Showing posts with label Red MX. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Red MX. Show all posts

October 03, 2013

Film review. An analysis of the cinematography of Kon-Tiki, by Joachim Ronning and Espen Sanberg

Kon-Tiki is a co-direction between Joachim Ronning and Espen Sandberg who already directed together theirs previous features (Max Manus, Bandidas). It is the Norwegian film with the highest budget ever produced and it is the official submission of Norway to the best Foreign language Film of the Oscar 2013.

The plot. It's a true story about explorer Thor Heyerdal who, in 1947, decided to cross the Pacific Ocean from Lima to Polynesia in a balsa wood raft to prove that Polynesia was first settled by south Americans and not from Asians.



Cinematography: Geir Hartly Andreassen
Camera:Arri Alexa Plus,Red One MX, Sony NEX-FS100
Lenses: Zeiss Master Prime, Fujinon Alura
Aspect ratio: 2.35:1
Format: ARRIRAW, Redcode RAW
Film Stock: -

As he already did for the previous two directors' features, Max Manus, Gair Hartly Andreassen is in charge for the cinematography of Kon-Tiki. I don't know his previous works so I am not able to say if the way he lit for Kon-Tiki is his own style or not. But, to be honest, I found that the cinematography did not have a structure throughout the film apart from few characteristics.

Since the beginning of the film, Andreassen makes use of wide angle lenses offering us some beautiful landscape shots, like the opening one, in the snowed Norwegian countryside, and, particularly, the shots of the raft while in the ocean. 

Light, at the beginning, has a natural feel: every light source is justified; day light, windows and artificial lights are used as sources, always softened by diffusers or, sometimes, smoke. Anyway, there are some shots where the light looses its naturalism and becomes a bit more theatrical, without really a reason. In the second half of the film, all the scenes are shot in the balsa-wood raft and light looses completely its natural feel. In the daytime scenes, contrast is never as high as it is under the sun in open ocean neither as harsh; in the cabin, I like the way Andreassen plays with the reflection of the sun passing trough the wooden roof, but I really miss some more contrast: light is very soft and the worry of filling up shadows caused problems of double shadow in some shots.  At night time, light imitates the moon light or lightning but not always with good results: there's always a Back Light cutting the characters out from the background that sometimes is too strong and sometimes unnatural, like in the storm scene, where moon light and lightnings coexist.

The strong Back Light is not a negative point though. This is another characteristic we find throughout the film and I quite like it actually, especially  I find very interesting the use of on set lights as light sources placed as Back Lights: lampposts, shop signs and neon lamps are used for this purpose, creating some very pleasant images. Even on the raft, characters are placed between the camera and the sun, producing beautiful flared or washed images. But it's true that sometimes the Back Light is far too strong, which can be disturbing and the problem is that we don't know if it is for a chosen aesthetic inspired by the original documentary Thor shot or the necessity of getting chroma right.

As it has become usual shooting with digital cameras, a soft filter has been used, probably a Pro Mist, to soften the image. Also we can notice some grain which add an organic look, though there are some shots, particularly the ones in low light conditions, where the presence of grain is too strong and not really pleasant: working at high ISO or shots taken with the NEX?

Kon-Tiki is a film with a lot of CGI which offers us some really spectacular images. It is entertaining even without the tension and the twists you normally expect from a film of this kind. Its cinematography, though, is quite fair to be honest, with very good approaches but with unhappy solutions too.


June 12, 2013

Film review. An analysis of the cinematography of Sightseers by Ben Wheatley

Sightseers is a British black comedy by Brighton based director Ben Wheatley (Kill List, Down Terrace); it was screened in the Director's Fortnight section of Cannes Film Festival last year.

The plot. Chris takes her girlfriend Tina, who never left her house and her mother, to a trip around Yorkshire with a caravan. But soon unfortunate events make them become condescending psycho killers.



Cinematography: Laurie Rose
Camera: Red MX
Aspect ratio: 2.35:1
Format: RedCode RAW
Film Stock: -


Ben Wheatly knew Laurie Rose when shooting Down Terrace, which was the first film both of them ever shot; since then Rose has DP'd all Wheatley`s work, including Sightseers. In an interview after the film première, Rose insisted that he was not comfortable with being called cinematographer or DP: he was just a simple cameraman. After watching Sightseers I realized that he was not trying to be just modest:  Sightseers lacks in cinematography

Light crew was reduced to a minimum and so were lights used and that can be noticed since the very first scenes, where the image is quite flat and the contrast poor. Light is natural and quite soft, almost shadows free, even in the exteriors, where the typical British overcast days helped to diffuse light. When the sun came out though, we can appreciate some harsh light and strong shadows creating an atmosphere that doesn't really serve the story. 

