Jump to content

Justin Hayward

Sustaining Member
  • Posts

    1086
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Justin Hayward

  1. So I've heard! Sounds like they treat their members well. They sent me a package full of cool stuff to go thru... nice letters... magazines... all sorts of cool stuff. Like I said, my 12-year-old self is beaming. 😊
  2. It is. And that's Denzel Washington in the background which means this is a behind-the-scenes shot of "Philadelphia." I'm a little surprised it's not Howard Hawks or John Ford or whoever since they essentially founded the DGA, but of course Jonathan Demme is a great director in my opinion, so... 🤷‍♂️
  3. Thanks! I am excited about it. Don't think it will help me get my feature made, but it's cool to be a part of a somewhat exclusive club of people that do what I've wanted to do my whole life. Feels nice.
  4. It doesn't change my life all that much other than I get some cool screeners and a pension, but my 12-year-old self is super excited. 😊
  5. I think I’m safe. Google “Justin Hayward“ and see what you get. edit: and no, my parents did not do that on purpose.
  6. I stand corrected. The 4:3 with extra headroom looks better in my opinion. Ugh... 😒
  7. I want to see a movie shot in 2.40:1 aspect ratio with anamorphic lenses that’s cropped to 4:3 in post and the only camera moves in the whole movie are pan and scan. edit: for artistic purposes
  8. 😂😂😂. Yeah and I watched the original version before it. The filmmaker in me had to compare the directing choices. I couldn’t help myself.
  9. I’m watching this movie right now and I would be really impressed by anyone that could give me a good artistic purpose why this movie is pillar boxed to 4:3 for any other reason than being noticeably different. Edit: I feel like whole performances from actors were pillar boxed out of this movie.😊
  10. It wouldn't be so bad if they at least masked the letter-boxed area with something. They don't even bother doing that anymore. Just looks like a giant TV. For my projector room I cut strips of foam core, painted them dark brown to match the walls and stick them to the letter-boxed area with clear velcro for 2.39 movies. Much more aesthetically pleasing in my opinion.😊
  11. Ever notice the aspect ratios that were meant to provide a "bigger" experience are now providing a smaller one? 2:39 was meant to be a "wider" viewing experience in theaters. You swapped to the scope lens, the curtains would open, and the screen would get physically wider. Now they just letterbox it... even in a lot of chain theaters, but always on home viewing which is all we get now, so the 2:39 image is actually smaller than if you had just shot 16x9. Lately IMAX movies shoot 1:33 for a much taller/bigger image in the theater than 1:85 or 16x9, but this movie isn't going to IMAX, it's going to HBO Max where it will be pillar-boxed to literally be the smallest aspect ratio we could possibly watch it in. If I ever get to make a movie I think I'll shoot 4:3, then letterbox it to 2:39 so there'll be a small rectangle in the middle of your TV. Then I'll recommend you watch it with binoculars for the full viewing experience. 🤓😁
  12. Does anyone have any idea why this might be 1:33 aspect ratio other than a way to differentiate it from the other version?
  13. Totally agree. It's very difficult to make anything look good in my opinion, but I don't believe a lot of people in this business have an honest subjective opinion if something looks good or doesn't. Now that digital has democratized the process (as Tyler put it) now you only have to eyeball a decent exposure and tell everybody it looks good and they'll believe you. With film, you had to have some experience in the technique just to get a decent exposure. Please don't misunderstand, I'm not a crazy film nut. I don't think I've shot on film for ten years. I'm just saying in the days of film, 24 year olds weren't getting $3500 a day to DP anything.
  14. I said in the eyes of the layman, not other filmmakers or support crew. I'm always thinking in terms of commercials these days, because that's pretty much all I do and the "layman" in the commercial world are agency people. Trust me when I tell you, they don't know what a focus puller is. I spoke to a gaffer not to long ago that was on a multi-million dollar commercial with a 24 year old DP that didn't understand ratios between dimming lights and adjusting the stop. That would never have happened in the days of film.
  15. This is the only reason I miss anything considered professional having to be shot on 35mm film. There was a technique to it that had to be learned and the person that could put film into a camera and spit out a beautiful image the next day was thought to be a magician in the eyes of the layman. Those days are GONE... Gone... gone...
  16. Obviously if it's the weekend, it's going to be a little easier. We could do a LA-11am, New York-2pm, London-7pm (if that's the right time difference). Or a LA-3pm, New York-6pm, London-11pm... if that's not too late for you Phil. Or somewhere in between. There's really no way for Phil to do the morning without the rest of us going really late or Phil getting up at like 4am, so... Whatever you all think works for me.
