Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Steven Speilberg votes NO on digital filming!

This is topic Steven Speilberg votes NO on digital filming! in forum Film-Yak 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=8;t=000954

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 06-04-2002, 12:35 PM:

Our friend and buddy Steven Speilberg had departed from his long time friend in the arena of digital filming. In a recent interview with WIRED magazine, he had this to say...

“Now the thing I'm most saddened by is the constant talk about the photochemical process becoming a thing of Thomas Edison's past,” Spielberg said. “There's a magic about chemistry and film. Sure, a digital shot is steady. It doesn't have to ride through the gate of a projector. And, sure, it's as clean as the OR in a major hospital. That's exactly what's wrong with it. Film has a molecular structure called grain; even a still of just a flower in a vase has life because of the grain, because of the molecules in the film. Especially if you sit in the first five rows of any movie theater, you know what I'm talking about. The screen is alive. The screen is always alive with chaos and excitement, and that will certainly be gone when we convert to a digital camera and a digital projector. I was one of the first people to use digital technology to enhance my films, but I'm going to be the last person to use digital technology to shoot my movies."

It is nice to know that at least he is on our side.

Dave

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 06-04-2002, 01:46 PM:

Speilberg was quoted in an issue of, I believe, the Director's Guild of America (DGA) newsletter as saying, "As long as there is film I will shoot it."

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 06-04-2002, 09:29 PM:

So which one will get their way, Steve or George when they start Indiana 4? (Although I still very much doubt this will ever see the light of day)

------------------
Too much of the rest of the film is given over to a romance between Padme and Anakin in which they're incapable of uttering anything other than the most basic and weary romantic cliches, while regarding each other as if love was something to be endured rather than cherished. There is not a romantic word they exchange that has not long since been reduced to cliche.

No, wait: Anakin tells Padme at one point: "I don't like the sand. It's coarse and rough and irritating--not like you. You're soft and smooth." I hadn't heard that before.

- Roger Ebert reviewing Episode 2. :)

Posted by Adam Fraser (Member # 1074) on 06-04-2002, 10:36 PM:

That is the first quote on digital projection from a Hollywood type that I actually have liked.

------------------
Adam Fraser
www.pinestheatre.com

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 06-04-2002, 11:02 PM:

Now they just need to point Mr. S to a 65mm camera. All the steadiness of digital, all the life of film!

Steve

------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 06-05-2002, 12:42 AM:

>>Now they just need to point Mr. S to a 65mm camera.<<

And he can shoot spherically like he prefers to as well!

-Aaron

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-05-2002, 03:08 AM:

Why go for spherical 65mm when Super8 is plenty good?

Anyway if Indy 4 ever comes out, I will bet it will be shot on film since Stevie always does the directing. George produces, so I'm not exactly sure what his role is other than writing checks to make the movie.

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 06-05-2002, 03:18 AM:

Thank you, Mr. Steven Speilberg.

As a passing thought, I think one of the funniest things I saw Mr. Speilberg do was in the video Making of the Raiders of the Lost Ark. He was reprimanding a snake and yelling, "You are ruining my movie!"

I don't remember if he throttled the snake, since it has been so long since I seen it. But it showed the human side of Mr. Speilberg.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 06-05-2002, 10:40 AM:

Mr. Spielberg has consistently felt the same way, along with many other great filmmakers:
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/newsletters/notes/march2000/filmmakers.shtml

"Arts stimulate something inside of us. I'm going to direct all my films on film until they close the last lab down."

--- Steven Spielberg

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
e-mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 06-05-2002, 11:02 AM:

"Anyway if Indy 4 ever comes out, I will bet it will be shot on film since Stevie always does the directing. George produces, so I'm not exactly sure what his role is other than writing checks to make the movie."

So what happens when when the producer wants digital, and the director wants film? Or one wants flat and the other wants scope, or any other choice which has to be made? Do they fire the director, and get someone else who will agree with the producer, or argue about it forever, and never shoot anything, or what?

