PDA

View Full Version : David Lynch's new movie shot in DV




Blue Velvet
May 15, 2005, 06:15 AM
It's subject matter is... surprise, surprise.

"It's about a woman in trouble, and it's a mystery, and that's about all I want to say about it," he comments diffidently.


Working title is "INLAND EMPIRE" (his caps), he goes on to say...

"I started working in DV for my Web site, and I fell in love with the medium. It's unbelievable, the freedom and the incredible different possibilities it affords, in shooting and in post-production."
"For me, there's no way back to film. I'm done with it," Lynch says. "I love abstraction. Film is a beautiful medium, but it's very slow and you don't get a chance to try a lot of different things. With DV, you get those chances. And in post-production, if you can think it, you can do it."


As for the quality of the DV image, Lynch says,

"It looks different. Some would say it looks bad. But it reminds me of early 35mm, that didn't have that tight grain. When you have a poor image, there's lots more room to dream."
"But I've done tests transferring DV to film, and there are all kinds of controls to dial in the look you want."


To me, this comes as surprise considering the lengths he's gone to in the past to get his pictures just so... although maybe not to a Kubrickian level of perfection.

Anyways, a little more over at:
http://www.lynchnet.com/

;)



LethalWolfe
May 15, 2005, 07:23 PM
Hmmm... hopefully it's not some self-indulgent piece of crap.


Lethal

irmongoose
May 15, 2005, 08:04 PM
That guy's still alive? Thought he must have buried himself by now...




irmongoose

Blue Velvet
May 15, 2005, 08:15 PM
That guy's still alive? Thought he must have buried himself by now...

Still around to pick up nominations from the Academy and best director awards at Cannes.

rugonnaeatthat
May 15, 2005, 08:35 PM
I'm a big fan of David Lynch. I think he makes beautiful movies that are a journey of abstraction & multiple story lines, rather than a movie that travels from point a to point b and finishes on c. I think the problem people have with his movies is they sit and analyze and try to make sense of it all when David Lynch is not giving you all the facts, this is of course intentional. The nature of the brain is to find order, his movies tickle the brain whilst transporting you to a different reality; I enjoy them immensely.

I found the point about moving DV back to film very interesting to get that 'film effect'.

irmongoose
May 15, 2005, 08:43 PM
Still winning at Cannes? Hmm... well, well.
I loved Eraserhead. I loved Twin Peaks (the TV series). I enjoyed Blue Velvet (not you).

However, I disliked The Straight Story and I more than disliked Mulholland Drive.

So, naturally, I thought he was getting worse and worse, and would soon dig himself into a hole.

This new one should give me a clear idea if he has done just that.



irmongoose

Blue Velvet
May 15, 2005, 09:33 PM
However, I disliked The Straight Story and I more than disliked Mulholland Drive.

When I first saw Mulholland Drive in the cinema, I was extremely disappointed, although that was eased knowing a little about the troubled route from production to final cut.

Seeing it a few more times on DVD recently had persuaded me that it is far better than I gave it credit for unlike Lost Highway.

Anyway, not intending to debate the films of David Lynch per se. Just found it interesting that a director who's worked with Freddie Francis is now prepared to work with DV for cinematic releases.

ham_man
May 15, 2005, 09:37 PM
Not too big on whoever this guy is, but I think that shooting in DV is great for everyone involved. It allows for innovative and creative uses of video. In fact, this evening I just saw a piece on the news about Richard Linklaters new movie "A Scanner Darkly". It is like an animated movie, where the animation is put on afterwards. The whole film is filmed, then using some program lines and colors are made to make the movie look like it was animated. Also, they are doing this all on G5s... :rolleyes:

leekohler
May 15, 2005, 09:56 PM
When I first saw Mulholland Drive in the cinema, I was extremely disappointed, although that was eased knowing a little about the troubled route from production to final cut.

Seeing it a few more times on DVD recently had persuaded me that it is far better than I gave it credit for unlike Lost Highway.

Anyway, not intending to debate the films of David Lynch per se. Just found it interesting that a director who's worked with Freddie Francis is now prepared to work with DV for cinematic releases.

