Why did The Wedding Crashers look like crap?

D

DoubleIt

Well-known member
Say what you want about the story, visually the wedding crashers was horrible. Everything was so dull, the contrast was crappy and there was no color. This was shot on 35 i belive so why is it so horrible looking? Film Stock and lighting? Why is a movie like this getting such little attention to the 'look'? It was very distracting for me
 
May have been the projector/projectionist at your cinema. Or a bad print. I look forward to digital projection.

In comedy, the photography will always take a back seat, but if it is distractingly bad, that is not god enough.
 
It's been a long time since I have seen a good print at the theatre.

Titanic comes to mind. I saw it at one of the last (and no longer remaining) really really big gigantic screens in the county. Just a hug screen and theatre that sat like I DONT KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE.

These days its multiplexes and these screens that are so small and the projection is coming from like 5 feet away. All THREE Lord of thr Rings looked liked crap to me; War of the Worlds was horrible (Not ot mention the projectionist didnt compensate for it being 1:85 until it actually just started.

Devils Rejects looked pretty good; but I think this was shot on S16?
 
Devil's rejects was shot in flat... meaning it wasn't true widescreen... I'm surprised that you thought the quality of it was good.

Someone said on another post that the island's print quality was really high. I'd like to check that out soon
 
If it was shot "flat" in 35mm, then it's the same widescreen process as Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, War of the Worlds, A Beautiful Mind, The Shawshank Redemption, etc. Almost every film shot in 1.85:1 has some form of cropping done to it via projection - it's because the 35mm film frame itself is a 4:3 shape.
 
I saw Wedding Crashers last night and thought it looked fine. The problem could've been specific to your theater.

Supposedly, many misinformed theaters have turned down the brightness of their camera bulbs in the mistaken belief that this will extend bulb life. This makes for dark, dull movies and has no impact on bulb life.

I saw Star Wars: ROTS in full digital glory. It was interesting to watch a movie without film...no reel changes, skips, hops, noise artifacts, etc. :thumbsup:
 
dj200423 said:
Devil's rejects was shot in flat... meaning it wasn't true widescreen... I'm surprised that you thought the quality of it was good.
Click to expand...

Devils Reject's was shot in Super16. (1.69:1)

The image is then blown-up to 35mm and printed flat. It's then run at 1.85:1 in theatres.

Why are you surprised it looked good to me? It was grainy but this doesn't mean it can't look good. :huh:
 
S16 is 1.66 (I knew this). I must have hit the 9

:undecided

Not sure about cameras mattering? Are Aaton's different? I thought film was film?

:huh:
 
John_Hudson said:
Devils Reject's was shot in Super16. (1.69:1)

The image is then blown-up to 35mm and printed flat. It's then run at 1.85:1 in theatres.

Why are you surprised it looked good to me? It was grainy but this doesn't mean it can't look good. :huh:
Click to expand...

first of all s16 doesn't have the quality that 35mm does, secondly, printing flat, rather than scope deducts even more of the image quality... I was surprised that you thought it looked... unless you were talking about the aesthetic side, rather than the actual quality.... in that case, I will shut my mouth. :)
 
Hahaha

Yes; I was talking about the aesthetic; just like I love the look of Dsjectas Super8 footage that he recently provided us.

LOL

I was wondering if you were going to go into the rant of resolution and latitude!

:grin: :cheesy: :beer:

Which get's me to thinking. What with all this talk of the highest possible resolution ever...

My favorite films (correction favorite shot films) are not at all crystal clear:

Saving Private Ryan
21 Grams
Amorres Perros
Devils Rejects
Schindlers List
The Godfather 1 and 2
Apacalypse Now

These films all have this wonderful aesthetic inherent to them. I like grain. I like the look of film; the emulsion. The inperfections.

There is the quest to get as much detail as possible (Think Singer praising the Genesis Camera online). I don't wan't to see the pimple on her ass, ya know? This may explain my tweaking I do in my own **** in post.

I want grain and contrast and all of the inperfections that come with older film stocks and S16 for example. It's like an oil painting. The pure beauty of oil painting is the inperfections and visible brush strokes.

At least to me.

Yeah; I loved the way DR looked. It was like a painting.
 
I saw a crappy print of Wedding Crashers last night, but it didn't louse up the experience for me. That is a pretty funny movie.

Date movie warning: Some women might find the first twenty minutes to be misogynistic.
 
This movie was freakin' hilarious!

I think Stiller, the Wilsons, and Vaughn are really gunny people but I gotta tell you I haven't really seen a movie with any combination of these guys that is a stand-out in my opinion (Anchorman and Old School were pretty damned good however). I just feel like together any combo of these guys is gold, but they just always come up short (Starsky and Hutch, Zoolander, Dodgeball, Parents and Fockers, Tenebaums, etc)

To comment quickly on the image, mine was pretty bland too. The skies were blown out. About half of it looked good, the other half (most of the 2nd half outdoor scenes) was like bad video. So I am not sure here if we have a projection problem.

At any rate, great movie, definitely a solid R rated comedy. Good times - loved it!
 
is the drop in quality your talking about with shooting flat because of the second optical that has to be done?

Now with Digital Intermediats it isnt really done as much anymore. Thats why a lot is shot on super 35 these days. No more anamorphic distortion.

jesse
 
jessecoane said:
is the drop in quality your talking about with shooting flat because of the second optical that has to be done?

Now with Digital Intermediats it isnt really done as much anymore. Thats why a lot is shot on super 35 these days. No more anamorphic distortion.

jesse
Click to expand...

don't really know, all i know is the image being projected wasn't all that hot (i noticed it in the outdoor scenes).

the movie was GREAT though and that's all i care about in the end.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top