The camera Rose chose was a Red One with MX sensor, a great camera, but he didn't manage to get the best of it. Throughout the film there are scenes (indoor or outdoor shots) with very bright spots with blown out highlights, which is quite unusual for a camera with 13 stops of dynamic range. Also Roses didn't used many lenses, sticking basically to the 50mm Arri Zeiss and switching to wide angle lenses for landscapes, to keep the natural look of the film, almost shot as it were a documentary. Camera movements are very little used; often camera is hand-held and sometimes placed in very low angles (and perhaps missing a wider angle lens), different and unexpected decisions that never contribute visually to the story. 

It looks like Rose limited himself to expose correctly the scenes, but, as we have seen in past posts, cinematography is much more than this and a correct exposure is not always the right one. Some scenes of Sightseers though are beautifully shot: some foggy landscapes and scenes filmed outdoor at sunrise or sunset, some back-lit, others with wanted gorgeous flares, but all of them with nice contrast and tones and shot with wide angle lenses.

Sightseers is a (literally) bloody good fun but also a bit obvious and predictable, and probably less mysterious and interesting than Wheatley's last work, Kill List.
Cinematography: Emmanuel Lubezki
Camera: Arricam LT, Arriflex 235, Panavision, Red MX,
Lenses: Arri Zeiss Master Prime
Aspect ratio: 2.35:1
Format: 35mm, 65mm, Redcode RAW
Film Stock: Kodak 5218
- See more at: http://donatelloromanazzi.blogspot.com.es/2013/06/film-review-analysis-of-cinematography.html#sthash.1odzoTYW.dpuf

Cinematography: Emmanuel Lubezki
Camera: Arricam LT, Arriflex 235, Panavision, Red MX,
Lenses: Arri Zeiss Master Prime
Aspect ratio: 2.35:1
Format: 35mm, 65mm, Redcode RAW
Film Stock: K
- See more at: http://donatelloromanazzi.blogspot.com.es/#sthash.KI6SyFZy.dpuf

Cinematography: Emmanuel Lubezki
Camera: Arricam LT, Arriflex 235, Panavision, Red MX,
Lenses: Arri Zeiss Master Prime
Aspect ratio: 2.35:1
Format: 35mm, 65mm, Redcode RAW
Film Stock: K
- See more at: http://donatelloromanazzi.blogspot.com.es/#sthash.KI6SyFZy.dpuf

Cinematography: Emmanuel Lubezki
Camera: Arricam LT, Arriflex 235, Panavision, Red MX,
Lenses: Arri Zeiss Master Prime
Aspect ratio: 2.35:1
Format: 35mm, 65mm, Redcode RAW
Film Stock: K
- See more at: http://donatelloromanazzi.blogspot.com.es/#sthash.KI6SyFZy.dpuf

Cinematography: Emmanuel Lubezki
Camera: Arricam LT, Arriflex 235, Panavision, Red MX,
Lenses: Arri Zeiss Master Prime
Aspect ratio: 2.35:1
Format: 35mm, 65mm, Redcode RAW
Film Stock: K
- See more at: http://donatelloromanazzi.blogspot.com.es/#sthash.KI6SyFZy.dpuf
Cinematography: Emmanuel Lubezki
Camera: Arricam LT, Arriflex 235, Panavision, Red MX,
Lenses: Arri Zeiss Master Prime
Aspect ratio: 2.35:1
Format: 35mm, 65mm, Redcode RAW
Film Stock: Kod
- See more at: http://donatelloromanazzi.blogspot.com.es/p/film-review.html#sthash.tIPS4wjN.dpuf
Cinematography: Emmanuel Lubezki
Camera: Arricam LT, Arriflex 235, Panavision, Red MX,
Lenses: Arri Zeiss Master Prime
Aspect ratio: 2.35:1
Format: 35mm, 65mm, Redcode RAW
Film Stock: Kodak 5218 500T, Kodak 5217 200T, Kodak 5219 500T
- See more at: http://donatelloromanazzi.blogspot.com.es/p/film-review.html#sthash.tIPS4wjN.dpuf
Cinematography: Emmanuel Lubezki
Camera: Arricam LT, Arriflex 235, Panavision, Red MX,
Lenses: Arri Zeiss Master Prime
Aspect ratio: 2.35:1
Format: 35mm, 65mm, Redcode RAW
Film Stock: Kodak 5218 500T, Kodak 5217 200T, Kodak 5219 500T
- See more at: http://donatelloromanazzi.blogspot.com.es/p/film-review.html#sthash.tIPS4wjN.dpuf

