Support NeoGAF

[NotTheGuyYouKill]

Nolan's the best.

 

[Messypandas]

shaky-cam

 

[TheKaeptain]

Inception was full of shaky cams. they filmed it on handhelds.

I don't remember that...

 

[Snufkin]

Thanks for posting this Jett. Also, this part caught my attention.

Q: Have you ever thought about communicating your feelings to the industry and other directors?
A: I’ve kept my mouth shut about this for a long time and it’s fine that everyone has a choice, but for me the choice is in real danger of disappearing. So right before Christmas I brought some filmmakers together and showed them the prologue for The Dark Knight Rises that we shot on IMAX film, then cut from the original negative and printed. I wanted to give them a chance to see the potential, because I think IMAX is the best film format that was ever invented.

Does anyone know who the filmmakers were?

Edgar Wright, Michael Bay, Bryan Singer, Jon Favreau, Eli Roth, Duncan Jones, Stephen Daldry.
Article about it here: http://www.laweekly.com/2012-04-12/film-tv/35-mm-film-digital-Hollywood/

 

[Messofanego]

We save a lot of money shooting on film and projecting film and not doing digital intermediates. In fact, I've never done a digital intermediate.

Zero post-production?!

However sophisticated your computer-generated imagery is, if it’s been created from no physical elements and you haven’t shot anything, it’s going to feel like animation.... The problem for me is if you don’t first shoot something with the camera on which to base the shot, the visual effect is going to stick out if the film you’re making has a realistic style or patina. I prefer films that feel more like real life, so any CGI has to be very carefully handled to fit into that.

Suck on that, Avengers!

Stylistically, something that runs through my films is the shot that walks into a room behind a character, because to me, that takes me inside the way that the character enters. I think those point-of-view issues are very important.

What type of shot is this? Over-the-shoulder?

Q: Another thing that’s unique about your style, especially for such big films, is that you choose to work without a second unit. Why is that?
A: Let me put it this way: If I don’t need to be directing the shots that go in the movie, why do I need to be there at all? The screen is the same size for every shot. The little shot of, say, a watch on someone’s wrist, will occupy the same screen size as the shot of a thousand people running down the street. Everything is equally weighted and needs to be considered with equal care, I really do believe that. I don’t understand the criteria for parceling things off. Many action films embrace a second unit taking on all of the action. For me, that’s odd because then why did you want to do an action film? Having said that, there are fantastic filmmakers who use second and third units successfully. So it all comes back to the question of defining what a director does. Each of us works in different ways. It’s really helped me keep more of my personality in these big films. There’s a danger with big-action fare that the presence of the filmmaker is watered down, it can become very neutral, so I’ve tried to keep my point of view in every aspect of these films.

Dictator!

I like that he started as a DIY filmmaker and fan rather than a film student that most filmmakers are now. Means he doesn't need to stick to typical act structures and can think out of the box.

I like his take on single-camera for dramatic scenes.

I didn't know each actor had their own style of takes.

Never done a re-shoot! :O

 

[SonicMegaDrive]

However sophisticated your computer-generated imagery is, if it’s been created from no physical elements and you haven’t shot anything, it’s going to feel like animation. There are usually two different goals in a visual effects movie. One is to fool the audience into seeing something seamless, and that’s how I try to use it

Like I needed another reason to respect this guy.

 

[BlackGoku03]

I thought shooting on digital was cheaper.

 

[Guzim]

What type of shot is this? Over-the-shoulder?

http://youtu.be/GokKUqLcvD8?t=1m12s

 

[TacticalFox88]

Shooting film looks better than Digital? lolWut?

 

[Messofanego]

http://youtu.be/GokKUqLcvD8?t=1m12s

Ah, that one. Is there an official name for it? Back shot? Point of view shot?

 

[shira]

Related to that, on the Dark Knight extras he mentioned that although he used CGI elements in the helicopter crash, he made a point of ending the sequence with a practical shot of the helicopter wreckage sliding down the street toward the camera shooting off sparks. He said that if you end the sequence with a real shot, then on a gut level the audience takes away from it that the entire sequence was real. I thought that was pretty cool.

Watching the movie for the first time I didn't notice the chopper was fake. I was too busy wondering how the henchmen knew to position themselves in such a way that they could catch the chopper with their wires.

On critical review it becomes really dumb with terrible CGI.

 

[NumberTwo]

Shooting film looks better than Digital? lolWut?

Maybe he means stylistically/aesthetically?

 

[Suairyu]

Shooting film looks better than Digital? lolWut?

It's certainly debatable in the 35mm vs RED choice, but IMAX format (65mm) is absolutely better than current digital recording technology. Its sole drawbacks are cost (about 3 times more expensive than regular film) and flexibility of shooting due to the size of the thing.

Maybe he means stylistically/aesthetically?

Eeeeehhh, I haven't scrutinised it fully, but the current RED cameras have that film-look down pretty well.

