Jump to content


Photo

Chris Doyle's take on Life of Pi/Lincoln

Hint: doesnt like them

  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1 Jason Outenreath

Jason Outenreath
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 112 posts
  • Director
  • Austin, Texas

Posted 26 June 2013 - 09:12 PM

blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/christopher-doyle-calls-life-of-pi-a-**(obscenity removed)**-insult-to-cinematography-hates-on-lincoln-more-20130314

 

Not quite sure what to say here... Thoughts?


Edited by Jason Outenreath, 26 June 2013 - 09:13 PM.

  • 0

#2 Kieran Scannell

Kieran Scannell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 339 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Netherlands/Ireland

Posted 28 June 2013 - 10:43 AM

I think it has been discussed here! But Chris Doyle is very passionate about the craft of cinematography! Personally I think he completely missed the point of "Life of Pi" He also needs to think about less Chardonnay before an interview discussing his fellow cinematographers. But everyone is entitled to there opinion however vitriolic.
  • 0

#3 John Holland

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

Posted 28 June 2013 - 11:28 AM

I am not a great fan of Chris Doyle [unlike a lot of people on here and elsewhere] but i do have to agree about his view of "Pi"


  • 0

#4 Kieran Scannell

Kieran Scannell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 339 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Netherlands/Ireland

Posted 28 June 2013 - 12:25 PM

In what respect John?
  • 0

#5 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7118 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 28 June 2013 - 12:33 PM

I think he could've been more diplomatic about how he phrased things, but I respect him for having the balls to say it. He knows what he's doing and while I don't think he's done anything I'm aware of all that amazing recently, one cannot say he hasn't got a certain unique sensibility (and personality).

The Pi has been discussed before, and for me personally, not the fault Mr. Miranda in the least, the best cinematography award was a bit of a head scratcher. However, this is really no different to other "beautifully shot" films which have won primarily because of what I perceive as their amazing production design.

And, in the end, does it really matter? Are any of the DoPs who are up for a best cinematography award struggling for work-- this being a make or break for their career? So, let it go. It was a head scratch-er, for sure, but in the grand scheme of our industry I don't see how that really makes a lick of difference or should be so harped upon.


  • 0

#6 Kieran Scannell

Kieran Scannell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 339 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Netherlands/Ireland

Posted 28 June 2013 - 03:09 PM

"Okay. I’m trying to work out how to say this most politely, and no offence to – I don’t know him personally – but what a total fucking piece of shit," "Let me be blunt. Ah, fuck. I don’t care, I’m sure he’s a wonderful guy and I’m sure he cares so much, but since 97 per cent of the film is not under his control, what the fuck are you talking about cinematography, sorry. I’m sorry. I have to be blunt and I don’t care, you can write it. I think it’s a fucking insult to cinematography."

 

This is what Chris said about Life of Pi!

Now to me this is not a ballsy statement, this sounds like frustration and jealousy!  If you had balls you would nitpick it technicaly say how it did'nt work for you visually and how you!! would have approached the film as a cinematographer. The fact is Claudio Miranda did a stalwart job on Life of Pi exactly what Ang Lee wanted and as a Cinematographer that's all that's required.

As for winning an Oscar…Well the Oscars may once have been a measure of the best in our industry but no more I'm afraid, If that were the case then Roger Deakins would have four.


  • 0

#7 Jason Outenreath

Jason Outenreath
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 112 posts
  • Director
  • Austin, Texas

Posted 28 June 2013 - 10:46 PM

Mauro Fiore won the best cinematography award for Avatar, and most of that film was digitally rendered later.

 

I don't think he says anything out of jealousy--the guy is probably the most well known cinematographer worldwide--known to a ton of people who have no association with cinematography. He's not very subtle, but it's hard to blame a guy just for going against the grain. I'm pretty sure if he was jealous, he would have just said it. He's pretty blunt after all.

I admire him if for nothing else, how he always challenges filmmaking/cinemagraphy. Whether you agree or disagree with his style or philosophy, it's good to have people who aren't yes men at these self-congratulatory events to celebrate cinema like the Oscars, and Cannes and such.


