Doug Palmer Posted December 11, 2016 Share Posted December 11, 2016 I saw this Ken Loach's latest 35mm film last night at our local cinema. I was slightly surprised to see Kodak on the end credits, as the subject would have been easier to shoot on video. Very natural performances, and shot mainly in northern UK urban locations. The camera was apparently Arricam ST. Does anyone know which Kodak stock was used ? It looked very sharp, although projected digitally. From the discussion afterwards I understand that Ken Loach likes to keep well back from the actors in his films. So they and the numerous extras tend to be less aware of the camera and crew. Also he apparently only provides them with the minimum of screenplay material, so the actors themselves are not fully aware what will happen in the next scene. And he tries to shoot everything in sequence as the story progresses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted December 11, 2016 Premium Member Share Posted December 11, 2016 Ken Loach northern UK urban locations I've heard enough :( You have to ask how he keeps getting this stuff funded. It can't possibly make its money back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin R Probyn Posted December 11, 2016 Share Posted December 11, 2016 He wins some big awards.. some of them make money. for sure... he,s well loved in France.. the shoots are only about 4 weeks.. and there is not alot of gear.. one camera and a tripod pretty much.. and not much lighting.. or big name stars to pay.. Its a great film actually.. well worth a look.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Holland Posted December 11, 2016 Share Posted December 11, 2016 You should make the effort to see this Phil as Robin says a great film . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Palmer Posted December 11, 2016 Author Share Posted December 11, 2016 Yeah, it's very different from what you normally get at cinema these days. Very static set-ups, no tracking (or drones !) and quite long lenses so the performances keep natural. But lots of northern dialogue which may not be understood too well by many, so maybe see a sub-titled version :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted December 11, 2016 Premium Member Share Posted December 11, 2016 The problem is that Ken seems to have been saying basically the same thing for the last several decades. Yes, I know it's grim up north, I know life is miserable and everyone is horrible and everything is terrible. I constantly gripe about these issues myself. This country is the pits. But I mean, good grief, the guy's too depressing for me. That's saying something. If I bang on and on (and on and on) about how awful everything is, people tell me to shut up. P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Miguel Angel Posted December 11, 2016 Premium Member Share Posted December 11, 2016 Phil, "I, Daniel Blake" is really really good, you should go to the cinema and watch it, seriously! :) Have a good day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin R Probyn Posted December 12, 2016 Share Posted December 12, 2016 Read the DP Robbie Ryan likes to use Kodak 5213.. 200T.. so maybe that was the stock used.. The Arricam ST seems to be Ken Loaches weapon of choice from Wind that Blows the Barley.. all the gear package comes from the same rental company in Europe.. I believe this is the first film he has edited on Avid.. always Steinbeck before that.. old school.. as far as i know.. he is not out to entertain an audience .. but to educate/ bring to notice.. through a good story.. i.e. Cathy come home.. his big break out production .. about homeless ness in the 60,s.. admittedly not much has changed.. I do agree some have been a less interesting than others.. Kes is still the classic .. Poor Cow..Wind that blows the barley.. My name is Joe.. Sweet Sixteen .. and this new one are very good.. IMHO.. He just hates any gear to be on set.. will always go for natural light if its do able.. the camera is just someone standing back leaning on the wall ..observing the action.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin R Probyn Posted December 12, 2016 Share Posted December 12, 2016 Wind that Shakes the Barley.. close enough :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Palmer Posted December 12, 2016 Author Share Posted December 12, 2016 Ah yes maybe 5213 200T. I thought it looked very sharp as I said, and grainless, like digital. But then I was at the back of a packed cinema and fighting heads, so hard to judge. Strangely the PC screens with their meaningless nonsense appeared to me very soft focus, maybe that was intentional ? I like his very simple style, and when Blake misbehaves near the end we see the scene in several different widening shots instead of one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Dunn Posted December 12, 2016 Share Posted December 12, 2016 (edited) He used up the world's remaining supply of edge numbering tape on his last film after an international whip-round found that Pixar still had a case. So, no more Steenbeck. I turned down one of his 35mm. pic-syncs in Soho in 2005 or 6- I'd just picked up a 16mm. one and couldn't carry it. £1. Edited December 12, 2016 by Mark Dunn 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