Luc Allein Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 (edited) I went to see this the other night. I'm a huge, huge Soderbergh fan (and even more so a 'Peter Andrews' fan). I love Oceans 11, I walked out of Ocean's 12. I heard this one was ok, so I figured...what the hell. Lots of plot, not much character development. Better than 2, but not near as good as the first. But holy crap, this one blew the other two away by a mile. It was goddamn delicious to look at. It was like visual candy! After a while I could care less about the story, I just enjoyed looking at it. His use of color, his framing, his editing, everything. It just jumped off the screen. You could freeze every frame and hang it on a wall in night club or something. I know Soderbergh uses some different and weird stocks of film to achieve some cool effects in his movies, and some of the scenes in this were totally crazy looking. Like some had very desaturated areas of color while other colors would would be highly enhanced, giving a very unique look. (Which always underscored the tone or the feeling of the scene) I was wondering about these different stocks here, if he'd used them. The nice thing about working at Panavision is that I ran into the loader about 7 hours after seeing it in the breakfast line. I was like "What the hell kind of film did he use?" It turned out it was your standard 5218 and he did all the splashy colors and stuff in the DI. He really tuned the poop out of it, it looks so good. I know a lot of people say "Yeah, that's easy to do, nothing special, all flashy and slick..." Probably. But I'm a sucker for it, and it dont get much better than this movie. That guy knows how to make someone look cool on film. I recommend seeing in a theater before it's gone. (BTW, he's shooting his new Che Guevera movie in 16mm with anamorphic lenses, should look pretty wild. I think its the last project Dan Sasaki worked on before leaving Panavision.) Edited June 12, 2007 by Luc Allein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Brad Grimmett Posted June 12, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted June 12, 2007 Luc, Could you change your font back to normal? It's a bit jarring. No comments on 13 from me. I haven't seen it yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie Zahn Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Yeah, the plot was not fantastic and the characters were well established so this was almost like an episode from a TV show in the sense that all context was provided in the previous films. But I did enjoy looking at it. I found, that it helped to enjoy cinematogrphy to get thru ocean's 12 too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adam Thompson Posted June 23, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted June 23, 2007 Bad thing about him is that I don't think his crew (gaffers) get the credit they should. I'm sure they are quite responsible for the looks. How do you know he's shooting on anamorphic 16mm? Sounds interesting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xavier Plaza Posted August 15, 2007 Share Posted August 15, 2007 Hey guys today i saw the movie and agree with you totally blow away. This guy have a lot of talent, just two thing: First at IMB the credit DP appears as himself, is totally true...??? And the second what a great sequence when the camera see 5 characters (traveling zoom in & out) in the casino i guess in the middle of the movie, wow it was awesome, i think Brad could comment about that movement, any way i like it ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Most Posted August 15, 2007 Share Posted August 15, 2007 BTW, he's shooting his new Che Guevera movie in 16mm with anamorphic lenses, should look pretty wild. I think its the last project Dan Sasaki worked on before leaving Panavision.) According to what I've been told, this isn't the case. He's using prototype Red cameras for the Che Guevara project. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Panczenko Posted August 15, 2007 Share Posted August 15, 2007 According to what I've been told, this isn't the case. He's using prototype Red cameras for the Che Guevara project. I've heard that they shot some very early scenes in NY back in 06, and I believe those were Super 16. But, yes, I've heard the rest of the movie is RED. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Tony Brown Posted September 25, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted September 25, 2008 Oceans 13 is one of the most poorly photographed films I've seen. Appalling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arni Heimir Posted September 25, 2008 Share Posted September 25, 2008 Oceans 13 is one of the most poorly photographed films I've srrn Appalling Not one of my favorite films. But I wouldn't go as far as the above statement. I kind of liked the Casino lighting in that film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevor Masid Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Oceans 13 is one of the most poorly photographed films I've seen. Appalling Agreed. The skin tones alone are enough to make me wanna turn it off, even though I truly enjoyed the movie, everyone is so disgustingly orange, it makes everyone look horrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now