Hard Candy!

Tomas Koolhaas · October 25, 2006

Hi,

I just saw Hard Candy yesterday (On DVD) and thought it looked AMAZING!!! very much the style I try to aspire to. I was wondering if anyone knew how it was shot (lenses, stock, process etc...) I saw what looked very much like anamorphic flares throughout but it says it was shot on Super35, can it be they added these flares digitally (I know its possible but seems like a lot of work just to make flares look anamorphic). I am very impressed by the look they achieved, the very subtle camera moves, very purposeful framing which enhanced the emotion/suspense and the very extensive use of close-ups was very affective. I like close-ups a lot and feel if you need to really feel what someone is saying, seeing things in the background/surroundings often just detracts from what they are saying.

I would like to know what everyone else thinks.

Cheers.

Max Jacoby · October 25, 2006

There is an article in the May 05 of AC.

They shot 3 perf Super35 with a Panavision Platinum and a 435 camera fitted with spherical Primo lenses. Mostly the 100mm and 150mm, since the film had a huge number of close-ups. The flares you refer to were achieved by adding an attachement in front of the lens. The stock as 5274 and the DI was done by MPC in London.

I saw this film in the cinema and do not share your enthousiasm about the look. I found this film to be over-color corrected in the DI. They created a stylized commercials look that I am sure works fine on the small screen but does not translate at all onto on the big screen where it is just too much. In the cinema one could see a huge number of color-correction artifacts, like the main character having pink blotches on his face, etc...

Tomas Koolhaas · October 27, 2006

There is an article in the May 05 of AC.

They shot 3 perf Super35 with a Panavision Platinum and a 435 camera fitted with spherical Primo lenses. Mostly the 100mm and 150mm, since the film had a huge number of close-ups. The flares you refer to were achieved by adding an attachement in front of the lens. The stock as 5274 and the DI was done by MPC in London.

I saw this film in the cinema and do not share your enthousiasm about the look. I found this film to be over-color corrected in the DI. They created a stylized commercials look that I am sure works fine on the small screen but does not translate at all onto on the big screen where it is just too much. In the cinema one could see a huge number of color-correction artifacts, like the main character having pink blotches on his face, etc...

Max,

Yeah I also heard that the director say that they specifically dialled in the look of the DI for a kodak print stock but were forced to use Fuji at the last minute (due to budgetary constraints), and subsequently the prints didn't look "Right" whereas the DVD version was right from the D5 master so it was more accurate.

Cheers.

Ram Shani · October 27, 2006

max

what kind of attachement is used to make flare??

Max Jacoby · October 27, 2006

The article doesn't go into specifics and I don't remember the flares, but it's probably a filter that stretches out highlights horizontally. Vantage Film have a similar filter, you can check it out on the website: www.vantagefilm.com. It's called Blue Vision and will give you blue anamorphic flares.

Joe Cooper · October 27, 2006

I just bought this film on DVD and I wasn't too crazy about the overly commercial look. I can certainly appreciate it, but I would have approached it a different way. I think not only is the direction a bit heavy handed but the film looks overlit to me. That story needed a more moody look not unlike the house interiors in Matchstick Men in my opinion.

Tomas Koolhaas · October 27, 2006

I just bought this film on DVD and I wasn't too crazy about the overly commercial look. I can certainly appreciate it, but I would have approached it a different way. I think not only is the direction a bit heavy handed but the film looks overlit to me. That story needed a more moody look not unlike the house interiors in Matchstick Men in my opinion.

Hi,

I know what you mean, and if I had shot this I probably would have also gone for a more desaturated underexposed kind of look (more like 'Fight Club' than a car commercial) but I think that's why I liked this so much, the fact that it was unpredictable....usually you can guess what a film will look like just from reading the synopsis (for example all WW2 films are now shot w/ Bleach bypass and stacato shutter angle Private Ryan style) but this one completely went against what you would expect. Even if some of the lighting/colour was a bit overkill I think we all have to admit that the framing/camera angles and shot choices were pretty daring and created an original/cool mood.....right?

Cheers.