I just rewatched Miller's Crossing by the Coen Brothers.
Damn that's a great movie.
It's got great dialogue: "Why don't you take your flunky and dangle?" "Hi, Tom what's the rumpus." "They took his hair, Tom. What the hell you suppose that means."
It's got a tommy gun shootup edited to rhythms of "Danny Boy."
It's got great acting down to the smaller parts including a hiliarious turn by Jon Polito. "You giving me the high hat!" "Yas fancy pants, all of yas." "You been to college. We only take yeggs what been to college."
It's got a great plot which is a comic updating of Dashiell Hammett's novels and it looks amazing.
The special features has an interview with Barry Sonnenfeld who is now a director, but was the DP on the first three Coen brothers movies which is interesting.
He says most of his career he used wide lenses. He says wide lenses are funny and long lens are "handsome." Miller's Crossing was going to be a handsome movie, so he used long lenses more. He says when he uses a wide lens, he moves his camera to tell the audience where they should look. He talks about how Kubrick uses a wide angle lens in a completely different way. Think of 2001 vs Raising Arizona. He keeps his actors far from the lens which is alienating. Sonnenfeld keeps his actors close to the lens which is more energetic and more comic.
I'm a big fan of deep focus and wide angle movies. Miller's crossing uses long lenses but it doesn't go overboard. The background is soft, but not out of focus. I really dislike the look of directors like Tony Scott who shoot with crazy long lenses and all you see behind the actor's head is big blooming out of focus lights. I think it's a cheat. It's a lazy way of controlling mis-en-scene.
Sonnenfeld also talked about shooting in the forest and how it looks much better when the sky is overcast. He even shot that scene on Fuji film because it's has a softer bluer green than Kodak. Kodak green is more "poppy, vibrant" primary color green.
The Sonnenfeld interview really helps you think of how you use the camera.
Damn that's a great movie.
It's got great dialogue: "Why don't you take your flunky and dangle?" "Hi, Tom what's the rumpus." "They took his hair, Tom. What the hell you suppose that means."
It's got a tommy gun shootup edited to rhythms of "Danny Boy."
It's got great acting down to the smaller parts including a hiliarious turn by Jon Polito. "You giving me the high hat!" "Yas fancy pants, all of yas." "You been to college. We only take yeggs what been to college."
It's got a great plot which is a comic updating of Dashiell Hammett's novels and it looks amazing.
The special features has an interview with Barry Sonnenfeld who is now a director, but was the DP on the first three Coen brothers movies which is interesting.
He says most of his career he used wide lenses. He says wide lenses are funny and long lens are "handsome." Miller's Crossing was going to be a handsome movie, so he used long lenses more. He says when he uses a wide lens, he moves his camera to tell the audience where they should look. He talks about how Kubrick uses a wide angle lens in a completely different way. Think of 2001 vs Raising Arizona. He keeps his actors far from the lens which is alienating. Sonnenfeld keeps his actors close to the lens which is more energetic and more comic.
I'm a big fan of deep focus and wide angle movies. Miller's crossing uses long lenses but it doesn't go overboard. The background is soft, but not out of focus. I really dislike the look of directors like Tony Scott who shoot with crazy long lenses and all you see behind the actor's head is big blooming out of focus lights. I think it's a cheat. It's a lazy way of controlling mis-en-scene.
Sonnenfeld also talked about shooting in the forest and how it looks much better when the sky is overcast. He even shot that scene on Fuji film because it's has a softer bluer green than Kodak. Kodak green is more "poppy, vibrant" primary color green.
The Sonnenfeld interview really helps you think of how you use the camera.