 

[rollingstart]

Nolan's real biggest secret revealed--

I was shooting a very important scene with Guy Pearce in which his character is extremely upset, and it’s the lead-in to where Carrie-Anne Moss’ character takes Pearce’s shirt off and sees all the tattoos on his chest. That day, the financier of the film just happened to be visiting the set and was literally standing right behind me. We did a take that I thought was very good, and I knew we were out of time. So I asked Guy if he felt he’d gotten it, and he said, ‘No, we should do it again.’ I remember having a ‘What do I do?’ moment. Do I let him do it and risk running over? Or do I insist that we move on, which Guy would have done, because he’s flexible and professional? But I let him do another take, and that’s the one used in the film

 

[Guerrillas in the Mist]

Nolan's real biggest secret revealed--

Guy Pierce is Nolan's secret co-director confirmed?

 

[kinggroin]

In the OP, its scary just how similar he looks to Kurt, on Glee.

 

[BocoDragon]

Whoa.. Is shooting digital really the norm now? I must have snoozed on movie tech during the last decade. Last I heard, Episode II and Spy Kids were experimentally shot digitally, and kinda stuck out like a sore thumb because of it.

 

[Salvadora]

In the OP, its scary just how similar he looks to Kurt, on Glee.

Oh shit, Can't unsee.

 

[apana]

This is an interesting debate. Any good articles on film vs. digital?

 

[sankt-Antonio]

Shooting film looks better than Digital? lolWut?

I have read somewhere that color reproduction / dynamic range on digital is still inferior to film. I have no idea if that is actually true.

Edit: Did't they had to make the "the Hobbit"-set and make up super high in contrast and with very strong colors to get the right look on digital?

 

[JB1981]

Maybe thats why his action scenes tend to be shitty: not a lot of coverage to when editing.

 

[Truant]

At this point, it's just up to what the director is most comfortable with, and what suits the movie the best. Some directors work better with film, some films benefit from being shot digitally.

 

[Solo]

Best action movie director of 2000s

 

[Guerrillas in the Mist]

Whoa.. Is shooting digital really the norm now? I must have snoozed on movie tech during the last decade. Last I heard, Episode II and Spy Kids were experimentally shot digitally, and kinda stuck out like a sore thumb because of it.

Tons of movies are shot digitally now, both big-budget and small-budget. Everything Fincher has shot from Zodiac onwards has been shot in digital, and his movies look phenomenal.

 

[Brera]

Nolan's Batman flicks are Dramas not action flicks.

 

[PairOfFilthySocks]

Shooting film looks better than Digital? lolWut?

I'll take film's lurvely texture over digital's sterile look any day.

 

[Dead]

I'll take film's lurvely texture over digital's sterile look any day.

Yeah, so sterile...

Fincher does what Nolan don't

Spoiler

can't?

 

[Joel Was Right]

If it's cheaper to work on film, as Nolan claims, then why would the studios try to phase it out by pushing digital?

 

[THE-Pink-Dagger]

Yep, that statement is weird, always have read that digital is cheaper. Plus, you can have an HD quality video feedback like right after shooting the scene, that's what rocks with digital, you shoot, you check it out right away, color correct in a couple of minutes ; can't do that with film, and there's the cost of the film itself to develop, etc, it can't be cheaper than digital.

 

[Solo]

Fincher does what Nolan don't

Spoiler

can't?

In Fincher we trust.

 

[PairOfFilthySocks]

Yeah, so sterile...


[IMG/]http://i.imgur.com/9jXih.jpg?1[/IMG]

[IMG/]http://i.imgur.com/EHzGn.jpg?1[/IMG]

[IMG/]http://i.imgur.com/oJwPq.jpg?1[/IMG]


Fincher does what Nolan don't

Spoiler

can't?

I haven't seen that film on Blu-Ray so I can't comment on it. I do hate the ultra-clean look of Zodiac, though. It's mainly the lack of a fine layer of grain that bothers me with digital film. I don't even like how the live-action stuff in Avatar looks. It's just too damn clean. I know, know, get of my lawn, etc.

 

[sankt-Antonio]

What does a battery pack and a HDD for RED cameras cost?

 

[Dead]

Digital grain can be terribly used though.

That nub who made that shite tron movie abused that stuff in a criminal fashion

 

[wenis]

I tear'd up a bit when he defended film. Film should never die.

 

[triplestation]

That's what I call a director.

 

[DonasaurusRex]

Digital grain can be terribly used though.

That nub who made that shite tron movie abused that stuff in a criminal fashion

...grain?

 

[PairOfFilthySocks]

Digital grain can be terribly used though.

That nub who made that shite tron movie abused that stuff in a criminal fashion

No argument there. Throwing grain on top of a digital image tends to have a fairly ghastly effect. It's completely different to film where the grain is part of the image, and it's why I prefer the look given by film to the 'clean' look of digital. I just prefer a film to look like, well, film.

 

[TacticalFox88]

Digital grain can be terribly used though.

That nub who made that shite tron movie abused that stuff in a criminal fashion

I fail to see where grain came from.....

