Reasons not to see Prometheus

[Freya Black]

My point is that high-end cameras, whether Epic, Alexa, or 35mm, get used on big and small productions. Some small productions just find deals or borrow one or make it a priority to get one.

 

Theres a bit of a difference tho, in that in the past with 35mm film, there was always the stock costs to take into account.

 

Phil is right tho, I am looking at things from a uk perspective, so I'm more thinking about TV than about movies, as generally there aren't much in the way of movies being made here. In fact during my whole life, I have seen 2 movies being shot. One was "Rock n Rolla" by Guy Ritchie and the other was a uk film 4 production that I have never heard of since.

 

Now I'm not saying that productions that would give a pd150 (or these days an xf305) to a self shooting AP or reasearcher, will suddenly be using Alexas, it probably is too expensive for those productions and is presently too big also, but I'm already seeing the Alexa being used anywhere that might have in the past used digibeta. Thus you see the alexa being used on cheap TV dramas, soaps and other such things.

 

I think you will see a similar thing in the states where productions in the past that may have shot Super16 will now be shooting Alexa, and very high end productions that would have shot 35mm will also be shooting Alexa.

 

Here in the UK things will go a lot further however.

 

There is an upside to all this in that smaller productions that have a concern for quality will be able to achiever results closer to that of the largest productions, which is obviously great news. I have already however, seen the biggest shoot, I have ever set eyes upon, use two alexas to create a product which as far as I know, was never even graded, or perhaps was graded by the editor, sometimes it's hard to tell over here.

 

I can tell you that the first wave of "Alexa with everything" is already on its way here in the UK.

Edited June 9, 2012 by Freya Black

[Freya Black]

Was thinking about all this some more last night.

I think we live in a very Privileged time right now with all this variety of film stocks.

In the past there was only really one Kodak colour neg film stock to choose from, so perhaps we are going back to something more like that.

 

I think what is going to happen, well already is happening, is that High end movies will be shot on the same camera as the cheapest TV drama productions.

 

These are going to be interesting times. Change is coming and anyone who believes otherwise has their head in the sand.

[Mike Lary]

By *far* the most spectacular 3D was the IMAX advertising sequence at the top of the film.

 

Agreed. I kept thinking that throughout the "experience". This movie convinced me not to drop any more dollars on 3D tickets until something in the process changes substantially. If a feature film with a massive budget can't compete visually with CG spinning text, it's going to lose my vote.

[georg lamshöft]

I personally think that the color calibration and dynamic range (more than 2 stops advantage over other cameras - that's the difference between a P&S and DSLR in the still photography world!) as well as other aspects of the Alexa are actual quite significant in the real world.

Skill and masterful artistic expression has always massively affected the overall cinematographic experience. Therefore compromising the technical ambitions/developments doesn't make sense and brings us a race to the bottom.

Right now, "we" (I mean people involved in one of the hundreds of 10++ mio. $ projects every year) have wonderful possibilities and we have to be very careful not to lose them because of stupid lobbyism work within the production system.

I personally think that Prometheus was comprimised by shortsighted technical decisions - but nevertheless, that wasn't it's main problem, sadly...

Edited June 9, 2012 by georg lamshöft

[John Holland]

Georg what " short sighted technical decisions" should i look out for when in this film on Monday ?

[Freya Black]

I personally think that the color calibration and dynamic range (more than 2 stops advantage over other cameras - that's the difference between a P&S and DSLR in the still photography world!) as well as other aspects of the Alexa are actual quite significant in the real world.

 

I'm sure they can be in the right circumstances but they aren't going to make that much difference if you just record the cameras output and do no grading.

 

...also in the "real" world.

[Chris Keth]

You're so cheery, Phil. With your sunny visage, it's a wonder England isn't the new beach-going capital of Europe.

[James Steven Beverly]

I think calling Tony Scott a "journeyman" director is far from true. While I may not care for some of his script choices and choices of actors, his ability as a director to bring a story to the screen is masterful. In fact, there is only one director that Ridley Scott has acknowledged as far more talented than himself...and that director is Tony Scott. Just Tonys body of work on commercials alone exceeds the realm of a journeyman.

