"Club Penton" - Ask questions to Hollywood insider "Penton-Man"

[wallendo]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Sci-fi is chock full of romances. For example I think you'd get a kick out of Firefly, and the stuff between Inara and Mal Penton Or how about Han and Leia?

Or, if you live in the Mountains of Tennessee: "Luke and Leia".

Who says sci-fi doesn't address major social issues.

[Sponge-worthy]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Sci-fi is chock full of romances. For example I think you'd get a kick out of Firefly, and the stuff between Inara and Mal Penton Or how about Han and Leia?

How about Hal 9000 and Dave Bowman? You can just sleep outside Mister!

[Jeff Kleist]

Or, if you live in the Mountains of Tennessee: "Luke and Leia".

Who says sci-fi doesn't address major social issues.

First Midnight showing of Empire Special edition. We wait for it, and at the right moment yell "INCEST!". Whole theater died laughing

That's the only show you can do that at

How about Hal 9000 and Dave Bowman? You can just sleep outside Mister!

There's a lot of off-color jokes I can make about that one, but I'll restrain myself. If you look in that contest, I guess the good Doctor can find all kinds of symbolism in the brain yanking scene

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

There's a lot of off-color jokes I can make about that one, but I'll restrain myself. If you look in that contest, I guess the good Doctor can find all kinds of symbolism in the brain yanking scene

I can feel it...

Originally Posted by SpaceDog

I would love to run a movie theater that forcibly ejects rude patrons and prohibits any stripe of "child" after 10pm.

Anyone else first read that as nude patrons? I was going to say depends on who...but usually the people who do are the ones you don't want to ever see...

[Jeff Kleist]

I would love to run a movie theater that forcibly ejects rude patrons and prohibits any stripe of "child" after 10pm.

Our arthouse used to have ties to...ummm...local <B>Families</B>, and Bruno (no not that one) would come out and perform those duties. Children under 16 only with adult and not after 6. Then Mark Cuban bought the chain so I dunno how they get rid of them now

[SpaceDog]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

I can feel it...



Anyone else first read that as nude patrons? I was going to say depends on who...but usually the people who do are the ones you don't want to ever see...

nude may or may not be rude depending on the patron.

[Jeff Kleist]

Figure people here might get a kick out of this

http://www.criterion.com/current/posts/1332

[Penton-Man]

From fan (PM) mail -
Regarding The Challenge (as to what scenes in Public Enemies were shot on film and which scenes were shot digitally), Kris, it looks like you set the bait (perhaps inadvertently) and ole Art couldn’t resist the opportunity to take a bite and 'enlighten' everyone………..

Originally Posted by Kris Deering

PE was shot with a variety of cameras including Super 35. So it is hard to say what camera was used for what scene.

Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn

Indoor bank robbery scenes from distance were often beautifully detailed. Once again look at the Pretty Boy Floyd scene in the orchard, just the opposite.

Of course Art ^ is the same guy who has claimed in the past that he can unequivocally differentiate ‘soft’ cinematography due to diffusion from dnr applied to Blu-ray movies.

As an aside, people should keep in mind that Public Enemies is about as indicative of the true capability of the F23 to mimic the look of film, as is Che (esp. Part 2: Guerilla) for the true capability of the RedOne camera to do the same, with the later motion picture (not yet released on Blu-ray) ‘plagued’ with hard clipped highlights and increased depth of field (compared to the traditional film camera look)………all Director intended also.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

You know, I just realized that I have never really made a contribution to the gamer dudes on this forum.
So, all you guys/gals who are still in the schooling phase, consider this my contribution to your passion. Send in your C.V.’s here………….
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/video?id=7173435

One more............
This just reinforces what I personally have always believed as to which is truly the *stronger* sex……..“The women play more intensely than the guys do,” Williams said. “They’re less likely to quit, and they’re happier playing.” -

http://uscnews.usc.edu/digital_media...ual_world.html

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by horseflesh

Including handsome A-list actors too??

Cell phones were forbidden on-set.
And that included eh-vreeeeeeeeeeeeeee-one.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

I am glad to see others have the same attitude as I do in regards to shaking the damn camera. For me, it gives films a “cheap” look and disconnects me from the story. Story tellers seem to have forgotten “its what in front of the lens that counts, not the lens itself”. I have ejected many a movie after only a few minutes because of the shooting style, these included......

Well Wendell, (b.t.w. long time no see ), you should love the shooting style of Inglourious Basterds as it is pure classical with everything shot by way of crane or dolly movements.

I recall no shaky cam at all and reportedly only one Steadicam shot made it to the final cut.
I really liked the theatrical presentation and hope to watch the Blu-ray this weekend.

[Sussudio]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Well Wendell, (b.t.w. long time no see ), you should love the shooting style of Inglourious Basterds as it is pure classical with everything shot by way of crane or dolly movements.

I recall no shaky cam at all and reportedly only one Steadicam shot made it to the final cut.
I really liked the theatrical presentation and hope to watch the Blu-ray this weekend.

