Clint Hulsey

Obviously these are fantastic David. I especially liked the first two. Is there a reason you like to crop to 2:1 (other than personal preference obviously)? What lenses do you use on your Sonys and Nikon? Do you use any of the lenses they make for phones (particularly the iPhone)?

[/url]Test Run May 22.00_05_38_06.Still125 by Clint Hulsey, on Flickr">http://Test Run May 22.00_05_38_06.Still125 by Clint Hulsey, on Flickr Test Run May 22.00_05_39_10.Still413 by Clint Hulsey, on Flickr

Me:

Oh, I was sharing the share link and not the bbc code, oops: P1060709 by Clint Hulsey, on Flickr

Had to make a flickr account (I couldn't get the photos to show up below so you'll have to follow the link), and I'm a non-professional with non-professional equipment, but: https://flic.kr/p/S97pR7 https://www.flickr.com/gp/152564260@N03/6PgVT0 https://www.flickr.com/gp/152564260@N03/qj0s74 https://www.flickr.com/gp/152564260@N03/0uK3ed

Those are really spectacular Satsuki.

I have The Town blu-ray and Affleck said they had a near four hour initial cut. I honestly think the extended cut of the movie is a little repetitive. There are a couple of good extra scenes, but I honestly prefer the regular cut (we didn't need the extra little expository dialogue for example). Maybe that is just primacy bias, and it is certainly just my opinion. I need to see Argo again. (Wasn't there some Red on Live By Night or am I wrong about that? IMDB suggests they used the Red Weapon Dragon, I don't know when it would have been)

I think I am going to have to see this again. I saw this at an AMC in Dallas and for some reason the right third of the image was tinted red for the whole movie. I guess I didn't know that that was possible on a projector and I certainly don't know why it would happen or be allowed to happen. I'm a huge fan of the book (and even more of a fan of the previous book A Given Day) and I don't know that the movie really captured the darkness of it and pacing wise it felt a little rushed, as if the compression wasn't handled well in the screenplay or the editing like it was in The Town (I don't think it was as cutty as The Town though and I think in scene editing was better). Richardson is great of course, I loved the scene where Coughlin meets with the Cubans and the camera just circles around each character and moves around the room with them. Will have to see again before I can really comment on the look of it I guess.

Saw this over the weekend at the Angelika in Dallas. I'm pretty sure that was the only place it was playing in Dallas and as far as I know, they only have 2k projectors so I am sure some of you in bigger cities saw a better image of it than I did so I won't really comment on how it looked. It's long, and the ending stretches out just like a novel (I haven't read the novel), but I think there is a good balance in the editing and the sparse score to really keep the movie even pacing wise, not going too fast or loud like it is Gangs or Wolf, but at least I didn't feel like it was too slow either (pacing and how a story is put together is so so subjective but at the same time seems to rule whether or not a movie is "liked"). However, while I enjoyed that aspect of the editing, and obviously Schoonmaker is one of the best, I didn't love the way the coverage was edited together. There were some mismatches and weirdness that seemed to hurt the performances a bit. I haven't seen the Japanese version and unfortunately, Netflix doesn't have a disc for it (when I had a Hulu subscription, they had it as part of the Criterion Collection section on it, maybe I'll have to get a subscription again for a month to watch it and some other movies). I did like the Japanese actors cast; seeing Tsukamoto, whose movies and style I really like, and Asano (who plays the Marlowe character in the Japanese mini-series of The Long Goodbye) was fun. The material itself is pretty heavy and your reaction to it may predicate on your religious and political views. As much as I feel like I need to see it again, some of the material doesn't necessarily encourage a second viewing, at least for me. Some shots I liked off the top of my head: a overhead shot while the priests are walking up (or maybe down) stairs while still in Portugal (much like Kundun, the actors speak English and pretend it's not, but at least many of the Japanese actors speak Japanese), the first person perspective shots of Garfield while in the cell, the Jesus painting inserts, especially the ones where Garfield is looking in the water and then sees something else in the reflection.

