refocusedmedia
Veteran
Will be premiering at Sundace 2013. First teaser released:
Upstream Color -- first film from Shane Carruth since 2004's Primer
- Thread starter refocusedmedia
- Start date
ryancglover
Well-known member
refocusedmedia
Veteran
Official plot synopsis:
A young woman (Amy Seimetz) is abducted and seemingly brainwashed via an organic material harvested from a specific flower. She later meets a man (Carruth) and after the two fall for each other, they come to realize he may also have been subjected to the same process.
Full-length trailer out:
This just might be my most anticipated film of the year..
A young woman (Amy Seimetz) is abducted and seemingly brainwashed via an organic material harvested from a specific flower. She later meets a man (Carruth) and after the two fall for each other, they come to realize he may also have been subjected to the same process.
Full-length trailer out:
This just might be my most anticipated film of the year..
Nektonic
Veteran
Looks interesting if a bit abstract. Then again, I'd rather a film not give away the whole plot in a trailer. Too many films nowadays do that and it makes the actual viewing less enjoyable because rarely are there any surprises.
I also just learned that this was shot on the GH2. Or maybe that is common knowledge around here at this point? Anyways, I hadn't been following this film much besides seeing the first teaser trailer a couple months ago and now this newer trailer.
I also just learned that this was shot on the GH2. Or maybe that is common knowledge around here at this point? Anyways, I hadn't been following this film much besides seeing the first teaser trailer a couple months ago and now this newer trailer.
Egg Born Son
Veteran
Looking forward to this. Primer was totally unexpected and refreshing. The fact he would wait so long to follow up suggests he has been waiting for the right idea rather than simply capitalising on his opportunity window. From the trailer looks like he's been thinking about cinematography in the meantime. Some nice shots in there.
maranfilms
Veteran
Funny, this film trailer does nothing for me. Doesn't interest me in the slightest, or make me want to watch it. As far as being shot on the gh2 goes , well... that means nothing either as we already know it's a perfectly capable camera if your willing to deal with the limitations, which I don't find to be all that bad. I guess thats why cinema is so amazing. Any given film might get one excited to see, and then someone else, not so much.
Gonna see this on my birthday in just over a week. I think it's gonna be good; I'm a sucker for abstract trailers : )
The fact it's shot on the GH2 is kind of neat as well. For a GH2 shooter like myself, it really interests me to see what it will look like in a theater. I think it's cool how this camera produces footage that just inherently "feels" suited for the big screen or cinema in general.
The fact it's shot on the GH2 is kind of neat as well. For a GH2 shooter like myself, it really interests me to see what it will look like in a theater. I think it's cool how this camera produces footage that just inherently "feels" suited for the big screen or cinema in general.
Last edited:
Cory Braun
Well-known member
I thought the trailer was excellent. Got me really excited to see it. Fact that it was shot on the GH2 makes me even more excited.
Nektonic
Veteran
Hive mind is an concept that's been done before Shane Carruth made this film, if that is indeed what Upstream Color is about.
Leonard Nimoy in Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978)
Patrick Stewart as Jean Luc Picard as Locutus of Borg in Star Trek TNG
Unless your idea concerning hive minds is exactly the same as Shane Carruths (which would be ironic since we are talking about hive minds here!), then just make your film. Better to make something you are passionate about than to try and guess what will be original enough to stand out in a year depending on what films may or may not come out and be similar to yours.
Because it had to be done to make an awesome triple Star Trek reference.
Nah, I know it's been done many times before. From TV shows to features to short films. Just haven't seen a hive mind feature since SLITHER, but haven't been paying attention much.
xD Still preparing to write regardless.
And still looking forward to UC!
Oh, and I actually like BODY SNATCHERS versus INVASION, believe it or not. xP
xD Still preparing to write regardless.
And still looking forward to UC!
Oh, and I actually like BODY SNATCHERS versus INVASION, believe it or not. xP
No, really? The Invasion with Nicole and Daniel? :laugh:
Fly-catchers
Active member
Is it likely to get a release in the UK? Never heard of Shane Carruth before this forum. But like the look of the Primer trailer and may well get a copy of it. Upstream Color looks interesting and nice to see yet another example of how good the GH2 can perform. What did Shane do on the film Loopers to get special thanks in the credits?
refocusedmedia
Veteran
He assisted with some visual effects and unofficially collaborated on elements of the script with Rian Johnson. Basically, from what I understand, the two had become friends and Rian would bounce ideas off him, etc.
So, I just got back from seeing this.
Thoughts regarding the film itself:
It was a challenging film. I'll be honest, aside from comprehending some of the visual metaphor Shane used to drive the plot forward without revealing details, I was never able to infer what the actual conflict was. You'll notice if you read any review thus far for the film, that no one actually knows what the conflict is. Many reviewers will tell you beat by beat how the story goes and give really good insight into what might be going on... but no one has come even close to explaining it.
So imagine my surprise when after the film, in the Q&A with SC, a random person asks him a question so basic, it forced him to reveal pretty much the central conflict in a way that instantly made the film comprehensible. Actually I felt bad... It really seemed SC did not want to reveal as much as he did, but the film made perfect sense afterwards. I could see almost the entire audience start to grin and nod their head with a "ah... ok" with just a single sentence of clarification.
If I had not been illuminated by SC afterwards... I don't think I would have really grasped it even after a second or third viewing. There's still a few symbolic elements to the film I'd like to work out when I see it again, but at least I know what the F*** actually happened. In fact, I might be only one of a few people who does... Anyhow, the film certainly has a few layers that need to be analyzed independently to get a good feel for how multi-dimensional it is.
