Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

Stalingrad

when i was there, these were not sets but practical locations. the burnt out one used to be a tire factory, when the USSR dissolved, everyone was fired and the factory shut down, in a matter of days. and this apparently happen throughout the whole USSR. so i was told there were thousands of sites like this around the region. my guess is east germany had similar sites. the big bummer was it rained like crazy and we had to move the location of the tent village a few times. i learned a good lesson about trying to find the highest ground when ever you show up on location, just it case it rains for 3 hours and the rain creates lakes on location. fortunately it was not my gear, so i was not as worried, but it did teach me to think ahead.
 
Frank Glencairn said:
Thanks for your warm words Eryc. And mind that I did all that as a one man crew with a FS100 and a BMC.
Give me an Epic, a little crew and a few bucks and see what I can do :sifone:

And yeah, I also have high hopes on REDRAY + ODEMAX.
First of all it makes no sense to me to convert material, that is already in a pristine wavelet codec to an other wavelet codec for delivery.
And I also hope for easier distribution. Right now, it's actually easier to make a film than getting it out there.
If you are a little unknown filmmaker from Germany, without huge (ant the right) connections, your fu....ed in the moment, no mater waht your material looks like.
It's still much more, who you know, than what you can do. I really hope that changes with ODEMAX by cutting the guys in the middle, that still sit between you and your audience.
Click to expand...

You're very welcome. We laud big budget films all the friggin' time, but if you look closely enough...these properties are generated by a sort of aristocracy. I'm much more interested in the fringe perspectives, so to speak. It's as if the everyman's stories are rarely important, and until recently, there was little way to compete on the same stage as a megalithic, studio picture. Not that it doesn't happen, but we all can agree it is pretty rare. And most "common people" are not going to have the resources, or knowledge, to be able to stage these large, revisionist history spectacles.

While I studied at a certain film school, I was one of the poor kids that sneaked in somehow -- climbed over the barbed wire, and eavesdropped on all their techniques. While in attendance, I developed the mantra, "Educating the rich to entertain the poor." I was being cheeky then, but now I can see just how much veracity there is in the statement.

Thank GOD for RED.

I just happened to run into David Mullen yesterday, and was dying to ask him what he thought about ODEMAX and REDRAY. It turns out he wasn't aware of ODEMAX. That speaks VOLUMES to me -- if he doesn't know -- who the hell will know? Let alone understand the implications of what this technology represents. This is one of the reasons I talk about it ad nauseam. Ultimately though, actions speak the loudest. I haven't had a camera in my possession for three months, and we're already about to shoot a feature. Somehow. Haha. This would NOT be happening if I did not have one of the most powerful cameras on Earth sitting beside me -- day in, and day out. :) So people can say whatever they want about RED...but it all just sounds like a bunch of BLAH BLAH BLAH in the end.

Jim and the RED team want us to be successful. For true success to occur, rarely is it something one enjoys alone. If I can ever be of assistance, let me know.

Eryc
 
Jordi Figueras said:
I think this can be applied to almost every european country. They say there is a crisis in the making of movies, but I constantly see and know about people working their asses off to get really, really, really low budget films with good aesthetics and stories, just to find that no one wants to distribute or even exhibit them.
Click to expand...

Although we tried stopping vertical integration in the states with legislation to prevent studios from owning production, distribution, and exhibition...I'm convinced that failed HORRIBLY.

Once we are able to easily send .RED files from home to a theater, effectively making all of us distributors, we'll see just how much of an oligarchy exists. It will likely be painfully obvious. Arbitrary standards instituted, bureaucracy, you name it...I hope it doesn't go this way, but we'll soon find out.

If nothing else, many of the cool stories you speak of may have to skip the silver screen and go directly to in-home 4K theaters. I'm fine with that. :)
 
dino g said:
Fedor is best friends with Putin. I mean best friends. so when 400 extras are needed that are dressed in army uniforms, guess what, 400 extras show up in real uniforms, at a location that is owned by the government. moreover, fedor's dad directed WAR and Peace...see more info on that here..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_and_Peace_(film_series) just like that film, the big expenses that most every other film ever made would have to pay for out of the budget, were given to the project.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Haha. Makes me laugh. Thanks for the confirmation, Dino, but I never doubted this kind of backstory for a second. It's the way we have historically generated cinema. This is going to sound crazy, and I realize most could care less about the philosophy of cinema here (or have no desire to discuss it because this is a camera forum after all), but it has been used as a "weapon" of sorts since its inception. Straight up propaganda engine.

Anyway, yes, Stalingrad looks great, but I'm also ready to see some of the more marginalized stories from around the globe. There are certainly a lot of them. I have several I would like to embark on, but certain perspectives would not prove endearing to the hegemony, and I'm not really trying to be a martyr...martyrdom is for younger people with limited understanding of the dangers involved. Haha. Kidding. But not.

