Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Wait! Don’t roll your eyes just yet! I know that many of you will think: “Oh, no! Not another Woody Allen thread! For God’s sake!” But this is not about Woody Allen; it is much more about Eigil Bryld (just in case you didn’t know, it seems that, as per the IPA notation on Wikipedia article, his name is pronounced, approximately, EYE-ghill BRILL) and how this will all turn out visually.


And, it seems from the photos, it will look great! Many articles in the last few days state that these are the first photos




but these were released a bit before




It looks stunning. Or perhaps that’s just my impression because I wasn’t expecting anything special visually, thinking that this was just a short mini-series with perhaps not lot of a budget. (Though, yeah, money doesn’t always equal stunning visuals.)


Here is the trailer:



From the House of Cards – cold, dark, bleak – to a total opposite (yes, I realize that is a pleonasm) for Eigil.


IMDb isn’t showing how this was shot:




I’m hoping for a brief write-up in the American Cinematographer. :)


P. S. By the way, have you seen it? Lo and behold, the colourist is Joe Gawler, of Midnight in Paris and To Rome with Love fame.

Edited by Alexandros Angelopoulos Apostolos

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now you’ve ruined it for me. :) I don’t know what to think now. When I first saw the trailer a couple of times, it looked lovely. But now I’m starting to doubt it. What is it that you didn’t like?


I keep re-watching thinking I will figure out if there is something drawn over the windows outside. Like some sort of thin transparent material or something like that.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

It might look lovely to you, my opinion shouldn't influence yours so easily. It just looks bland to me, like most of his films (with the exception of Manhattan, and Café Society I'd say, Magic In The Moonlight as well), Allen has never really had an eye, this just looks to me like typical middle of the road, pedestrian TV digital cinematography, which is to say, uninspired, flat, boring.

Edited by Manu Delpech

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

But maybe its meant to be flat,low contrast for a reason.. cant always look like a commercial .. would you say the same about the TV version of Fargo..or even the film come to think of it.. Im very sure this DP could light it in any style if they wanted to.. but a certain look had been agreed .. the lighting should "fit" the mood ,look the director wants.. doesn't always have to jump out the screen with the DP,s agents number in the corner of the frame.. :)

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just saying what it looks like to me. Fargo doesn't look flat imo (although it would look better shot on film instead of shooting Alexa and adding grain). I get what you mean, it's just that flat, boring visuals are not appealing to me.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Visual Products

    New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

    Wooden Camera

    Gamma Ray Digital Inc

    Paralinx LLC

    Ritter Battery

    Just Cinema Gear

    The Original Slider

    Metropolis Post

    Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

    Abel Cine


    FJS International

    G-Force Grips

    Rig Wheels Passport

    Broadcast Solutions Inc


    Serious Gear

    Tai Audio

    Cinematography Books and Gear
  • Create New...