The Dark Knight Rises. Camera Too Heavy?

[Barry Bishop]

Im sorry I didn't like the film as much as I thought I would. I felt that the camera was soft in many of the shots, not sharp and not clear. Granted this could be the projector being out of focus, but some shots were real crisp and clear. Also the color grading I thought was not as good as it could have been. Robin tinted yellow while in the same room with Wayne who was punched blue...its just these little things that I noticed.

 

[M Most]

I guess not since you CHOSE to quote me in a reprimanding tone, in defense of Nolan

You really need to stop taking things I say personally. At least 3 or 4 other posts in this thread implied that somehow Nolan's vision was either limited or impaired by the equipment that was used, and my reply was stating that this is very unlikely. The fact that your post happened to be the most recent that mentioned this doesn't mean I was responding to you personally. Threads on forums are discussions between all posters, not just one or two.

 

[Alex Kornreich]

The Ridiculously HUGE Camera set up is to blame no doubt, but you can only blame it so far, as even with such a HUGE camera set up, Movement and a TONE more of action following breath taking up your neck fast moving images in your face, can still be achieved, just definitely not as easy as with an EPIC...

So, lets be nice to the Director and say, 30% The Huge camera set up was the issue, and 70% The Director's choices were the issue...

Christopher Nolan is a master filmmaker, uses one of the world's best DP's, who in turn uses the best camera operator in the world (Scott Sakamoto). He also had a blank check for the film.

Saying a heavy camera affected the creative direction of the film has no basis in reality, just pure speculation.

 

[Steve Sherrick]

There is a very fine line between moving a camera too much and moving it too little. The great directors and cinematographers know how to walk that line because it's always about the best way to convey the story. I see many films and tv shows these days that seem more interested in calling attention to the cinematography than the story.

 

[Keegan O'Brien]

I'd respond to the OP, but I'd probably get banned.

 

[Marc Wielage]

Im sorry I didn't like the film as much as I thought I would. I felt that the camera was soft in many of the shots, not sharp and not clear. Granted this could be the projector being out of focus, but some shots were real crisp and clear. Also the color grading I thought was not as good as it could have been. Robin tinted yellow while in the same room with Wayne who was punched blue...its just these little things that I noticed.

Where did you see the picture? I caught it with some friends at the Universal City Imax, and thought it was absolutely pin-sharp. Breathtakingly clean.

The vast majority of the picture was color-timed in a lab, so the color-grading was essentially what was lit and shot on the negative. (Granted, there were hundreds of visual effects shots which had to be pre-timed to a point, but the film did not go through a D.I. in that sense.)

You might not agree with cinematographer Wally Pfister's choices, but I think he got what he wanted out of the film. Me, I thought it looked fine throughout. The mix on the other hand... :torsten_violent-smi

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Christopher Nolan is a master filmmaker, uses one of the world's best DP's, who in turn uses the best camera operator in the world (Scott Sakamoto). He also had a blank check for the film.

Saying a heavy camera affected the creative direction of the film has no basis in reality, just pure speculation.

It does not matter whom you are or how great you are, the tool will always affect the way you do what you do, but in defense of Nolan, I meant in what I said in my post that camera was certainly not going let you do the same as a smaller camera, just it is the way it is, and if Nolan had a smaller camera Him and his crew would have afforded a much more action like movement with the camera.


The fact that He did the movie the way He did, its his choice, and I am certainly not accusing him of not doing it right, I just replied to the tread saying that is not the camera to be blamed 100%, only at most 30%, as the rest is Nolan's choice.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Watched it last night. As to the action scene camera work--it was a lot of people standing in front of each other punching each other and shot like a standard dialog scene. But that was regardless of 35mm or IMAX. Looked like standard Nolan action direction. I didn't feel like the cameras had any effect one way or another.

Probably my favorite Nolan film and one of the best films I've seen in a long time, I just personally am not a fan of his camera direction. He's no Spielberg in that regard--which is fine, but I think he falls more into the writer/dialog centric director category. Everyone has their own interests and strengths and it certainly didn't prevent him from making an exquisite piece of cinema.