Tony Scott's GREATEST MOVIE-Top Gun... A great movie, not Laurence of Arabia or the Maltese Falcon great but certainly an 80s milestone. second best Enemy of the State good movie, not great. Days Of Thunder, OK movie, Spy Games, Beverly Hills Cop II, Crimson Tide, Revenge, Man On Fire (remake not as good as original), The Taking of Pelham 123 (remake not as good as original), the Fan, The Last Boyscout, Domino, Unstoppable, all watchable films but not inspired and far from great. The rest mediocre at best. I submit Tony Scott, despite his brother's endorsement is a journeyman director with the benefit of connections because of his name. NOTHING against Tony, it just is what is is. He's made some watchable films but only Top Gun has rising to the height of any of Ridley's minor achievements. B)

Edited June 10, 2012 by James Steven Beverly

[Freya Black]

Tony Scott's GREATEST MOVIE-Top Gun... A great movie, not Laurence of Arabia or the Maltese Falcon great but certainly an 80s milestone. second best Enemy of the State good movie, not great. Days Of Thunder, OK movie, Spy Games, Beverly Hills Cop II, Crimson Tide, Revenge, Man On Fire (remake not as good as original), The Taking of Pelham 123 (remake not as good as original), the Fan, The Last Boyscout, Domino, Unstoppable, all watchable films but not inspired and far from great. The rest mediocre at best. I submit Tony Scott, despite his brother's endorsement is a journeyman director with the benefit of connections because of his name. NOTHING against Tony, it just is what is is. He's made some watchable films but only Top Gun has rising to the height of any of Ridley's minor achievements. B)

 

I can't stand Top Gun but I guess it's kind of an 80's iconic movie but then the 80's were bad, really bad.

So crimson tide isn't very good then?? That always struck me as perhaps being the interesting one? (not seen it)

 

I always thought they would make a great team, Tony Scott making the really commercial popcorn fare and Ridley make the really intelligent epics. Maybe C. Tide would have been better if Ridley made it.

 

Anyway it hasn't turned out that way, maybe Tony was a bad influence. :(

[georg lamshöft]

Georg what " short sighted technical decisions" should i look out for when in this film on Monday ?

It's nice to look at compared to many other films, especially the CGI is very well made. But does it look like THE Ridley Scott movie shot with IMAX-sized cameras with a nearly unlimited budget and resources? Certainly not. It almost looked like they were too busy handling the complex technology on set and in post. To be honest, I saw it last week and can hardly remember any particular scenes anymore regarding cinematography. Tell me tomorrow what YOU thought about Prometheus? Or better let it rest a few weeks, then we discuss again if this was the movie (visually, the story is another topic within this forum) we've been all waiting for!?

Edited June 10, 2012 by georg lamshöft

[Rex Orwell]

Stephen Nakamura's Use of Resolve in Prometheus

 

http://www.blackmagicuser.net/index.php?/topic/17-stephen-nakamuras-use-of-resolve-in-prometheus/

[Freya Black]

Well here it is, the definitive review of Prometheus from John Holland:

 

I saw it yesterday in Imax 70mm 3D on a 26 metre x 20 metre the biggest screen in G.B. Like others have said silly problems with the script certain things didnt make any sense , but i thought it looked stunning and the use of 3D was just right very subtle . I enjoyed it for what it is great entertainment

 

I guess if you go in there without any expectations beyond the idea of some slightly silly fun space based entertainment, you will probably be on the right track. I've heard a lot of people say it was a good film and they had a great time, no big analysis or anything. Like that last Star Trek movie maybe or the Tony Scott film deja vu I mention elsewhere.

 

It is what it is and I'm sure there are FAR worse movies out there.

 

Hopefully I will be able to catch it on the BBC iplayer in a year or so.

 

love

 

Freya

Edited June 12, 2012 by Freya Black

[Oliver Hadlow Martin]

I liked it.

 

 

 

 

I went in thinking I was going to see and action sci-fi and that's exactly what I got, I didn't have huge massive expectations for it, especially after all my friends said it was one of the worst films they had seen!

 

 

 

 

People hype the poop out of things far too much, many of my peers gave it a lot of stick for not living up to it's hype. Everyone hated it and seemed to revel in picking it apart - more so than a normal film, it seemed they went to see it just so they could pick out continuity errors or if it was "realistic" enough.

 

I personally think the hype was created by people and snowballed, I think the hype was lesser from the production "machine".

 

 

 

 

It looked spectacular and it was £12 well spent at the 3D Imax in London in my opinion.

 

 

[KH Martin]

For me, Tony Scott only has two seriously entertaining flicks, and those are LAST BOY SCOUT and CRIMSON TIDE. ENEMY OF THE STATE tries, but part of the problem with all his films is trying to deal with the smoke levels, it looks like Peter Hyams but with a good DP in most instances.

 

Then again, I only find three of Ridley's films outstanding, and an awful lot of clunkers. Maybe his kids will make more successful movies?

[James Steven Beverly]

For me, Tony Scott only has two seriously entertaining flicks, and those are LAST BOY SCOUT and CRIMSON TIDE.