  17. Time frame on my little "movie club" has been one of the hardest things to negotiate. New York to LA is a three hour difference and we all want to do evening. Obviously the other side of the world is a bigger issue. As far as picking a movie... there's not much to it... something streaming.... something people would talk about.... I'll give five I just watched that I feel are worth talking about.... "Blue Jasmine" A fantastic take on "Streetcar Named Desire" in my opinion. Streaming on Prime for $3.99 "Agatha" which I just reviewed on my movie club based on a facebook post by David Mullen. I'd never heard of it and his ranting and raving about the cinematography made me take a look. Streaming on Prime for $1.99 "Catch Me if You Can". A near perfect Spielberg film (in my opinion) streaming on Netflix right now. "Goodfellas". Obviously a movie we all love, but when I watch it in my old age, it feels like a horror film to me. I'm scarred to death of this movie, as much as I appreciate it. Netflix "Chef" streaming on Netflix. This may be one of the best movies on the craft of cooking I've ever seen.
  18. I watched it on Prime on my projector and the blacks looked really washed out, but it just occurred to me the movie opens with that slow push into that old super washed out black and white TV which turns into the actual movie. Maybe he wanted to maintain more of a washed out TV look from the 50's, but in a darker, low-light, modern, style?
  19. And I'd be down! Especially if it's only once a month.
  20. Because the whole movie looks lifted, not just the darkest scenes, and the rest of the director's choices were so bold (long takes followed by rapid fire edits... fading to black for long chunks of a dialogue scene...) I took it as an artistic choice. But there's no question it could be the latter.
  21. Another thing is we do "blocks" of movies, so we can compare and contrast. We just finished our Sorkin block, so we started with "Moneyball" (which is awesome), then the next week we did, "The Social Network", then "Molly's Game" and we finished with "The Trial of the Chicago 7." I'm a bit Sorkin'd out. Next we are going to do a Coen brothers block. It's a pretty interesting way to discuss their movies as opposed to a one-off in my opinion.
  22. I started a movie club at the beginning of the lockdown where we watch a movie on our own and between 6 and 12 of us get on a zoom call and do a two hour review. I have a mixture of directors, DP's actors and producers (and one casting director who has quite a bit to say about the performances:). I also only invited people I've had long film discussions with and I know have strong opinions and will have a lot to offer. We do once a week depending on availability, so we're around 40 movies at this point. I thought I knew what I was getting into, but it has been shocking... no SHOCKING how intense these things are. People's opinions on movies are insanely diverse and people are so freaking passionate about their love or hatred. Movies I thought would be universally praised are torn to shreds by these vipers. You get a bunch of people in a room together that are passionate about movies to discuss something they all just watched and you'll see some sparks. I occasionally will invite someone new and I have to warn them not to take anything personally. What happens is when you say you really love something and someone else says they hated it, you feel like they're attacking your taste. It's tough to have someone sit there and refute every point you just made.... ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY'RE RIGHT!!! I originally started with "popcorn fluff" type movies, cause I wanted this to be light and fun, but had to give those up months ago cause you find out there's just not a lot to say about them. We know what they are and why they exist, so there's not much to dive into. It's crazy though how I'm surprised by every meet. Last week we did the Errol Morris 1981 doc, "Vernon, Florida", which almost none of us liked, but one guy gave a very convincing argument as to why we all missed the point. He literally changed all of our minds and now we feel like we need to re-watch it. On the flip side of that coin, I was a huge champion of that Prime movie, "The Vast of Night." I watched it three times in a row and it became one of my favorite movies of the decade. Everybody else hated it and spent 2 hours telling me how wrong I am. I couldn't dig myself out of that hole. Then Team Deakins had the director on their podcast cause they loved the movie so much... so I got to throw that in their face. All that to say, it's a lot of fun. I say do it. Just don't take anything personally. 😊
  23. Wide open because it's a flat surface. 1.4 or 2.8... whatever. It's the 5 or 6 stops of frame rate that I'm talking about or some shutter if you want to add it.
  24. Alright, I'll bite even though I'm pretty sure there's no solution... what if you want to use artificial lighting to create a tack sharp shadow of something like a martini glass with liquid being poured into it at high speed... like 500fps or even a 1000fps? Something high noon sunlight could probably create (although I haven't tried), but with artificial and controllable lighting. What is a source so small, but so bright that it could give that sharp a shadow with that much punch to expose for a 1000fps? I don't think a 4k xenon can't provide enough stop for a 1000fps if it's far enough away to cast that sharp of a shadow, right? If we're dabbling in theory, then I'll dabble... Thanks
  25. I thought the movie looked fantastic and I think the opening credits easily set up how this was going to be an homage to "Citizen Kane" (and films made at the same time like it) while immediately being a modern interpretation of the same thing. The whole movie had references to films made at that time all the way to the way the movie was edited. Of course the "film reel change marks" (if that's what they're called) were super noticeable, but it didn't matter in my opinion. I was sucked into this movie, probably in every way David Fincher intended a person like me be sucked into this movie.
×
×
  • Create New...