Jump to content


Photo

Climates - Nuri Ceylan


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 NathanCoombs

NathanCoombs
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 102 posts
  • Producer
  • Bath, UK

Posted 13 February 2007 - 07:33 AM

Just saw Climates at the Ritzy in Brixton last night. Pretty good film, although not as interesting as Uzak.

But what was most surprising was all the critical attention lavished on director Nuri Bilge Ceyland for the use of HD. Before the screening I had read plenty of quotes along the lines of: "stunning use of hd", "uses HD for spectacularly detailed images never before seen" and "first director to use HD resolution to the full."

After seeing the film I am all the more convinced of the cinematographic illiteracy of the majority of critics.

Now the HD certainly didnt look awful, but the film did not benefit from the use of it. The scenes in the sun were contrasty and burnt out.. Only the snow scenes and interiors looked good, but owing to the low dynamic range of light sources this is only because it looked more filmic in these scenes.

But there waqs nothing in the film which benfited from HD. It even looked a lot softer then 35mm, particuarly noticeable after the trailers, which were films all shot on 35mm.

It seems shooting HD still has rebel crredibility in critical circles!
  • 0

#2 Max Jacoby

Max Jacoby
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2955 posts
  • Other

Posted 13 February 2007 - 08:54 AM

I'll definitely check this one out when I'm back in London as I liked 'Uzak'.

I'm not surprised by critics comments about HD anymore, it seems like anytime they can tell that a film is shot on HD (which means that it must really look it), they feel like they have to compliment on it, regardless of whether this look actually works of not. 'Miami Vice' comes to mind.
  • 0

#3 Oron Cohen

Oron Cohen
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 212 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Tel-Aviv/London

Posted 13 February 2007 - 11:10 AM

I saw "Climates" at the official screening at Cannes film festival last year (2006).
The film was screened at Cannes in HD and not 35mm
I didn?t like "climates" so much and I think in this case the "video factor" had lots to do with this.
Because the films of nuri ceylan are very much relies on the visual aspects of film making.
And the HD looked so bad even more in the HD projector in the "Grand theatre Lumiere".
I was talking with other people at the festival after the screening ended and everybody agreed that it looked bad and it didn?t gave the film any advantages in the story telling.
I am pretty sure it was a better film if shot in 35mm like "uzak" but you never knows, I also hope his next film will be in 35mm :D

Unfortunately my bad English stops me form telling more of what I think on this film.
  • 0

#4 NathanCoombs

NathanCoombs
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 102 posts
  • Producer
  • Bath, UK

Posted 13 February 2007 - 12:08 PM

I think a Nuri Ceylan film in 35mm double-x would look amazing - returning back to his pre-Uzak style.

I hope he only shot this one on HD due to insecuirties about his acting abilities and the ability to use huge shooting ratios.

As for the film itself. It is beautiful and thought provoking, but it suffers from only really exploring the psychology of one character - Isa. His wife is not given much more to do than cry poetically in long take. Uzak was so rich because of the two conflicting characters and the rural/urban divide, plus the portrait of unemployment and social reality in turkey.

Compared to Uzak this film feels a little self indulgent - an upper middle class chamber drama. Probably why the critics love it! And why they hate Bela Tarr!
  • 0

#5 Max Jacoby

Max Jacoby
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2955 posts
  • Other

Posted 13 February 2007 - 12:17 PM

Nuri Ceylan has very little money to make his films, so I'd figure shooting on HD was influenced by that. Although I agree that such a visual filmmaker would be better served with 35mm.
  • 0

#6 NathanCoombs

NathanCoombs
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 102 posts
  • Producer
  • Bath, UK

Posted 13 February 2007 - 12:24 PM

Nuri Ceylan has very little money to make his films, so I'd figure shooting on HD was influenced by that. Although I agree that such a visual filmmaker would be better served with 35mm.


In interviews he claimed he only shot HD because he was uncertain about his acting ability; he could do many, many takes.

