Jump to content


Photo

The Hunger Games


  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

#1 Richard Boddington

Richard Boddington
  • Sustaining Members
  • 5482 posts
  • Director

Posted 19 March 2012 - 07:22 PM

So what will likely be one of the biggest movies of the year was shot 2D on 35mm.

Good grief what is the world coming to?

http://www.imdb.com/...41472/tt1392170

R,
  • 0

#2 Blake Z Larson

Blake Z Larson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 18 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Massachusetts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 04:09 PM

I think 35mm was a great choice for the gritty-ness of the subject matter in the movie. And really, who needs 3D anyway?
  • 0

#3 John Holland

John Holland
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2248 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London England

Posted 23 March 2012 - 05:16 PM

35mm isnt " Gritty" dont know what you have been watching ?
  • 0

#4 Darrell Ayer

Darrell Ayer
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 99 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York

Posted 23 March 2012 - 09:44 PM

I'm seeing it tomorrow... I can't wait. I really love the look from the trailers an the book was awesome. I'm sure more will be posted by me after that...
I wish I had something of value to add.... sooon.
  • 0

#5 Vedran Rapo

Vedran Rapo
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 118 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Croatia

Posted 25 March 2012 - 04:31 PM

Really looking forward seeing it in cinema tomorrow.
  • 0

#6 Chris Millar

Chris Millar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1642 posts
  • Other

Posted 25 March 2012 - 04:54 PM

Alright film - internal logic made simple for the target demographic ...

Paced well such that I wasn't watching the cinematography with an eagle eye (if I had one in the first place) - did notice some interesting bokeh 'glimmering' around the edges of objects in focus and the BG that I'd like to understand more.

I was dreading that the film would be all teal and orange, the poster was pushed certainly in the warm direction - timing was relatively neutral, maybe a shift here and there between the districts and the Capital.

Initial shakey cam annoyance cleared after about 5mins.

Posted Image
  • 0

#7 Richard Boddington

Richard Boddington
  • Sustaining Members
  • 5482 posts
  • Director

Posted 25 March 2012 - 08:29 PM

Initial shakey cam annoyance cleared after about 5mins.

Posted Image


Why does Hollywood refuse to invest in tri-pods?

R,
  • 0

#8 Markshaw

Markshaw
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 232 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 27 March 2012 - 05:12 AM

Was a little underwhelmed by the movie, though the girl friend loved it. A little too kiddie friendly for my tastes.
  • 0

#9 George Ebersole

George Ebersole
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1570 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • San Francisco Bay Area

Posted 27 March 2012 - 07:33 AM

Well, I went and broke down to see what is ostensibly a kids' film. Still, it was entertaining for what it was. It was fun to see Frederick Brown's "Arena" sci-fi short story reborn for a newer generation. Still, I couldn't help but wonder where Captain Kirk and the Gorn were, and even though the plot and story were lifted directly from older sci-fi libraries, it was kind of fun to see it reborn.

I had planned on tearing into it, accusing it of being a rip off of Soylent Green, Adam Strange, Star Trek, Logan's Run and other stuff, but there was a unique enough flourish placed in this iteration of the basic story that I thought it quite original.

A couple of things; I didn't quite understand the full back-story, and the buildup, as noted by Variety, took an awful long time. The action is sporatic, but it's actually a very smart film in spite of a few caterings to the younger demographic. I think film makers who make alleged block busters for older audiences should take notes.

Just my two bits.

The key scene and thrust of the film, done some three decades prior;

On shakey-cam; I'm pretty exhausted of the style. I remember when it became the big thing back in 1986. SNL even did a parody skit about a company that sold tractors using the style. Here we are over 20 years later, and a lot of you pros are still opting to use this shooting style?

Just... why? ... :(
  • 0

#10 Richard Boddington

Richard Boddington
  • Sustaining Members
  • 5482 posts
  • Director

Posted 27 March 2012 - 10:33 AM

On shakey-cam; I'm pretty exhausted of the style. I remember when it became the big thing back in 1986. SNL even did a parody skit about a company that sold tractors using the style. Here we are over 20 years later, and a lot of you pros are still opting to use this shooting style?

Just... why? ... :(


I personally hate it. Except for when doing an actors POV shot as they look around a corner or down a street, then it should be hand held. Because as we all know....when a human looks at something, the image is all shaky.

R,
  • 0

#11 George Ebersole

George Ebersole
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1570 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • San Francisco Bay Area

Posted 27 March 2012 - 12:50 PM

I personally hate it. Except for when doing an actors POV shot as they look around a corner or down a street, then it should be hand held. Because as we all know....when a human looks at something, the image is all shaky.

R,

I can understand POVs, but, well, I don't know. I think I've had enough of young film makers trying to break in with "edgy" shots by shaking the lens back and forth while zoomed up on some subject.

