This is topic MGM keeps dithering about Michael Moore in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.
To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=004142
Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 10-25-2002, 03:09 PM:
Found inside the Bowling For Columbine film cans.
quote:
Post Production Department Memo MGMImportant note regarding "Bowling For Columbine" prints.
The movie was made in a "Documentary" style which means it contains scenes that were filmed using both video and film cameras. Several scenes in the movie may appear soft in focus, the color may not look good, and shots may be overexposed.
This is not a defect and is the intended effect of the director of the movie.
Thank you for your co-operation.
MGM Studios
MGM dithered as to release this film. Now that they have, they are worried about what people will think of the look.
Heck, Michael Moore took half these images off of his TV set!
Well it was nice to get a heads up in the can.
Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 10-25-2002, 03:24 PM:
I ran a screening of "Bowling For Columbine" for Harvey Weinstein
and Michael Moore. Just before Cannes. Miramax passed on the film.
Before the screening Moore's group had me run the first three reels.
To see how it looked and sounded before Harvey got to the room. They started the screening at 10pm on a Sunday night.
Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 10-25-2002, 03:54 PM:
Michael Moore ran his film for the staff of the Telluride Film Festival. We enjoyed the film and we saw nothing wrong with the look of the film. It looks just fine for what it is. We also thought that it was a good treatment of vioence in America.
Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 10-25-2002, 04:46 PM:
You are right Ian , I found nothing wrong with it. I have enjoyed
his other films too.
Posted by Rick Long (Member # 213) on 10-25-2002, 11:11 PM:
We screened it at the Toronto International Film Festival. It looked like exactly what it was, a documentary. Enjoyed it very much.
Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 10-26-2002, 12:39 AM:
As I said in "movie reviews" I though this was a great film. I think that this is one case where the use of video, and film actually made it a better film.
Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 10-26-2002, 11:35 AM:
Didn't the documentary "Trekkies" (came out same time as Episode 1) use a combination of film and video? (video for the interview sequences, film of course for the clips of the movies/shows) Although only 6-10 people showed up for that film, the combination of formats didn't look bad at all. It also seemed that the titles and graphics were added to the finished film, rather than them being on the video and transferred to film.Can't wait to see Bowling for Columbine! 
=TMP=
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 10-26-2002, 11:48 AM:
Trekkies was shot in 16mm and was a very nice blowup. Most of Bowling for Columbine looks like a really big screen TV (which is not a compliment!), although video and 16mm tend to be more acceptible in documentaries than features.
Posted by Brad Haven (Member # 954) on 10-26-2002, 12:00 PM:
When i saw this film, i was enjoying it too much to be thinking about the quality of the images.
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 10-27-2002, 03:15 PM:
Was there anything in the cans of BLAIR WITCH PROJECT giving anyone a heads up to warn that the film was going to looked like a big lump of dog-doo on the screen? Or CHELSEA WALLS or EPISODE 2? If they started doing that, the distribs would have to order additional reams of stationary.