criterionforum.org

Monterey Jack wrote: Sun Sep 30, 2018 7:33 pm

flyonthewall2983 wrote: Tue Sep 25, 2018 7:00 pm Michael Mann

Are we talking raptly hypnotic, pre-2004 Mann, or fuzzy cell-phone, post-2004 Mann?

And I thought I was the only one having this opinion. Its like Collateral with its mixture was the last interesting thing he'd done

flyonthewall2983 wrote: Sun Sep 30, 2018 8:01 pm He's talked about wanting to shoot on film again, so it wouldn't be an unreasonable idea for him to do this, especially if it's not a modern take.

Christ, let's hope so. [-o<

dda1996a wrote: Sun Sep 30, 2018 8:21 pm

Monterey Jack wrote: Sun Sep 30, 2018 7:33 pm
Are we talking raptly hypnotic, pre-2004 Mann, or fuzzy cell-phone, post-2004 Mann?

And I thought I was the only one having this opinion. Its like Collateral with its mixture was the last interesting thing he'd done

It's sad that the director who gave us such gorgeously-photographed movies as Manhunter, Last Of The Mohicans and Heat now makes movies that have the same picture resolution of YouTube videos of fat people arguing in line at Walmart. I was pretty sure there was a good movie somewhere in Public Enemies, but the hideously fuzzy, smeary look of the film makes it almost completely unwatchable from an aesthetic level. It was like being stuck at someone's house and being forced to watch a movie with the "smooth motion" feature turned on because they don't know any better...and Mann SHOULD know better, dammit. I could sort-of accept the DV look of Collateral and even Miami Vice, as those were contemporary crime thrillers, but seeing a lavish 30's gangster picture shot in Fuzz-O-Vision was a crime.

Why does a '30s setting preclude a DV look?

The DV in Public Enemies really insists on itself, as opposed to something like Zodiac which is as much of a total period piece but the look is entirely more cinematic because of the separate choices Fincher and Harris Savides made.

I really liked Public Enemies too and didn't mind how it looked but understand the problems people had with it on that level.

knives wrote: Sun Sep 30, 2018 9:20 pm Why does a '30s setting preclude a DV look?

I would have been fine with Public Enemies being shot digitally, but Mann's use of DV cameras is head-slappingly inept, making a $90 million period production look like someone's VHS camcorder footage from 1985. ](*,) How could anyone look at the dailies from that and think, "Yes, this is EXACTLY how this should look...!"?

Monterey Jack wrote: Mon Oct 01, 2018 3:03 am

knives wrote: Sun Sep 30, 2018 9:20 pm Why does a '30s setting preclude a DV look?

I would have been fine with Public Enemies being shot digitally, but Mann's use of DV cameras is head-slappingly inept, making a $90 million period production look like someone's VHS camcorder footage from 1985. ](*,) How could anyone look at the dailies from that and think, "Yes, this is EXACTLY how this should look...!"?

I thought the effect ended up being pretty striking and unique.