June 05, 2013

Film review. An analysis of the cinematography of To the Wonder by Terrence Malick

Few days ago I had the opportunity to watch again To the Wonder, a film by Terrence Malick who needs no presentations: The tree of Life, The thin red Line, The new World, Badlands are some titles of his filmography. It was a great delight to enjoy once again the work of one of the best cinematographer of the present time: Emmanuel Lubezki.

The plot. An American falls in love with a divorced girl living in Paris. She follows him and settles in Oklahoma but problems arise in their relationship. Meanwhile, a priest struggles against his faith.


Cinematography: Emmanuel Lubezki
Camera: Arricam LT, Arriflex 235, Panavision, Red MX,
Lenses: Arri Zeiss Master Prime
Aspect ratio: 2.35:1
Format: 35mm, 65mm, Redcode RAW
Film Stock: Kodak 5218 500T, Kodak 5217 200T, Kodak 5219 500T

Terrence Malick relies once again on the cinematography of Emmanuel Lubezki whose filmography is quite extensive ( Ali, The New World, Sleepy Hollow, Meet Joe Black, Y tu mamá también...). As he already did it in The Tree of Life, the mexican cinematographer only makes use of natural light for filming To the Wonder, using just bouncers and blockers. According to him, "natural light is more complex than artificial light and once you master it, it is hard to go back and illuminate a scene artificially". He not only did an excellent job with that but also taught (or reminded) everyone that everything has to serve cinematography to visually tell a story in the best way possible: not only trough light, costumes design and colours, lenses and camera movements, but even trough the film stock, the camera itself and the format used.

Throughout the film, Lubezky always seeks back-light; in the exterior shots the sun is always low in the horizon and quite often in frame, he plays with it, positioning the actors between it and the camera, avoiding the silhouette and shooting them shadow free, and looking for light spills and flares every time they move, overexposing some areas of the frame. In the shots taken indoors the back light is more extreme: he uses doors and windows as light sources and the actors are dense black silhouettes. Shooting indoor must have been complicated: with light changing constantly Lubezki only had few useful hours in every location. They shot fast and they shot a lot, because they didn't have to "waste" time moving lights, and probably shot some hours in a house and some hours in an identical one but architecturally different to take advantage of the entire shooting day.
In the few night time shots, available light of lamps is used: they are always in frame and overexposed, creating great contrast in the scene.

Five different cameras were used to shoot To the Wonder. The film starts with some images of the couple in a train taken with a digital camera full of digital artifacts but it does remind a super-8 camera and the feeling of holiday and happy memories, like the beginning of a relationship. When Marina (Olga Kurylenko) goes back to Paris, Lubezki follows her alone in the street at night using a Red MX, giving a sense of modern and urban life (in contrast with the Oklahoma surroundings) as well as a sense of cold solitude. All the rest of the film is shot in 35mm apart from the scenes where Ben Affleck starts a relationship with an old friend, Rachel McAdams: here the 65mm negative is used. This relationship is less romantic but more stable than the one with Marina: for Lubezki the 65mm reflects this more realistic stability.
Camera is rarely static: always flowing with the characters, mostly following them, on a steady-cam or hand-held, and always going forth, suggesting the idea that life always goes on. Lubezki chose, as in The Tree of Life, Master prime lenses which offer a very clean and sharp image, mostly using wide angle lenses, achieving a very great depth of field which suits perfectly Malick's way of directing especially because the director rarely leads the eye of the spectators toward the actor, and offers them the whole frame instead.
Terrence Malick is a peculiar director with a peculiar style pretending to make poetry with images. You can like his style or hate it. And To the Wonder is no exception. The movie was shot without a script, almost has no dialogue and no plot nor action: it is absolutely visual, showing moments of the life of a couple and it's up to the spectator to shape a story. Whatever you like his style or not, To the Wonder is a cinematographic piece of art which confirms Lubezki as one of the best living cinematographer capable of creating stunning beautiful images and a visual storytelling second to none. To the Wonder is an exquisite visual experience, completed with great music and editing,  that will undoubtedly be in this year top five best cinematographies.