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 :)

The Great Gatsby Trailer

Cant wait to watch it on the REDray 3D laser projector! The images off of the projector looked amazing!
 
Graeme Nattress said:
Paris, there's some makeups that just don't work that well. I've tested to find some, and when I did I threw every digital camera I had at them as well as the REDs, and it's a makeup issue. It's exacerbated by makeup being applied while not under the "to be shot" lighting, and also by neutral white balance (leaving the balance warm hides a lot of things). You can actually see the makeup issue with your own eyes when you change the lighting too. The Hobbit issue was something rather different - the colour change through the mirror of the 3D rig.

Graeme
Click to expand...

Thanks for that explanation about The Hobbit... I didn't understand why PJ had to saturate the colors.
 
Bruce Allen said:
Um, we do immensely respect the work put in.

I love Baz Luhrmann films. In the specific field of cinematic color... films like Romeo + Juliet and Moulin Rouge were hugely inspiring and influential.

I also think that Brook is a total RED genius. I couldn't imagine that anyone could get more out of the camera than him and his team.

This looks like beautiful work and I can't wait to see it (yes - in 3D). At the same time, though... if we see issues in the footage that look like issues we've had ourselves with the same equipment (and suspected they were equipment-related, but weren't sure because we doubted our own skill)... it reconfirms that there are areas that I would personally like RED to focus on if even the best guys in the world seem to be having the same issues.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
Click to expand...

Sorry Bruce
My comment was posted at the same time as yours
Not directed toward you or anyone in particular

I am always tremendously grateful for your input on the forum
Sincerely and Respectfully ; )

P.s. your pm box is full
 
Just a side note.. The movie poster going around right now and the one here was created by a fan from who knows what.... it is not the official movie poster, which has not been released yet. Just keep that in mind as you guys pick it apart.
 
Graeme Nattress said:
Paris, there's some makeups that just don't work that well. I've tested to find some, and when I did I threw every digital camera I had at them as well as the REDs, and it's a makeup issue. It's exacerbated by makeup being applied while not under the "to be shot" lighting, and also by neutral white balance (leaving the balance warm hides a lot of things). You can actually see the makeup issue with your own eyes when you change the lighting too. The Hobbit issue was something rather different - the colour change through the mirror of the 3D rig.

Graeme
Click to expand...

Hi Graeme - Has it been limited to one specific ingredient that would be causing this? It would be extremely useful I think if we could build a list of non-safe make-up (or perhaps a safe list would be better) that we could give to make-up artists prior to shoots. Is there any chance you could comment on what brands or products were problematic? Or perhaps it would be less political if you could comment on with which products skin tone problems couldn't be reproduced?
 
Sergio Perez said:
Baz Luhrman often re-images his "worlds". He's an expressionistic director, and the "world" his characters live in are more of an expression of his vision of the era- a "romantic" memory and portrait (that's how I see it). One should not expect realism and era accuracy in his films, but if the story, the characters, the music all work together to create a unique "world" and "experience" which is a Baz Luhrmann film. That's why his films are so polarizing, in a way: either you accept this creative liberty and approach from Luhrmann or you will probably walk out in disgust by the lack of the historical (time) accuracy and representation of the real world in his films. A good comparison to what Baz does with history or with "historical landscape" is what Tarantino did with Inglorious Basterds! Tarantino "changed" history in his film, because he assumed it as his "world", and in his "world", in his film, in his "story", that was the way things happened. Same goes to Luhrmann, but not in such a provocative sense!

obviously we all have different tastes, and certainly Tarantino has a better taste for music than Baz
Click to expand...
 
Move over Hugo! Xtreme Eye Candy coming through!!

Not what I was expecting - my kid just read the book and I just got done splaining the lush production of the 1970's with those amazing Theoni Aldredge costumes . . .
[h=1][/h]
 
great_gatsby.jpg


Just look at the yellow! Clearly a problem with the... er... :)
 
Makes me laugh. All I hear is "it's not filmic". Guess what people...it wasn't shot on film! Red is its own look and it's not like film. Not better or worse IMO just another choice for artistic expression. I color RED footage all day long for a living and I too noticed the yellow and have experienced this myself in certain situations. That said, Leo skin tones looked great. Probably some of the best I've seen come from RED originated material.
But seriously, it's not fair to judge RED versus film. If film is your gold standard save your money and shoot it. Then you can say how cinematic and amazing the skin tones looked.
 
Yikes, That ain't no Robert Redford or Mia Farrow. I'm waiting for the 3D Casablanca Staring Justin Beber and Paris Hilton.
 
