my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » The Interpretor... Sydney Pollack's first scope feature since Tootsie.

Author Topic: The Interpretor... Sydney Pollack's first scope feature since Tootsie. John Wilson Film God Posts: 5438 From: Sydney, Australia. Registered: Dec 1999 posted 04-22-2005 12:59 AM                     He was once in an interview where he said he didn't shoot in scope anymore because he hated the Pan and Scan of the way they ended up on video and TV. I guess DVD has changed his way of thinking? Good news.  |  IP: Logged David Stambaugh Film God Posts: 4021 From: Eugene, Oregon Registered: Jan 2002 posted 04-22-2005 11:32 AM                        Is it real scope or Super35?  |  IP: Logged Pravin Ratnam Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 844 From: Atlanta, GA,USA Registered: Sep 2002 posted 04-22-2005 01:29 PM                     I hope it's his first movie since Tootsie that manages to keep you awake. The guy is a better actor than director.  |  IP: Logged Jeremy Jorgenson Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1002 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: Feb 2005 posted 04-25-2005 04:12 AM                        quote: John Wilson because he hated the Pan and Scan of the way they ended up on video and TV. I guess DVD has changed his way of thinking? I seem to remember reading something about him removing his name from the airline edits of Three Days of the Condor because he disliked the P&S & the cuts. as to the DVD q... Random Hearts was filmed about the time DVDs were just starting to explode and take over the home video market, so this being his first film since then, it's certainly concieviable... also 16:9 TV screens are more widely in use too (I was watching History of the World Part I the other night on an HD cable channel & it still got some Pan & Scan on the 16:9 screen & I would've prefered it to be letterboxed... but it certainly was better than "normal" P&S.)  |  IP: Logged Christian Appelt Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 505 From: Frankfurt, Germany Registered: Dec 2001 posted 04-25-2005 05:55 PM                     quote: David Stambaugh Is it real scope or Super35? From the trailer, it looked like true anamorphic to me.  |  IP: Logged Michael Coate Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1904 From: Los Angeles, California Registered: Feb 2001 posted 04-27-2005 10:44 AM                     Yes, anamorphic. quote: John Wilson He was once in an interview where he said he didn't shoot in scope anymore because he hated the Pan and Scan of the way they ended up on video and TV. This sounds like the interview I conducted with him in 2000 for Widescreen Review. I don't have the issue with me, nor do I remember the exact issue number, but it was early 2000 ("The Bone Collector" on the cover). Essentially, Pollack stated that, like many other filmmakers, he stopped shooting in scope because he hated the way his films ended up looking on TV. But he added that if 16:9 widescreen TVs became more common he would consider returning to shooting in widescreen. Well, it took four or five years, but he stuck to his word! (He also said he regretted shooting "Out Of Africa" in 1.85:1.)  |  IP: Logged Darryl Spicer Film God Posts: 3250 From: Lexington, KY, USA Registered: Dec 2000 posted 04-27-2005 08:00 PM                    quote: Michael Coate nor do I remember the exact issue number, but it was early 2000 ("The Bone Collector" on the cover). Volume 9, Number 2, Issue 37 March/April 2000  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 04-27-2005 10:04 PM                     I watched "The Interpreter" Monday night. I was surprised this wasn't just another Super35 film. Not only was the film shot in real 'scope. Sydney Pollack took advantage of the anamorphic format's oddities for good effect. There was a rack focus telephoto lens shot of Nicole Kidman walking toward the camera inside the U.N. The exaggerated depth of field made the shot go from a vertical blur to razor sharp (and no visible grain) in quick instant. Nice punctual feel to that, to add to the dramatics.  |  IP: Logged Pravin Ratnam Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 844 From: Atlanta, GA,USA Registered: Sep 2002 posted 05-02-2005 02:27 PM                     Place a review Bobby. This movie seems to be the rare #1 movie not to have been reviewed by anybody in the Film Reviews forum.  |  IP: Logged Bill Gabel Film God Posts: 3873 From: Technicolor / Postworks NY, USA Registered: Jan 2002 posted 09-19-2005 12:11 PM                     On the DVD in the bonus features of "The Interpreter", Sydney Pollack talks about the use of scope vs. pan & scan. And that he favors the use of shooting films in scope to tell the story.  |  IP: Logged Andy Summers Master Film Handler Posts: 397 From: Bournemouth Dorset United kingdom Registered: Jun 2005 posted 09-19-2005 05:35 PM                 John’ Hears some information on the film The Interpreter http://www.theasc.com/magazine/may05/interpreter/page2.html TECHNICAL SPECS Anamorphic 2.40:1 Arricam Studio, Arri 435, Arri 35-3 Cooke lenses Kodak Vision2 Expression 500T 5229, Vision2 100T 5212 Digital Intermediate by EFilm Though I’m not a total “Sydney Pollack” fan so to speak, I only have I think it’s one film Out of Africa which I only got best sound achievement recorded and released in (Dolby Stereo) which sounds awesome via the home THX, so is his new film “The Interpreter” has it got a good involving soundtrack, as I can guess it’s mostly dialogue with subtle ambient sounds and the occasional high dynamics. I’m tried after looking for that information on the visual side, as (Super 35) sucks and I have a few or more than a few titles need I say what they are, anyway who’s done the sound mix for “The Interpreter” who are the re-recording mixers? "Three Days of the Condor" now there’s a film I like to get hold off directed by “Sydney Pollack” damn when’s there going to be a region 2 DVD release was it filmed in flat 1.85:1, like “All the Presidents Men” also “Sydney