Jump to content


Photo

chris doyle shoot for gus van sent


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 Ram Shani

Ram Shani
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 735 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • isreal

Posted 06 April 2007 - 11:19 AM

i just look at imdb and noticed that Doyle shoot new van sent move

well that should be something

Gus and his style and long relationship with Harris savides and there cinematic style

Chris and and his relation with wkw and his style

this should give us something to talk about :)
  • 0

#2 Christophe Collette

Christophe Collette
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 177 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Montreal, Canada

Posted 09 April 2007 - 12:02 PM

Chris Doyle shot Psycho for Gus Van Sant already... Second collaboration, hopefully more fruitfull.

C
  • 0

#3 Angeliki Makraki

Angeliki Makraki
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 81 posts
  • Other
  • Athens, Greece

Posted 29 May 2007 - 10:14 AM

i just look at imdb and noticed that Doyle shoot new van sent move

well that should be something

Gus and his style and long relationship with Harris savides and there cinematic style

Chris and and his relation with wkw and his style

this should give us something to talk about :)


From what they say at Cannes, Paranoid Park is a superior film in every way.
Don't know when it's coming out here in Europe. Will be interesting to compare
it to Elephant.
  • 0

#4 Byron Karl

Byron Karl
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 65 posts
  • Other

Posted 10 October 2007 - 03:59 PM

I caught Paranoid Park last night and it was pretty awful. There was one amazing shot (in the shower), but the rest of the film was very flat and boring. It had nothing to do with Doyle's other work and it has a pretty routine, stock look about it. But not flat enough to be interesting in that regard. Along with the 1.38 aspect ratio, this movie imports the lesser aesthetics of TV. Even though it's most 35mm, it could have been shot on video. Similarly, the mixing of various formats fell flat.

The only interesting mention about Doyle this time around is that he has a speaking cameo.

I'd be cautious of anything complimentary people say of this effort, as it's probably based more on press than actually seeing the film.
  • 0

#5 Michael Lehnert

Michael Lehnert
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1086 posts
  • Other
  • London, UK / Basel, CH

Posted 10 October 2007 - 06:54 PM

It would be nice to see Gus van Sant return to the level he had when he shot "My own private Idaho". Similarly, it would be nice to see Chris Doyle return to his inventiveness and visual creativity he contributed to the early Wong Kar-Wai films.

It would also be nice not to have to see a collaborative oeuvre as "Psycho (remake)" again.
  • 0

#6 Tom Lowe

Tom Lowe
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1211 posts
  • Director
  • somewhere worshipping Terrence Malick

Posted 10 October 2007 - 09:32 PM

Doyle needs to hook up with some top-rate visual directors.
  • 0

#7 Yutine Fung

Yutine Fung
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 15 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 16 October 2007 - 01:19 PM

Doyle needs to hook up with some top-rate visual directors.


Totally agree. I find Lady In the Water really boring... ;)
  • 0

#8 Tom Lowe

Tom Lowe
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1211 posts
  • Director
  • somewhere worshipping Terrence Malick

Posted 18 October 2007 - 12:10 AM

Doyle is in rare company as a cinematography god right now. he needs to take another step now.
  • 0

#9 Isaac Chung

Isaac Chung
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 36 posts
  • Director

Posted 23 January 2008 - 01:23 AM

I caught Paranoid Park last night and it was pretty awful. There was one amazing shot (in the shower), but the rest of the film was very flat and boring. It had nothing to do with Doyle's other work and it has a pretty routine, stock look about it. But not flat enough to be interesting in that regard. Along with the 1.38 aspect ratio, this movie imports the lesser aesthetics of TV. Even though it's most 35mm, it could have been shot on video. Similarly, the mixing of various formats fell flat.

The only interesting mention about Doyle this time around is that he has a speaking cameo.

I'd be cautious of anything complimentary people say of this effort, as it's probably based more on press than actually seeing the film.


What a shockingly and absurdly negative review. The film shows the maturation of a director and cinematographer.
  • 0

#10 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 23 January 2008 - 02:18 AM

What a shockingly and absurdly negative review. The film shows the maturation of a director and cinematographer.


Explain.
  • 0

#11 Isaac Chung

Isaac Chung
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 36 posts
  • Director

Posted 23 January 2008 - 03:41 PM

Explain.


Both director and DP moved beyond some of their weaker tendencies; for GVS, he used to channel other filmmakers' methods too closely (Bela Tarr, Hitchcock) while losing some of his original voice; this film seemed to go deeper than the last ones because he gave himself greater trust.
For Doyle, his visual style was always beautiful, but with each film, he's becoming more subtle. I think within the subtlety, he's stripping away to the essential substance of shots. From what I understand, GVS was interested in a more stylized film, but it was Doyle's recommendation that they tone things down.
  • 0

#12 Bob Hayes

Bob Hayes
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1087 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Culver City, California

Posted 12 December 2008 - 09:23 AM

I just bought PARANOID PARK and watched it last night. I thought it was great. Chris Doyle and Rain Li did a terrific job photographing it and Gus did a wonderful job capturing the story. Performances were captivating and the style of the film making really enhanced it.

The version I bought said widescreen on Amazon but the DVD is 4:3 what happened here? The box says standard version protecting the aspect ratio of the original theatrical exhibition.
  • 0

#13 Ram Shani

Ram Shani
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 735 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • isreal

Posted 31 December 2008 - 03:19 AM

to paraphrase old saying " you only good as your last director" :)
  • 0

#14 Hampus Bystrom

Hampus Bystrom
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 132 posts
  • Student
  • Stocktown

Posted 31 December 2008 - 10:36 AM

Yeah I don't get the Paranoid Park being "boring", well it's subjective of course but nevertheless, I liked Paranoid Park both as a narrative and as a visual concept. I'm definitely looking forward to "Milk" here in Sweden.
  • 0

#15 Jason Debus

Jason Debus
  • Sustaining Members
  • 311 posts
  • Student
  • Los Angeles, CA

Posted 31 December 2008 - 02:49 PM

The version I bought said widescreen on Amazon but the DVD is 4:3 what happened here? The box says standard version protecting the aspect ratio of the original theatrical exhibition.


Gus Van Sant likes 1.37:1, it's the 'intended' aspect ratio of the film (see Last Days, Elephant). When shown theatrically it played 1.85:1 or 1.66:1 depending on the theaters capability, because most theaters can't project full frame academy.
  • 0


Metropolis Post

rebotnix Technologies

Rig Wheels Passport

CineTape

Visual Products

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Wooden Camera

FJS International, LLC

Tai Audio

Opal

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Technodolly

Abel Cine

Glidecam

Willys Widgets

Paralinx LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Ritter Battery

The Slider

CineLab

FJS International, LLC

Glidecam

Paralinx LLC

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

rebotnix Technologies

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

The Slider

Opal

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

Ritter Battery

Wooden Camera

CineLab

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Visual Products

Metropolis Post

Technodolly

Aerial Filmworks

Willys Widgets

CineTape