understand . I mean maybe not a great plot or Oscar-winning acting but those things seemed on the same level as many action features and in contrast it seemed like Point Break was mostly real people doing real stunts - amazing extremely dangerous stuff that was awesome to watch. So many recent action pictures seem to be all computer-based visual effects and it was great to see great Stunts and great cinematography.

Bottom line I enjoyed it very much and the cinematographers should be proud .

Saw it in 2-D but in 4K on the theaters biggest screen - looked great - extremely sharp.

Was it shot in stereo 3-D or computer-generated?

 

[Peter Lyons Collister ASC]

Thank you all..... I have been at home in Paris and it hasn't been released there yet. and now I am in Dominican Republic shooting so I will miss it in the theaters. It is doing rather poorly but I am very proud of the action sequences shot on both Alexa and Epic. All in 2D with post conversion.

Here we are on Angel Falls with Chris Sharma (he doubled for Utah in the climbing)

 

[Peter Lyons Collister ASC]

And BTW Michael's video housing that we used in Venezuela for the rapids scene worked amazingly well and I wish I just owned one! Would recommend it to anyone....

 

[Sean Connery Smith]

Yeah Point Break was nice..Nuff Said

 

[Tuomas Hakala]

I went to see this just cause I wanted to see the cinematography under these extreme conditions and how VFX free it was as this was one point the raised on the featurettes. While the shooting is achievement of its own and really really cool, everything else in the movie felt apart so badly. The plot makes so little sense that I would hardly call it a plot. It is more bunch of random events stick together in order to show cool stuff with characters doing extreme stunts. Other than that they are discussing about life philosophy while they fail to connect on any other way to each other or the audience. Most of the stuff that happens is unmotivated and just simply put silly. I think it is achievement of its own too to see how badly everyone in the loop failed to control where the script was going... or how did the script of this level ever end up being made. Ok, hard to know what the script was like originally and if something got changed or was it always like this, but anyways it fails. Great stunts, but unfortunately you see best of it already in the trailer and in the movie those most exciting trailer scenes seem to be quite meaningless in related to the story, lots of it happens in very first minutes of the movies. If you just like extreme sports and want to see some of that, yes you might like this and I know people who did exactly for that reason. You might want to see it also just for seeing the extreme cinematography and people who did that have lot to be proud of. But if you want to see a movie with a story, character growth, proper conflicts with characters you can relate to then it barely qualifies as a movie.

 

[Enrique Blein]

Peter Collister's input to the film is the only thing worth mentioning. Mediocre plot with half baked pseudo philosophical reasons flying around tattoed mediocre actors in the world most beautiful landscapes. Good for Peter who could actually 'see' more than the rest...