That's one of the reasons I love it...the cinematography reminds me of a Sergio Leone movie

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Well Wendell, (b.t.w. long time no see ), you should love the shooting style of Inglourious Basterds as it is pure classical with everything shot by way of crane or dolly movements.

I recall no shaky cam at all and reportedly only one Steadicam shot made it to the final cut.
I really liked the theatrical presentation and hope to watch the Blu-ray this weekend.

Originally Posted by Sussudio

That's one of the reasons I love it...the cinematography reminds me of a Sergio Leone movie

It marks Quentin's return to glorious anamorphic Panavison as well.

[Sponge-worthy]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

As an aside, people should keep in mind that Public Enemies is about as indicative of the true capability of the F23 to mimic the look of film, as is Che (esp. Part 2: Guerilla) for the true capability of the RedOne camera to do the same, with the later motion picture (not yet released on Blu-ray) ‘plagued’ with hard clipped highlights and increased depth of field (compared to the traditional film camera look)………all Director intended also.

Speaking of Che, can anyone shed some light as to why the two "Parts" employ different aspect ratios?

[horseflesh]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Well Wendell, (b.t.w. long time no see ), you should love the shooting style of Inglourious Basterds as it is pure classical with everything shot by way of crane or dolly movements.

I recall no shaky cam at all and reportedly only one Steadicam shot made it to the final cut.
I really liked the theatrical presentation and hope to watch the Blu-ray this weekend.

Basterds is great, I watched it again the other night when my BD arrived.
I loved how it was shot too, it has a "classic" un-gimmicky feel to it. I actually looked up Robert Richardson after I watched it, and he's certainly worked with some heavyweight directors.
Marty S. seems to like him

I'm still trying to decide between Inglourious Basterds and Up for my film of the year.

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by Sponge-worthy

Speaking of Che, can anyone shed some light as to why the two "Parts" employ different aspect ratios?

Aesthetically, it mirrors the divide in narrative tone, from the "epic", widescreen rise of him as a freedom fighter, to the more claustrophobic, almost pedestrian death at the end.

On a technical level, I believe the entirety of part 2 is shot on the Red (and then, as Penton states, DI'd to some sort of weird, halucinagenic, blown highlight/desaturated mess), while the first part was shot on a combination of 16/35 with some Red as well.

Think of Part One as a glossy, traditional biopic with some Oliver Stone-like play with film stock (a la JFK), while Part Two remains resolutely documentary in style.

Oh, wait, who "shot" JFK (the film) again? Ah, conceptual continuity at its best....

I had a chance to see the public Premiere at TIFF in 2008 in one sitting, and while the first half is a far better/more enjoyable film, independent of the choices of capture technology (the rise is more fun than the fall), taken in its entirety the Che project a hell of an accomplishment, and Del Toro is rediculously amazing.


As I said at the time (http://filmfest.ca/2008tiff/09.html):

First the good - Benicio is simply mesmerizing in his portrayal. Soderbergh crafts the film in an effective way, and the supporting characters provide convincing and memorable performances (helpful when trying to keep everyone straight in your head). The challenge, however, is that the first half of the flick (basically the first movie), telling the tale of Cuba and the rise of Che and Castro, is so compelling, so richly drawn and performed, that the Bolivian scenes of Che's descent are an inevitable disappointment.

The screening had both halves of the tale stuck together with a brief intermission (each is dubbed, apparently, The Argentinian and The Guerrilla respectively, although we had no credits at all). This break further emphasized the fact that the first portion was far more of an enjoyable, accessible film than the latter half. Still, taken together, this epic tale is an insightful, audacious film, lovingly shot and quite astonishing in its scope. A commendable effort, and if not a total success, still certainly a worthwhile film to visit.

[jdc115]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

As I said at the time (http://filmfest.ca/2008tiff/09.html):

sharkshark,

Is that your site? I was wondering where I found that, I went back through all the years and found a lot of great selections to go explore. If it is yours, thanks for the good work

[sharkshark]

Hey, cheers... Very kind of you to say so, and publicly!

Now, if I could get off my butt and make it a real, CMS driven site it'd be a happy thing... So easy to be so lazy with ones own site, and I've yet to find a killer review-site theme for Wordpress, Joomla, Modx, etc.

Meh. Now you've got me talking nerd.

[woodspoon]

Hi Penton, can you give us your take on the blu-ray 3D format? Any inside info you can tell? I just hope someone publishes DIAL M FOR MURDER in the format...

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by horseflesh

I actually looked up Robert Richardson after I watched it, and he's certainly worked with some heavyweight directors.
Marty S. seems to like him

While I must admit, I'm not a fan of Richardson, I have to say I very much like his work in Basterds. For the most part, I think, he kept a lot of his idiosyncrasies in check.*





* Don't get me wrong- I'm all in favor of cinematographers developing and applying their own idiosyncrasies, in general; I'm just not so hot on Robert Richardson's particular aesthetic