CHUD.com - A Movie Website and SO MUCH MORE. - Blogs

re: 3-D and IMAX (aka I Call Bullshit on Devin)

no@spam.com (Dr. Ultimately) — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 00:00:00 EST

I have a feeling that Devin will probably chalk this up to the fact that since he moved to Los Angeles, I’ve probably invited him out for beers something like ten times, and I’ve never gotten a response.* I am simply – as the headline states – calling bullshit on the idea that IMAX and 3D are gimmicks.

Storytelling has been around for thousands of years, before the written language was even invented. Perhaps early some early hominids felt that words were gimmicks, designed to distract the audience from what was happening on the cave wall. The point is that storytelling is just as much about the experience of what you’re seeing with your eyes as it is about understanding what’s going on in the story with your brain, and when one suffers, both suffer.

At their core, the movies have always been about gimmicks – about wowing the audience – and while new filmmaking technologies allow today’s storytellers to create more elaborate and more complex experiences, they’re trapping them as well. The ability to tell new stories will always be limited by the capabilities of the available technology.

Look at the history of modern cinema:

First you have Muybridge’s photographs, then the zoetrope, then the “magic lantern”, then the lightbulb, then standards were implemented that shrunk some camera negatives down from a whopping three inches (talk about large-format) to a more manageable 35mm size. Optical printing and special effects were commonplace in the days of Pathe (circa 1903; see Dream of the Rarebit Fiend and Magic Boxes). Then came sound, then color. While the anamorphic process was devised almost thirty years prior, the full-scale rollout of a widescreen format in 1953 (Cinemascope, Vistavision, Cinerama, et al) was the studio's desperate attempt to lull viewers back into the theaters after TV took a big wet bite out of the theater experience. 3-D was also invented in the 1920s, enjoyed novelty-status in the 50s (probably also in response to the TV threat), and waned all the way into the 80s. IMAX was developed in the 70s, largely as a special large-format/dome exhibition format. Computer graphics begat watery pseudopods, liquid-metal killers, dinosaurs, aliens, and a new age of cinematic trickery.

The Jesuit philosopher Teilhard de Chardin once observed that “The history of the living world can be summarized as the elaboration of ever more perfect eyes within a cosmos in which there is always something more to be seen.”

So I say embrace IMAX. Embrace 3-D. Remember what it was like to watch a VHS tape after seeing DVDs? Remember what it was like to watch a DVD after getting a Blu-Ray player? With ever more perfect eyes, how could we not want a more perfect way to tell a story?

*Although he did buy me lunch at a Chinese buffet (I’m a cheap date).

CHUDindie Returns?

no@spam.com (Dr. Ultimately) — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 00:00:00 EST

Anyone out there interested in me continuing the CHUDindie column I was doing before? Things got pretty busy for me for awhile and i had to concede my author position to more committed individuals, but I'm interested in doing a semi-regular thing in the blogs where I cover the latest technology for indpendent filmmakers.

Ultimately, Inc. #5

no@spam.com (Dr. Ultimately) — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 00:00:00 EST

This week I watched, in no particular order of viewing or preference:

The Crow
Michael Clayton
The Darjeeling Limited
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
Raiders of the Lost Ark
The Conversation
Alphaville

I pretty much enjoyed all of them.

I also got sick, started on the SNES version of Final Fantasy III, built a little clay backpack and bicycle frame for One Night Kickstand, interviewed Matthew Leonetti for a podcast, wrote three articles for DV Magazine, and went on a tour of Downstream Digital in Portland, OR. It's been a pretty busy week for being relatively unemployed.

Oh yeah - Scrap, a recycled art supply store just northeast of downtown is selling off bits and pieces of the sets from Coraline. I bought probably $100 worth of gels and diffusion, and some fake foliage for $5.

Ultimately, Inc. #4

no@spam.com (Dr. Ultimately) — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 00:00:00 EST

I'm not shooting Manipede! which is a bummer, because I really did like the script (which is rare). The truth of the matter is I had to give it up in preproduction to another DP who could devote more time and effort to it.

In other news, I'm slowly inching towards the conclusion of One Night Kickstand. I'm almost finished building the set, and it's turning out a lot better than I expected. I'll post pictures soon.

I'm eager to be done with this project so I can jump to the next one, tentatively titled The Analog. What is it about? Well, I'm watching Alphaville and The Conversation for inspiration this week, if that's any indication.

Ultimately, Inc. #3

no@spam.com (Dr. Ultimately) — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 00:00:00 EDT

From my written journal, entry on 09/04/08:

"MANIPEDE! My first feature since quitting iO Film. It's a small gig but it's a great script. Matt, the director, seems very eager and open to ideas, and so must I. My biggest problem has always been a lack of respect for the material, and now that I've been given a chance to be a part of something good, swallowing my pride has become a part of my job.

I will trust my instincts.
I will trust and respect my director.
I will trust and respect my crew.
I will be professional.
I will be humble.
I will not argue.
I will think before I speak.
I will pre-plan.

I'm not looking at this as any kind of break, but a reprieve of sorts. After the disaster that was Manje, I didn't see myself ever shooting again.

Meeting with Matt in half an hour. Hope all goes well...

Ultimately, Inc. #2

no@spam.com (Dr. Ultimately) — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 00:00:00 EDT

"In everything you do, have skill."

- something my Motion Picture Language instructor Alan Campbell once told me.

DISCUSS IT WITH SKILL

Ultimately, Inc. #1

no@spam.com (Dr. Ultimately) — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 00:00:00 EDT

"I have come to understand that all language is but substitute vision and, as Teilhard de Chardin has observed, 'The history of the living world can be summarized as the elaboration of ever more perfect eyes within a cosmos in which there is always something more to be seen.'"

- Gene Youngblood, Expanded Cinema, 1970

ULTIMATELY, INC. on the FORUMS

Doing Awesome Things In Los Angeles

no@spam.com (Dr. Ultimately) — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 00:00:00 EDT

Last Friday I saw The Fall and then I rode my bike on the freeway. It was pretty rad.

Pictures after the jump.

Expanded Cinema

no@spam.com (Dr. Ultimately) — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 00:00:00 EDT

I was thinking today about what it would be like if movies were more like books. Think about it. Books and their readers have a very special relationship. The author of a book presents a dramatic narrative to the reader - often times in the abstract forms of similes, analogies, and suggestions - who must then participate by drawing upon personal knowledge and experience to create mental images that complement the story. Each experience is totally unique, and the reader may even generate new images to help rationalize new ideas.

With movies - and I'm talking about the movies we talk about 'round these parts - it's a completely different game. Movies are narrative and visual and audible. They do all the work of telling the story for us, reducing the audience to a passive observer instead of an active participant. If movies and their audience members shared the same relationship that books and their readers enjoy, we'd go to the theater and be presented with a totally visual experience. With no words or dramatic structure to bog us down with confusing details, we have the opportunity to develop our own narratives.

The only downside is when the movie sucks we'll have no one to blame but ourselves.