David Lynch's new movie shot in DV

Blue Velvet

Moderator emeritus
Original poster
Jul 4, 2004
21,652
123
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/

;)
 

Blue Velvet

Moderator emeritus
Original poster
Jul 4, 2004
21,652
123
irmongoose said:
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

macrumors regular
Mar 2, 2004
138
0
Adelaide, Australia
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

macrumors 68030
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

Moderator emeritus
Original poster
Jul 4, 2004
21,652
123
irmongoose said:
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

macrumors 68020
Jan 21, 2005
2,265
0
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

macrumors G5
Dec 22, 2004
14,162
19
Chicago, Illinois
Blue Velvet said:
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

Moderator emeritus
Original poster
Jul 4, 2004
21,652
123
leekohler said:
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

macrumors G3
Mar 9, 2002
9,025
1
Blue Velvet said:
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.
 

Savage Henry

macrumors 65816
irmongoose said:
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

Moderator emeritus
Original poster
Jul 4, 2004
21,652
123
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

macrumors G5
Dec 22, 2004
14,162
19
Chicago, Illinois
Blue Velvet said:
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

macrumors G3
Jan 11, 2002
9,366
119
Los Angeles
iGav said:
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
 

iGav

macrumors G3
Mar 9, 2002
9,025
1
LethalWolfe said:
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).

LethalWolfe said:
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).
 

LethalWolfe

macrumors G3
Jan 11, 2002
9,366
119
Los Angeles
iGav said:
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."

Blue Velvet/ said:
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
 

James Philp

macrumors 65816
Mar 5, 2005
1,494
0
Oxford/London
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

macrumors G3
Jan 11, 2002
9,366
119
Los Angeles
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).


James Philp said:
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