Jump to content


Photo

Children of Men car scene


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 andrew heggli

andrew heggli
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 45 posts
  • Student

Posted 05 August 2007 - 12:18 PM

I haven't seen te whole movie (I will though), but the car scene I've seen on youtube and I was really stuck on how they did that? How did they have space for a camera man in there!? Was there no cameraman in there? did they use some remoted controled thing? (didn't look like that to me though... shots were too smooth) if anyone knows i'd really appreciate it.

Peace

Andrew
  • 0

#2 Stephen Williams

Stephen Williams
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4708 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Europe

Posted 05 August 2007 - 12:29 PM

I haven't seen te whole movie (I will though), but the car scene I've seen on youtube and I was really stuck on how they did that? How did they have space for a camera man in there!? Was there no cameraman in there? did they use some remoted controled thing? (didn't look like that to me though... shots were too smooth) if anyone knows i'd really appreciate it.

Peace

Andrew


Hi Andrew,

Take a look at the right hand bottom picture, that is the car rig.

Attached Images

  • AC_mars_2007.jpg

  • 1

#3 Stephen Price

Stephen Price
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 84 posts
  • Digital Image Technician
  • London

Posted 05 August 2007 - 02:08 PM

Look at;

http://uk.youtube.co...h?v=4A55xTYXMpI

The Children Of Men - Making Of

Truly Amazing!
  • 0

#4 Nick Mulder

Nick Mulder
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1023 posts
  • Other
  • Auckland, New Zealand

Posted 05 August 2007 - 04:46 PM

http://www.cinematog...n...c=24595&hl=
  • 0

#5 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11939 posts
  • Other

Posted 05 August 2007 - 05:40 PM

It's only money.

Phil
  • 0

#6 Nick Mulder

Nick Mulder
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1023 posts
  • Other
  • Auckland, New Zealand

Posted 05 August 2007 - 06:44 PM

It's only money.

Phil


Take a look at the earlier thread I linked re. the same scene ...
  • 0

#7 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11939 posts
  • Other

Posted 05 August 2007 - 06:57 PM

I did.

It's still only money.

Phil
  • 0

#8 Nick Mulder

Nick Mulder
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1023 posts
  • Other
  • Auckland, New Zealand

Posted 05 August 2007 - 08:06 PM

time, money, quality whatever - its up to everyone to create distinctions of their own between them ...

But to just say "It's only money." - yeh, ok - so... or am I mistaken and what exactly is your point ?

I find it more interesting to look at the $$$ spent and the relative efficiency of the process in terms of the outcome (yes, yes, being as subjective as you are prepared to let it be)
  • 0

#9 Chris Keth

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

Posted 05 August 2007 - 08:49 PM

It's only money.

Phil


So in other words, if you gave film students enough money, they could pull that off just as well?

Yes money was a factor but so was ingenuity, imagination, and skill.
  • 0

#10 andrew heggli

andrew heggli
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 45 posts
  • Student

Posted 06 August 2007 - 10:09 AM

WOW, thanks for the posts (almost) everybody! I saw the picture, and yep, it was a machine, good. I just couldn't get my mind around how a cameraman would have space to move in there. and i agree with chris and the others, that wasn't just money, even though they might have had a lot of it. there loads of high budget bull crap thats been put out before.

I will watch the youtube videos also, right after posting this!

Thanks again

Peace

Andrew
  • 0

#11 Paul Bruening

Paul Bruening

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2858 posts
  • Producer
  • Oxford, Mississippi

Posted 06 August 2007 - 11:04 AM

I found the shot amazing as well. The DVD I rented has a long presentation on how they pulled it off. I really respect that they did it live action and didn't lean heavily on CG.

At the same time, I felt that it was counter-intuitive. It drew so much attention to itself that I was distracted from the dramatic objectives. Maybe, I'm just a creature of habit and prefer a conventional cut-around-the-scene approach. Even with my limitations, I respect what they did.
  • 0

#12 James Steven Beverly

James Steven Beverly
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4199 posts
  • Director
  • El Paso, Texas

Posted 10 August 2007 - 12:04 AM

So in other words, if you gave film students enough money, they could pull that off just as well?

Yes money was a factor but so was ingenuity, imagination, and skill.

Well, I may not be a film student, but give ME that kinda money and I'll be HAPPY to show you what I can do with it!! ;)
  • 0

#13 Max Jacoby

Max Jacoby
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2955 posts
  • Other

Posted 10 August 2007 - 05:45 AM

At the same time, I felt that it was counter-intuitive. It drew so much attention to itself that I was distracted from the dramatic objectives.

That was my feeling as well when I saw the film. I find it a technical feat, not an artistic one. So Phil is right, it is only money.
  • 0


Rig Wheels Passport

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

Wooden Camera

CineLab

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Visual Products

FJS International, LLC

Metropolis Post

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Glidecam

Willys Widgets

Opal

Abel Cine

Technodolly

Aerial Filmworks

Ritter Battery

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Tai Audio

The Slider

rebotnix Technologies

The Slider

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Opal

Ritter Battery

Visual Products

Glidecam

Abel Cine

Technodolly

Metropolis Post

CineTape

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio

CineLab

Paralinx LLC

Willys Widgets

FJS International, LLC

Wooden Camera

rebotnix Technologies

Aerial Filmworks

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS