quality, quality, quality... anyone sick yet?

Cody_Jordan

Cody_Jordan

Active member
hey guys... Lately I've been trying to achieve the highest quality possible for my DVX and I'm about to throw up all over my computer. I'm talking about all the recent crazes like andromeda, 35mm adapters and the new HD cameras. I feel its really easy for us to get so focused on having the highest quality possible that we forget what actually makes a good film.

To me what makes a good film is more-so the writing/directing/acting/lighting... then with quality of equipment last. Yet I understand equipment has some level of importance. But its like we invest so much time and money to get the best equipment possible when we should have spent that time and money writting/directing 3 or 4 short films. Napoleon Dynamite anyone?

I'll be making my next short on VHS-C just to prove my point. ;)
 
I thought Napoleon Dynamite was just 'alright' and not at all worth the hype. I fail to see the sensation. I enjoyed it but not at this crazy OMG way. The best bene for me was seeing the original balck and white short on the DVD
 
John_Hudson said:
I thought Napoleon Dynamite was just 'alright' and not at all worth the hype. I fail to see the sensation. I enjoyed it but not at this crazy OMG way. The best bene for me was seeing the original balck and white short on the DVD
Click to expand...

I hear you John. I could never understand the hype, I don't think I liked it as much as did.

hey did you ever see Saints and Soldiers?
 
Oh yes I did (thanks for asking)

I enjoyed it. I am admittedly spoiled by my favortie war films (platoon, SPR, We Were Soldiers, BHD) so the 'Scale of Combat' I found lacking at times; but I really liked it. A very well done film and indiependent no less. The cinematography I found very basic and felt it somewhat miscast and the the one problem for me?

I can totally see why this did not see a theatrical release. It was just missing something, But a good DVD rental.
 
aw comon guys... Napoleon dynamite was awesome and if you don't like it you're just too cool to admit it :-) It was never introduced with "hype"... that was just the after effect of a great movie. Yes i knew it was shot on film thank you very much.... I mentioned it because its a 35mm film that has very little emphasis on cinematography, yet it's become a cult classic for some people. It's one of those movies you have to watch more than once to actually get it. I admit, the first time I saw it I was like "what the heck just happened??" Then I watched it a few more times and couldn't stop laughing. It's kinda like a new cd that you hate at first then becomes your favorite after growing on you.

And oh yea, being younger than 30 helps too. (also runs ducking from the room)
 
Well I am not under 30, or even under 40, yet I liked Napoleon Dynamite alot. It helps when you see it with a very young audience. The one thing about being an old fart is you get a little perspective. I think that Napoleon Dynamite fits right in with such films as American Graffiti, Hollywood Knights, Porky's, John Hughes' films, Dazed and Confused and others that hit a certain generatonal nerve at the right time. ND is funny as hell.

With that out of the way, I think we sometime forget that a movie is answer "E", "All of the above". All the elements, script, direction, editing, audio design, music, acting, production design as well as cinematography, must be right for the film and mesh together seamlessly to make as best a cinema experience as possible.

My favorite example of an effective movie with shitty cinematography is the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre. It looks like ****, but it still scared me silly. Yet, the cinematography is perfect for the film and adds to it's effectiveness. It was shot on 16mm color reversal film, which at the time was what the majority of the countries TV news was shot on. Like The Blair Witch Project, that leveraged the look of handheld video for visual impact, TCM, by it's look, gives instant suspension of belief. So even though it looks like ****, the look is perfect for the movie.
 
I love ND, but I kind of feel like John did with Saints and Soldiers. Every time I watch it I laugh my head off but I always feel like it drags, or could have been more of like a 70 minute indie film. The director and I share the same religion, as with Saints and Soldiers. I hope this isn't a trend and when I get my film finished people are like "Yeah, it was good, but it was just missing ... something."

Chris
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top