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-05-2002, 01:31 PM:

Well, Lucas does shoot scope and Spielberg does shoot flat...yet the Indiana Jones movies are all scope. Hmmmmmm. Makes you wonder.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 06-05-2002, 01:40 PM:

Until recently, many of Mr. Spielberg's films were anamorphic ("Close Encounters of the Third Kind", "Jaws", "1941", "Hook", etc., not just those produced by George Lucas. As long as the choice of format is based on the filmmaker's vision, rather than economics and a demand to "fit" video, I enjoy and appreciate all film formats.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-05-2002, 01:41 PM:

Yes, but those are very old films, before the threat of cropping for home video came about. The only exception being Hook.

Posted by Aldo Baez (Member # 790) on 06-05-2002, 02:45 PM:

Frank Darabont is going to direct indy4.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-05-2002, 02:59 PM:

Frank Darabont? Oh no. He is a great director, but we could very well have the last Indiana Jones movie shot on video in 1.85!

Posted by Dwayne Caldwell (Member # 417) on 06-05-2002, 03:05 PM:

Frank Darabont is the latest writer taking a shot at the rewrites for the Indy 4 script. As far as I know, Spielburg is still directing it.

------------------
The man with the magic hands.

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 06-05-2002, 04:58 PM:

There is currently a debate on Minority Report.

Is it flat or scope??

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 06-05-2002, 05:30 PM:

Sadly, even Speilberg may change his mind when the day comes that: the cost of shooting film vs. digital is exceed by 50%

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 06-05-2002, 05:45 PM:

I'm guessing that if the cost of shooting on film were 500% higher than digital, nobody would second-guess Spielberg's choice of film. He could probably say "I will do another Indiana Jones movie, but after that I want to shoot a 4-hour documentary on the history of barrell bung holes through the ages and it will be released in 70mm only" and the only question would be "Would you like the check made out to cash?"

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 06-05-2002, 06:39 PM:

Spielberg has gone back and forth a couple times between using flat and scope aspect ratios. He made movies like "Empire of the Sun," "Always" and "The Color Purple" before he shot "Hook" in 'scope ratio.

When you examine all of Spielberg's following directorial efforts ("Jurassic Park," "Schindler's List," "Lost World," "Saving Private Ryan" and "A.I."), he has valid reasons for shooting all of those films in 1.85:1 ratio. I know some were disappointed about the dino-flicks not being super-wide, but he wanted a lot more aspect ratio headroom. You don't really have that with 'scope. "A.I" is really the only one out of that group that might have been better served in 'scope format.

To me, "Minority Report" looks like it will be released flat. That's my guess. It is definitely spherical photography. And some of the flat ratio trailers show visual effects scenes rendered for flat frame rather than be panned and scanned (which you can spot if you look close enough to the shot composition). Anyway, I'll be surprised if Fox releases this one in Super35.

My primary hope on "Minority Report" is not whether the movie is flat or scope, the hope if for it to be really good. "Spiderman" was okay, and "AOTC" had some neat looking CGI stuff, but honestly it has been years since I have left the theater on a high rush from having just seen a great film.

Most anyone knows that feeling I'm talking about. You regret the movie is over and you want to see it again immediately or can't wait to get back. It has been a long time since I have felt that. I've seen a lot of moderately entertaining movies and admirable films. But that is different from that adrenaline charge you get from a film that reaches that next level.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-05-2002, 07:02 PM:

According to the I.M.E., Minority Report will be in Scope.

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 06-05-2002, 08:41 PM:

"Films that reach that next level"

Good point. I can't really think of anything that has reached the next level in the last few years. "Schindler's List" & "Unforgiven" come to mind from the 90s. Many of the movies that reached "next level" status for me are pre-1990 and I saw all of them in 70mm. "The Last Emperor", "Out Of Africa", and "Empire OF The Sun" are a few... (sue me but I loved those 3 movies)