  • 0

#8 Kieran Scannell

Kieran Scannell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 339 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Netherlands/Ireland

Posted 30 June 2013 - 02:38 PM

Well then we must agree to disagree! I respect Chris Doyle's skill as Cinematographer and actually really love his "style" I wish I had the opportunity to do it. But when you criticize another colleague and say that his work is "A total fucking piece of shit" you must quantify that statement! Back it up in some way professionally otherwise It's just shouting stuff out loud! And his argument that it was 97% out of Miranda's control is well....just not true!
  • 0

#9 Jason Outenreath

Jason Outenreath
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 112 posts
  • Director
  • Austin, Texas

Posted 01 July 2013 - 12:15 AM

Oh, I completely agree with the inappropriateness of how he expressed himself. I was talking more generally and in terms of style more than what he says. Sorry for not making that clear :).


  • 0

#10 Kieran Scannell

Kieran Scannell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 339 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Netherlands/Ireland

Posted 02 July 2013 - 03:18 PM

Were good Jason! Good to have different angles on these things and see them from different perspectives as camera people. 

Check this workshop from David Mullen ASC. You'll learn a lot! 


  • 0

#11 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4161 posts
  • Other
  • Went over the edge... Central Europe

Posted 04 July 2013 - 12:54 PM

Check this workshop from David Mullen ASC. You'll learn a lot! 

 

That video is really good and inspirational! :)

 

Freya


  • 0

#12 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4161 posts
  • Other
  • Went over the edge... Central Europe

Posted 04 July 2013 - 01:02 PM

Well then we must agree to disagree! I respect Chris Doyle's skill as Cinematographer and actually really love his "style" I wish I had the opportunity to do it. But when you criticize another colleague and say that his work is "A total **(obscenity removed)** piece of poop" you must quantify that statement! Back it up in some way professionally otherwise It's just shouting stuff out loud! And his argument that it was 97% out of Miranda's control is well....just not true!

 

Well I think Chris was trying to say that far too much of the movie was computer generated.

97% Might have been over egging the pudding.

I do understand where Chris Doyle is coming from. Claudio Miranda has made far better and significant work than Life of Pi, so it must feel strange to be nominated for such a film.

 

Having said all that. I'm definitely not keen on the abuse of alcohol.

 

Freya


  • 0

#13 Kieran Scannell

Kieran Scannell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 339 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Netherlands/Ireland

Posted 04 July 2013 - 05:23 PM

What happened to "Love Freya"?

Cinematography has changed! We really need to get to grips with the realities!This film could not have been made without CGI! Or could have been made conventionaly but the producers would have balked at the budget and the film would not have been made!

Getting the film made is what I think is important and if you've read the book "which I would recommend" they got it spot on!

How much CGI is too much if it tells the story?

 

Love, Kieran


  • 0

#14 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4161 posts
  • Other
  • Went over the edge... Central Europe

Posted 06 July 2013 - 06:29 AM

What happened to "Love Freya"?

 

It got dropped somewhere after the point that I started to understand what human beings were really like.

See the Lars Von Trier movie dogville for more details!

Thankfully my time in Dogville is coming to an end soon.

 

love

 

Freya


  • 1

#15 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4161 posts
  • Other
  • Went over the edge... Central Europe

Posted 06 July 2013 - 06:40 AM

Cinematography has changed! We really need to get to grips with the realities!This film could not have been made without CGI! Or could have been made conventionaly but the producers would have balked at the budget and the film would not have been made!

Getting the film made is what I think is important and if you've read the book "which I would recommend" they got it spot on!

How much CGI is too much if it tells the story?

 

Love, Kieran

 

I don't think the point is too much CGI but the fact that the CGI isn't cinematography. It's visual effects.

I actually agree with what you say and do think CGI will play a bigger part more and more in certain kinds of movies.

This isn't the work of the cinematographer but the work of the VFX people tho. It's the VFX people that made the amazing tiger etc.

 

I also felt the few non CGI parts of Life of Pi weren't that impressive either but that's me.

 

I'm not sure that cinematography has changed in that sense, it's just becoming a lot less important in certain kinds of movies.