I liked both Lost Highway and Mulholland Drive along with The Straight Story. I feel that most people don't like to think when they watch film and therefore dismiss Lynch's work. This man will be regarded as THE genius of our time, trust me. Guys-Lynch takes patience and perseverence, all the films make sense and once you get them, they're amazing and rewarding.

Blue Velvet
May 16, 2005, 02:20 AM
This man will be regarded as THE genius of our time, trust me.

With my 'tar, I'm certainly not disputing that. Every genius has an off-day, though... :)

iGav
May 16, 2005, 10:33 AM
Anyway, not intending to debate the films of David Lynch per se. Just found it interesting that a director who's worked with Freddie Francis is now prepared to work with DV for cinematic releases.

I'm surprised he hasn't got round to employing DV before. Films such as 'Session 9' (shot on Sony's 24p HD) proved that you can capture film/Kubrick rivalling atmospheric vista's digitally.

leekohler
May 16, 2005, 10:47 AM
With my 'tar, I'm certainly not disputing that. Every genius has an off-day, though... :)

Yes- like Wild at Heart. That was an absolute mess.

Blue Velvet
May 16, 2005, 10:49 AM
Yes- like Wild at Heart. That was an absolute mess.

I love it. Rambling, stupid, insane but I still love it.

leekohler
May 16, 2005, 11:03 AM
I love it. Rambling, stupid, insane but I still love it.

I've really tried to like it. I just don't. And we both agree it's rambling and stupid. :)

Savage Henry
May 16, 2005, 11:49 AM
However, I disliked The Straight Story and I more than disliked Mulholland Drive.
As much as I agree with you on the second part, I have to cconfess to liking Straight Story. There are not enough films written about septuagenarians taking coming-of-longer-age road trips on lawnmowers ... Lynch saw the niche ... score! No really, I did enjoy it.

Blue Velvet
May 16, 2005, 12:30 PM
Even a poor Lynch movie is more thought-provoking, entertaining, mysterious and conversation-worthy than 99% of the schlock that passes across our cinema screens.

leekohler
May 16, 2005, 03:05 PM
Even a poor Lynch movie is more thought-provoking, entertaining, mysterious and conversation-worthy than 99% of the schlock that passes across our cinema screens.

That's so true. Most everything is rehash and dull. Do you go to many film festivals? Those are usually the best places to see good work.

LethalWolfe
May 16, 2005, 05:08 PM
I'm surprised he hasn't got round to employing DV before. Films such as 'Session 9' (shot on Sony's 24p HD) proved that you can capture film/Kubrick rivalling atmospheric vista's digitally.

woah, stop right there, cowboy. :p

H-U-G-E difference between DV and HD.

From what it sounds like Lynch is running around w/a standard def, $4-$5000 prosumer camera. Not a $100,000 CineAlta (Sony's HDCAM camera).

Hopefully Lynch's DV movie will yield better results than those of other established directors who experimented w/DV in the past.

IMO "Session 9" was flat and too bright. It felt very un-scary to me. Although I think most of that were user issues and not camera issues.


Lethal

aswitcher
May 16, 2005, 05:30 PM
So is he editing on a Mac?
:D

iGav
May 17, 2005, 07:22 AM
woah, stop right there, cowboy. :p

H-U-G-E difference between DV and HD.

I'm very much aware of that thanks ;) :p

I don't know much about Lynch and I don't care much for his movies so I've no idea if previously he was something of a film traditionalist. My point was that is that I'm surprised he's only just beginning to consider the use of digital formats in the filming process (whether it be DV or HD).

IMO "Session 9" was flat and too bright. It felt very un-scary to me.

I don't think they were going for the scary look though, it's a massively atmospheric film, with some incredible sweeping and tracking shots (very Kubrick infact) most of which were naturally lit (a trick that would've been difficult to pull of with conventional film).

Blue Velvet
May 17, 2005, 07:50 AM
Given his fondness for 2.35:1, what formats would support that?

LethalWolfe
May 17, 2005, 12:43 PM
I don't think they were going for the scary look though, it's a massively atmospheric film, with some incredible sweeping and tracking shots (very Kubrick infact) most of which were naturally lit (a trick that would've been difficult to pull of with conventional film).

