Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
A film always changes in the edit. The process is not robotic. But, that said, there were only 5 shots that we made for Barton Fink that do not appear in the final cut. The final version of Jesse James is cut in the originally conceived pattern but the film is shorter. The edit was condensed and the final scripted and shot 20 minutes of the story were taken out.
There is no way to be obsessed about a shot that is not used or a move that is truncated. The director and editor are only trying to create the best film out of the material. If you have all been in sync during prep the resulting film will be true to your intent, if not exactly the same as how you shot it.
My disappointment is with my own contribution or, and this is very rarely, with a musical score that has been added.
Those sequences were blockled out with the actors on the day of the shoot. John had a clear idea of when he wanted to emphasize a moment in the dialogue and bring the two actors to a halt.
The book is a little large but when you get the one chance to reflect on your life and work it is hard. I cut out so much, so many memories, as it is.
I’m interested in other peoples suggestions! Everyone has a subjective answer to what darkness is. The train in Jesse James comes out of pure darkness but it only feels ‘dark’ because of the light that it brings.
I may have used a bounce source to augment the light on the close shot of Emily, but that would only have reflected what light existed. Otherwise I used no additional lighting.
The candles were doing the work. On Kundun and Prisoners I remember hiding some small quartz bulbs between the candles but on Rev Road the cake was enough.
I can’t say I took no notice of the home media when I was shooting for the cinema screen. I began framing for 1:85 but exposing with a 1.66 gate. Then the studios wanted the full academy frame exposed for home media. That was a problem, but it did not compromise what I framed for the theatrical release.
On Blade Runner 2049 we knew there would be an IMAX release but the 2:40 frame was always paramount. Shooting open gate allowed us to use the top and bottom of our centered 2:40 for IMAX.
We only had one ‘flame out’ and that was in testing for projection. As far as I know there were no problems on release. The recent Criterion copy of 1984 is the only one that reflects our intent.
That was a question of cost. The Blondes were blued so the HMI was not so cold in comparison. That would not have been my choice in other circumstances but I was restricted to a lighting package that had to work for a variety of sets. I could not order in per set. The 6K HMI was also used on the ext. night shoots and was far more efficient than any alternative.
Freddie Young shot Lawrence of Arabia with Super Panavision – 70 cameras (modified Mitchell BFC 65s). If he were shooting the film today he might use an IMAX camera or a 65mm Vistavision. Who knows? But that choice might come down to the director. Chris Nolan might choose film emulsion but another director might choose digital capture. There are all sorts of arguments about the benefits of one over the other. The bottom line is a camera ‘negative’ will become a digital positive.
But its not as if a “big” film need be shot with a big “outdoor heavy” camera. An Alexa mini LF, as well as many other top of the line cameras, can cope with quite extreme conditions. The choice comes down to the director’s preferences and a few other factors like budget! I would certainly not consider ‘reframing’ as one of those. I’m sure Freddy Young would be aghast!
That was partly a case of design. My next book will be in a larger format and have single images to a page. The ‘gutter line’ is annoying but we tried to use images where it was less distructive.
