Sean Azze

I got the sense that Benjamin's travels through India may have been given a look to approximate films of the 80's, but I may just be seeing something that isn't there. Either way, kudos to Mr. Miranda. I thought the film was gorgeous to look at, and specifically very soft, belying that it was a digitally shot production.

So, I get the sense that from a dp's reel, you have to present a montage of varying shots that look pretty and demonstrate your skills with lighting and composition. But for a director's reel, how do you decide what shots from your work to throw into the mix? I have mainly music videos and commercials on my reel, so I don't have a collection of scenes that I can throw together had I a repertoire of shorts. So where does that leave me? What should the pacing be when laying these shots out? Thank you to everyone for your time...

Yep, there's film thrown into the mix. In the behind the scenes interstitials, they mention something about lugging around cans of film stock.

Wow, sounds thorough. I would have guessed it was totally done with computers. Do you know if they are also able to incorporate camera movement with that time lapse technique? Some of the sequences are long tracking shots which show plant growth as the camera dollies along.

Any idea how they shoot the growing of plants and fungi in fast motion? I'm assuming it isn't time lapse because the sun nor shadows ever change positions during those shots.

That's weird. From my recollection, it was actually Guillermo Navarro that shot Once Upon a Time in Mexico. He isn't credited, but in the director's commentary Rodriguez mentions Navarro as the DP when he makes his cameo as a doctor. Then again, Rodriguez may have said "this is DP Guillermo Navarro" as opposed to "this is the DP of the film Guillermo Navarro" - I haven't heard it in awhile. Not sure if anyone else can confirm this...

I noticed in the credits that Tarantino dped for the first time. Just wondering if any of the cinematographers on the forum would like to give their professional opinions on how he did. As for my humble review, I was really disappointed after anticipating this film for so long. Planet Terror was a complete bore for me, I couldn't wait till it finished. I wasn't crazy about Death Proof either, but I did enjoy it a little more. I loved the typical stellar dialogue written by Tarantino, and Kurt Russell stole the show with his performance. Oh, and a couple of the trailers made for a great laugh (kudos to Edgar Wright - dying to see Hot Fuzz). I guess I'm just not a big fan of camp and ludicrisly over the top action. If thats your thing, you'll probably get a bigger kick out of this movie than I did.

Congratulations, Bossman - well deserved.

I believe said stuntwoman was driving the rig that was towing the car involved in the scene. Nicole Kidman was behind the wheel of the Jaguar in the scene so she'd be on camera. http://www.imdb.com/news/wenn/2007-01-26/#3

? You shot this film how many years ago? I guess it leads me into the question: Do you make it a habit of documenting lighting set ups for future reference or do you just have an uncanny memory?

"Yeah well, why don't you give me, ah.. why don'tcha give me Ape-Tit for $200."

Little snooty of you, don't you think? There's been hundreds of notable figures in human history. Just because neither I nor Mr. Heinlein has ever heard of Tesla doesn't imply that we have been cohabitating in a bunker a vertical mile underneath the earth for the last 100 years. :lol: You aren't one of those Jeopardy judges, are you?

I did. Unfortunately you speak in generalities and don't offer any concrete examples to back your position.

Thats fine, but not something that has to be sketched out in the shot list. You can either plan to set some tracks up for the dolly, or just throw the camera on the ops shoulder! Exactly. But how often is a story being told through the performance sequence of a music vid? "But to continue to just showcase, video after video, without regard to the individuality of each song seems highly irresponsible; a series of wasted opportunities." - Keneu Luca This is what you said, so you've just contradicted yourself. This is a subjective statement. Now you're calling into question the merit of the work, as opposed to recognizing what is precedent and the protocol one can follow to complete a video. I never said it was creative. I said it was do-able. Music video - not live concert. You're digressing, playa... :blink:

I second that. And on IMDB.com it has super16 mixed in with the formats alongside 35 and video for the mock news footage. Oh, and I liked it quite a bit. I enjoyed it more for the inside look at the traditions of the monarchy and less about the conflict at the heart of the story.

OK - now its your turn to elaborate. You tell me how one would fine tune a performance sequence to match the concept of a song. Explain to me how the performance sequence in a song about love and a song about a jilted lover vary in the way they are shot...

