This is topic Driven in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews 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=4;t=000136

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 04-27-2001, 05:40 AM:
 
Renny Harlin is at it again, and his latest music video is a piece of .

First, if anyone reading this actually knows Renny, please smack him and remind him that he is making a MOVIE and NOT A MUSIC VIDEO! The cinematography was crap. The directing was crap. The acting was crap. And Ray Charles must've mixed the sound.

At any single moment in the entire film did I give a shit about the characters? Hmmm, let me think real hard here. Aaaaaaah. Hmmmmmm, geez that's a big NO!

Was the cast made up of horrible actors? No, it isn't the cast's fault for the bad performances...it's the directing. I've seen these people in other movies and they performed very well. In Driven they overacted.

Check out that fabulous editing and cinematography. (Well, if you want to call it that.) About the only good thing I can say is the movie WAS scope and the colors were excellent. Past that, I think Renny got a half a dozen cameras on the set, placed them all in a row beside each other, and then proceeded to randomly cut back and forth between almost identical shots throughout the dialogue scenes to try and evoke some sort of emotion. Well Renny, it didn't work and like I said before, this ain't no music video. All I have to say is the idea of putting a racetrack announcer in the audio mix was a DAMN GOOD IDEA. If that had not've been in the mix, I would not have been able to tell what the hell was going on, for the storyboard, shots and most importantly that thing they called "editing" was just plain bad. There were sections of the race scenes that went on for 10...15...20 seconds with NOTHING BUT CLOSEUP SHOTS OF THE ACTOR'S EYES, WHEELS SPINNING, THE FRONT OF THE CAR, AND BASICALLY NOTHING BUT THE ANNOUNCER TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WAS GOING ON! Wow is the editing bad on this flick!!!

Then there is of course the whole "music video" thing coming into play yet again. Apparently Renny didn't think that a single minute of this flick should pass without music playing. Some scenes which were supposed to be emotional just had us all laughing the music was so overdone.

Now assuming you make it to the END of this waste of film, take extra note to the dialogue mix in the final few minutes of the movie. (Yes, just after our "hero" wins the race to make him #1 in the world...or some such nonsense that you will most certainly not care about. Didn't see THAT one coming!) What are they saying? Beats me, because it is buried in the noise of the crowd cheering and the blaring music! Was it the sound system? Nope. After the movie we even checked levels and everything was perfectly on target to Dolby specs. But it isn't just that final scene, the audio mix (in respect to the dialogue levels) on this film is bad throughout. Some scenes the dialogue was too loud and in others it was undiscernable. Apparently the mixers knew this film was so bad that the audience just assumes not hear the script anyway.

Oh well, just avoid it.



 


Posted by Don Anderson (Member # 397) on 04-27-2001, 07:57 PM:
 
I agree, it is shit. Just how much more skin can Reynolds have stretched on his face? Were the cameramen on crystal-meth? I grew tired of the jittery and zooming of the head shots, bad lighting, and gosh awful script. Save your precious time and watch the trailer over and over again, as it doesn't get much better than that. I took a friend to see it and basically guessed how every scene would be shot, and i was right about 90% of the time, including the thrusting of the trouphy in the air freeze frame ending. Really lame digital effects throughout the film too! How can the fuel in those cars burn in water, I thought that fuel was extinguished with H2O on contact.
 
Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 04-28-2001, 04:21 AM:
 
have not seen the movie yet but have seen the trailer. Just how many indy cars have u seen race in the rain or water. They have racing slicks they would hydroplane all over the place. Much rather watch days of thunder than this one anyway.
 
Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 04-28-2001, 05:57 PM:
 
Open wheel racing on a Grand Prix circuit will race in rain. They have treaded tires in addition to slicks.

(Haven't seen Driven, but I ran a screening of Super Speedway this morning!)


 


Posted by Will Morrow (Member # 792) on 04-28-2001, 06:03 PM:
 
Darryl: The movie addresses the issue you speak of. The cars for this type of racing are fitted with "rain tires". They are cut to run in the water. Wally Dalenback (Spelling) was consulted on the racing scenes, and he knows his stuff when it comes to racing. I would venture to guess that his input was taken quite seriously, but this is Hollywood, so who knows for sure.
:-)
 
Posted by Don Anderson (Member # 397) on 04-29-2001, 05:31 PM:
 
Will, but what about the quarters on the tires? Oh come on, do they actually expect the audience to believe this crap. I'm glad I don't have to pay to watch this junk.
 