Scary might have been the wrong word. When I watched it (and this was probably 2-3 years ago) I never felt like the visuals complemented the story. It felt too open, and light, and safe. Sense you brought up Kubrick, there were ways that the hotel in "The Shining" were shot that were subtley unnerving. It might just be a shot of a big, empty normal looking room but the way it was done was unsettling. I never got the same feeling w/ "Session 9."


Given his fondness for 2.35:1, what formats would support that?


From what I've heard I think if you shoot in 16:9 mode on a 4:3 camera and have an anamorphic adapter on it you can get around 2.35:1 but I don't know how good the image quality would be.

I'd assume he's just using an anamorphic adapter on a 4:3 DV camera and that would make it 1.85:1.


Lethal

Abstract
May 17, 2005, 10:40 PM
Can someone explain Mulholland Drive in a nutshell, because I saw that film last year and by the end, I couldn't stop blinking and thinking of lesbians.

James Philp
May 17, 2005, 10:47 PM
Wasn't the Mann film "Collateral" shot on DV? (be it high-def DV)
That's what he goes on about in the commentary track, because there was very little lighting used, and only video would pick up the required definition.

LethalWolfe
May 17, 2005, 11:05 PM
Okay, not to pick nits but DV does not refer to HD and there is no such thing as "high-def DV." "DV" (capital "D" capital "V") is a specific video format, it's not a generic term. "Digital video" is a generic term. "DV" is not. And MiniDV is DV format video, but just on a smaller sized tape (hence the "mini" part).


Wasn't the Mann film "Collateral" shot on DV? (be it high-def DV)
That's what he goes on about in the commentary track, because there was very little lighting used, and only video would pick up the required definition.

Most of the movie was shot on HD because it provided the look Mann wanted.


Lethal

Blue Velvet
May 18, 2005, 12:33 AM
Can someone explain Mulholland Drive in a nutshell, because I saw that film last year and by the end, I couldn't stop blinking and thinking of lesbians.

In the first frames we hear someone breathing and the camera settles towards a pillow. In a nutshell, the film is a dream of an aspiring actress's rise to fame in Hollywood, instead of her infatuation and obsession with a star, degradation, and eventual suicide.

That's as best as I can do within one short paragraph.

Eniregnat
May 18, 2005, 03:04 AM
Still winning at Cannes? Hmm... well, well.
I loved Eraserhead. I loved Twin Peaks (the TV series). I enjoyed Blue Velvet (not you).

However, I disliked The Straight Story and I more than disliked Mulholland Drive.

I agree about Twin Peaks, but I have to say that the Straight Story was one of the best written screenplays ever. I thought it was going to be stupid, but wow. I never thought that I would be sitting on the edge of my chair watching a man drive a tractor at 15miles an hour, but I was.

Lynch loves the Bobs Bigboy near Burbank. I really wanted to win the Lunch with Lynch contest, but alas, all I can do is get Pappy Parkers Chicken Snack solomente.

I do hope that this new film is a little more coherent than Mullhullland Drive- though I think I got it. I just wan’t more people to see his films so that he keeps making them.

aswitcher
May 18, 2005, 05:46 AM
Can someone explain Mulholland Drive in a nutshell, because I saw that film last year and by the end, I couldn't stop blinking and thinking of lesbians.


You need to see Bound by the Wachowskis ;)

milatchi
May 25, 2005, 03:43 PM
Do you go to many film festivals? Those are usually the best places to see good work.
Yes, I try to go to film festivals but I usually find that 90% of what is shown is rehash, and dull. The other 10% are often diamonds hidden among coal, and it's often an arduous task sifting through the crap to find the real jewels.

So is he editing on a Mac?
:D
From what I understand, David Lynch not only edits on the Mac using FCP, but his website is run by 20 or so PowerMac G4's.

Just for the record my roomate is a big David Lynch fan, and I've seen most of his work. I for one am glad Lynch is still around trying to keep art alive.

Frisco
May 29, 2005, 10:31 AM
Can someone explain Mulholland Drive in a nutshell, because I saw that film last year and by the end, I couldn't stop blinking and thinking of lesbians.

The film is a satire of Hollywood, the star system, the corruption of producers, their connections with the Mafia.

Here's a good Review (http://wl.middlebury.edu/storyritual/stories/storyReader$255)