Cinematography

I prefer when they don't try to emulate film grain. For me digital noise is it's own magic. Otherwise it cheapens the whole idea: we want it to look like film, but we won't use film.
 
Last edited:
Reeves shot Alexa 65 on War because it’s simply much more practical to shoot a completely performance capture driven film that way (that plus large format so to speak). That’s exactly why Spielberg and Kaminski were forced to shoot The BFG on the Alexa (they only shoot on 35mm).

I’m not waxing lyrical, I’m incredibly passionate about celluloid, have studied it for years, I’m also a filmmaker and if I can never, ever shoot digitally, I would be elated. There’s never a time when watching even some of the great digital work where I don’t think “wish it was shot on film, too clean, too sterile, ugh”.

I remember Fraser actually saying he was eager to shoot on film again on Vice. “It has an instant nostalgic quality and an inherent texture that brings a certain spirit to the image.” Kinda what I’m talking about.

“I am so pleased to see that film is getting a good run with more filmmakers not just using celluloid but shooting with it really well- movies such as First Man, Dunkirk and BlacKkKlansman. Celluloid has an underlying spirit that I think filmgoers really respond to as well. The results look great, and I’d like to think the same can be said about Vice.”

Anyway, I’m sure it’ll look great and yes, some practical considerations may be behind it but yeah....

And I'm also a filmmaker! :funny: You're preaching to the choir here, my friend. Two of my favorite films of the last two years were shot on film (Suspiria and The Lighthouse).

Granted I'd hardly that I've accomplished much in my career thus far. Hell, I've only had the luxury of working with film stock on any project I've been involved in once, where we shot an indie music video for a local band on 8mm film. But at the same time, I do think there are genuine reasons to film a movie on digital cameras beyond practicality.

Did you see Ari Aster's Midsommar? Gorgeous film with rich colors and stunning camera work. It was shot on a Large Format digital camera (the Panavision DXL2) and the way Panavision's color science on the camera worked allowed for Ari and his cinematographer to push the colors in the film to insane Technicolor-like limits as the story became increasingly more psychedelic overtime.

Actually, have you watched the video of Fraser speaking out about his love of Large Format cameras? Because he brings up Vice in that video and that while he doesn't dislike the look of 35mm or other smaller film stocks like 16mm or 8mm, he's just more fond of the look that you get from Large Format compared to Super 35. So it seems to me that for Fraser in particular, the whole matter comes down to a question of which suits the story he's filming more; the texture of celluloid film stock versus the more immersive visual quality of Large Format?
 
Joker was shot on an Alexa 65 and it actually fooled me into thinking it was film. Didn't know until I looked it up.

I do still think there's an intangible, nostalgic quality to film. The difference is probably imperceptible to the vast majority of viewers, but I do think the more discerning eyes can see it/feel it.

I'm totally cool with The Batman being shot digitally, Fraser does fantastic work and I'm sure the film is going to look gorgeous and it's going to be something fresh for the franchise. That said, considering the classic noir influence being emphasized and what I imagine will be a gritty aesthetic, I was a bit surprised. But again, Joker's results are pretty hard to argue with if you're looking for a direct and relevant comparison point.
 
Joker is a stunner. If we're getting something of similar quality in Batman, hoo boy. And I'm not even sure I can settle on anything inferior. Nolan's Batman and Mangold's Logan were the only CBMs of the last decade with legit great cinematography. And now Joker.
 
I'm definitely one of those people smiling while watching Joker in cinema, thinking it was shot on film. :hehe:
 
This is good, as it's why I'm not convinced that they are riffing on Se7en in terms of the look. If you look at his other films, it looks consistent with Frasier's past cinematography combined with an advancement of both him and Reeves as a filmmaker if you look at his past films too. That orange-ish lighting you see in The Batman trailer with the lamp lights is similar to the way the lights are in Let Me In and how Frasier uses room light in his others. It just looks more attuned to the world of Batman. I can see why Reeves selected Frasier for this movie.
 
Last edited:
This is good, as it's why I'm not convinced that they are riffing on Se7en in terms of the look. If you look at his other films, it looks consistent with Frasier's past cinematography combined with an advancement of both him and Reeves as a filmmaker if you look at his past films too. That orange-ish lighting you see in The Batman trailer with the lamp lights is similar to the way the lights are in Let Me In and how Frasier uses room light in his others. It just looks more attuned to the world of Batman. I can see why Reeves selected Frasier for this movie.

Very true, but I do believe that there are at least some deliberate inspirations of evoking David Fincher's visual style on Matt Reeves' end. There had been several relatively reliable rumors over the past few years that Reeves was looking at films like Se7en and Zodiac as inspiration for his take on Batman.

That said, I love how much the video highlights how Fraser's style of filming is aimed more as a supporting role in the service of the story and actors. He adjusts his techniques and gear to best serve the scene at hand. It's a great, subtle approach to the job IMO.
 
Very true, but I do believe that there are at least some deliberate inspirations of evoking David Fincher's visual style on Matt Reeves' end. There had been several relatively reliable rumors over the past few years that Reeves was looking at films like Se7en and Zodiac as inspiration for his take on Batman.

That said, I love how much the video highlights how Fraser's style of filming is aimed more as a supporting role in the service of the story and actors. He adjusts his techniques and gear to best serve the scene at hand. It's a great, subtle approach to the job IMO.

Do you remember where those rumors were? I'd like to see them. I stand by what I say for now, but if Reeves comes out and says Fincher was an influence, it's understandable. I guess I'm just trying to engage in these things in a more in depth way.
 
I hope there's a shot similar to this...

bc000d807f29af3524b3f6b125a8317c79621ad3.gifv
 
I always wondered about this, but was the actor playing Doe (as I'm not sure it was really Spacey in that scene) wearing a dark mask? It's particularly noticeable when he is running through traffic. Either that, or they darkened his face using makeup. Either way, I think it's actually a pretty cool costume.
 
My only nitpick is the ear/head silhouette is a bit weak looking. Keaton still has the best "outline" in his respect.

But yeah, absolutely gorgeous shot. Been waiting forever for a fully realized fantastical Gotham that doesn't look fake, and this might finally be it.
 
My only nitpick is the ear/head silhouette is a bit weak looking. Keaton still has the best "outline" in his respect.

But yeah, absolutely gorgeous shot. Been waiting forever for a fully realized fantastical Gotham that doesn't look fake, and this might finally be it.

The ears are very thin and that becomes more apparent when they're not in focus. To be completely honest I still don't completely love the cowl in general, but I also don't really care at all when the overall visuals of the film look to be top notch.
 
I still love the shot of Bats rising against the skeleton gang after the beatdown. This shot is great though just to show how determined he is at the fight assuming he's worked until the sunrise in that shot.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"