felliniesque film
- Thread starter filmman
- Start date
Nathyn
Low Budget Ninja
I haven't seen the parody, Nate. But this scene shows how powerful is the attraction of film. It's a felliniesque moment. Gloria Swanson is in her own world, a dream world like Fellini's.
Here is a still from THE RED QUEEN.
What's the set up? I mean how did you go about shooting this?
Also Shawn G. Smith did a magnificent job of portraying the evil character in THE RED QUEEN. He starred in BUTTERFLIES IN THE WIND and is coming along real well as an actor.
I remember this dude from the trailer for BITW. Quite a transformation. Is he your heavy or just a guy you tap for parts. Mike MacRae was in my two films. I always get him to play parts.
The Gabrielle's a cutie. What part does play in the film?
-Nate
filmman
Veteran
The nightclub where I shot the opening and closing of THE RED QUEEN is lit in its normal way. It's generally a dark club and some of the biggest bands play here on Hollywood Blvd. I shoot in the biggest nightclubs and all the best locations. I have 40 years of experience so I know how to talk to people.
I shoot alone, because I'm at that point in my career as a filmmaker that I don't need to worry about what anybody says regarding my techniques. I've done it all. Don't get me wrong, I have major 35mm projects waiting for funding, and one might be almost funded within a month, so when I shoot one of the big projects I will shoot using my 35mm Arriflex cameras with a proper crew.
I'm really not convinced about the potential of digital image acquisition as being comparable to 35mm. To me it's really not necessary to argue the point anymore. The short of it is this:
1) it costs $80,000 to blow up digital to 35mm intermediates and generate release prints. I can do an entire 35mm production for that, so where is the wisdom of shooting digital?
2) digital is great because my Sony Z1U doesn't need 20 people on the crew to shoot it, so when I have zero funding (except for my own personal expenses and the few minor expenses of dealing with a few actors), I shoot with the Sony Z1U and edit on FCP 5.04 (non-intel). This is as far as I will go with this system.
What digital allows me to do is shoot without any planning and without a preconceived thought before I actually decide there is something before me worth my attention and coverage as a filmmaker. I enjoy making motion pictures; I like the process. Give me a couple of actors and I'm off making a movie.
I have the Sony Z1U on automatic. I use available light. I know how to use available light to create my vision. As for sound, here I get a bit more "sophisticated", I actually have a lavalier which I put on one actor (I'd like to have another, but it costs too much) and a cardioid mic on the camera (I don't remember what they are; they work alright) and the Sony Z1U has two canon plugins for sound, so I generally set the levels to automatic. Although sometimes when there is wind or whatever, I may put them on manual and monitor them. I prefer everything on automatic. This is the beauty of these digital cameras.
I hate shallow focus, because I don't like one actor's face in focus and another actor's face that he's talking to totally blurred. I know, it's supposed to be arty, but if I want to blur a face, I can do it in post with a blur filter.
If I want the film look and I don't have money to shoot 35mm, there is 16mm and even Super-8.
But what I like about digital cameras is the ease of working with them: no film to load and process and unlimited potential for experimentation.
Having said that, I'd like to make a few feature films in real time, based on events. I've actually shot many seminars for professors with a roving camera. After the shoot, I went home and transferred the MiniDV to VHS and gave them the finished movie and collected my check. I made a living for a few years like that. I learned how to shoot and edit in camera. I kept the camera movements simple. I walked all over the classroom and sometimes the campus and shot entire programs in one long take. I gave it to them at the end of the shoot (when I was shooting with a Panasonic VHS camera) and that was that. They thanked me and showed the seminars and programs all over the world even for extended education.
So this is a skill I developed over the years. It's not Rembrandt lighting or anything.LOL And the camera work is not intended for the Academy Awards. It's cinema verite.LOL
Here's a still from my movie THE RED QUEEN.
I shoot alone, because I'm at that point in my career as a filmmaker that I don't need to worry about what anybody says regarding my techniques. I've done it all. Don't get me wrong, I have major 35mm projects waiting for funding, and one might be almost funded within a month, so when I shoot one of the big projects I will shoot using my 35mm Arriflex cameras with a proper crew.
I'm really not convinced about the potential of digital image acquisition as being comparable to 35mm. To me it's really not necessary to argue the point anymore. The short of it is this:
1) it costs $80,000 to blow up digital to 35mm intermediates and generate release prints. I can do an entire 35mm production for that, so where is the wisdom of shooting digital?
2) digital is great because my Sony Z1U doesn't need 20 people on the crew to shoot it, so when I have zero funding (except for my own personal expenses and the few minor expenses of dealing with a few actors), I shoot with the Sony Z1U and edit on FCP 5.04 (non-intel). This is as far as I will go with this system.
What digital allows me to do is shoot without any planning and without a preconceived thought before I actually decide there is something before me worth my attention and coverage as a filmmaker. I enjoy making motion pictures; I like the process. Give me a couple of actors and I'm off making a movie.