Really? :huh: For me, Crimson Tide was...I don't know, hokie and extremely shallow for the subject matter (not even close to the films that covered the subject in the 50s and 60s) where as The Last Boy Scout was relatively unwatchable and this from a guy who would watch Bruce Willis paint his house. B)

Edited June 14, 2012 by James Steven Beverly

[John David Miller]

Really? :huh: For me, Crimson Tide was...I don't know, hokie and extremely shallow for the subject matter (not even close to the films that covered the subject in the 50s and 60s) where as The Last Boy Scout was relatively unwatchable and this from a guy who would watch Bruce Willis paint his house. B)

 

My favorite is True Romance which hasn't even made anyone else's list. Just shows how arbitrary opinion is. I still laugh at someone who says Tony Scott is a Journeyman director.

[Leo Anthony Vale]

...but part of the problem with all his films is trying to deal with the smoke levels, it looks like Peter Hyams but with a good DP in most instances.

 

 

What about all those damn long lens shots? Ridley's an offender too. But Tony's the worse of the two.

[Pat Murray]

Tony Scott making the really commercial popcorn fare and Ridley make the really intelligent epics.

 

Has Ridley ever produced an intelligent epic? When you look at his resume of films he isn't really known for profundity. Perhaps we are simply mesmerized by his visual style and set designs? Otherwise, he's mostly a popcorn salesman just like his younger brother. A damn good one at that!

[James Steven Beverly]

My favorite is True Romance which hasn't even made anyone else's list. Just shows how arbitrary opinion is. I still laugh at someone who says Tony Scott is a Journeyman director.

Haven't seen it, but as far as laughing at "someone", laugh all you like. I stand by my statement. His shots are functional but not particularly inspired. His choice of material is dreadful. His images are reasonably well made but none struck me as particularly indelible except for a few scenes in Top Gun and that was mainly the aerial footage. His direction of his actors was average, again, none were really lifted above their general level to create truly memorable performances. I call that a journeyman director. B)

[KH Martin]

Really? :huh: For me, Crimson Tide was...I don't know, hokie and extremely shallow for the subject matter (not even close to the films that covered the subject in the 50s and 60s) where as The Last Boy Scout was relatively unwatchable and this from a guy who would watch Bruce Willis paint his house. B)

I really think LAST BOY SCOUT is a totally misunderstood movie. And I also see it as the quintessential Willis movie, one that has an edge that was missing from what went before, but still has some glint of humor that doesn't survive past PULP, and it hints at how well he delivers 12 MONKEYS. Then again, i haven't liked any of his stuff since THE SIEGE.

 

CRIMSON has a real hodgepodge script (Tarantino AND Robert Towne as scriptdoctors), and the WEPS guy changes his mind so many times that I wish Denzel and Hackman had blown HIS head off. But it just works for the stuff with the two leads, which I find seriously compelling.

[KH Martin]

My favorite is True Romance which hasn't even made anyone else's list. Just shows how arbitrary opinion is. I still laugh at someone who says Tony Scott is a Journeyman director.

 

 

I keep forgetting he made that. Yeah, TRUE ROMANCE absolutely smokes all of the others (no pun intended.) The shower glass fight with Gandolfini and Arquette, the big squareoff at the end, and the Walken/Hopper scene alone are, as they say in the flick, just so cool.

[James Steven Beverly]

I keep forgetting he made that. Yeah, TRUE ROMANCE absolutely smokes all of the others (no pun intended.) The shower glass fight with Gandolfini and Arquette, the big squareoff at the end, and the Walken/Hopper scene alone are, as they say in the flick, just so cool.

OK, what does that say when both of you "keep forgetting" the movie? Maybe it's not as memorably awesome as you remembered....or didn't remember in this case. Tony Scott, a guy who makes great movies that I can't remember!! Quite an endorsement. :rolleyes:

Edited June 15, 2012 by James Steven Beverly

[Mike Lary]

My favorite is True Romance which hasn't even made anyone else's list. Just shows how arbitrary opinion is. I still laugh at someone who says Tony Scott is a Journeyman director.

 

Great film, and possibly Tarantino's best work as well, well crafted and executed.

Edited June 15, 2012 by Mike Lary

[Adam MB Smith]

Ironically, that's the only Tarantino movie I haven't seen!

[KH Martin]

OK, what does that say when both of you "keep forgetting" the movie? Maybe it's not as memorably awesome as you remembered....or didn't remember in this case. Tony Scott, a guy who makes great movies that I can't remember!! Quite an endorsement. :rolleyes:

Look at what I wrote. I forget HE made the movie. I keep thinking it is a QT flick that just looks bad photographically. Perhaps I should describe it as a QT flick that survives Scott.