Jump to content
Ben Brahem Ziryab

Dunkirk 70mm

Recommended Posts

....surfboards.. :)

 

My son wanted me to see Malick's Thin Red Line `recently. Early in with this film, set in WWII, I saw a saw a short surfboard that I'm sure dated from the 70's. So it's all just a mirage, though that one was quite funny. Later, The New World, was a far more worthy mirage, a great film, and not a surfboard of any kind in sight...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are plenty of dead bodies on the beaches, there are plenty of bodies thrown up into the air from explosions.

 

It's just, they didn't need to 'Saving Private Ryan' the beach scenes, there was no reason. You weren't focused on the action as much as the characters, so what's the point of having a limb fly in front of them, only to get an R rating?

 

It's far more important that people feel safe watching this movie, so the word about what happened at Dunkirk gets out to the public. I've told dozens of people about this movie and NOBODY knew about the Dunkirk invasion of WWII. This film's whole purpose is to educate the masses, that's the only reason Nolan made it.

 

So if it were rated R, it wouldn't have as great of a mass appeal, thus common people who may know nothing, may have not gone out to see it, which is a real shame.

 

I think Nolan did the right thing as documentary wouldn't have nearly as many eyes on it.

 

But surely properly conveying the terror they went through would be part of this education? I haven't seen the film yet, so I will reserve full judgement for when I have. But the article seems to be complaining of lack of realism too, which to me means holding back on that education you speak of.

 

But I will still see it on theaters anyway. After watching The Hateful 8 on a theater screen and being amazed and then watching The Revenant and a year later Rogue One on a theater screen, shot on the Alexa 65 and being totally disappointed with the image in comparison to The Hateful 8, it is clear the only way to get the experience I got from The Hateful 8 is watching 65/70mm film on theaters. Digital 65mm didn't look any better than digital 35mm to me based on Rogue One and The Revenant. The Hateful 8 was astonishingly great. I kept asking myself why we are moving to digital. So I will watch any movies shot and released on 65/70mm film . Never know for how much longer we will be able to do that.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I rest my case.. even Malik is mucking around with the accuracy of surfboard lengths.. probably a twin fin with flyers too.. nothings is sacred ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone should be careful about the sound mix on this one. My laser IMAX (which looked astonishing by the way, fifth row, and just tack sharp, 65mm 5 perf material stood out quite a bit, not in a bad way, 15 perf just that much cleaner & clearer) showing had insanely loud sound, I've read a lot of similar complaints, apparently, the mix is supposed to be that way, even DCPs seem to be as loud. I had to plug my ears a bit everytime there was a gun shot, a Spitfire flying, any kind of explosion, etc, you get it. Beware hearing loss cause this will do it, this prevented it from being the best experience possible because it was just TOO loud, even the dialogue was saturating, not to mention Zimmer's score which turned to mush from time to time.

 

Kinda wish Nolan would cool it on this aspect, but yeah it's his thing, I've heard the non IMAX mix is still clearer & more detailed.

 

By the way, saw the War For The Planet Of The Apes trailer and despite being a 2K release, it looked incredible, it's a much different feeling seeing the trailer on a 100 inch screen at home, in the movie theater and in the fifth row of a laser IMAX theater with a ginormous 1.70 screen, still has nothing on Dunkirk, but nice stuff.

 

Film's great by the way, not my fav because of the purely experiential aspect, not character or story driven, but what a rush.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. I've told dozens of people about this movie and NOBODY knew about the Dunkirk invasion of WWII. This film's whole purpose is to educate the masses, that's the only reason Nolan made it.

 

So if it were rated R, it wouldn't have as great of a mass appeal, thus common people who may know nothing, may have not gone out to see it, which is a real shame.

 

I think Nolan did the right thing as documentary wouldn't have nearly as many eyes on it.

 

I've been thinking the same thing as I've watched people give long interviews about their relatives who were at Dunkirk and how they wouldn't have recognised the movie etc.

 

Also many articles explaining about Dunkirk or even articles talking about the Ealing Studio film about the subject.

Now there are even actual photos from Dunkirk being dug up and there is a lot of argument and discussion about Dunkirk. To be honest even if it was a sci-fi version of Dunkirk in space I think it would be a positive thing.

 

There is now a lot of interest and discussion about a subject that wasn't even close to being on a lot of peoples radar.

 

Freya

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just it just now at the IMAX in Melbourne, Aus.

 

It's pretty funny, we walked out of the theatre and life began to imitate art as the escalator had stopped working and hundreds of people in the foyer had to scramble up the stairs like soldiers escaping a sinking boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But surely properly conveying the terror they went through would be part of this education? I haven't seen the film yet, so I will reserve full judgement for when I have. But the article seems to be complaining of lack of realism too, which to me means holding back on that education you speak of.