I have the Sony Z1U on automatic. I use available light. I know how to use available light to create my vision. As for sound, here I get a bit more "sophisticated", I actually have a lavalier which I put on one actor (I'd like to have another, but it costs too much) and a cardioid mic on the camera (I don't remember what they are; they work alright) and the Sony Z1U has two canon plugins for sound, so I generally set the levels to automatic. Although sometimes when there is wind or whatever, I may put them on manual and monitor them. I prefer everything on automatic. This is the beauty of these digital cameras.
I hate shallow focus, because I don't like one actor's face in focus and another actor's face that he's talking to totally blurred. I know, it's supposed to be arty, but if I want to blur a face, I can do it in post with a blur filter.
If I want the film look and I don't have money to shoot 35mm, there is 16mm and even Super-8.
But what I like about digital cameras is the ease of working with them: no film to load and process and unlimited potential for experimentation.
Having said that, I'd like to make a few feature films in real time, based on events. I've actually shot many seminars for professors with a roving camera. After the shoot, I went home and transferred the MiniDV to VHS and gave them the finished movie and collected my check. I made a living for a few years like that. I learned how to shoot and edit in camera. I kept the camera movements simple. I walked all over the classroom and sometimes the campus and shot entire programs in one long take. I gave it to them at the end of the shoot (when I was shooting with a Panasonic VHS camera) and that was that. They thanked me and showed the seminars and programs all over the world even for extended education.
So this is a skill I developed over the years. It's not Rembrandt lighting or anything.LOL And the camera work is not intended for the Academy Awards. It's cinema verite.LOL
Here's a still from my movie THE RED QUEEN.
Nathyn
Low Budget Ninja
Super 8 versus 1080/24p is almost laughable. You could buy magic bullet and get the film look everytime and save the money to pay crew, buy food for the production, get those lav mics you wanted, etc. Then the distributors can blow it up to 8, 16, 35, or whatever they want. By the way, there are Lavs for cheap on eBay. Don't know how good they are, but they do exist.
Nothing to argue about, it's already been proven via film and TV both. America (nor most people) don't care nor know the difference. In fact in many parts of the world video is generally excepted.
Why do you care? This is the distributor's job to worry about. They're going to fix your film to their liking anyway, so it's a bit of a moot point. They put almost a million dollars in "El Mariachi" (shot for $7000) if not more. But it was less than shooting the film for millions Hollywood style. That's the wisdom.
But to many, this is exactly how NOT to make a digital feature. Digital allows you to shoot with a small crew (normally about three people in my case), shoot until it's right (or until you're kicked out of the location) and not spend a dime on processing until the end if you even have to. 20 DV tapes cost way less then a mile of film, SD Cards and harddrive cams may offer an even better value.
But if you're doing Cine Verite the LAST THING you want is a video look. Try the reverse UK. Back in the day, UK shows would shoot everything outside in film in things inside with video, try shooting everything outdoors and filmlook everything indoors.
I like her expressions and facial structure.
-Nate
Last edited:
filmman
Veteran
I would enjoy debating film vs. digital with you someday. I'd like to talk to you personally about it, because the points are subtle. It goes into the personality of the filmmaker. We probably won't disagree at a certain point, because film and digital are personal choices. Ok, at this distance we can just leave it as artistic differences. Your points are valid, but I can't explain my points better.
You asked about Shawn. Yes, I like Shawn Smith. He's a great character actor. He really puts himself in a role. I like to give the roles that appeal to him. He's a hard working kid and a really nice guy once you get to know him.
You asked about Shawn. Yes, I like Shawn Smith. He's a great character actor. He really puts himself in a role. I like to give the roles that appeal to him. He's a hard working kid and a really nice guy once you get to know him.
filmman
Veteran
When shooting a no-budget movie I try to get more creative and use a lot of locations, instead of shooting the movie in one or two locations. I have heard too many distributors ask, "Where did you shoot this movie, in your garage?" So I look for exotic locations and production value the less I have to work with. Here's an example
Billy Pilgrim
Stye in my eye
I'm definitely going to try and find as many unique locations as I can for my next feature. I shot most of Carte Blanche in the same locations. If I re-used locations I tried to shoot from different angles and light differently each time, but I think next time around I'm going to look for more interesting backdrops. I think it would open up the cinematography as well. How do you go about finding and securing locations? Do you scout, or do you write for places you know?
Nathyn
Low Budget Ninja
filmman
Veteran
I shot this with a camera I picked up on eBay for a few bucks. This was its test.LOL Sorry for the ecode. I'm going to do another one tomorrow -- gotta get some sleep. This was today by the way, and the AFM runs between Nov. 4th to Nov. 11th this year.
I hope the footage gives you some idea of how the buying and selling is conducted. The AFM takes place inside the Loews Hotel in Santa Monica, California. Buyers come from all over the world to negotiate for their territories. They usually buy all rights for their territory. I will post some going rates for this year tomorrow.
If you have any questions, let me know.
I hope the footage gives you some idea of how the buying and selling is conducted. The AFM takes place inside the Loews Hotel in Santa Monica, California. Buyers come from all over the world to negotiate for their territories. They usually buy all rights for their territory. I will post some going rates for this year tomorrow.
If you have any questions, let me know.
