The low-budget bubble has well and truly burst

[IronFilm]

Quote

 

"The low-budget bubble has well and truly burst

 

In 2010, 63% of all films shot in the UK cost under half a million pounds. Just seven years later, that figure has plummeted to 34%. "

 

 

https://stephenfollows.com/big-changes-in-uk-film-production/

[Kisaha]

But... there is a film production in UK, in other countries the film production (I mean features) are counted on fingers. Hand fingers.

[JurijTurnsek]

How can this be?? You can shoot feature films on iPhones now!

[zerocool22]

9 minutes ago, JurijTurnsek said:

How can this be?? You can shoot feature films on iPhones now!

And it will look like shit. 

Yeah It might be the end for decent Cinema. Netflix buys all crappy films that dont do well in theaters, and actually makes profits of em. (for instance the latest cloverfield).. 

I know its all about money for the studios. But if they make shitty films in the end, nobody will watch any films anymore. On the other hand the current generation does seem to like shitty movies(im so fed up with the mindless filmmaking these days: Villian tries to destroy the world but he needs a toy that has been hidden, Hero defeats the villain and saves the world). So there might be a future after all.

[Kisaha]

This is the Soderbergh film?! It reminds me some horror flicks we did in film school! The picture is pretty similar too, we used to use Canon (XM2?) camcorders!

[IronFilm]

3 hours ago, zerocool22 said:

And it will look like shit. 

Hate how every shot is at the same FoV, and no focus pulls. 

3 hours ago, Kisaha said:

It reminds me some horror flicks we did in film school! The picture is pretty similar too

Not surprised that the image is just as bad. 

[kidzrevil]

@zerocool22 I think the point of filming it with an iPhone is it has a specific aesthetic that we are ALL familiar with. The idea of the movie is to play with our idea of sanity and if we or the protagonist of the movie are actually crazy. Its hard for me to explain it but its like you know how iPhone footage looks since we get bombarded with it on social media all the time so it looks “real”. Think of it as the new Blair Witch aesthetic. I think using the iPhone here is genius because it’s like someone recording what goes on in a mental hospital with their phone. Its visceral. Sorry guys no shallow depth of field and 10 bit to see here ?

[fuzzynormal]

Seen "Inland Empire"?

"28 Days Later"?

"Pi"?

The thing with ambitious film directors is that they go places for their stories without strictures.

Automatically assuming that a film is "less" based on IQ is unfortunate understanding of the craft, imho. 

5 hours ago, Kisaha said:

This is the Soderbergh film?! It reminds me some horror flicks we did in film school! The picture is pretty similar too, we used to use Canon (XM2?) camcorders!

I'm going to go out in a limb and guess that the storytelling in Soderbergh's film might have a little more emotional heft than whatever y'all did back in the day. 

[kidzrevil]

@fuzzynormal thank God the average consumer isn’t as obsessed with image quality and thank God some of these directors aren’t neither. This storyline could be a hit. The plot and how he plans on playing with perspective...this could be revolutionary

[IronFilm]

1 hour ago, kidzrevil said:

@zerocool22 I think the point of filming it with an iPhone is it has a specific aesthetic that we are ALL familiar with. The idea of the movie is to play with our idea of sanity and if we or the protagonist of the movie is actually crazy.

Yes, this film fits in a unique little niche where this look works in its favor. The filmmakers are smart to make that pairing. 

But for most other films it would be greatly annoying indeed!

 

[sanveer]

1 hour ago, kidzrevil said:

@zerocool22 I think the point of filming it with an iPhone is it has a specific aesthetic that we are ALL familiar with. The idea of the movie is to play with our idea of sanity and if we or the protagonist of the movie is actually crazy. Its hard for me to explain it but its like you KNOW how iPhone footage looks since we get bombarded with it on social media all the time so it looks “real”. Think of it as the new Blair Witch aesthetic. I think using the iPhone here is genius because it’s like someone recording what goes on in a mental hospital with their phone. Its visceral. Sorry guys no shallow depth of field and 10 bit to see here ?

Except the fact that it could have been recorded on a host of other smartphones, many of them more capable.

[Kisaha]

If it didn't say Soderbergh in the titles, I do knot know if we would be talking about it, here, there, anywhere, or ever. 

The aesthetics and style was similar, and that was almost 15 years back. Obviously he is an acclaimed director, have won the Cannes and everything, and our shorts went a few festivals and gained a grand once, and most of us are humble and plain film and video technicians, so I guess my opinion is nothing, because Soderbergh is best friend with all the Oceans, and all.

I am not bombed by the "iPhone" aesthetics because I do not take part in any of those. I use some, only for my job and very close friends. There is so much white noise around us, all the time, I can't afford to waste brain cells for things I do not care. 

Why exactly "Pi" and "28 days later" are here? (after Mulholland, including this, I lost interest in Lynch, Eraserhead to Straight Story, one of my favorites, later on, just experimental for the hype of it.)

Pi was shot in 1997-1998 in 16mm, and 28 days later around 2001-2002 with Canon XL cameras. The first is amazing, in everything, the second, could do with a little better image.

I remember back then those cameras were workhorse cameras, like the C100mkII are today. Can you not make a film with C100mkII today? of course you can, the 35Mbps codec is a joke in front of raw from Arri and Red, but you still can do it.

We were using Letus's adapters with better lenses as well. Later on, we did a lot of work with the EX3 Sony cameras, again, Letus and whatever you could throw in front.

But I will let Don Mantle himself to explain the situation.

"If I had shot those on a big negative, it would have looked absolutely stunning," Dod Mantle reflects. "It was extraordinary to see those city streets deserted. I knew how beautiful those could have been, but we made an artistic decision and I stood by it. In those particular instances, of course, we would not have been allowed to shoot and take up so much space [in 35mm] for two weeks at such a delicate time before early-morning rush hour."

