Stephen Perera

Huga Drax from Moonraker...yessss....what a great villain.....funny how they still all have the english accent = villain hahaha. I remember we all loved Jaws back in the day.....the best henchman ever?? the scene where he cuts the tension wire with his teeth forever etched in our memories hahah Scaramanga was the coolest though.....Christopher Lee is great.

ok ok maybe i was feeling grouchy on my first watch haha....the cinema was packed and I couldn't stretch my legs out properly as had people either side of me...and its a long film! I am going to the cinema to watch it again....lets see what I think then..... I personally like Rami Malek as the villain.....the 40 year old has that look in the eye and the way he purses his lips makes him quite unnerving to watch. Of course the Freddie Mercury casting is hard to forget. I liked the fact Ana de Armas character didn't become another Bond film trope and that her time was limited to the fight scene during that mission in Cuba and that's it. The Mi6 characters are all great casting in my opinion. Judi Dench was superb in her time as 'M' and now Ralph Fiennes is a worthy successor. Ben Wishaw as 'Q' is great too and very believable. I like his line about being able to care my damage in his pyjamas thats any field agent etc et at home in a previous film.

your input always appreciated David thanks a lot...I remember as if it were yesterday watching Close Encounters of the Third Kind in our local cinema with its huge screen.....the music communication scene had everyone spell bound!!!

We're of the same generation David...do you recall trying to get rid of flares at all costs with lens hoods etc....I speak as a photographer not moving image of course!

Reverence for cinematographers here is expected. I for one hold Linus Sandgren as one of my favourites not least because he's one of the world's best and most fervent celluloid-shooting DPs around. My opinion still remains, as a cinephile, that the film has one too many blue flares and they are pandering to the YouTube generation that equates a flare with great shooting. It may have been the producers for all we know that insisted on the flares who knows....haha wtf Ironic - I'm of the generation that spent time and effort trying to avoid flares using lens hoods at all costs before they became a thing.....

Hasselblad lenses on IMAX cameras - are they re-housed Zeiss Hasselblad V system lenses? e.g. the 80mm Planar, the 50mm Distagon, 40mm Distagon and so on? or were they specially created for IMAX cameras back when they started using them.

and why not....a comparison of the difference between the blades themselves! Note the straight sides on the blades of the pentagon on the 80mm as opposed to the rounded sides of the pentagon on the 110mm The 80mm Planar, in my opinion, is a beautiful lens offering beautiful drop off in focus and bokeh

Unrelated-is but since we're talking about lens blades.....here's my Hasselblad (Zeiss) 110mm f2 Planar that gives different bokeh from f2 to f5.6 and then at f5.6 and a half down to f16. Beautiful lens.

I have a film stills photography background, not a cinematographer or even close.....but how the hell does a lens change characteristics based on whether image is recorded on film or digital. I've used/own quite a few quality lenses for my Hasselblad, Nikon, Leica cameras and ONLY the 'texture' as I call it changes to my eye - i.e. film and digital have different flavours that's it... same with all this SDR and HDR and 'lighting for it' ....eh.......what the hell is going on....is this the 'masterclass' and 'buy my course with this 20% off token' trying to pull wool over our eyes with pseudo revelations in order for us to become their clients or what hahahah wtf

anamorphic lens flares just look like some f*uck up to me and always will hahahah.......a long blue streak across the screen.....spherical lens flares are so much more...romantic.....still....each to his/her own. Never shot with anamorphic lenses anyway so how can I possibly enrich the discussion other than as a cinephile....

wow impressive!!!! thanks for posting Gregory

yeah hope he's ok too!!!!!! Im gonna drop him an email see if I get response!

yes Geoff is a loss....I enjoyed his British sensibilities and ways and sense of humour and especially when he was being grumpy! haha Did not have the pleasure of knowing him personally though, only through CML

strange Les has not contacted back yet. he's charming and 'old school' do things the right way. The number is: + 44 1685 811422

ah I see.....the Criterion people do good things eh

well let's get back on here when we actually see it and share thought! thanks for coming in on the thread

what does this mean Manu?

sounds very interesting...and to me...whatever keeps the film stocks available to buy for nobody's like me in 16mm format is to be applauded and pursued as art is art is art.....

absolutely....so bored by it all on YouTube especially

Masterpiece film. Saw it this weekend for the first time. What a film! definitely recommend this film to anyone with a social conscience. This is what the big powers and their historic, in the shadows influencing, support and sometimes literal installing of puppet governments around the world results in to the societies that suffer 'la mano negra' of their powers......

So as a huge Wes Anderson fan I would like to promote and remind people of this film coming up. Tech specs: Camera Arricam ST, Cooke S4 and Technovision/Cooke Lenses Laboratory Sixteen19, New York (NY), USA (digital dailies) Negative Format 35 mm (Kodak) Cinematographic Process Digital Intermediate (4K) (master format) Spherical (source format) Technovision (anamorphic) (source format) Printed Film Format 35 mm (Kodak Vision 2383) D-Cinema

Totally disagree....its definitely sparked my interest as has the 4:3 frame and already a Bergman influence about it. The only thing I already dont like is the digital look it has. That fake black and white thing.

I'm soooo bored by excessive camera movement for the hell of it....toys for the boys and all that....lets use a this that and the other......I am particularly narked (good word eh?) by the typical trailer start to all films.....the aerial f*cking drone, establishing, swoop down shot!!! Yours is an excellent, short, precise, technical review Dom. As I said earlier, RED cameras come closest to film to my eyes. Arri Alexa's are wayyyy off (to my eyes) and have that dunno what it is but I can spot it a mile off look about them.

yes I agree Dom beautiful film wasn't it......and for those who know nothing of this film here's the trailer. The beach shooting was particularly exquisite. As the unqualified, boring as hell, repetitive, film snob in here wouldnt this have been exquisite on 500T?! Regardless.....chapeau...beautiful piece. I love wind swept, contained epic period films like this.... ...and for the record...to my eyes....RED cameras are shot (if this is the intent) to look way more like film than Alexa's.....and it seems I'm not the only one: "In April 2018, I had the chance to participate in tests initiated by TSF around large sensor cameras (ALEXA 65, VENICE and MONSTRO 8K VV cameras). Testing gave me a chance to discuss with other colleagues the specifics of these new cameras. At the very first tests for Portrait of a Lady on Fire, we wanted to see 35mm images and digital images. I chose the RED MONSTRO 8K VV for these tests, convinced that the large sensor would bring the desired presence to these portraits. Its texture and color rendering, which I really like, also reminds me of 35mm film."

I stand corrected haha. Hope all is well Uli. As a fellow European.....have you had a chance to see the film yet?I think Linus Sandren did a great job as was expected. He's definitely in the premier league of film stock DPs now isn't he. Shame Roger Deakins is so set on this digital path, I would love to see him shoot celluloid again, as he is premier league of course and a fellow Man Utd supporter to boot haha