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 :)

UPSTREAM COLOR

Rick Darge

Rick Darge

Banned
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
3,775
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
44
Such a MINDFUCK of a movie.

Go see it if you have the chance but don't expect anything you've ever seen before....

All shot on a GH2. Looks amazing. Sound design was incredible. --- I'm giving up forever on the camera race wars. It no longer matters what we shoot on guys. If you are a filmmaker and you have a STORY to tell... You can make anything. NO EXCUSES.

Wow. My brain is still hurting from this film.
 
Sounds great, do you have links?
 
Thanks Stefan, looks great, want to see it. The Scarlet fixed of it`s age. Imagine if they had been able to truly hack the camera rather than change a few settings.
 
Upstream Color may be the film of the year from all fronts. there are def no excuses, cameras are irrelevenat, tech is irrelevant, just make something that tells a story and draws in the audience. DONE
 
Jason Diamond said:
Upstream Color may be the film of the year from all fronts. there are def no excuses, cameras are irrelevenat, tech is irrelevant, just make something that tells a story and draws in the audience. DONE
Click to expand...

Yes an no. How did you get that result? Did stars have to wait around on set because your camera or other tech slowed you down? Did you not get the shot your promised the agency because you ran out of dynamic range? Whether you ever work again is not just about the result, it's about the process.
 
Jason Diamond said:
Upstream Color may be the film of the year from all fronts. there are def no excuses, cameras are irrelevenat, tech is irrelevant, just make something that tells a story and draws in the audience. DONE
Click to expand...

An interesting thought experiment:
1) Mandate to Hollywood that for the next 2 years no budget can exceed that of Upstream Color.
2) For the following two years, it's business as usual except mandate that Shane Carruth must green-light all productions, and see how that affects the bottom line 4 years later.

It's true that spectacle drives the big numbers in this industry, but how and why it got like that is contentious.
 
Last edited:
Robert Ruffo New said:
Yes an no. How did you get that result? Did stars have to wait around on set because your camera or other tech slowed you down? Did you not get the shot your promised the agency because you ran out of dynamic range? Whether you ever work again is not just about the result, it's about the process.
Click to expand...
No doubt tech is not irrelevant. But this is a good example of a filmmaker that has a complete grasp of what they want to accomplish and the tools he chose I have no doubt achieved his end goal. Whether the process was as smooth as possible, that we may never know. Some stories that happen on set, stay on set. He doesn't seem like a filmmaker that wants to talk a lot about the cameras or tech. All that matters now to the audience is whether the film is good or or not. 99% of the audience just won't care about the GH2's role in this movie. If it looked like complete garbage, they may say something like "wow, that movie didn't look very good" and then they'll move on.

I own both RED and GH2 (hacked). Obviously they have a different look. There are times when I shoot the GH2 over the RED. For a movie, personally I would almost always lean towards the RED but I could see situations where I would utilize the GH2. So, I respect that he used the GH2 and presumably got the look he wanted. I admire his ability to do all of those roles on his movies. It is really hard to do that, especially on a feature.
 
Robert Ruffo New said:
Yes an no. How did you get that result? Did stars have to wait around on set because your camera or other tech slowed you down? Did you not get the shot your promised the agency because you ran out of dynamic range? Whether you ever work again is not just about the result, it's about the process.
Click to expand...
I meant in that the choice or debate of the tech is no longer the barrier. Quality is available to the content creator at all levels not that the tech itself is not involved in the process.
 
It's refreshing to see a filmmaker take his approach and knowingly exclude all outside parties from his film, process & even distribution and take full responsibility for the success or failure of his film. This is an unfettered vision delivered directly from the filmmaker to the audience. To have that be A. Successful. 2. Possibly profitable and III. Actually a good film, is a pretty good feat regardless of the tech or manner of getting there.
 
Last edited:
I am a camera tech guy, and long we know that if you shot right you don't need mire than 8 bit, even a viewfinder, just like the old days of film. But the truth is that extra but, low noise, extra latitude on losses compression is going to make a better flexible process. You can then changer ir enhance things if you like. Whipper snappers :-) .
 
Rick Darge said:
Such a MINDFUCK of a movie.

Go see it if you have the chance but don't expect anything you've ever seen before....

All shot on a GH2. Looks amazing. Sound design was incredible. --- I'm giving up forever on the camera race wars. It no longer matters what we shoot on guys. If you are a filmmaker and you have a STORY to tell... You can make anything. NO EXCUSES.

Wow. My brain is still hurting from this film.
Click to expand...

AGREED...

cameras are pretty much at the point where they all look good.. little difference..

its all about story telling at this point..and thank god you cant buy that for cheap...
 
I'll be the first one to say it, I did not like Upstream Color at all. Not one bit.
 
Jason Diamond said:
I meant in that the choice or debate of the tech is no longer the barrier. Quality is available to the content creator at all levels not that the tech itself is not involved in the process.
Click to expand...

When has this ever been different?

30 years ago people with ideas had the choice to shoot on 65mm, 35mm, 16mm or 8mm...

Every time a film like this comes up we all get excited... it was shot on 16mm... it was shot on DV... it was shot on a 5D, a red, a gh2, a bolex... an iphone... next somebody will make a story that is half decent on google glass and we will be having this same conversation yet again.

I don't see what is surprising about this. Can't we simply accept this as a given fact of life (that artist will create art with the tools they are given, within the limitations that they are given) and not treat it like some great surprise every time a new film is released?
 
Michael Millichamp said:
I'll be the first one to say it, I did not like Upstream Color at all. Not one bit.
Click to expand...

I'll be the second one to say it. I was curious what the other 2 people in the theatre watching it with me thought of it. Maybe I'll watch it again.........on acid.
 
Michael Millichamp said:
I'll be the first one to say it, I did not like Upstream Color at all. Not one bit.
Click to expand...

Good bad or ugly, I have massive respect for filmmakers investing their time and resources to push the medium. Every filmmaker benefits from that. And for my money there hasn't been a more nuanced time travel plot than Primer, so I am very excited to see this.
 
Last edited:
Brett Harrison said:
Good bad or ugly, I have massive respect for filmmakers investing their time and resources to push the medium. Every filmmaker benefits from that. And for my money there hasn't been a more nuanced time travel plot than Primer, so I am very excited to see this.
Click to expand...

I agree. I have massive respect for Shane, and telling a story he wanted to tell, and what appears to be, exactly the way he wanted it. It just wasn't for me and that is not a jab at the film maker. There are obviously going to be people who don't like the film and I just happen to be one of them.
 
Ivan Kovax said:
When has this ever been different?

30 years ago people with ideas had the choice to shoot on 65mm, 35mm, 16mm or 8mm...

Every time a film like this comes up we all get excited... it was shot on 16mm... it was shot on DV... it was shot on a 5D, a red, a gh2, a bolex... an iphone... next somebody will make a story that is half decent on google glass and we will be having this same conversation yet again.

I don't see what is surprising about this. Can't we simply accept this as a given fact of life (that artist will create art with the tools they are given, within the limitations that they are given) and not treat it like some great surprise every time a new film is released?
Click to expand...

Yep, we can all shoot like Blair Witch did Ivan ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top