DRAGON UNCHAINED. ;)
 
Not to nitpick on your budget conversations about the film, and certainly do not want to start a fight, but a few facts:

1. In accordance to the DGA... any film below 11M is low budget... above that, is not. 30M is not.
2. Although shot in 1998, Saving Private Ryan (shot on film, Tom Hanks, Spielberg, Janusz Kaminski, John Williams, etc... locations in France, Ireland and UK)... 70M
3. Although shot in 1998, Thin Red Line (Terrence Malick, John Travolta, Woody Allen and the list goes on and on)... 58M

So, although the budget is not Pearl Harbor, it is definitely not a "low budget" film by any means.

In fact, according to Russia Today, this film ranks among the "most expensive Russian films".

http://rt.com/art-and-culture/stalingrad-movie-3d-shootings-836/ (Russia’s first big-budget 3D movie shootings over)

Don't get me wrong, the images look amazing, and kudos to RED for providing the cameras, but, really, don't come and tell me that 30M is a low budget, because, well, its not.
 
+1 Eric

That said... if someone really has the thought that 30M is a low budget, please call me, I have 6 ideas I can do AMAZINGLY WELL if you want to write me a little $30m check.

:-)
 
Low"er" budget then lol

ERIC PECK said:
Not to nitpick on your budget conversations about the film, and certainly do not want to start a fight, but a few facts:

1. In accordance to the DGA... any film below 11M is low budget... above that, is not. 30M is not.
2. Although shot in 1998, Saving Private Ryan (shot on film, Tom Hanks, Spielberg, Janusz Kaminski, John Williams, etc... locations in France, Ireland and UK)... 70M
3. Although shot in 1998, Thin Red Line (Terrence Malick, John Travolta, Woody Allen and the list goes on and on)... 58M

So, although the budget is not Pearl Harbor, it is definitely not a "low budget" film by any means.

In fact, according to Russia Today, this film ranks among the "most expensive Russian films".

http://rt.com/art-and-culture/stalingrad-movie-3d-shootings-836/ (Russia’s first big-budget 3D movie shootings over)

Don't get me wrong, the images look amazing, and kudos to RED for providing the cameras, but, really, don't come and tell me that 30M is a low budget, because, well, its not.
Click to expand...
 
ERIC PECK said:
Not to nitpick on your budget conversations about the film, and certainly do not want to start a fight, but a few facts:

1. In accordance to the DGA... any film below 11M is low budget... above that, is not. 30M is not.
2. Although shot in 1998, Saving Private Ryan (shot on film, Tom Hanks, Spielberg, Janusz Kaminski, John Williams, etc... locations in France, Ireland and UK)... 70M
3. Although shot in 1998, Thin Red Line (Terrence Malick, John Travolta, Woody Allen and the list goes on and on)... 58M

So, although the budget is not Pearl Harbor, it is definitely not a "low budget" film by any means.

In fact, according to Russia Today, this film ranks among the "most expensive Russian films".

http://rt.com/art-and-culture/stalingrad-movie-3d-shootings-836/ (Russia’s first big-budget 3D movie shootings over)

Don't get me wrong, the images look amazing, and kudos to RED for providing the cameras, but, really, don't come and tell me that 30M is a low budget, because, well, its not.
Click to expand...

I don't think Jarred is suggesting $30 million is no money. I think he is saying the production value, and film overall, looks considerably more expensive -- relative to other contemporary, spectacle films.

So if you want to create a $120 million war/drama/space opera, but find you have a paltry $30mil in the piggy bank -- you should get on the phone with ol' Vladimir, son. That's really what we should be taking from all this. :)
 
Jeffrey T. Morgan said:
+1 Eric

That said... if someone really has the thought that 30M is a low budget, please call me, I have 6 ideas I can do AMAZINGLY WELL if you want to write me a little $30m check.

:-)
Click to expand...

+1

I'll take $1 million. You can have the other $29m.

:)
 
I think everyone forgets where this movie is being made. It's not made in Hollywood, where they use certain accounting practices. Russian film production practices for films like Stalingrad are very different. For one, Russian government through it's Cinema Fund bankrolls so called 'national champions", like Stalingrad. According to official sources a full 1/3 of the budget was provided by the Fund. It's not a loan, it's a grant. Moreover, as a chosen national champion, Stalingrad is entitled to a whole bunch of discounts and freebies, courtesy of the same Russian government. They shot the movie at the government owned locations in city of Kronshtadt as well as in San Petersburg film studio Lenfilm. If the post production were to be done at the government owned Mosfilm studios, then more discounts or outright grants are to follow. 900 extras were used in the film. I have no doubt, that some, if not all were Russian soldiers, that were provided free of charge. So, in other words, even at the official $30 million budget, the actual budget is much, much higher. Russian government is very serious about maintaining the propaganda machine. That is why they worked very hard to systematically re-nationalize all main TV channels as well as taking back the control of Mosfilm and Lenfilm- two of the biggest Russian film studios. Films, like Stalingrad about the Great Patriotic War as WW II is known in Russia, are always welcome there. Russians are very proud of their role in defeating Germany and they always ready to spend money in order to remind the young generation about glorious Russian past.
 
jake blackstone said:
I think everyone forgets where this movie is being made.
Click to expand...