Pollack” makes the odd cameo appearance…. ________________________________________________________________ Michael’ You do Widescreen Review) damn good magazine, I like the information one what you get on the films technical specifications like aspect ratios and sound presentation. Yeah MAN "Out of Africa" in scope 2.35:1 tasty any day mate, trail and error, what can I say… ________________________________________________________________ Bobby’ Man you’ll be surprised just how many films I turn my nose up at, ok so I have a few super 35 ones like giant RATS they are, there’s just no stopping them, and when I pick a DVD up the first two things I’m looking for in no order is Aspect ration and sound. But when I see 2.35:1, I’m thinking to myself is this the real McCoy or is it another “TOP GUN” hence (Super 35) and when I get it home and carefully looking at it looking for tell, tell signs. If the distributors said this film was filmed in (Super 35) 2.35:1 would DVD sales decline, on a technical issue?  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 09-20-2005 08:15 AM                     Actually Super 35 when done properly actually looks better than anamorphic. It provides better depth of field than the equivelent anamorphic camera lens will. I have run alot of Super 35 Dailies and most of them look great, "True Lies" in particuluar lokoed magnificent as did its 70mm release prints!. Its in the lab where careless handling causes the format to fall apart. Yes, even the labs have bad film handlers. Mark  |  IP: Logged Andy Summers Master Film Handler Posts: 397 From: Bournemouth Dorset United kingdom Registered: Jun 2005 posted 09-20-2005 08:46 AM                 Mark’ I have “True Lies” on laserdisc 2.35:1, and I have seen a televised version in the past where there was more bottom part of the frame exposed with less side field view of the visual image, due to cropping of the sides. So when you look at (Pan & Scan) of a true “anamorphic” film there is a whole lot of the visual splendour missing. When you look at a (SUPER 35) print “Pan & Scan,” there’s not a whole lot missing only the sides, marginally cropped but the bottom part of the frame is exposing more and looking slightly different, there is “APOLLO 13” where it is imprinted in my mind where the astronauts are getting strapped in and seeing more of the bottom part of the image…. Anyway I don’t what talk about this any more as its depressing…….  |  IP: Logged Andy Summers Master Film Handler Posts: 397 From: Bournemouth Dorset United kingdom Registered: Jun 2005 posted 09-27-2005 07:31 PM                 Today I bought two “Sydney Pollack” films on DVD “Out of Africa” Special edition, which I all ready have so now I have to versions both look different in terms of aspect ration starting with chapter (2) where there’s slight shrinkage of the frame on the first edition, also the colour in tone and depth of field is clearer in the newer transfer, the sound mix is now in 5.1 or six-track Dolby with DTS, with the first edition the Dolby mix was 4.1 left centre right, mono surround, and the sub bass LFE. The newer version as a more open feel to it and the atmosphere of “John Barry” score is totally indispensable. Now the with the much talked about film “The Interpreter” this set the tone with James Newton Howard’s score placing me in an uneasy mood, alone with “Sydney’s” direction the use of sound told me this was going to look good and sound good, the framing was nice to see, the 2.35:1 Scope, not widescreen W/S which is how some projectionists Interpret it. The style and pace for this story had me thinking, and feeling suspicious of some of these characters and as the film unveiled it self before my eyes all was revealed there was one thing I noted was the assignation attempt towards the end, it somehow reminded me of “STAR TREK VI The Undiscovered Country” where the assassin is assembling the rifle, and cutting out the glass, and the surprise of one of the UN officials enters the room, “I knew it.” It’s not always I breakout the tissues, yeah it made me cry, anyway “Sydney” well done. Now when is “Three Days of the Condor” going to be realised on DVD region 2, and I sure it’s 2.35:1 (scope). Now tell me if I’m seeing things but there’s a scene in “The Interpreter” before the bus blows up, where there’s a location that looked like it was used in “Three Days of the Condor,” and though I’ve only seen this film twice and not for the last 10 to 14 years, it’s a location used in the opening of “Three Days of the Condor” where that nutter dressed up as a postal work and armed to the teeth with a machine gun. So does anyone remember it? Now I’m watching the Bones extras on “The Interpreter” where “Sydney” is showing us the A&B differences and I agree with “Sydney” P/S pan & Scan, really does ruin a scope film dramatically with windscreen films W/S 1.85:1 there’s just a little of the artists visual intention is taken away, but scope is a big deal, when television came about in the 1950’s film thought back the only way they can with wider lenses big screens that went beyond TV with supporting fanfare. And films like “Casablanca” which is in the academy ratio look fine, way before W/S, scope, 70mm and IMAX. Also did anyone noticing the cameo roll played “Sydney Pollack” just like in ”Tootsie” is there any more films where he plays cameos?  |  IP: Logged Christian Appelt Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 505 From: Frankfurt, Germany Registered: Dec 2001 posted 09-28-2005 07:52 AM                     quote: Andy Summers Hears some information on the film The Interpreter http://www.theasc.com/magazine/may05/interpreter/page2.html TECHNICAL SPECS Anamorphic 2.40:1 Arricam Studio, Arri 435, Arri 35-3 Cooke lenses Kodak Vision2 Expression 500T 5229, Vision2 100T 5212 Cooke never made anamorphic lenses. There are anamorphic back converters for Cooke zoom lenses, and some manufacturers of anamorphic lenses use Cooke prime lenses and add their own anamorphic elements, like JDC-Scope by Joe Dunton.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.