life aquatic...

Post by **Justin Lovell** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 8:16 am

What film stock did they use for their 16mm 'documentary' footage, and what camera were they using?

It looks like kodachrome film, but how they hell would they have been 'processing' their film on the ship so they could check their dailies...!?!! (I know I know, it's just movie... but HOW damnit!)

*shrugs

jusetan

Post by **mattias** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:15 am

they would have shot 7239, 7240, 7250 and 7251 ektachrome vnf, and printed their dailies on vnf print film 7399. :-)

/matt

Post by **leadlike** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 1:35 pm

I'd agree with the reversal VNF stocks-although I'm sure the salt air on board ship did wonders for the processing and chemistry!

As for the camera, wasn't it an Eclair ACL or some such thing?

Post by **Justin Lovell** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 1:56 pm

i would have assumed a VNF film too,

but the actual footage didn't look like VNF film to me.. what say you?

jusetan

Post by **leadlike** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 2:03 pm

I'd like to say kodachrome as well, but you have to remember that a film production like that can't wait around for a week to get their footage back from Wal-Mart. If they shot reversal at all, it would have to have been VNF, as they could get dailies of that stuff.

Oliver Stone uses mostly VNF super 8 when his movies call for it as he can view dailies of the material shot.

So, what did Life Aquatic do? If they took the easy route, they could have just shot color neg and corrected the colors in post to make them 'look like' reversal, or if they wanted to get crazy with reversal, then they likely used VNF.

Post by **MovieStuff** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 3:21 pm

I haven't seen the film yet but I see no logistical reason that they could not shoot Kodachrome. I mean, certainly they can afford Fed-X to send the film to Dwaynes, I'm sure. And "daileys" are hardly watched every day anymore due to the use of video assist playback for judging content. Productions will often shoot for several days without seeing any footage from the previous days and just depend on the lab to alert them if there was a technical problem with the footage. Even if they shot with negative, it is highly unlikely that they were processing footage out on the boat! So they could pretty much shoot whatever they wanted for their doc footage. It would have made no difference in the production schedule, even if they had to wait a few days for processing.

Roger
http://www.moviestuff.tv

Post by **Justin Lovell** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:04 pm

roger you should see the film.

It's kind of a silly question i posed, but in the movie, they are shooting a documentary, and they say that they can process their film on the boat, that's how they see their dailies (not the real film production dailies, but in the movie it's their dailies..)

i'm not explaining this very well..

just watch it, you'll know what it mean.

jusetan

Post by **MovieStuff** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:35 pm

Oh. I thought you meant the actual daileys.

Roger

Post by **matt5791** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 6:12 pm

Which film is this? is the name "life aquatic"?

When was it made?

Matt

Post by **mattias** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 6:52 pm

leadlike wrote:So, what did Life Aquatic do?

again i thought we were talking about what the fictional crew used. the "real" production most likely didn't shoot vnf and they definately didn't process it on the boat. ;-)

Which film is this?

the life aquatic with steve zissou. released earlier this year. by wes anderson.

/matt

Post by **steve hyde** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 8:38 pm

mattias wrote:
Which film is this?
the life aquatic with steve zissou. released earlier this year. by wes anderson.

/matt

I'm really sure why, but I loved this film. Maybe it is Bill Murray - maybe it is the subtle cinematic humor of Wes Anderson - maybe it was the tactful use of David Bowie's songs.. All I know is it worked.

Steve

Post by **RenÃƒÂ©** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 9:11 pm

I own the Jaques Cousteau dvd box and in one of the films (I think it's The Silent World) they show some of their custom made camera's and they mention that they process the film on board. I believe you even get to see the some of the equipment.

RenÃƒÂ©.

Post by **Justin Lovell** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 9:56 pm

the cinematography is so sublte but so beautiful in this film.

no doubt the idea of Wide, medium, tight and "let's just get coverage" was NEVER thought of in this film.
When you look at the way the shots were composed, it truly portrays what the actors are emotionally going through. (take a look at the framing and camera positions in most of the dialogue between people)

visually wonderful.

that spanish bowie stuff was great too

jusetan

Post by **steve hyde** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 10:34 pm

jusetan wrote: that spanish bowie stuff was great too

jusetan

I loved it too...actually portuguese.. http://www.seujorge.com/

Steve

Post by **mattias** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 10:49 pm

steve hyde wrote:I'm really sure why, but I loved this film.

me too.

/matt