Overall, I liked it. It's a film that I'll need to revisit at least once more to finalize how I feel about it. A great second second effort by SC that really wasn't anything like or similar to primer apart from the story being a bit obtuse during the first viewing.
Technical aspect:
It was fun to see the GH2 on the big screen, never seen it before like this... it looked incredibly cinematic. I'm not sure if it was on purpose... but 50-60% of the film was pretty soft focus and about 15% was just out-of-focus. It was obvious they were chasing as much DOF as possible for probably 70% of the film. I noticed a similarity in my footage when I'm following someone around on a steadicam and I've really only got 6-10" of leeway, with lets say- a Sigma 30 1.4 wide open... it's damn hard to keep everything even remotely sharp. I would say this was slightly bothersome and certainly more of a problem than your average film... but it didn't ruin anything for me.
I enjoyed the neutral look, the colors, and the detail. I've seen a more than a handful of DSLR features on the big screen, and this was by far the one that held up the best- almost no noise, crisp and lots of detail... especially in the macro shots. One of the reasons it held up almost the entire way through visually, is because 90% was natural / available light which the GH2 THRIVES in. The GH2 has never held up against other cameras in all-studio lighting imo, but in natural light it's damn cinematic and looks as good as nearly any other camera out there if you know what you're doing. Honestly, it was undeniably superior to any Canon DSLR footage I've seen on a screen that size. I find it curious how most footage actually looks a lot better projected on a large massive screen than it does on a high-res monitor.
Technically speaking, I felt this was something very achievable by many GH2 shooters here. I don't think it would be too difficult to replicate the look or style of anything in this film apart from the biological visual effects. There is no excuse not to make a film anymore, from a technical viewpoint at least. These days, it comes down to talent & a bit of money; cameras / lenses / gear... just don't qualify as relevant problems anymore.
Thoughts regarding the film itself:
It was a challenging film. I'll be honest, aside from comprehending some of the visual metaphor Shane used to drive the plot forward without revealing details, I was never able to infer what the actual conflict was. You'll notice if you read any review thus far for the film, that no one actually knows what the conflict is. Many reviewers will tell you beat by beat how the story goes and give really good insight into what might be going on... but no one has come even close to explaining it.
So imagine my surprise when after the film, in the Q&A with SC, a random person asks him a question so basic, it forced him to reveal pretty much the central conflict in a way that instantly made the film comprehensible. Actually I felt bad... It really seemed SC did not want to reveal as much as he did, but the film made perfect sense afterwards. I could see almost the entire audience start to grin and nod their head with a "ah... ok" with just a single sentence of clarification.
If I had not been illuminated by SC afterwards... I don't think I would have really grasped it even after a second or third viewing. There's still a few symbolic elements to the film I'd like to work out when I see it again, but at least I know what the F*** actually happened. In fact, I might be only one of a few people who does... Anyhow, the film certainly has a few layers that need to be analyzed independently to get a good feel for how multi-dimensional it is.
Overall, I liked it. It's a film that I'll need to revisit at least once more to finalize how I feel about it. A great second second effort by SC that really wasn't anything like or similar to primer apart from the story being a bit obtuse during the first viewing.
Technical aspect:
It was fun to see the GH2 on the big screen, never seen it before like this... it looked incredibly cinematic. I'm not sure if it was on purpose... but 50-60% of the film was pretty soft focus and about 15% was just out-of-focus. It was obvious they were chasing as much DOF as possible for probably 70% of the film. I noticed a similarity in my footage when I'm following someone around on a steadicam and I've really only got 6-10" of leeway, with lets say- a Sigma 30 1.4 wide open... it's damn hard to keep everything even remotely sharp. I would say this was slightly bothersome and certainly more of a problem than your average film... but it didn't ruin anything for me.
I enjoyed the neutral look, the colors, and the detail. I've seen a more than a handful of DSLR features on the big screen, and this was by far the one that held up the best- almost no noise, crisp and lots of detail... especially in the macro shots. One of the reasons it held up almost the entire way through visually, is because 90% was natural / available light which the GH2 THRIVES in. The GH2 has never held up against other cameras in all-studio lighting imo, but in natural light it's damn cinematic and looks as good as nearly any other camera out there if you know what you're doing. Honestly, it was undeniably superior to any Canon DSLR footage I've seen on a screen that size. I find it curious how most footage actually looks a lot better projected on a large massive screen than it does on a high-res monitor.
Technically speaking, I felt this was something very achievable by many GH2 shooters here. I don't think it would be too difficult to replicate the look or style of anything in this film apart from the biological visual effects. There is no excuse not to make a film anymore, from a technical viewpoint at least. These days, it comes down to talent & a bit of money; cameras / lenses / gear... just don't qualify as relevant problems anymore.
Last edited:
This makes zero sense to me, unless by "natural" light you mean, outside...in which case you simply mean "more light".
Hmm, well I definitely don't mean "more" light (the quantity or amount of light isn't what I'm referring to). I'm just trying to say the film was shot primarily using sunlight vs tungsten, fluorescent, LED lighting etc.
Digital camera sensors are generally optomized for the 5600k of the spectrum as opposed to the 3200k (you see the difference mostly in noise levels). But that's almost every digital camera, not just the GH2. So you're statement was technically correct, but a bit misleading.