EDIT: NVM.

On the subject of grain, it's one of the many reasons why I vastly prefer digital than film. While grain is natural on film and it's been there from the get go, I still fucking hate it with a passion because it's so distracting to me.

 

[Dead]

artificial grain added to the original video to give it the illusion of being more "film like"

 

[nomis]

I'll take film's lurvely texture over digital's sterile look any day.

Especially after seeing Dragon Tattoo, I'm convinced that the "film look" is a crutch for directors who don't want to put in the extra effort with their cinematographer. Things look naturally plain when captured digitally because it captures precisely what it sees. Things captured on film do not look like real life. It's not that I don't love the look of film... I have a heart attack when I see some of the shots in Star Trek and Inception, but I think there's a special kind of artistry behind making digital video not look like Attack of the Clones.

Also the trailer for Prometheus... digitally shot films can have atmosphere so fucking thick you can cut it with a knife.

 

[SCULLIBUNDO]

IMAX > 3D. Yes I know there is also IMAX 3D.

I really will be surprised if a lot of 3D movies are being made in 10 years. I don't know anyone who likes them and everyone complains about the ticket prices for them.

This made me laugh. We should already have autostereocopic 3D by then (aka 3D without the glasses).

Plus there is no way 3D is going to die with Avatar 2&3 still on the horizon.

 

[timetokill]

Love it. Great viewpoints.

 

[SCULLIBUNDO]

Speaking of flat looking 3D movies. Webb's Spider-Man looks especially so in every non-CGI action effects scene that I saw.

 

[JB1981]

Speaking of flat looking 3D movies. Webb's Spider-Man looks especially so in every non-CGI action effects scene that I saw.

man i'm so burned out on spider-man, could hardly give a fuck about that movie.

 

[Escape Goat]

I only notice if its filmed digitally or on film when im watching DVD. I wonder if its due to projectors or maybe I'm just not looking for it in the theater.

 

[C.Dark.DN]

man i'm so burned out on spider-man, could hardly give a fuck about that movie.

The cast is horrible. I'd care if it wasn't... :|

 

[artist]

Q: Speaking of technical changes, was there any pressure to do The Dark Knight Rises in 3-D?

A: Warner Bros. would have been very happy, but I said to the guys there that I wanted it to be stylistically consistent with the first two films and we were really going to push the IMAX thing to create a very high-quality image. I find stereoscopic imaging too small scale and intimate in its effect. 3-D is a misnomer. Films are 3-D. The whole point of photography is that it’s three-dimensional. The thing with stereoscopic imaging is it gives each audience member an individual perspective. It’s well suited to video games and other immersive technologies, but if you're looking for an audience experience, stereoscopic is hard to embrace. I prefer the big canvas, looking up at an enormous screen and at an image that feels larger than life. When you treat that stereoscopically, and we've tried a lot of tests, you shrink the size so the image becomes a much smaller window in front of you. So the effect of it, and the relationship of the image to the audience, has to be very carefully considered. And I feel that in the initial wave to embrace it, that wasn’t considered in the slightest.

Shots fired at Avatar and other 3D movies, Me likes.

 

[Don'tBeWeird]

Almost poetic how Nolan is going up against Ridley this year.

 

[SCULLIBUNDO]

Shots fired at Avatar and other 3D movies, Me likes.

That is why you don't apply depth to large scale things. Avatar certainly didn't lose its sense of scale in 3D.

 

[artist]

Didnt think GAF would lap this up like this.

I love this guy.

IMAX > 3D. Yes I know there is also IMAX 3D.

I really will be surprised if a lot of 3D movies are being made in 10 years. I don't know anyone who likes them and everyone complains about the ticket prices for them.

Every time I read an interview of the man, I like him even more.

That was refreshing to hear. It's why films like his will resonate in the future.

His view on Film being cheaper is interesting when I've heard much to the contrary. Is it only really cheaper with small-budget films? It's refreshing to see a director of large-scale films saying what he's saying about CGI and 3D, though.

*sigh* If only that good intuitive sense for filmmaking had kept making more movies like Memento. His points on all of those pretty much mirror my opinions almost exactly.

His approach to film making seems to be a very intimate one. Nolan just shot up there into my favorite directors list.

His stances on 3d and all that bullshit is why I'll see any Nolan movie despite having zero interest in the subject matter oftentimes (like batman).

Best action movie director of 2000s

Interesting stuff about the digital vs. film

He also has the right attitude about CGI

It's like the man says all the right things.

Wow, I've become a bit bored with his style/schtick, but what great answers. I always respect someone who is principled.

The problem with 3D is that it on the whole, makes the film look worse. Until every cinema has a giant 3DS screen I don't think it's worth it.

I like this guy.

the boss of all bosses

Nolan is the director we deserve. Great man.

Nolan's the best.

I tear'd up a bit when he defended film. Film should never die.

That's what I call a director.

Love it. Great viewpoints.

Came here expecting pages of hatin'