Black Swan

Gonzo_Entertainment said:
I'm pretty sure it was second unit stuff.
Click to expand...

According to the Am. Cinematographer (Dec '10) article it was a 7D and a 1Dm4s. Libattique used his 5d to shoot rehearsals and show the operators how the shots should play.

The 7D scenes are in the subway (according to the article), and I'm fairly sure the 1Dm4s was used for burst mode stills, probably in the club scene but the article was not specific.
 
Yeah. Just didn't grab me at first. The "[blank] who finally gets a shot to be a [blank] but finds it more difficult than they thought" is a story I've seen a million times. It was only when Aronofsky let himself be Aronofsky did I start enjoying the film.

And TRUE GRIT is overrated. Good, but overrated.
 
NicklausLouis said:
Yeah. Just didn't grab me at first. The "[blank] who finally gets a shot to be a [blank] but finds it more difficult than they thought" is a story I've seen a million times.
Click to expand...

There's only one dramatic story out there... Someone wants something badly but something bad stands on his or her way. 98% of the movies ever made fall into this category. Why do movies feel so different from one another? Well, mainly the characters and location. Black Swan introduced us to a macabre ballet universe... the behind the scenes...

Leroy, Lily, Beth, and the Mother all strengthened Nina's persona. Nina is antagonized by all of them, but she's actually her own villain. It felt different to me.
 
Let me preface my tiny judgement at the end by saying i have always been a big proponent of Aronosfky's work since the beginning when no one knew his name and i remember when a few years ago imdb had three movies announced by him, i was hoping Black Swan would be the one he made first because the subject matter screamed his take on it. And Natalie Portman's acting was nothing short of her usual brilliant self. Also, i am comparing my thoughts to his other movies not other movies in general. Compared to other movies in general, this is great, compared to his... well read on.

Yes, the directing was brilliant but quotes from his own movie imo define Black Swan.

"Honestly i don't care about your technique. You should know that by now."

"All the discipline for what... I never see you lose yourself."

And to paraphrase: It's not about control, it's also about letting go.

The story was predictable; within the first twenty minutes, i knew what the ending would be.

We see the symbolism, the mirrors, the white walls, the black doors, the costumes. Heavy, very heavy. Which may not be a bad thing (although being subtle is often better). The Fountain was heavy with symbolism as well but i felt he let go in there and never did in here. The emotion here was too controlled whereas the same heavy symbolism in The Fountain flew with uncontrolled and uncaring emotion for the audience to witness.

I never thought i would be disappointed in this movie but i am, compared to his other one's.
But it is a great movie compared to what we generally see these days.
 
I feel like I slightly missed the boat on this one but that's one of the things I sacrifice for the National Health Service ( :D ) ...

Anywho, I've finally seen Black Swan which I have been looking forward to for considerably more than a year. Ever since Natalie Portman (the future Mrs.Clapper) was attached and then when the rumours about a certain scene with a certain Mila Kunis came out...

...so, yes. I wasn't attracted to this film (originall) for the right reasons. But I became interested in it as a film, especially given what everyone thinks about Aronofsky and Libatique's visual style.

Anyhow I just wrote the review for my website and thought I'd leave a link here in case anyone ever wants to know what I thought about the film! :D

My Black Swan Review!
 
I saw it tonight with Scott. I thought it was absolutely brilliant. It really scared me too, which I wasn't expecting. I thought the use of sound was spectacular and some of the shots I was just sitting there in awe.
Scott on the other hand, gave it a lower rating than me. He said it was good, but just not the sort of movie he generally enjoys.

The only thing I didn't enjoy about Black Swan was the stupid people in the audience with us, which obviously is not the movie's fault lol. It did subtract from the intensity somewhat, hearing people laugh when Nina was masturbating the first time, or seeing out of the corner of my eye the guy down the row shifting uncomfortably in his seat during the intimate scene with Nina and Lily. -_-

Anyway, back to the actual movie. I loved it and I have to agree, Darren Aronofsky, Matthew Libatique, Natalie Portman, Vincent Cassell, Barbara Hershey, and the writers, the sound and music people and all the design people (costumes, make up, choreography etc) (so basically every one who had anything to do with it lol) definitely deserve all the accolades they are getting and hopefully will get in the upcoming awards.
 
