The Public Enemies Look

[Tom Lowe]

Hey you guys should lay off of Sanjin!! :ciappa:

He has his opinions, and I for one get a kick out of his posts.

Without him, my company would not have its impressive new marketing tagline: "advanced video touristic cinematography"

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

This is reminding me of the Macgregor SC250 post. Sanjin must be off the medications.

Andrew,

as Build 20 showed us later that SC250 was a "medication" for sort of video-mediocre shooters...

From the AC article:

Quote:
"The EX1 was especially great for car interiors..."


I don't think so! Those interior shots looked god awful with the blown-out windows and banding.

Tom,

of course they have to have a certain "made-up-story" to talk about "amazing" Sony cameras...

Sanjin is always quoting Godard -- what would Godard say about using obvious video artifacts and a lack of visual consistency, about making filmmaking techniques more obvious rather than hidden and invisible, about breaking the audience's concentration of the narrative, etc.? I recall an essay by Godard where he talks about the inherent draw of narrative, the willing suspension of disbelief, and how that should be disrupted to remind the viewer that they are watching a recreated event.

David,

very good point in a certain way.

Good art-work or even discussion about that art-work sometimes helps in making the invisible visible...

Hey you guys should lay off of Sanjin!! :ciappa:

He has his opinions, and I for one get a kick out of his posts.

Without him, my company would not have its impressive new marketing tagline: "advanced video touristic cinematography"

Tom,

BTW, what are the latest NEWS in development with your "advanced video touristic cinematography" using Canon 5DMK2 with Panavision Primo anamorphic lenses?

Sanjin, whatever it is that you are on, please let us know.

Steve,

this could be a good start up for a triller that should be shot with all those digital cameras...

Sony, Genesis, Arri D21, Viper, SI-2K, RED1, Phantom HD, Panasonic, Canon 5DMK2,...

And of course I'll let you know...

:smilielol5: :smilielol5: :smilielol5: :smilielol5:

BREAKING NEWS!!!

Sony Knew What Soderbergh Was Up to on Moneyball Script>>>

About the latest "inside baseball" game between Sony and Soderbergh!!!

LINK>>>

 

[Andrew Walker]

Man you guys give Sanjin way too much crap. To think that he is off his "meds" because of what he is saying is just uncalled for. I think what he was trying to get at regarding Sony was that they woo directors by setting up free use of their cameras and total kiss their ass, which I believe is to blind them from even thinking about looking at any other camera. To think that all directors know of what is out there is just wrong. Some just look at the price of the camera or that the name doesn't say Sony, Panasonic, Arri or Panavision to make their decision.

I truly believe that if Mann would have shot Public Enemies on the Red it would have looked 100x better. Granted you need to follow a couple rules like Alex Proyas did in Knowing. Never use the 360° shutter unless you just want it to look like video. I still don't understand why people do this in movies. To me it looks very lazy as it just tells me that they wanted to do it the easy way instead of the right way.

 

[DS Williams]

I will say, the unique approach to Cinematography in the film was largely distracting to me and my family. I really did not enjoy it.

 

[Andrew Wilding]

First off, I dont honestly think that Sanjin is "off his meds." I was more or less playfully rolling my eyes at the conspiracy theory talk.

Never use the 360° shutter unless you just want it to look like video. I still don't understand why people do this in movies. To me it looks very lazy as it just tells me that they wanted to do it the easy way instead of the right way.

You've contradicted yourself here. Its not lazy or wrong to use a 360 degree shutter if you WANT it to look like video. Which Mann clearly did. Im sure he has achieved exactly the look that he set out too - laziness or cheapness or lack of knowledge don't figure into the equation. Mann and Spinotti are top professionals. That is like assuming that Battle of Algiers is rough around the edges because Pontecorvo and Marcello Gatti simply didn't know what the hell they were doing. I don't see how Public Enemies is any different than this.

Wether or not you find it effective, aesthetically pleasing, etc, is another story. But dont assume its lazy.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

First off, I dont honestly think that Sanjin is "off his meds." I was more or less playfully rolling my eyes at the conspiracy theory talk.

Andrew,

read more about certain conspiracy theory or praxis at the following links as I already mentioned above:

Sony Knew What Soderbergh Was Up to on Moneyball Script>>>

"Yesterday we posted Sony's take on why Moneyball,

the Soderbergh/Pitt film based on Michael Lewis' book,

died five days before shooting was to start.

Now someone close to the project has provided us with a different version of events."

Deanen>>>

 

[Baltazar Balta]

Baltazar,

just read again my replay above of yours...

Again nothing here about RED1 FUNBOYISH it's more about SONY BOYISH if ever you can get it...

In our industry doesn't exist sort of "rude" pressure, it's more about a soft or underneath sort of doing things where UNDER is related especially as to be hidden...

Hope this helps...

Sanjin,

I do not think Sony's scrapping Soderbergh's Moneyball is somehow related to use of any company's cameras. I am not as pro as you, so I cannot be considered as much "in" the industry as you but I think boxoffice issues were the problem in Soderbergh's case. I mean investing 57 million dollars in this movie is a little risky, you know. No giant peeing robots, no Great American Army, no Megan Fox or no shining vampires...

And how do you think Soderbergh's situation is related to Michael Mann and Public Enemies' case?

P.S Excuse my English.

Baltazar

 

[David Mullen ASC]

I truly believe that if Mann would have shot Public Enemies on the Red it would have looked 100x better. Granted you need to follow a couple rules like Alex Proyas did in Knowing. Never use the 360° shutter unless you just want it to look like video. I still don't understand why people do this in movies. To me it looks very lazy as it just tells me that they wanted to do it the easy way instead of the right way.

