Hurt Locker!?!?

[Patryk_Rebisz]

2 pages of comments and all comments are "it was good," "it wasn't good"?
From the trailer it's obvious they were going for documentary style to add the realism to the scenes as if they are just trying to capture what's happening in front of the lens on the fly.

If as a DP you were asked to deliver this kind of feeling, what would you do differently?

 

[emretufekci]

2 pages of comments and all comments are "it was good," "it wasn't good"?
From the trailer it's obvious they were going for documentary style to add the realism to the scenes as if they are just trying to capture what's happening in front of the lens on the fly.

If as a DP you were asked to deliver this kind of feeling, what would you do differently?

If I was going for a documentary style (Meaning I am not going to use technocranes, flycams, 100 man crew for lighting, I have no input on the script...etc) I would film it more POV and shoot every shot using a steadicam. The human eye does not see how a camera sees (vomit-cam) your brain compensates for the movement and the shakiness. That would allow me to move the camera around a lot easier (thus establishing the surroundings better) and shoot faster as well.

I would also color time the movie a lot differently (I know you are familiar Genesis systems Patryk) but do it with Panalog LUT's trying to keep the Matrix transform in post as an option.

I would probably stick with the same lens selections they used.

Just my 2c.

 

[Patryk_Rebisz]

Just because human eye doesn't see as camera does doesn't mean you can't use the cultural artifacts of people having seen tons of doc-style films thus getting used to the style. So rather then pounding on their head: "You are all WRONG!" you can just use that cultural legacy and use it to your advantage.

 

[emretufekci]

Thanks for the advice Pat. I will look into the matter.:thumbsup:

 

[Amr Rahmy]

documentary style or reality means no cinematography.

you can't discuss the cinematography of the film if it didn't have any.

that would be like discussing the story of transformers 2.

 

[Patryk_Rebisz]

Thanks for the advice Pat. I will look into the matter.:thumbsup:

Oh, STFU!

 

[Patryk_Rebisz]

documentary style or reality means no cinematography.

you can't discuss the cinematography of the film if it didn't have any.

that would be like discussing the story of transformers 2.

WHHHHHAAAAAATTTTTTTT?????????

The second you chose to frame this object this way and frame out that one you are making a visual choice - that constitutes cinematography. Even more so when you do it consciously with certain goal in mind (as they did here doing the docu-style to heighten reality) it constitutes higher-end of cinematography when you are about making images to support the story rather then just pretty pictures.

 

[Adam J McKay]

WHHHHHAAAAAATTTTTTTT?????????

The second you chose to frame this object this way and frame out that one you are making a visual choice - that constitutes cinematography. Even more so when you do it consciously with certain goal in mind (as they did here doing the docu-style to heighten reality) it constitutes higher-end of cinematography when you are about making images to support the story rather then just pretty pictures.

Agreed.

I don`t like to play this card, but I am going to. Do any of you nay sayers have an academy award nom? To claim there is no cinematography is retarded...

Cinematography (from Greek: kinema - κίνημα "movement" and graphein - γράφειν "to record"), is the making of lighting and camera choices when recording photographic images for the cinema.

I guess that never happened.

 

[Amr Rahmy]

choose to frame one object and frame out, that's not cinematography,

maybe you can pass it as mobile phone photography or something of that sort. if your only looking at the first and last frame of the shot, that's not cinematography.

making images to support the story... as oppose to what making audio without images.

it's a requirement to have images in a film, it's not a choice. same way as "documentary style" is not a choice for a film.

 

[Amr Rahmy]

if you can't tell your story, or make it "real", then you can't tell the story period.

 

[Patryk_Rebisz]

amrrahmy, are you a college student by a chance? Cause you sound like me in college where wrongly i would claim that "without beauty there is no art."

 

[Amr Rahmy]

no, i just don't set my standards too low.

"without beauty there is no art", eh.

art is making something beautiful.

 

[Patryk_Rebisz]

if you are filming, say a violent rape scene, will you still try to make it beautiful?

 

[j1clark@ucsd.edu]

Agreed.

Cinematography (from Greek: kinema - κίνημα "movement" and graphein - γράφειν "to record"), is the making of lighting and camera choices when recording photographic images for the cinema.

I guess that never happened.

Actually recent etymological research has shown that the kin-, as used in cinema,
actually was a corruption of the greek root word, 'kyn-', as in 'dog'. In addition 'graphein' also means scratching, and so...

kynographie... dog scratchings... particually fleas...

 

[Ryan Patrick O'Hara]

And I thought it meant 'drunkards who occasionally make images'.

 

[j1clark@ucsd.edu]

if you are filming, say a violent rape scene, will you still try to make it beautiful?

Documentary stile:
--------------------
Lucrece draws on the story described in both Ovid's Fasti and Livy's history of Rome. In 509 BC, Sextus Tarquinius, son of Tarquin, the king of Rome, raped Lucretia (Lucrece), wife of Collatinus, one of the king's aristocratic retainers. As a result, Lucrece committed suicide. Her body was paraded in the Roman Forum by the king's nephew. This incited a full-scale revolt against the Tarquins led by Lucius Junius Brutus, the banishment of the royal family, and the founding of the Roman republic.
--------------------


Art style:

 

[Patryk_Rebisz]

Bravo, you just proved my point! The dude made a beautiful painting that invokes the feelings of beauty and commotion rather then fear and violence. If his intentions were the first two then he succeeded splendidly but if the second 2 then he failed.

Same goes for filmmaking. Appropriate style and form for the intended result.

 

[Amr Rahmy]

if you are filming, say a violent rape scene, will you still try to make it beautiful?

sure, depends on the story, can go in three or four ways. mainly your doing the scene either to emphasize or portray a villain or to get the viewer feel or go through what the character felt or went through or to justify something, if you made a connection with the viewer, he will be entertained no matter what the subject matter is, it's easy to link something as shocking to the viewer as a rape scene, the art is to make the whole movie connect to the viewer.

the rape scene can just be a reference, you could do it in like 10 frames, that's too easy. try something harder. i like this game.

 

[Amr Rahmy]

reality tv is not a form of film(it has tv in the name)

 

[Patryk_Rebisz]

"sure, depends on the story, can go in three or four ways. "

Another proof to my point. There is no one answer, not one "It HAS to look beautiful" solution. Appropriate style and form for the intended result. The "Hurt Locker" wanted to emulate certain visual aesthetic to ride the wave of emotions, feelings and associations related to that aesthetics. And they did it.