There is a fine line though... If you educate through realism, you will loose a great deal of your audience. People will tell their friends it was too bloody and then others won't see it. So there is a happy medium between showing the "horrors" of war like Saving Private Ryan or showing enough horror to get a bigger audience, like most older war movies do. Honestly, I don't think in today's age we need to show more blood and guts, I think those days are over.

 

But I will still see it on theaters anyway. After watching The Hateful 8 on a theater screen and being amazed and then watching The Revenant and a year later Rogue One on a theater screen, shot on the Alexa 65 and being totally disappointed with the image in comparison to The Hateful 8, it is clear the only way to get the experience I got from The Hateful 8 is watching 65/70mm film on theaters. Digital 65mm didn't look any better than digital 35mm to me based on Rogue One and The Revenant. The Hateful 8 was astonishingly great. I kept asking myself why we are moving to digital. So I will watch any movies shot and released on 65/70mm film . Never know for how much longer we will be able to do that.

Yea, these digital movies today are so flat, they're so blah and uninteresting. They're after that HDR look, where even the darkest of moments has detail. The problem is, humans don't see that way, we see in much higher contrast and dynamic range. Film naturally has more contrast and dynamic range, especially when photochemically finished and projected on film. Sure the blacks aren't as dark, but do we really need pitch black's? Not really.

 

As of this writing, there are 3 more 5 perf 70mm movies coming out in the next 2 years, all 3 of which will be released on film like Dunkirk. Unfortunately, they are all visual effects movies, so when will we see another non-vfx 5/70 movie like Dunkrik or Hateful Eight, that's the big question. A possibility is Vox Lux, which is a musical and will probably have no VFX. But, they've had lots of issues getting it off the ground and now Star Wars 9 has the 5/65 cameras. Once Star Wars is done, The Nutcracker movie is suppose to get them. So who knows if Vox Lux will give up and shoot 35 at this point. When there are only two sync sound 5/65 cameras in the world, they are in high demand!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure there will be non-VFX scenes in Branagh's 65mm-shot "Murder on the Orient Express"...

 

I liked "Dunkirk" but thought at times they were going out of their way to not show blood -- even old Hollywood war films in color used a certain amount of blood, even if candy-colored! Minor complaint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just got home from seeing it in 15-perf/70mm at IMAX. And I'm spent. Such a tense, gripping experience. I thought it was superb.

The sound of those Stukas, and bullets glancing off metal were terrifying.

I thought it was very interesting to have the film screened in juxtaposition to EVERY SINGLE TRAILER they played before it, which were all superhero movies/series. It's hard to understand the appeal of these computer game looking films, when the experience of something like Dunkirk is so much more affecting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once Star Wars is done, The Nutcracker movie is suppose to get them. So who knows if Vox Lux will give up and shoot 35 at this point. When there are only two sync sound 5/65 cameras in the world, they are in high demand!

 

 

Is that true? I mean Arri have the 765 and Panavision have System 65.

They surely can't have one camera each?

 

Freya

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just watched Dunkirk in 15/70mm at IMAX Waterloo felt drained and exhausted wow , has to be seen in this format or the largest screen you can find in70mm !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that true? I mean Arri have the 765 and Panavision have System 65.

They surely can't have one camera each?

Nobody uses the 765 really, it's a troubled camera. Evidently it's all electronic and it has a nasty habit of loosing loops mid shot. The guys at Arri North America don't like renting it because of that issue.

 

Panavision has 2 quiet system 65 cameras they made for Far and Away. They also have 3 MOS cameras which are MUCH smaller then the sync sound cameras, but they make a lot of noise.

 

Arri has 3 765's in working condition. One of them is in Munich and two of them are in Atlanta. Evidently Arri Germany want's to destroy these cameras, but because of the demand these days, people are renting them more then they have in recent years. So I guess their destruction has been put on hold. It's just, no big movie would ever really use them.

 

So unfortunately,(at the moment) there are no other options for sync sound 5/65 shooting then Panavision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just watched the movie on film print at arclight in Hollywood. The cinematography was great but the movie was just awful. I didn't care about any of the actors as the character development doesn't exist. Another one of those, shot on x gimmick movies. "Shot on IMAX" - well maybe, but where is the story?.... I've seen deeper and more meaningful short films in comparison to this movie. The movie has no substance other than "shot on IMAX" and other technical achievements.

Edited by Giray Izcan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hang on.. there is no story.. ! thats a fairly major negative (pardon the pun)..

It's like a really fantastic war reenactment. Imagine the movie "Titanic", but lose the Rose and Jack characters, open with the ship hitting the iceberg and recreate what all the key players did with some rapid fire action and pulse pounding music.