Posted by Aaron Haney (Member # 747) on 05-01-2001, 01:10 AM:
 
Brad, you're not kidding when you say this thing had excellent colors. Wow!! Do all the prints look as colorful as the one I saw? The bright reds of the pit area just jumped out of the screen! And there was another scene in a nightclub with lots of colored lights everywhere that had me drooling. It was almost like a dye-transfer print!

I noticed in the end credits that it said "Printed on FujiFilm products". Yes, I'm certain I read that right. It definitely said "printed". Could that have something to do with it? Does Fuji even make release print stocks?

In any case, I'd say it's worth seeing this film just to have a look at the colors, assuming all the prints look as good as the one I saw.


 


Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-01-2001, 02:13 PM:
 
Yes Fuji makes release print film stock and this movie was on Fuji. However, (although I am not a cinematographer) I would say it has more to do with how the film was shot than anything else. The basic idea of film stocks is to accurately reproduce what the filmmaker wanted and not to "boost colors". Do you remember "Gone in 60 Seconds"? That movie had magnificent colors in it and was printed on Kodak Vision stock.
 
Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 05-02-2001, 10:48 AM:
 
The "look" of a movie is very much affected by the lighting and use of filtration to control sharpness, contrast and color. Kodak offers many different camera films, offering a wide choice of speed and "look":
Kodak Camera Film Data

We also offer both KODAK VISION and VISION Premier print films, depending upon the "look" desired in the prints:

Kodak VISION Color Print Film 2383

Kodak VISION Premier Color Print Film 2393

Finally, the labs offer variations on the standard processing, which can be used to achieve a certain "look":
Processing Techniques

"American Cinematographer" magazine has excellent articles that discuss the techniques cinematographers use to achieve the "look" desired:
American Cinematographer Magazine

Kodak's "In Camera" publication likewise has article about cinematography:
Kodak "In Camera" Magazine
Free Kodak Newsletters

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion


 


Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 05-25-2001, 10:27 PM:
 
I watched part of this movie and walked out. I give it (Four shits)

I agree with all the above criticisms so I won't belabor those points.

What really bothered me is the complete lack of reality:
Formula One cars racing down busy city streets... sucking up manhole covers (which were flat frisbee-like things and not the "dished" ones like in real life)... shooting sparks out the back ends at seemingly random times and for no reason. Now, tell me... how the hell could a car launch a manhole cover, break plate glass windows when they fly by, blow hundreds of newspapers all over the place and yet when a girl's skirt gets "blown up" she isn't killed by the (supposed) shockwave? -- Okay...It's a MOVIE! The laws of physics don't apply. (Unless it's part of the plot.) I'll give you that. But, still... after all this mayhem the cops don't descend upon them and haul them away in a paddy wagon??? They just have this LAME dialogue on the "philosophy of victory" and walk away. It isn't until several minutes that we are inforned by a TV announcer (or something like that) they were "fined $25,000" for this "incident". No... in real life they would be doing at least 90 days in a county jail!

Take a look at the cockpit of these "super cars". They have these complicated LED displays attached to the steering wheels. Not only are they too complicated for a driver who is supposed to be paying attention to the road ahead of him, they TURN when the wheel moves, rendering them illegible when the wheel is turned upside down. This reminded me of those sci-fi movies where the space helmets have lights inside them to show the actors' faces. Of course, you would never be able to see out of them from the glare.... but HEY! This is a movie, right? Everything has to look "pretty" and "futuristic" so damn any semblence of reality!

Now, for the final blow to reality... one of the cars runs off the track in the afformentioned rain storm. It hits an embankment, flies an impossibly far distance and lands upside down in waist deep water. There is all this talk of the car blowing up because of the leaked fuel. Number one: everybldy KNOWS that Formula One cars run on ALCOHOL! The fuel would be diluted by the water and could NEVER be ignited. Now, when the inevitable explistion DOES happen there is this nice ORANGE fire ball! Alcohol burns with an invisible flame! Then, to add insult to injury, everybody walks away from the crash!

This is about the 9,000,000 th time I've said, "This is just a MOVIE!" So why do I keep worrying about it?
All of these "fantastic" events are supposed to make you "feel" for the characters. You're supposed to be scared when they are inches away from certain death, right? Well, the incredulity spoils the effect! If I KNOW that they could never be harmed then there is no "relief" at the end of the scene when the characters make it out alive! To tell you the truth I wanted them to DIE but since the events that took place were so implausible I was subjected to yet another let-down!
 






Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2