 

love

 

Freya


  • 0

#16 Jason Outenreath

Jason Outenreath
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 112 posts
  • Director
  • Austin, Texas

Posted 07 July 2013 - 01:56 PM

I could argue both sides, but even with as much CG as Life of Pi had, it takes an enormous amount of skill to light/frame/plan for that kind of movie. To make it look realistic later. And in a way the cinematographer has primary control over the look of such a movie, by virtue of his or her lighting. Because then the visual effects people have to match the scene with whatever the cinematographer set up initially. I think the debate of how much CGI is too much, parallels the discussion of digital or film. There's a lot of cinematographer's who aren't comfortable with the constantly changing definition of what it means to be a cinematographer. It's not the same as it was 10 years ago, much less 30 or 40. Nobody's job is getting replaced however, in my opinion. There are just different expectations today.


  • 0

#17 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7118 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 08 July 2013 - 03:04 AM

At the same time; however, such can also be very limiting, if they are working off of animatics first, and the VFX team is concurrently creating the FX shots; you often can be stuck lighting for an FX which was already rendered. Not saying this doesn't take skill; it certainly does, but it brings up strong questions of authorship, if you ask me.


  • 1

#18 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4161 posts
  • Other
  • Went over the edge... Central Europe

Posted 08 July 2013 - 04:50 AM

 I think the debate of how much CGI is too much, parallels the discussion of digital or film. There's a lot of cinematographer's who aren't comfortable with the constantly changing definition of what it means to be a cinematographer. It's not the same as it was 10 years ago, much less 30 or 40. Nobody's job is getting replaced however, in my opinion. There are just different expectations today.

 

Well like I say, I don't think the matter at hand is whether there is too much CGI but that the CGI isn't cinematography and to suggest it is undermines the hard work of the VFX artists.

 

The CGI aspects were my fave bits of Life of Pi in fact.

 

Freya


Edited by Freya Black, 08 July 2013 - 04:52 AM.

  • 0

#19 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4161 posts
  • Other
  • Went over the edge... Central Europe

Posted 08 July 2013 - 05:35 AM

I could argue both sides, but even with as much CG as Life of Pi had, it takes an enormous amount of skill to light/frame/plan for that kind of movie. To make it look realistic later. And in a way the cinematographer has primary control over the look of such a movie, by virtue of his or her lighting. Because then the visual effects people have to match the scene with whatever the cinematographer set up initially.

 

I disagree that the cinematographer has primary control over the look of the movie. He or she is already having to light the blue/green screen with the VFX people in mind. In fact the cinematographer will have to consider the VFX in many decisions especially on a film like Life Of Pi. I certainly wouldn't expect the cinematographer to shoot any old thing and expect he VFX people to deal with it later, they should be working with the VFX people in mind.

 

Also it makes me very sad the way people some people view the VFX artists. There certainly seems to be a lack of respect for the hard work of software developers and VFX artists and the collapse of Rhythm and Hues in spite of having produced the effects for such a movie only underlines that I think. They make a significant contribution to many movies and certainly to Life Of Pi.

 

Check out the video below for a vague idea about some of the amazing things they did on this movie:

 

http://www.redsharkn...s-in-life-of-pi

 

Freya


  • 0

#20 Jason Outenreath

Jason Outenreath
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 112 posts
  • Director
  • Austin, Texas

Posted 08 July 2013 - 08:47 PM

To be perfectly honest, I've never shot a movie that required a substantial amount of VFX in post, so I'm not in the best position to comment on the difficulty of such an act. Maybe there's someone on this forum who knows more about this--or has experience in it. It's an interesting question to bring up. What degree of skill is required to light in movies that are largely rendered digitally in post? I don't know the answer to that.


  • 0


Rig Wheels Passport

CineLab

Aerial Filmworks

Visual Products

Abel Cine

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Tai Audio

Metropolis Post

The Slider

rebotnix Technologies

Opal

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

Willys Widgets

Technodolly

FJS International, LLC

Wooden Camera

Ritter Battery

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Glidecam

Technodolly

CineLab

Glidecam

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

rebotnix Technologies

Wooden Camera

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

Ritter Battery

Metropolis Post

Aerial Filmworks

Willys Widgets

Visual Products

Opal

FJS International, LLC

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

Broadcast Solutions Inc

The Slider