 

It was pretty awesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's like a really fantastic war reenactment. Imagine the movie "Titanic", but lose the Rose and Jack characters, open with the ship hitting the iceberg and recreate what all the key players did with some rapid fire action and pulse pounding music.

 

It was pretty awesome.

 

So in other words, like other IMAX films before it, such as films about nature or whatever, it is not really a movie but rather a "presentation"? It just happens to have name actors in it and a big budget. This is how it is sounding to me. I should see it soon enough though.

Edited by Adam Paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So in other words, like other IMAX films before it, such as films about nature or whatever, it is not really a movie but rather a "presentation"? It just happens to have name actors in it and a big budget. This is how it is sounding to me. I should see it soon enough though.

Tell us what you think. Whereas you could think of it as one of those well done TV documentary reenactments, in a larger format, I think you'll agree it succeeds because of Kenneth Branagh, Mark Rylance and the rest along with Nolan's direction. Imagining seeing it later on TV... I don't think you'd get all the minute acting nuances and distant aeroplane details as shown in 15/70. I haven't seen it 5/70 yet.

 

Whatever, the audience at BFI Imax London liked it :)

post-29820-0-56484800-1501232621_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's like a really fantastic war reenactment. Imagine the movie "Titanic", but lose the Rose and Jack characters, open with the ship hitting the iceberg and recreate what all the key players did with some rapid fire action and pulse pounding music.

 

It was pretty awesome.

 

Yeah Im sure its awesome .. but so can a roller caster ride.. depends what you want from a film I guess.. again i haven't seen it.. not released here yet..but the reaction of a previous poster who has just seen it.. is what Im worried about..no depth to characters or story.. a visual triumph Im sure.. but I want more for my dollar..but each to their own.. I,ll go and see it but it seems more like a fair ground attraction in a way.. I dont think the camera work should be the highlight of a film in fact the opposite.. personal opinion only.. I loved his early stuff..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely depends on how you look at it. I am drawn in by peoples struggles, and this movie was one long struggle for multiple characters.

 

I like good dialogue and dramatics as much as the next guys but the tension between a dozen guys getting shot at in a beached boat is equally as story building.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The film is an experience, it's deliberately so, characters don't have the time to sit around and talk, it's survival. I should mention that seeing it in 2.20, regular DCP, sitting further away, the impact wasn't nearly as big obviously as sitting up close in laser IMAX. I can't imagine watching this on a TV, it's going to feel so small.

 

There's no fighting to speak of (except the air sequences), it's really barebones in a way. I'd say it's both a strength & a weakness. Rewatching Saving Private Ryan (imo the superior film, very different though), it cemented my thought that those who level that criticism at the film, about there being no characters, no depth, no dvpt, are right in doing so. It's monumental filmmaking for sure but it feels more like Gravity for example in that sense. Something like SPR with a terrific script, great characters, actual dialogue, and a clear progression is much more to my liking.

 

I also feel, and some have talked about it, that the film, surprisingly for its budget, lacks scale, some have compared (silly I know) the 5 min one take of Dunkirk in Atonement, which feels, obviously since it's one scene, bigger than anything in Dunkirk. It is clearly a deliberate choice, but I didn't feel there were that many people on the beach, it all feels very contained.

 

I still think Dunkirk is great, but I'm wary of those who have already (and very quickly) proclaimed it a masterpiece. If I had to rank Nolan's films, it would be like this: Insomnia (weird maybe, I think it's his best) > Interstellar > Inception > The Dark Knight > The Prestige > Batman Begins > The Dark Knight Rises > Dunkirk > haven't seen Following.

Edited by Manu Delpech

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would agree.. I think thats his best too.. but as they say.. one mans meat is another mans poison ..

Edited by Robin R Probyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes not a Lean masterpiece, but still great. There was not enough screentime (with all the necessary action) to maybe do much more with the characters. I too would have liked more soldiers on the beach. There seemed to be some digital stuff going on in the background ? Not too convincing because of the huge screen. Maybe adding some dummies would've helped :D as in Gone with the wind. I thought the most convincing part was the sinking ship.

It was interesting that the fast cutting of close shots did seem to work well in 15/70. 3D would have been a liability.

The music was great...

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.

Guest
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.



  • Abel Cine



    Just Cinema Gear



    Glidecam



    CineLab



    Rig Wheels Passport



    Serious Gear



    Paralinx LLC



    Ritter Battery



    Wooden Camera



    Broadcast Solutions Inc



    Visual Products



    Metropolis Post



    FJS International



    G-Force Grips



    Gamma Ray Digital Inc



    Tai Audio



    Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS



    New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment


×
×
  • Create New...