› ›

SKYFALL: It's official: ROGER DEAKINS is on board!

PanchitoPistolesPanchitoPistoles 2.0
edited August 2013 in Skyfall Posts: 4,619
We have known for a few months that there is a pretty good chance that Roger Deakins will be the cinematographer on Bond 23. Hollywood Reporter posted today an article that reinforces that and it also mentions the possibility of using digital cameras.

<i>But with the rapid advancements in digital cinematography, Deakins is becoming a convert. He shot his most recent film, Andrew Niccol's Now, using the new Arri Alexa digital camera. And as he prepares to shoot the next James Bond movie, which Sam Mendes will direct this year, he tells The Hollywood Reporter, "I'm probably going to use Alexa on my next shoot — it seems very likely."</i>

Source: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/cinematographer-roger-deakins-switching-film-178661

MAJOR UPDATE: Roger Deakins revealed on his official website that he is going to be the director of photography of Bond 23. Filming starts in November!

<i>Yes, I can say that I am doing the next 'Bond' film. It is early days and the film won't shoot until November.</i>

Source: http://www.deakinsonline.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1761 (Scroll down!)
«13

Comments

  • Mr_SterlingMr_Sterling
    Posts: 99
    Im sorry, its probably a really great idea but im just not a big enough geek to appreciate the difference between digital and standard film.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    Well, I'll always be of the opinion of, "I hope it's not this film but the next one" that is the first digital Bond, as I don't want it to happen but know it will one day. Still, 50 years on Bond on film is a record unlikely to be beaten by anyone else.

    Good to have yet more confirmation of Deakins doing Bond 23, that should make for perhaps the best shot Bond in a long time, maybe even on Freddie Young/Ted Moore levels.

    Thanks for the news @PanchitoPistoles!
  • BounineBounine
    edited April 2011 Posts: 2,599
    They should not shoot in digital! It doesn't look half as good as film. This would be a bad move, especially for Bond where beautiful, exotic, colourful locations are shot. There's no reason why it should ever be shot on digital. If they insist on saving money, then it would be passable if they shot on digital then transferred it to film afterwards like what they did with the Singer Superman flick.
  • tqbtqb
    Posts: 1,022
    well according to the cameras website, the palio scene from QOS was shot on it. http://www.arridigital.com/node/1112
  • casinoroylecasinoroyle
    Posts: 6
    i think film has a warm feel compared to digitials cold look
  • tqbtqb
    Posts: 1,022
    not to mention most films now an days are ended up being put on a computer than back onto film anyways. So there could be "quality" loss either way. I believe the negatives of the film are scanned and the colors are added digitally but i could be wrong about that.
  • CharlesCharles
    Posts: 9
    There have been tests made ​​between 35 mm and Canon 5D Mark II still camera (price $ 5,000 including lens) and even the professionals see little difference or not. The general public will not tell the difference. Film still wins in the highlights. http://www.zacuto.com/shootout
    Proper color correction is important. Of course, we want them to shoot film ...
  • ZorinIndustriesZorinIndustries
    edited April 2012 Posts: 23
    There are MANY reasons why shooting on digital could be in the film's favour.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    I don´t see why digital should be a problem. People have shot good things and bad things on digital as well as on film.
  • BounineBounine
    edited April 2011 Posts: 2,599
    Quoting ZorinIndustries: Sorry but that is all rubbish. The Bond films do not need to cut corners on cost and budget (although this new film will see a paring down of some things, I
    would imagine - but all for the good). The digital notion is only there because
    craftsman like Roger Deakins (who has not at all been officially linked to the
    film) know how to use it. The likes of Deakin are painters with light. It
    doesn't matter what brushes they use. And there are MANY reasons why shooting on
    digital could be in the film's favour if things went down that route.
    In my experience digital just doesn't look as good as film plain and simple. "Not looking half as good as film" is an exaggeration but film is a fair bit nicer to look at. Having been involved in films shot in digital and on film I can see the difference as can many. If the digital footage is transferred to film afterwards then it is looks okay. Kinetic scenes (action) shot in digital is alright to an extent, as one's eyes are more on the action, paying less attention to the picture quality, but for slower moving shots, Bond should be shot in film or at the very least shot in digital then transferred to film. It just looks more lavish and attractive. Digital looks more like an artificial television programme. Aesthetically, it doesn't have the same cinematic, atmospheric effect. Well, those are my thoughts on it.