Maxi Claudio said:
Yikes, That ain't no Robert Redford or Mia Farrow. I'm waiting for the 3D Casablanca Staring Justin Beber and Paris Hilton.
Click to expand...

If you are comparing a Baz Luhrmann film to your average popcorn flick your film knowledge is a bit limited. Baz is certainly one of the best directors of his generation. Have you watched his films, or only saw Australia? Even that one has some very interesting aspects on it, specially the theme. I'm not Australian but i can see how the "mixed" and the Colonization are very strong issues there. Trying to tell that story the way he did was no easy task! I'm a fan of the director, so I'm obviously biased, but Strictly Ballroom, Romeo and Julliet, Moulin Rouge are films that are truly unique and sign of an "auteur" filmmaker that truly knows how to use pop culture and even Hollywood language to express his unique vision.
 
mikeburton said:
Makes me laugh. All I hear is "it's not filmic". Guess what people...it wasn't shot on film!
Click to expand...
One can make an argument that 1922 (the year in which the story takes place) wouldn't look clean, sharp, and grain-free, not even to the naked eye.

But Luhrmann is known for making very stylized, over-the-top, intense movies (like Moulin Rouge), and I think he has the artistic license to make the movie look the way he wants. The question is whether audiences will buy into it.

I'm more curious as to how modern audiences will deal with a non-action/adventure, dramatic story shot in 3D.
 
Sergio Perez said:
If you are comparing a Baz Luhrmann film to your average popcorn flick your film knowledge is a bit limited. Baz is certainly one of the best directors of his generation. Have you watched his films, or only saw Australia? Even that one has some very interesting aspects on it, specially the theme. I'm not Australian but i can see how the "mixed" and the Colonization are very strong issues there. Trying to tell that story the way he did was no easy task! I'm a fan of the director, so I'm obviously biased, but Strictly Ballroom, Romeo and Julliet, Moulin Rouge are films that are truly unique and sign of an "auteur" filmmaker that truly knows how to use pop culture and even Hollywood language to express his unique vision.
Click to expand...

The film isn't out. So i can only critique based on the trailer, which usually is a composition of the best scenes. The CG car and the opening shot of the bridge down to CG characters in a convertible reminded me of the CG in THE POLAR EXPRESS. Do you think DiCaprio is a believable Gatsby? The original film had a lot nuance. Things you had to read between the lines. The quiet relationship between Sam Waterston and Redford. At least as the movie's portrayed in the trailer, it doesn't seem to care much about any nuance. Maybe it is generational. Audiences today don't have the attention span and require constant glitter and sparklies.
 
Maxi Claudio said:
The film isn't out. So i can only critique based on the trailer, which usually is a composition of the best scenes. The CG car and the opening shot of the bridge down to CG characters in a convertible reminded me of the CG in THE POLAR EXPRESS. Do you think DiCaprio is a believable Gatsby? The original film had a lot nuance. Things you had to read between the lines. The quiet relationship between Sam Waterston and Redford. At least as the movie's portrayed in the trailer, it doesn't seem to care much about any nuance. Maybe it is generational. Audiences today don't have the attention span and require constant glitter and sparklies.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, Maxi. Don't you think a critique on content of a film and if it has "nuance" or not a bit premature on a trailer that is made to excite the average audience? Have you seen any of Baz's other films? They are full of nuance: Baz's nuance is in the sets, the use of color, the lensing, the use of music and, of course the expressionistic acting he demands from his actors. Each of his film is full of "layers" and are a delight to watch, at least for me, in a cinematography, editing, mise-en-scene and even acting perspective. One of the reasons Australia didn't come out so well, in my opinion, was because one of the key roles was obviously written for a specific actor- Russel Crowe- and ended up on another actor (Hugh Jackman), who just didn't have the "gravitas" to pull that character off. Baz Luhrmann is a director that demands a LOT from his actors, specially because he loves the use of close ups and extreme close ups, as well as very dramatic text (probably coming from his stage roots). In other words, this is going to be a completely different beast to the Redford "Gatsby". And I do consider Di Caprio one of the best actors of his generation. He, however, suffers from the same stigma that affects Brad Pitt, for example. They are just too damn good looking, which puts off the male audience, creates a "star" like aura on the character that takes it away from a film, if its demanding "realism", that is. However, in Baz Luhrmann films, Di Caprio, in my view, fits like a glove.
 
Sergio, FYI, the Redford version is hardly the original. This new one is the fifth Great Gatsby. So while I don't care for what I saw in the trailer, I can appreciate the rationale for doing something different.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top