Evolution of Michael Bay's cinematography

Discussion in 'Transformers Movie Discussion' started by red4, Jun 21, 2009.

  1. red4

    red4 Banned

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Posts:
    2,598
    Trophy Points:
    151
    Likes:
    +0
    Just watched Bad Boys 1 today, and hot dang! The lighting and camera movement were docile and very easy on the eye compared to Transformers. Everyone didn't constantly look tan and sweaty, and bathed in searing neon light and dusk didn't come every 2 minutes.

    I'm really not sure if this should go in general discussion.
     
  2. Ktulu

    Ktulu Whoosh TFW2005 Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2002
    Posts:
    14,865
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    291
    Likes:
    +3
    It's the evolution of cinema in general really, these days there's tons of movies that are very high contrast with lots of monochromatic lighting. The almost "romantic" look of shooting on film is a rarity now, most films opt for the heavily processed digital sheen instead.

    Whether that's bad or good is up to the viewer, I suppose.
     
  3. red4

    red4 Banned

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Posts:
    2,598
    Trophy Points:
    151
    Likes:
    +0
    I don't understand this classification. This "romantic" way of shooting far more closely resembles the way human eyes perceive light. So to me, that's normal and realistic, not "romantic".
     
  4. transmetal2dinobot

    transmetal2dinobot Sub-Commander

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2006
    Posts:
    2,788
    Trophy Points:
    151
    Likes:
    +0
    Ebay:
    well, realism in entertainment is a romantic notion in itself. as in romanticism, not ZOMG FLOWERS N SHIT. the tradition in filmmaking is to create a world distinctly seperate from the one we live in, but similar enough that we could apply the situation to our world. i believe the terminology is "disguising something as what it is", fairly sure hitchcock said it, can't confirm without my course notes.
     
  5. Ceasar121

    Ceasar121 Wants a Toxitron repaint!

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Posts:
    2,887
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    151
    Likes:
    +1
    Bad Boys was shot 'realistically', but its not just Bay... almost noone shoots like that anymore. When they do its usually a stylistic, or budget choice. I like film like that, but it wouldn't work with a CGI heavy movie, everything would be too dull and drab.
     
  6. red4

    red4 Banned

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Posts:
    2,598
    Trophy Points:
    151
    Likes:
    +0
    It worked perfectly for Jurassic park, and Hulk (Ang Lee version).
     
  7. Ceasar121

    Ceasar121 Wants a Toxitron repaint!

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Posts:
    2,887
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    151
    Likes:
    +1
    Jurassic Park was made before Bad Boys, so id say the technology wasn't there yet to shoot that high contrast style with it being cost effective... plus it was intended to be shot creepy and shadowy. And major parts of that movie were anamatronic.

    The Hulk was universally panned for cheesy CGI, so that one fails as well. I thought it was a decent flick but its style failed to please many. The hulk did look a tad too cartoony in it as well.

    Even if you count those, they're just the exception to the rule.
     
  8. red4

    red4 Banned

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Posts:
    2,598
    Trophy Points:
    151
    Likes:
    +0
     
  9. TigerClaw

    TigerClaw Autobot

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Posts:
    146
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    61
    Likes:
    +1
    Cinema is evolving with the advent of film being shot digitally in HD.

    When shooting on regular film, They would have to digitally scan the entire film on the computer in order to put in the FX, Nowadays, You shoot it digitally and there's no need of any scanning, It already be transfered to the computer.
     
  10. JDF

    JDF Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Posts:
    175
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Likes:
    +0
    Except neither TF1 nor TF2 were shot digitally. Both were shot on 35mm with some scenes for TF2 being shot on 70mm.
     
  11. Bumblethumper

    Bumblethumper old misery guts

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Posts:
    8,807
    News Credits:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    192
    Likes:
    +19
    Jurassic Park still holds up. The CG is still on a par with anything you see'd see today. The only difference is nowadays all restraint has gone out the window.

    It's not a case that the technology wasn't there before. The high contrast look has been achieved with the 'bleach-bypass' process for decades. Spielberg could've done it for Jurassic Park if he'd really wanted. I don't think it would've made it a better film. The reason it's so common now is that it used to be something you had to put some thought into, where now if it comes out a bit wrong it can be tweaked endlessly.

    It should be a stylistic thing. IMO it just gets used all the time for no real reason nowadays. It's become a gimmick, and I suspect it may be a bit of a fad. Like how seventies movies always had those zoom in shots.
     
  12. Bumblethumper

    Bumblethumper old misery guts

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Posts:
    8,807
    News Credits:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    192
    Likes:
    +19
     

Share This Page