Even at 4 a.m., traffic control could hold back angry commuters for just so long as scenes were shot at Piccadilly Circus, Westminster Bridge and the Docklands. These sequences necessitated the use of as many as eight Canon XL1 MiniDVcameras to cover all angles, allowing shots to be made as quickly as possible. "I placed them all and framed them all," Dod Mantle recalls. "It was very difficult because we had to deal with Walkie-Talkies, screaming commuters just out of frame, police asking when we'd finish and six or eight people operating cameras. Even my gaffer, Thomas Neivelt, and producer Andrew MacDonald were operating some of the cameras. I was trying to Walkie T-stops knowing that they were at six different angles in accordance to the constantly rising sun. It was hell.

"As I watched the morning light come over St. Paul's Cathedral with all of these beautiful violets, yellows and magentas, I thought, 'How much of this information am I going to be able to maintain on the final print for a massive throw in a big cinema house in London or the States?'"

and there is a lot going on about post, and choices, and filters, and techniques, etc etc They didn't just take one of those and shoot natively.

So, the above choices were made from need, and Inland Empire and Soder/s choice is out of need to be different, for no particular reason at all (which I call "hipsterism in motion"). 

[kidzrevil]

@IronFilm absolutely would be annoying in another application.

have you seen the trailer for this on facebook/instagram ? They styled the player to look just like a social media post. I legit thought it was real footage from a mental hospital til I scrolled up and seen it was a sponsored post. I think that was the effect he was going for. “Wait...is this for real ?!”

[fuzzynormal]

5 hours ago, Kisaha said:

Why exactly "Pi" and "28 days later" are here?

As examples to show that pristine IQ isn't as important as some people think.  The implication that a film looking "like shit" means that the movie is mediocre is a sad notion.

Some of my favorite movies have image quality worse than a 1970's video camera.  

5 hours ago, Kisaha said:

Inland Empire and Soder/s choice is out of need to be different, for no particular reason at all

Well, I guess I'm glad someone here can talk with authority to the creative motivations of filmmakers like Steven Soderbergh and David Lynch.  Lord knows they've had a hard time articulating themselves in the movie business.  I suggest you reach out to them and help produce some of their future work --as apparently they're just doing stuff for no particular reason at all.  [eyeroll] 

7 hours ago, kidzrevil said:

The plot and how he plans on playing with perspective...this could be revolutionary

Unsure about revolutionary, but I do trust Soderbergh, as a prolific guy from an indy background, to be inventive, embrace the aesthetic, and use style for his storytelling.  How well he hits that balance between style and substance, well, we'll see.

[User]

5 hours ago, Kisaha said:

So, the above choices were made from need, and Inland Empire and Soder/s choice is out of need to be different, for no particular reason at all (which I call "hipsterism in motion"). 

"For no particular reason at all?" Is that really the best you can do? Tisk tisk.

[IronFilm]

7 hours ago, Kisaha said:

I remember back then those cameras were workhorse cameras, like the C100mkII are today. Can you not make a film with C100mkII today? of course you can, the 35Mbps codec is a joke in front of raw from Arri and Red, but you still can do it.

 

I worked (doing sound for some of the days) on a feature film a few years back shot entirely on a C100, looks pretty good:
 

 

[kye]

For me the important thing isn't that lots of people make films on tight budgets, it's that people CAN make films on tight budgets.  The more accessible it is for people to get their feet wet the less of the talented people will 'bounce off' the industry and we'll never see what they might have created.

[Kisaha]

I quote a whole segment of the DoP of the 28 days that said clearly he would prefer to shoot on glorious 35mm, and all you got to say is that I do not have the right to have an opinion??! wow...

Pi is one of my favorite films ever, it doesn't mean I still like the latest Aronofsky films (Black Swan/Noah/Mother! - Didn't care much). That goes with others as well - Lynch is another one, later Trier, etc. Image has nothing to do with it. I was educated in experimental cinema and video arts, where the quality of the image was the last parameter we analyzed, if at all.

[Tim Sewell]

59 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

I quote a whole segment of the DoP of the 28 days that said clearly he would prefer to shoot on glorious 35mm, and all you got to say is that I do not have the right to have an opinion??! wow...

I can't find where he says he would have preferred to. he said he could imagine how lovely those vistas would have looked on 35mm, but that that wasn't what they were doing.

[Kisaha]

1 minute ago, Tim Sewell said:

I can't find where he says he would have preferred to. he said he could imagine how lovely those vistas would have looked on 35mm, but that that wasn't what they were doing.

"If I had shot those on a big negative, it would have looked absolutely stunning," Dod Mantle reflects. (now it doesn't?!)

In those particular instances, of course, we would not have been allowed to shoot and take up so much space [in 35mm] for two weeks at such a delicate time before early-morning rush hour." (no time/no budget for film?!)

"As I watched the morning light come over St. Paul's Cathedral with all of these beautiful violets, yellows and magentas, I thought, 'How much of this information am I going to be able to maintain on the final print for a massive throw in a big cinema house in London or the States?'" (did he maintain that information?!)

They didn't have the budget and the time. They used 6 XL cameras for those 2 reasons, they couldn't afford 6 35mm cameras in anyway, they didn't have the time to close London for weeks of filming. time = money + (35mm = more money + close London for a month or os = even more money ) = money they did not have. They lacked both, the movie is great anyway, my point was that some times you take a decision based of your resources, and Sod took this decision for other reasons.

In anyway, when you take a decision, you stand firm to that decision and try to do your best.