District 9 a lesson at multiple levels

The new District 9 movie which has taken the critics by storm is a lesson at multiple levels. Not only for its social commentary, but also for its filmmaking style. The movie was shot with a Red One, and almost 2/3s of it is in documentary style shooting and grading (or lack thereof):

There’s no shallow depth of field, cropping, or aggressive color grading. It’s just a run and gun movie, and it works. The magic is all in the story, apparently.

When I saw the “Eviction” clip showing the guy pictured above I smiled, because the look is exactly like Canon’s “Cinemode” — a look easily acquired by a consumer camera. That scene looked like it was shot with my HV20, and this was a great feeling.

The real funny thing is though that a lot of people shoot in cinemode because the heard that this is how they will achieve the movie look, and then they are unhappy because cinemode looks so flat. But it’s that the beauty of cinemode: in its low contrast, low saturation look.

7 Comments »

pooridge wrote on August 15th, 2009 at 11:24 AM PST:

This might interest you dear Eugenia.


Tuishimi wrote on August 16th, 2009 at 3:20 PM PST:

Will definitely check this out. Sometimes a low saturation look can be tiring on the eyes (to me) just as much as \hand held\ shooting style, with jerky cams, can.

It does look very interesting tho’.


rjames wrote on August 19th, 2009 at 3:14 AM PST:

District 9 a lesson at multiple levels
>
>
Bullshit. District 9 is a pile of crap from start to finish.
How these god-awful moives get made is beyond me then promoted as being worth watching, and why idiots like you feel you have to praise this trash is also beyond me.

District 9 is nothing but another bad SF “B” movie that belongs on the sci-fi channel with the rest of the crap those idiots create.


This is the admin speaking...
Eugenia wrote on August 19th, 2009 at 1:09 PM PST:

rjames, I am sorry but you are the idiot, not me. I hope my taxes won’t pay for your disability, because I prefer to see people like you evolve-out. Peace.


JimDesu wrote on August 19th, 2009 at 2:08 PM PST:

rjames is just part of the bulwark of lemmings the industry has slowly nurtured who can have any piece of crap wielded at them so long as it’s shiny and full of female skin, special effects or both. This guy probably loved the last Star Trek movie (which I thought was horrid).

Your assessment is spot on: District 9 is classic sci-fi and will become known as a classic. Sadly, the shaky-cam part may have helped the budget, but I suspect this stylistic choice will be seen to be a vogue of the past decade or so, in the same way that cheesy lens-flares in fully CGI’d sequences will eventually go away (I hope).


rjames wrote on August 19th, 2009 at 6:40 PM PST:

rjames is just part of the bulwark of lemmings the industry has slowly nurtured who can have any piece of crap wielded at them so long as it’s shiny and full of female skin, special effects or both. This guy probably loved the last Star Trek movie (which I thought was horrid).

Your assessment is spot on: District 9 is classic sci-fi and will become known as a classic. Sadly, the shaky-cam part may have helped the budget, but I suspect this stylistic choice will be seen to be a vogue of the past decade or so, in the same way that cheesy lens-flares in fully CGI’d sequences will eventually go away (I hope).
>
>
You losers really need to understand that Cheesy Video Tech and CGI’d sequences does not a good moive make.

Dark Star,a SF moive which came out in 1974 is light-years ahead of this garbage.

Too bad BOMB #20 wasn’t around when the idea for District 9 was being pitched…..

Darkstar

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Star_(film)


Jashan Makan wrote on August 21st, 2009 at 2:56 PM PST:

District 9 was EXCELLENT! So much depth to it. There were many references to earlier events in South Africa that every viewer might not have got. And also, the “non-shallow depth-of-field, low contrast look” was filmed with an EX1. The “Filmic” parts were shot on a RED and had some pretty shallow depth of field so the whole movie did not look like the screenshot above.


Comments are closed as this blog post is now archived.

Lines, paragraphs break automatically. HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

The URI to TrackBack this blog entry is this. And here is the RSS 2.0 for comments on this post.