Before he became famous with Uzak he shot his 'no budget' films on 35mm. Now he is a minor-director star I doubt money played a big part in his decision.

check out nuribilgeceylan.com for tech details on all his films.
  • 0

#7 Oron Cohen

Oron Cohen
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 212 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Tel-Aviv/London

Posted 13 February 2007 - 03:20 PM

I think a Nuri Ceylan film in 35mm double-x would look amazing - returning back to his pre-Uzak style.

As for the film itself. It is beautiful and thought provoking, but it suffers from only really exploring the psychology of one character - Isa. His wife is not given much more to do than cry poetically in long take. Uzak was so rich because of the two conflicting characters and the rural/urban divide, plus the portrait of unemployment and social reality in turkey.

Compared to Uzak this film feels a little self indulgent - an upper middle class chamber drama. Probably why the critics love it! And why they hate Bela Tarr!


Thanks Nathan,

This is exactly what I was thinking about the deferens of the two films and didn?t know how to explain it in English.
  • 0

#8 Max Jacoby

Max Jacoby
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2955 posts
  • Other

Posted 13 February 2007 - 04:57 PM

In interviews he claimed he only shot HD because he was uncertain about his acting ability; he could do many, many takes.

I see your point, but if he chooses HD because it allows for more takes than if he shot on film, then that is a budgetary consideration, since shooting more takes on film would raise the budget.
  • 0

#9 K Borowski

K Borowski
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3905 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • I.A.T.S.E. Local # 600 Eastern Region

Posted 21 February 2007 - 09:03 AM

Well of course they have to compliment it. HD, like poorly-done DIs is digital so it must be better. Besides, haven't you heard? It's the way of the future, the way of the future, the way of the future. . . the way of the future, the way of the future, the way of the future. . . . . . the way of hte future. . .
  • 0

#10 Tugce Sen

Tugce Sen

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • Cincinnati & Istanbul

Posted 21 February 2007 - 12:21 PM

Hi,

I love NBC cinema, it is because he offers very different taste to the audience who likes to eat pop-corn while watching movie, he offers dark-coffee or scotch whiskey or he likes to remind us Tarkovsky, Bresson...

I also agree with almost all above mentioned opinions. However, I believe that it might be a mistake to compare Climates to Distant since they are technically and theoretically very different from each other.

Why is Climate so successful? For me, its simplicity, natural look, and its hidden humor. I assure you it would get the big prize if Cannes juries had known Turkish :)

To criticize, as i have already said, I like NBC but cinema must be more than giving nice and hidden images , or symbolize our visual understanding. I also believe, actings in Climates harmed the movie a lot, and I am pretty sure we all get to used to watch HD on white screen soon.
  • 0

#11 NathanCoombs

NathanCoombs
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 102 posts
  • Producer
  • Bath, UK

Posted 27 February 2007 - 07:55 AM

Why is Climate so successful? For me, its simplicity, natural look, and its hidden humor. I assure you it would get the big prize if Cannes juries had known Turkish :)

To criticize, as i have already said, I like NBC but cinema must be more than giving nice and hidden images , or symbolize our visual understanding. I also believe, actings in Climates harmed the movie a lot, and I am pretty sure we all get to used to watch HD on white screen soon.


I think the best thing about nuri's work is the pacing and rhythm. He is a master of the 'time signature' and like in Tarkovsky's Stalker his films always seem to hint at something deep, mystical and portentous which at any point will reveal itself, but ultimately we are always brought back to ourselves.

I prefer his work to some of the other tarkovsky wanabees such as Sokurov (who's on the nose christianity dulls his work) and Reygadas who revels in new-age nonsense.
  • 0


Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Wooden Camera

Opal

FJS International, LLC

Visual Products

CineTape

The Slider

Aerial Filmworks

rebotnix Technologies

Abel Cine

Willys Widgets

Technodolly

Metropolis Post

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

CineLab

Tai Audio

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Paralinx LLC

Ritter Battery

Glidecam

Metropolis Post

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Wooden Camera

Paralinx LLC

Opal

CineLab

Glidecam

Technodolly

Abel Cine

FJS International, LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineTape

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio

Visual Products

Aerial Filmworks

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Willys Widgets

Ritter Battery

rebotnix Technologies

The Slider