I thought that style wouldn't last beyond whatever product I first saw it used on way back in college. But it's never left. Now it's just down right annoying as anything.
  • 0

#12 Chris Millar

Chris Millar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1642 posts
  • Other

Posted 27 March 2012 - 04:01 PM

For me (over cooked) handheld doesn't mimic the saccade movement on human vision at all - it serves more as a cue that the footage is real time / gathered news / or whats that term - ah yes 'immediate' ...

Posted Image

Anyway, like I said after a few minutes I was no longer bothered by it - so much so I couldn't say if it was still there or it had actually mellowed out.
  • 0

#13 Blake Z Larson

Blake Z Larson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 18 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Massachusetts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 07:59 PM

35mm isnt " Gritty" dont know what you have been watching ?


Sorry, I think I meant Grainy. Don't get me wrong, I love grain and I love 35mm!
  • 0

#14 George Ebersole

George Ebersole
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1570 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • San Francisco Bay Area

Posted 28 March 2012 - 01:08 AM

For me (over cooked) handheld doesn't mimic the saccade movement on human vision at all - it serves more as a cue that the footage is real time / gathered news / or whats that term - ah yes 'immediate' ...

Posted Image

Anyway, like I said after a few minutes I was no longer bothered by it - so much so I couldn't say if it was still there or it had actually mellowed out.

For me it's like at first they were selling perfume, or coffee or something that was "intimate", and I figured it would last a couple of years, then fade.

But it's like, it hasn't. And it's gotten on my nerves, so much to the point where I can't watch new films by "up and coming" film makers because they use it all the time. :angry:

I wonder what Ansel Adams photos would have been like if he had used "shakey cam" for his stills.
  • 0

#15 Daniel Jackson

Daniel Jackson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 159 posts
  • Sound Department

Posted 03 April 2012 - 06:07 AM

The film was fairly entertaining. However the screaming by teenybop girls in the auditorium was very annoying.
  • 0

#16 Chris Millar

Chris Millar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1642 posts
  • Other

Posted 03 April 2012 - 03:39 PM

Yeh, we had a group get the giggles when one of them decided to cough and hiccup at the same time - she then proceeded to vomit in her cup. I screwed up and threw my ticket stub at the back of the head of the first one that dared to pull out her cellphone, she turned around expecting to see someone of a similar age but instead she got me smiling back at her a few rows back - she got the message without any further prompting.
  • 0

#17 James Steven Beverly

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

Posted 03 April 2012 - 10:56 PM

Why does Hollywood refuse to invest in tri-pods?

R,

Because shaky, bouncy, can't focus on a single subject for 2 freakin' seconds is so "REALLLLL" :rolleyes: Cinema Verite abuse....thank you, France.
  • 0

#18 Vincent Sweeney

Vincent Sweeney
  • Sustaining Members
  • 686 posts
  • Director
  • LA at the moment.

Posted 04 April 2012 - 01:14 AM

For me Barry Lyndon has always been one of the best examples of well thought-out handheld camera use.

Can you even recall it having any? It does and it's perfectly (big surprise) executed there.
  • 0

#19 James Steven Beverly

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

Posted 04 April 2012 - 11:05 PM


This brings up another thing that drives me nuts, why does everyone in the future dress like they just stepped out of Acropolis? One would THINK in a thousand years, clothing might have advanced a LITTLE bit. How about fibers that turn logos into interactive wearable billboards or swirling artwork patterns that wash across the fabric. Back to the Future II seems to be the only movie I can remember where clothing technology kept up with the times. B)
  • 0

#20 Daniel Jackson

Daniel Jackson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 159 posts
  • Sound Department

Posted 10 April 2012 - 05:17 AM

This brings up another thing that drives me nuts, why does everyone in the future dress like they just stepped out of Acropolis? One would THINK in a thousand years, clothing might have advanced a LITTLE bit. How about fibers that turn logos into interactive wearable billboards or swirling artwork patterns that wash across the fabric. Back to the Future II seems to be the only movie I can remember where clothing technology kept up with the times. B)


I get you on that, they always look so cheesy.
  • 0


Metropolis Post

CineLab

Technodolly

Tai Audio

Wooden Camera

CineTape

Glidecam

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Ritter Battery

Paralinx LLC

Broadcast Solutions Inc

rebotnix Technologies

Aerial Filmworks

Abel Cine

Visual Products

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Willys Widgets

Opal

The Slider

Rig Wheels Passport

FJS International, LLC

Abel Cine

Visual Products

Opal

Aerial Filmworks

CineTape

Tai Audio

Ritter Battery

Rig Wheels Passport

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Willys Widgets

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineLab

Paralinx LLC

Metropolis Post

Technodolly

Glidecam

The Slider

Wooden Camera

FJS International, LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

rebotnix Technologies