Why do record labels and artists pump hundreds of thousands of dollars into music videos? To advertise the artist so they can sell records, merchandise, and tickets to their concerts. What is the primary purpose of a performance sequence in a music video? To show how the artist delivers as a performer. To show their personality. I think if one gets too bogged down in shot lists they miss out on the spontaneity that the artist can deliver to express themselves. Sometimes (and not necessarily all the time) its good to just sit back, observe, and let the artist do their thing. He's a down south rapper - http://www.youngjeezy.com/ Thats probably the case 9 times out of 10. Because of the rush rush of the corporate machine, its more important to churn these things out at a high rate then to truly turn them into a well thought out piece of cinema. I think ultimately, you and I share the same opinion. I just feel like I've had to defend the piece of advice I gave because I simply told the gentleman who started this topic that he can get away with being less stringent in planning the performance side of things because so many videos lend themselves to ad libbing the action. I think if he really wanted to sketch every shot out precisely, he would have gone ahead and done it and not seeked out help from this forum.

Yes, but the mood can be achieved with the lighting. The tempo can be matched through editing. These are not things that have to be meticulously planned with shot lists. Again, as I said in a previous post, I am one who likes to determine every shot before hand, but thats just me. I'm sure a close up I've designed to appear at 1:20:00 is perfectly interchangeable with a wide shot. My suggestion to just grab various shots of the performance was to solve the problem of the topic starter who was feeling overwhelmed by all the work he was doing in preproduction. There are some videos from time to time which IMHO are absolutely art (Eminem's "Guilty Conscience", Cibo Matto's "Sugar Water", Prodigy's "Smack my Bitch Up"), but I'd consider them more the exception than the rule.

Sounds like someone is reading too much into an industry whose primary goal is to advertise an artist to consumers. If you can intellectually dissect the performance sequence in a Young Jeezy video, I'll print up a certificate for you this second.

I never said roll through the whole song in one pass. You failed to quote the portion of my post where I said to get close ups, wide shots, tracking shots, etc. The point of my post was for him to know that as opposed to having to storyboard shots from a "b" or "c" story line to cover the entire duration of the song, that if he had gaps in the video he could always cut back to the performance sequence in editing. I would hate to give the impression that I'm someone who decides the concept of the video on the day - in fact I'm entirely the opposite. I plan every single shot of the video days in advance. I like doing things very much in the style of Hitchcock where all the work is done in preproduction so that shooting is essentially just that task of checking off all the shots you have planned for the day. I simply observed that he was flabbergasted with coming up with so many angles, and figured this was a safe way to get enough footage to have a video to piece together once he wraps.

If anything, just make sure you shoot the performance for the entire duration of the video. Whats cool about that is that you don't have to be so precise beforehand with how you capture the performance - you can be more spontaneous on set. Get wide shots, close ups, tracking shots, maybe action of the singer/rapper/group when they are not lip-synching; just enough footage so that if you don't feel like coming up with a shot for every single waking moment of the song, you always have performance to fall back on in editing.

Another article on the vfx - http://www.fxguide.com/article390.html

LOL - never heard that one before. And I thought the English were protective of their own. I don't suppose you liken Ricky Gervais to a hedgehog high off laughing gas? Cheers, Mate lol

Don't get me wrong - I think Daniel Craig is a great actor, but after seeing Clive Owen in this role with all the little sly remarks and funny quips he makes convinces me that he probably would have been the perfect Bond. Hands down.

I won't argue with that - you do find some interesting personalities in Altman's films. But I'd say that also has to do with how character driven his films are. I mean, whats Short Cuts really about? Does Gosford Park really focus on the murder mystery that much, or is that really just a starting point to examining a varied cast of characters divided by the aristocracy and the help? Think about the message in Babel. It deals with our failure to communicate with one another- whether it be because we speak a different language, or because we are a deaf/mute who speaks in signs and with a pen and a pad. The characters exist primarily to serve a greater purpose, but I don't think the writer and director neglected to flesh them out to achieve that goal. Anyway, there were better movies this year so I think I'm gonna let this discussion go. Yet I do think the film merits a second viewing and should be appreciated for what it set out to achieve, not be faulted for what some people presume its lacking. I mean, did Mission Impossible 3 have the most intriguing characters? Not really - but man it was a kick ass movie! (I have a feeling I'm gonna spark another debate... :huh: )