Red Scarlet Announcement Info

J Davis said:
Actually we're starting to touch on a topic that is very relevant. There are two types of audiences that make up different markets.
There are those that go specifically for the special effects and 'gloss' and they are not film maker types. Avatar being a great example.
Then there is the audience who are going for story.
Click to expand...

Not an expert here, but I think you could say they are both out for ONE thing: They want to be entertained. How much is pure visual...how much is pure story....(or a little bit of both)
 
I agree that they both want to be entertained but relevant to the discussion of 4k and production value over story then they I see them as very different.
 
J Davis said:
Then there is the audience who are going for story.
Click to expand...

The thing is that in order for the visuals to step back and not distract the audience from the story, they need to be crisp and clean. That's why romantic comedies and some dramas have such a clean technically perfect look to them. And that's why movies that used low end cameras like 28 Days Later, Paranormal Activity, Crank, Cloverfield, ect. are intentionally much more visually distracting (because it worked for what they wanted to achieve). I mean sure, if your story and characters are good, bad visuals may not destroy the movie, but it will distract the audience from the story...even if they get used to it, it's better just to keep them from noticing it to begin with. Same thing goes for rediculously overly color graded styles, IMO.
 
urrr ... 28 days later ... sorry I have a bee in my bonnet over that one (english expression for u americans)

if we have to go to a film to exemplify what we are talking about there's a a film called CRANK its fun, fast and emulates a computer game,

shot with canon vixia's like the HF100 (I believe) or something like that ... and had a budget of around 12 million or 16 million or so. Doubled its money at the box office.

Now thats a great example of how a digital deep focus feel ADDs to a story - especially when they are looking for the feel of a computer game.
 
Last edited:
J Davis said:
urrr ... 28 days later ... sorry I have a bee in my bonnet over that one (english expression for u americans)

if we have to go to a film to exemplify what we are talking about there's a a film called CRANK its fun, fast and emulates a computer game,

shot with canon vixia's like the HF100 (I believe) and had a budget of around 12 million or 16 million or something like that.

Now thats a great example of how a digital deep focus feel ADDs to a story - especially when they are looking for the feel of a computer game.
Click to expand...


IMDb:

Camera
Canon XL-2
Sony CineAlta HDC-F950, Zeiss DigiPrime and DigiZoom Lenses

Budget was ~$12 mil

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0479884/
 
J Davis said:
urrr ... 28 days later ... sorry I have a bee in my bonnet over that one (english expression for u americans)

if we have to go to a film to exemplify what we are talking about there's a a film called CRANK its fun, fast and emulates a computer game,

shot with canon vixia's like the HF100 (I believe) or something like that ... and had a budget of around 12 million or 16 million or so. Doubled its money at the box office.

Now thats a great example of how a digital deep focus feel ADDs to a story - especially when they are looking for the feel of a computer game.
Click to expand...

Well that's all well and good...my point is that they're definitely visually distracting movies. Movies that put story and characters up front tend to be clean and technically very slickly made (with big expensive cameras ;) ). Even the low budget indie ones shot on DSLRs try to be clean and slick looking. It's the fast paced visually focused movies that have gotten away with low end cameras.
 
oh sh-t ... crank 2 was the vixia's? I was typing from memory ...

Crank 1 was definitely the better of the two films, especially its pov intro
 
J Davis said:
oh sh-t ... crank 2 was the vixia's? I was typing from memory ...

Crank 1 was definitely the better of the two films, especially its pov intro
Click to expand...

I forgot about the 2nd one haha! And yah they did use the VIXIEs for the second. wrong (slightly) movie but valid point!
 
Crank 2 (or more properly, CRANK 2: HIGH VOLTAGE) was the one shot on a variety of cheap Canon cams, yes. Then after that the guys shot on RED for their next film, Gamer.

I would like to point out that in a TV spot for it, our editor John Lucanic fearlessly unleashed the best / worst line of copy ever written:

"HE'LL TRY ANYTHING TO KEEP HIS HEART ON"

I think we actually got a Key Art award for that :P Ah good trailer memories!

Bruce Allen
www.boaciema.com
 
Last edited:
I kinda wanted to respond to Gabrobot's earlier posts just to say that I totally get the point he is driving.

I believe if a 'look' to the film is not contributing to the story then the 'look' to the film should not even be noticed and I think thats where he is going too.

Now for one of my rambles ... and this is not directed at anyone in particular.

To further go down that road of thought you approach the realm of indie and in that the production value, choice of camera, or lack of budget may introduce a look to the film that says 'low budget' and thats where story, actor and character makes or breaks the movie. If the story is great then the audience doesn't care.

One film that pops into my mind that did this for me is a Belgian film whose title (my Belgian friends tell me) translates to 'It happened somewhere near you' the western release title was Man Bites Dog.

It had a black and white look, nothing special cinematically. The film is fiction and not a documentary but it is done to appear like a documentary. The story is of a group of young filmmakers who encounter a serial killer so they interview him and start following him around on his murders. The killer explains his techniques to the camera and starts to love being on camera ... so much that when they run out of money the killer starts to fund their film! (which is the one you're watching)

Highly original ... if anyone hasn't seen it, go check it out.
 
Last edited:
bruceallen said:
Crank 2 (or more properly, CRANK 2: HIGH VOLTAGE) was the one shot on a variety of cheap Canon cams, yes. Then after that the guys shot on RED for their next film, Gamer.
Click to expand...

Crank 2 was shot mostly on the Canon xh a1 cameras. Gamer funnily had quite bad rolling shutter effects from the Red + high shutter combination. Crank 2 had none of that ;)
 
its funny - there's so much talk about what red is doing on the 3rd ... I have to confess, I'm equally curious to see what Canon is going to reveal.

Even if I get a scarlet ... I want a 7d mark 2
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top