I think it really depends on what kind of pacing and mood/effect you want, as well as how visible, you the interviewee, want to be. More charged documentaries like political documentaries often seem to have (I'm thinking like Moore or Josh Fox docs) the filmmaker more visible or interacting with the subject in the interviews, while more laid back ones, like director interviews etc, might flash the question over a black screen for a few seconds if the context is needed. For multiple interview docs that are cut together, usually similar questions are asked of all of them and just editing it together pretty much tells the viewer what the question generally was. I guess the same idea would work for a single interview, ask multiple questions and get answers, then cut the answers down and in a logical way to show transitions. The only thing you would have to worry about is that you have to either use some dissolves or have some jump cuts if you are doing a sitting down interview (which is why so many docs use walking shots or use multiple interviews that they can cut back and forth from). But yeah, unless they are just a prolific rambler, and you would want that rambling, you are going to need multiple questions.

Dead link (at least for me) Don't know if this is what you are looking for: http://nofilmschool.com/2014/07/chart-has-everything-you-need-to-know-digital-cameras

A bit of a peculiar film to place, "Blue Valentine" being full of sarcastic imagery (fireworks: end of the relationship! Future room: I want to have an abortion!), "...Pines" being a three part backwards film (most of the action early, the rest being about moral choices), "...Oceans" is about relationships breaking down and moral choices, but is told in an odd hurried slow. I haven't read the novel but the movie seemed to need to jam a whole lot of information and events, but needed to do it slowly because anything that smelled of being fast paced would be inappropriate. Problem between the two mediums that has been handled better before and can be discussed more elsewhere. If you are a fan of long dissolves and double exposure like I am, there is a lot to enjoy. Favorite shot/cut: a side look at Fassbender sitting down looking into a mirror in a way where there are two Fassbenders but not obvious glass that then has a shot of Vikander outside standing out in the beautiful New Zealand (apparently) scenery placed on it to where she is in the middle of the frame, flanked by two Fassbenders. Related to the novel idea above, the film had a rather large number of montages and multiple series of short shots of scenery mixed in with the character various reasons. How much you enjoy that is all according to personal taste, but one place I thought it worked particularly well was during the second (spoiler that I won't post) when the movie cuts around to random objects inside the house. The lighting stuff Adam already touched upon above more intelligently than I can. I will say there was a scene where I was like "obviously there is a big light shining through this door" before Fassbender opened the door and walked through it, showing there wasn't. The scene in the graveyard had some kind of weird blur to it, especially in the edges on some shots. When Fassbender is inside the lighthouse in the scene Adam discussed above, it's obviously rain tower type rain that doesn't match the shots of her out there (maybe I'm sensitive to it because I saw "A Tale of Love and Darkness" for the second time right before I saw "...Oceans" and "..Darkness" has a scene of super obvious rain towerness (to be fair, the "...Darkness" scene is somewhat surreal and metaphorical and the movie itself is one of my favorites of the year). On what Adam touched on above about the few random handheld scenes, my theory is that those were tossed in there (what shots they were early on didn't really look like it was "okay b camera, just go handheld and we'll use you whenever") so when there is the big handheld running following shot, it's not completely out of the rules of what they have been doing before then, so it is less jarring (small handheld shots to build up to a big handheld shot basically). But yes, mostly tracking type stuff, a really good one when the boathand sees the reward money sign. Fassbender is the best actor going right now in my opinion and Vikander is proving to be one of the best actresses, and of course Rachel Weiss is great. I personally don't think it's going to be a serious Oscar contender, but that's an opinion, and what do I know?

I imagine, as well as the "realism" angle, they are also going for a chaotic sensibility, which the editing also accomplishes. Particularly in the CIA scenes where they are initially "hacked" and then the scene where they are tracking Bourne during the Greek riots, there is a lot of crazy camera movement inside the CIA office (?) itself, which is a break from the norm of steady closeups/steadicam walking shots in the office versus crazy cutting/handheld in the action section of the scene. I know the makers of the film explicitly said that they were going for "documentary" feel, but I think chaos and intentional disorientation was a big part of it as well.

Turns out I was wrong about something above, as according to this article, it was not the Codex Action Cam that was used for the big car chase in the climax, but instead the small Blackmagic cameras: http://www.digitaltrends.com/photography/blackmagic-micro-cinema-camera-jason-bourne/ I wonder what they used the CAC for then (or maybe they used a mixture of both in that scene, as this article reads almost like a commercial or something), but I personally thought those were the most impressive looking images in the movie.

Thanks for the article Kevin, great stuff.