I hate this sort of post -- it makes me want to shoot a movie with a 360 shutter and a lot of gain and a heavy diffusion filter just to prove a point, that there is not one way to make a movie. All movies don't have to look alike, they don't all have to be slick, sharp, fine-grained, and film-like. It has nothing to do with laziness or incompetence, it has to do with making artistic choices that sometimes go against convention and expectation. It has to do with questioning the rules that get handed down from on high about how to shoot a movie.

I suspect if you talked to the camera crew on "Public Enemies" they would probably not be telling tales of how easy the movie was to shoot, how little work they actually did.

 

[Tom Lowe]

I don't agree that Public Enemies should have been shot on Red One. Mann was looking for exceptional low-light performance, and while Red One has many strengths, that is not one of them.

But I do agree that you guys should lay off of Sanjin. He's a very humorous and interesting poster, and I'd hate to see him throttle back his opinions! :ciappa:

 

[Tom Lowe]

BTW, if Mann wanted to shoot the entire picture on EX1, that would have been fine. Aside from overcranking, that camera is fully capable of shooting a major feature. But if they did, they should have kept it consistent with one choice of camera, and protected windows and highlights from blowing out.

 

[Andrew Wilding]

But if they did, they should have kept it consistent with one choice of camera, and protected windows and highlights from blowing out.

Unless, of course, they wanted the windows and highlights blown out. Which they must have. We on this board, in general, want our video to look like film as much as possible. Mostly because its what we are used to perceiving as professional, beautiful, whathaveyou, but also because it has always been out of our reach as low budget (for the most part) film makers.

It makes no sense to assume that Mann is trying to get as "filmic" a feeling as he can from these digicams. He has the budget, manpower, and experience to shoot on 35mm for any project he chooses. Obviously then, if he chooses to shoot digital, it is because he prefers its inherent look for whatever project he is doing. If he wanted it to look like film, he would shoot on film. To assume that Mann and Spinotti are merely not skilled enough, or too lazy, to make digital as film like as possible is arrogant and irrational.

 

[Tom Lowe]

Andrew, I am only giving my personal opinion. I am not assuming anything. If they intended to blow out those shots, I disagree with their decision to blow them out. That's all. In no way have I argued or assumed on this thread that they were intending to mimic film, nor that they should have.

 

[Nick Gardner]

I personally don't understand the typical redusers terror of blown out highlights. Look at any of Storaro's work. Ever hear of Robert Richardson? Highlights burn on film just like anything else. Most of the time on purpose. Get over it.

Nick

 

[Andrew Wilding]

Sorry Tom - I wasn't calling you out specifically. I was just going to amend my post with the disclaimer that it went out to no one in particular!

I, myself, go for a "classic film" look, so I in general dont love blown video highlights either. With the red one though, I find that blown highlights tend to look quite nice though - the rolloff to no detail is rather gentle and pleasing.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Tom

I am not afraid of any kind of throttle opinion about my posting here.

Anyway they can't touch or even catch me at all :hand:

Also it's not surprise at all that there are many conformists on this forum talking about "artistic decisions" of Mann and Spinotti to choose Sony cameras in PE :devil:

About RED1 possibility at 360 degree shutter I'll show you two shots that I did it right now handheld on my balcony at this night (here in Vienna),

I would not degrade RED1 as a bad low-light camera at all just because you have to get a pretty fast lens.

Shot on RED1 with Canon 50mm FD f/1.2 @ wide open f/1.2, shutter 360 or 1/25 @ 25FPS, ISO 320 default, copied&pasted from 1K QT proxy files,
the first shot about "spying my new neighbors at night" is all at available light, the second skull chain shot was lighted by tungsten light bulb 75W at the distance from about 1m.


Download 360 degree shutter quick & dirty handheld example>>>

 

[Tom Lowe]

Tom

I am not afraid of any kind of throttle opinion about my posting here.

Anyway they can't touch or even catch me at all :hand:

heh heh. That's my man. :thumbsup:

 

[Steve G]

Sanjin can be a humorous and interesting poster, but when he makes idiotic statements like

Also it's a pity that MM was "trapped and surrounded" with "Sony Boys" agents (informants) who recommend him "Sony Bloody Digital HD Technology" that can't compare with RED1 at ALL !!!

Who knows maybe HE (MM) in his next feature will do (finally) his own digital research... choose RED1 ... or he is (dead) as a good movie director anyway...

then sorry, but I think he should be able to properly justify it, not just make weird, speculative and paranoid comments. Or maybe my bullsh*t detector is a little bit sensitive.

I'd also love to see Sanjin do something that isn't just a quick and dirty lens test and try and get some of that humor out on a screen. He is a professional after all.

 

[mike ogden]

My point is that the 'look' didn't work for the story. That's all I care about.

There are lots of ways to shoot a movie, there are lots of ways to shoot the same movie, some more successful than others. If Mann had decided to use a RED, I am sure it'd still look as bad. The choices Mann made serve no artistic purpose I can understand. There's nothing groundbreaking here and it's a shame because it's a good story, well performed and art directed.

When you do anything with a camera, you're saying something about the story even when the camera is rock still. What Mann is saying is beyond me.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

I'd also love to see Sanjin do something that isn't just a quick and dirty lens test and try and get some of that humor out on a screen. He is a professional after all.

Steve,

I'm very lazy and slow the same as Michael Mann's 360 shutter speed :biggrinjester: :reddevil: :gnorsi:

 

[Tom Lowe]

Steve G, you may be taking things too seriously. :laugh:

One of the things that really sets this forum apart from all others is that we always treat each other with respect here, and put up with each other's eccentric views. On 99% of internet forums, like cinematography.com for example, people are constantly sniping at each other, or taking little digs. But here, it's always positive, and we never get personal.

Sanjin is a very funny guy. Just go with it, man.