    I know that Eon don't need to cut corners on cost which is why film should be used if not initially then in the secondary stages. Still, their Bond flicks these days are pretty much non stop action anyway and they allocate very little time for post so maybe digital would suit them. Sure, it cuts down on the logistics but it's less superior visually even when dressed up. LOL.
  • CharlesCharles
    Posts: 9
    Within two years digital film is definitely superior to film.
    The question is whether we want it? The problem is perhaps that we love the "restriction" of film, such as the organic part. With digital we can reached a much cleaner image. Do we want that? (Film looks different even against other film.)
    Another question is whether digital delivers enough quality. And the answer is yes. So it is more used. The public will not be asked. If the story or action is good, we see the difference either. But our reference will still be a while the bad digital examples...
    ARRI ALEXA vs Film: The Low Light Studies: http://www.stargatestudios.net/channel/?p=863


  • UndiscoveredCountryUndiscoveredCountry
    edited April 2011 Posts: 50
    I'm not the biggest supporter of digital out there, but I'm sure Deakins knows what he's doing. Admittedly, it's getting to the stage where a casual viewer like me can barely tell the difference between the two formats -- in that respect, we've come a long way since the Star Wars prequels and some of Mann's uglier work.
  • QsAssistantQsAssistant All those moments lost in time... like tears in rain
    Posts: 1,812
    I guess I don't know the difference in the two.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    Digital isn't necessarily a problem, provided someone knows how to handle it well. That said, I prefer the subtle imperfections of film. Either way, suppose they were shooting Bond 23 on film, I'm pretty confident they'd add layers of digital patch work in post anyway, so I'm not sure it'll have such a disastrously different look at all.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    Quoting DarthDimi: suppose they were shooting Bond 23 on film, I'm pretty confident they'd add
    layers of digital patch work in post anyway, so I'm not sure it'll have such a
    disastrously different look at all.
    Just look at all that awful digital grading used in Die Another Day.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    Exactly. By no means would I question the use of digital right away. It is the future, it's not something we'll be able to stop. It merely takes some folks who know how to handle it well - that's the key. So if Bond 23 falls under the creative abilities of someone who can work with digital, I don't necessarily think that's going to destroy the film for us.

    That said, I have a secret dream (well, not secret after this confession) in which a Bond film would be shot like in the old days. I love the colouring and film stock they used in the 60s for example. ;;)
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,718
    @DarthDimi You mean technicolor? It's be great if it made a comeback !!
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    Absolutely. I miss technicolor. It provides such a good visual experience!
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    It's one of the reasons the early films today can look as good as they do. Indeed I love Technicolor.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    It would indeed be a bold move if they could return to that for a Bond film. I'm quite sure, however, that none of them EON folk will take the risk. :P
  • kv007kv007
    Posts: 10
    I have absolutely nothing against digital. As a film maker I PREFER the look and feel of film, but as an INDEPENDENT film maker, I understand the appeal of digital. The new Arri Alexa is a force to be reckoned with. I'm sure you could put a Sony Handycam in Roger Deakins' hands and he'd deliver something beautiful.
  • PanchitoPistolesPanchitoPistoles 2.0
    Posts: 4,619
    MAJOR UPDATE: Roger Deakins revealed on his official website that he is going to be the director of photography of Bond 23. Filming starts in November!

    Yes, I can say that I am doing the next 'Bond' film. It is early days and the film won't shoot until November.

    Source: http://www.deakinsonline.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1761 (Scroll down!)
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,718
    Amazing news !!

    Please, bring Thomas Newman as well... [-O<
  • Risico007Risico007
    edited May 2011 Posts: 9,847
    very cool nice to see November is official as well
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    Great DoP we have for this upcoming film, I'm so glad it's official that we'll have Deakins on board as well as confirmation of the November start of shooting. A November - April schedule will leave seven months for post-production as well - great stuff.
  • Risico007Risico007
    Posts: 9,847
    Also unless I'm off base a November start date should mean an interesting summer for bond fans and we might even get title confirmation before the end of the year. :-D
  • forgotmyusernameforgotmyusername
    Posts: 2,782
    Is his involvement part of the product placement strategy? :-?
  • Jazz007Jazz007 Minnesota
    edited May 2011 Posts: 257
    This is great news to me, Roger Deakins is one of the best cinematographers to ever work in film and this is a high honor for Bond. Although, I do have to say that Roberto Schaefer was no slouch.
  • Bond_EdBond_Ed
    Posts: 37
    Digital Film is like the CD vs. an album in good shape on a good turntable.

    There's a "warmth" that a needle delivers that surpasses what a CD can deliver.

    It's Real ! !
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,582
    Quoting Risico007: Also unless I'm off base a November start date should mean an interesting summer
    for bond fans and we might even get title confirmation before the end of the
    year.
    A nice thought :-D
Sign In or Register to comment.