The 16mm is gorgeous.
It dragged REALLY bad in the middle third. I almost fell asleep.
Natalie Portman is so gross.
The 5D/7D stuff was probably the stuff on stage. The stage scenes seemed very crisp and digital compared to the grainy 16mm look of the rest of the film.
 
"It dragged REALLY bad in the middle third. I almost fell asleep.
Natalie Portman is so gross."

Is this supposed to be ironic?
The middle of the film is a non-stop devolution into psychosis, hallucinations, lesbian fantasies, the meat of the story.

Watch it again in 5 years, perhaps.
 
From IMDB

Camera
Arriflex 16 SR3
Arriflex 416

Film negative format (mm/video inches)
16 mm (Fuji Eterna Vivid 160T 8643, Eterna Vivid 500T 8647)

Cinematographic process
Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)
Super 16 (source format)
Click to expand...

It'd be nice to know what scenes were shot on the 7D + 5D.
 
polfilmblog said:
"It dragged REALLY bad in the middle third. I almost fell asleep.
Natalie Portman is so gross."

Is this supposed to be ironic?
The middle of the film is a non-stop devolution into psychosis, hallucinations, lesbian fantasies, the meat of the story.

Watch it again in 5 years, perhaps.
Click to expand...

I dunno, girfriend liked it MUCH more than I did. I'm certainly not saying it's terrible by any means. The cinematography is very nice, the performances are all good (with Portman a Good +). About an hour in I started looking at my cell phone clock, and wishing I wasn't in the middle of a row so I could slip out and smoke a cigarette. I felt much the same about Requiem For a Dream, could have benefited from about 35 minutes of it winding up on the editing room floor. Pi, loved it, The Wrestler, loved it. Black Swan and Requiem. Eh, they're ok.
 
NickClapper said:
I read the American Cinematographer article with Matthew Libatique and saw him talk about using the 5D to film the rehearsals, but I can't recall him talking about using the 7D. Why would he use the 7D for the final film?
Click to expand...

Sensor size, probably. A FF 35mm stills sensor is substantially larger than motion picture 35mm, so trying to match the depth of field of 16mm with a 5D in low-light conditions would be very tricky indeed. "I ended up shooting on a Canon 24mm lens at 1,600 ASA to get as much depth of field as possible at a stop of T81⁄2."
 
chilipie said:
Sensor size, probably. A FF 35mm stills sensor is substantially larger than motion picture 35mm, so trying to match the depth of field of 16mm with a 5D in low-light conditions would be very tricky indeed. "I ended up shooting on a Canon 24mm lens at 1,600 ASA to get as much depth of field as possible at a stop of T81⁄2."
Click to expand...

That makes sense.
 
NickClapper said:
I read the American Cinematographer article with Matthew Libatique and saw him talk about using the 5D to film the rehearsals, but I can't recall him talking about using the 7D. Why would he use the 7D for the final film?
Click to expand...

Because they were stealing shots* on the NYC subway and they needed to be as low profile as possible. There's supposedly some 1dm4s stuff in there as well, but I didn't see any specific reference to scenes. I'm pretty certain the AC article talks about the 7D. There's a picture of him shooting Natalie's reflection in the article.

Chili's point is important. Easier to match the "look" of the sensor on those cameras (APS-C and APS_H respectively IIRC) to an s16 image than it would be to match a 5d "look" to that.

* - shooting without permits. I don't think the AC article mentions that as part of it, but the ICG magazine article (went out and snagged both, trying to decide which one to subscribe to, probably AC as it has more on lighting than ICG does, although as a magazine ICG is more nicely presented and printed) - i think mentions that point.
 
chilipie said:
Sensor size, probably. A FF 35mm stills sensor is substantially larger than motion picture 35mm, so trying to match the depth of field of 16mm with a 5D in low-light conditions would be very tricky indeed. "I ended up shooting on a Canon 24mm lens at 1,600 ASA to get as much depth of field as possible at a stop of T81⁄2."
Click to expand...

Thanks, that's a thoroughly reasonable explanation! :D

I have to say that I wouldn't have noticed the change in camera on those scenes. I can't actually remember any subway scenes other than the one with the leering old man...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top