Awesome post, Jake...but are you sure you read the other posts? ;) I think most of us are actually in agreement with you.

I was reading some comments regarding the new Schneider Xenons at www.nofilmschool.com, and came across this:

For the first time ever, Film making [sic] is truly becoming a meritocracy because anyone can afford it instead of the wealthy and connected; and I am all for that. Plus, you can own a decent set of Zeiss or Canon primes and have access to them whenever you want to make whatever you want. That kind of freedom is amazing. --Gene Sung

This sentiment seems to be permeating the interwebs, and is basically what I came to see the REDvolution signifying back in 06.


E
 
jake blackstone said:
I think everyone forgets where this movie is being made. It's not made in Hollywood, where they use certain accounting practices. Russian film production practices for films like Stalingrad are very different. For one, Russian government through it's Cinema Fund bankrolls so called 'national champions", like Stalingrad. According to official sources a full 1/3 of the budget was provided by the Fund. It's not a loan, it's a grant. Moreover, as a chosen national champion, Stalingrad is entitled to a whole bunch of discounts and freebies, courtesy of the same Russian government. They shot the movie at the government owned locations in city of Kronshtadt as well as in San Petersburg film studio Lenfilm. If the post production were to be done at the government owned Mosfilm studios, then more discounts or outright grants are to follow. 900 extras were used in the film. I have no doubt, that some, if not all were Russian soldiers, that were provided free of charge. So, in other words, even at the official $30 million budget, the actual budget is much, much higher. Russian government is very serious about maintaining the propaganda machine. That is why they worked very hard to systematically re-nationalize all main TV channels as well as taking back the control of Mosfilm and Lenfilm- two of the biggest Russian film studios. Films, like Stalingrad about the Great Patriotic War as WW II is known in Russia, are always welcome there. Russians are very proud of their role in defeating Germany and they always ready to spend money in order to remind the young generation about glorious Russian past.
Click to expand...

Michael Bay gets troops, planes, and ships for the cost of gas.

Superman paid off $175 of its initial cost in product placement (though I don't think this was counted against the stated budget).

Plus most movies shot in the US take advantage of some tax incentives.

That said, the actual production cost of "big" movies is much lower than it appears. Ludicrous producer fees and bookkeeping designed to withhold points keep budgets artificially inflated.
 
$70 000 000 for "Stalingrad" doesn't look to me like "incredibly low budget" :) and 3REALITY was main subcontractor for multiple 3D rigs on this movie - number one 3D team in the world btw :) No wonder it looks awesome.
 
Very informative! Thanks!


jake blackstone said:
I think everyone forgets where this movie is being made. It's not made in Hollywood, where they use certain accounting practices. Russian film production practices for films like Stalingrad are very different. For one, Russian government through it's Cinema Fund bankrolls so called 'national champions", like Stalingrad. According to official sources a full 1/3 of the budget was provided by the Fund. It's not a loan, it's a grant. Moreover, as a chosen national champion, Stalingrad is entitled to a whole bunch of discounts and freebies, courtesy of the same Russian government. They shot the movie at the government owned locations in city of Kronshtadt as well as in San Petersburg film studio Lenfilm. If the post production were to be done at the government owned Mosfilm studios, then more discounts or outright grants are to follow. 900 extras were used in the film. I have no doubt, that some, if not all were Russian soldiers, that were provided free of charge. So, in other words, even at the official $30 million budget, the actual budget is much, much higher. Russian government is very serious about maintaining the propaganda machine. That is why they worked very hard to systematically re-nationalize all main TV channels as well as taking back the control of Mosfilm and Lenfilm- two of the biggest Russian film studios. Films, like Stalingrad about the Great Patriotic War as WW II is known in Russia, are always welcome there. Russians are very proud of their role in defeating Germany and they always ready to spend money in order to remind the young generation about glorious Russian past.
Click to expand...
 
They must have Jerry Bruckheimer's Colorist! I havent seen a movie use that extreme coloring since Armageddon!
 
There's no way that film cost $70m maybe rubles. Two tanks. whoopee. Bet it's $5-10m.
 
Or $30m. After looking at the bts shots I must be wrong. More like $3-5m and producer got a chunk of taht I'm sure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top