Christopher Nolan Films Inception on 65mm Film
Posted 01 July 2010 - 09:22 AM
Posted 05 July 2010 - 09:46 AM
This'll help, considering there won't be an aspect ratio change to signal the change in footage. Though I'd expect the 65mm will have quite a good jump in clarity over the 35mm...
And I wonder where the VistaVision fits in. They reportedly shot some of that too!
Boy, don't you wish Nolan'll get to shoot something in all large format? Panny's system 65 is pretty compact, not nearly as unwieldy as Imax's cams.
Posted 05 July 2010 - 11:30 AM
Posted 05 July 2010 - 11:38 AM
However once 4K digital projection becomes mainstream theatre owners will be screaming for more 65mm content.
Tom, I REALLY, REALLY, REALLY hope you're right. I truly think, for the big budget pictures, studios are crazy not to shoot on 65mm 5 perf. Blows up wonderfully to Imax, reduces near perfectly to anamorphic 35, and while it won't fully resolve on blu-ray high def, it'll be about as shimmering, crisp, grain free as you can possibly get. And there's so much information in a 65mm neg that it's a good insurance policy as new technology rolls out.
What's too bad is studios that use large format aren't doing more to capitalize on it. I've heard nary a mention in the mainstream of Inception's use of large format, nor even when Dark Knight rolled out. Studios need to educate their audiences, and convince them why these films are worth paying a little more for Imax. As I've said before, I'd pay to watch a movie about paint drying, if it was shot in Super Panavision or Imax!
Posted 05 July 2010 - 12:18 PM
The problem is that a lot of Cinematographers love to tickle the ears of the budget conscious producers. They will first say that 35mm resolves up to 8K therefore 65mm film is overkill and then they will say that these big screen 65mm formats such as Showscan and IMAX HD look like video. So rather than going to bat for the best possible picture quality they take the "Don't Rock the Boat Attitude". I hope that a lot of younger Cinematographers although they lack the resume of a Cinematographer with decades of experience will be able to get a job by insisting on shooting a movie using the best possible picture quality. These younger Cinematographers have nothing to lose by rocking the boat because if they take the more conservative approach they will probably be passed up for the Cinematographer with more experience.
Posted 05 July 2010 - 12:25 PM
Posted 05 July 2010 - 04:30 PM
Now that we have 4K digital projection as well as IMAX theatres the public is now screaming for more 65mm content. Christopher Nolan who produced the first IMAX feature film has now completed filming of the movie inception with some of the scenes filmed with 5 perf 65mm film negative. Although most cinematographers consider 65mm overkill because 35mm film can be scanned at 4K the fact is that even the Blu-Ray format can benefit from 65mm aquisition just because of the fact that 65mm film can reduce grain even if it can not be fully resolved at 1080p. So 1080p which is totally free of film grain will look liquid once the fine detail becomes unmasked not to mention the extra pop from the increased color fidelity.
The public are "screaming" for more 65mm content?
I mean I wish this were true...
Posted 06 July 2010 - 11:05 AM
Posted 06 July 2010 - 03:04 PM
People were scrambling to see "The Dark Knight" on IMAX because it looked great but also because "this IMAX is better than what you normally see in IMAX;" because, unlike most movies screened in IMAX, the IMAX sequences were shot with IMAX cameras. There was a hook and people ate it up. Not everybody. Like I said, there are two forces at play here value vs cost. If I had a family and kids I might not be able to afford the extra $$ plus the trek across town to the one IMAX theater to see the special format. That's fine. That's why there's not an IMAX on every corner. But for even my non-cinephile friends in the 18-34 demo with no family and a bit of disposable income, it was a no-brainer. Go see it in IMAX. (honestly, even if I had a family and kids, I'd go see it IMAX first then take the family to the megaplex).
People will buy into your marketing if you're marketing what you're doing right. Film may be losing its place as a distribution format, but it doesn't have to lose its place as an acquisition format. Modern film technology and larger formats will keep the edge and you have to applaud guys like Chris Nolan and Wally Pfister who are going ahead full steam with analog.
Posted 07 July 2010 - 01:08 PM
I'm not even sure you have to explain what 70mm is...just say that it is special and new, and has incredible resolution, and people will say to other people, "I hear they shot parts of it in some new format...let's see it in Imax."
And whatever happened to the plain ole informational trailer? When Disney shot "Sleeping Beauty," in Super Technirama 70, he shot a trailer where he told the audience exactly what Technirama was, and how it was better than anamorphic 35.
Likewise, "This Is Cinerama," explained the process to its viewers before demonstrating it, and it was one of the top grossers of the year.
If I could fix one thing in Hollywood, it'd be marketing. They blow obvious selling points like large format, and make god awful, unoriginal trailers that either show all the best parts, blow the spoilers, or say nothing at all. Like "Dinner for Schmucks." I've seen several different trailers, and I still can't tell what the hell this movie is about, aside from the fact that some guy has to some idiots to a dinner. I'm just left scratching my head, and I sure as hell ain't spending money to go see it.
Posted 07 July 2010 - 05:49 PM
I saw the same thing happen in the wedding video industry when the videographers refused to shoot in high definition because the brides would not pay them more money yet ignoring that the reason why you pay a professional to shoot your wedding is so you can get better picture quality than if you had your uncle Charlie shoot it for free. Yet what ended up happening is that uncle Charlies footage turned out better because consumers now have access to high definition cameras.
Posted 07 July 2010 - 05:53 PM
Posted 07 July 2010 - 05:57 PM
Posted 20 July 2010 - 05:23 PM
Glorious 3D seems to be the current 70mm. Unfortunately, it doesn't look as good.
YES! I'm so glad others feel this way. I was so excited when I found out that Nolan shot parts of TDK in IMAX format. It looked phenomenal and gave me extra incentive to see it in an IMAX theater.
Now that the industry is going toward 3D, it is being plastered all over every movie poster and trailer.
Films like Inception or TDK, however, have no mention of the shooting formats.
Sure, your typical moviegoer isn't going to care about all of the technical details, but if you can tell them "HEY! 3D is better than 2D!" Well, shouldn't that work for larger format film as well? There's all the hype about Blu-Ray, and most people don't know what the difference is except that it looks better.
If large-format shooting is marketed better, we'll get more large-format films. Thank you, Mr. Nolan for trying to forge a path to these formats.