Posted by James Bong 00420 at spider-wg033.proxy.aol.com on November 22, 1999 at 21:55:53:
In Reply to: SNAKE EYES sucked... posted by Vincent on November 22, 1999 at 19:41:47:
: ... but DePalma has made some wonderful movies, and certainly has a distinct visual style. It's not like the guy in the post above was FLAMING Kevin, just making an observation re: his style of lack thereof.
: : No offence, but from the clips and trailer, Dogma looks like an 80s B-flick.
: For the record, I think DOGMA DOES show an improvement in Kevin's style, and re: the original poster's comments on the trailers and T.V. spots- that's not Kevin's fault that they look so bad. For whatever reason, the studio used an anamorphic release print rather than a Super-35 interpositive to cut together some of the trailers. Anybody who works in film-to-video transfering knows that a release print is NEVER used, because the contrast ratios are too high and it results in a plugged-up looking video transfer. Plus, release prints are three-generations removed from the camera negative, and in the case of Super-35 go through an optical step as well.
: ALSO for the record, for whatever reason the bulk of the release prints of DOGMA were rushed through printing at Delux, and a lot of them look pretty bad. Having seen the original dailies projected as well as some of the prints that WEREN'T rushed, I can say that Yeoman did a good job shooting it. Some of the elegance that I saw in the original footage was lost in the editing of the film, but it IS well-shot. It may not be David Lean or Scorcese, but it ain't bad. I was pretty impressed with some of the subtle stuff Kevin and Yeoman did with the camera- again, the camera doesn't race around like in BOOGIE NIGHTS or whatever, but it IS used. I honestly think a lot of the bitching about the 'look' of DOGMA has to do with audiences/critics preconcieved notions that ANYTHING Kevin does MUST look shitty, so they go in there looking for things that are "visually wrong" with the film. Yeah, some of the editing may be a bit off and, IMHO, some of the film is "overcut" (not in terms of what was removed, but in the cutting between coverage), but it isn't "awful" by any means. It's just imperfect. Kevin never claimed to be a visual powerhouse- he just wants to tell his damned stories and let his dialogue and ideas be heard. Give the man a break, will ya? And give Bob Yeoman a break while your at it- people seem to forget that Yeoman is a damned fine D.P.- just because Kevin directed the film didn't have any effect on the cameras, filmstocks, and lighting used by Yeoman. In fact, over at rec.arts.movies.tech there is actually a thread talking about how GOOD "DOGMA" looks for a Super-35 film. These guys are MAJOR techies, and they thought it looked good.
: Vincent
: : : Please, please, please! Kidnap Brian De Palma and Martin Scorsese and get some directing lessons off them, that way you won't be such an easy target for lazy critical slags.