comment #1

Zimmergirl says ...

But the question remains, is he better than he was in Things We Lost in the Fire?

comment #2

JackTorrance says ...

Just wanted to point out that Che Guevara was a right-wing lunatic masquerading as a leftist hero who murdered and imprisoned countless homosexuals, blacks, liberals, conservatives, artists, and whoever else he deemed unfit to be revolutionary.

comment #3

bdboudreaux says ...

my big question is how does it look? I'm dying to see what the Red camera looks like when shooting something realistically. In full tech nerediness, that camera is the future.

comment #4

Santo says ...

I'm a little confused about the aspect ratio change between the two films. IMDB had them both listed as 2.35. I don't doubt that Soderbergh would change aspect ratios, I'm just curious if it's true or not.

Also, does anyone know if the awards ceremony is being aired in the US? IFC seems to have gone strictly internet this year.

comment #5

Jeffrey Kunze says ...

Never heard Jeff rave this much about a film in such a short snippet. Wow, must really blow The Good German out of the water.

comment #6

Geoff says ...

Wells, be sure to give us something on the Red cam.

What does everyone think of the aspect ratios?

First film, going by Wells' take, is the revolution and pride before the fall. A building up of this powerful man. So scope seems appropriate.

Since the second film is the downfall, and much darker, perhaps a more intimate approach is needed? A grittier, TRAFFIC style thing.

comment #7

actionman says ...

Sounds excellent. I am certainly excited to see this but I can't help but be curious about what Malick would have done with this material.

Wells: is there anything Malickian about either of the films? Did any of Malick's work end up in Buchman's final scripts?

comment #8

T. Holly says ...

Hey, I thought they were making changes back at the post facility last week, how'd they get it there?

comment #9

mutinyco says ...

I would think the look of the RED would be determined by how it's projected -- whether it's 35mm, standard digital 2k, or full 4k...

comment #10

T. Holly says ...

Fortunately, we have some info on that, I'm digging it up.

comment #11

T. Holly says ...

"Both films are being finished at Technicolor," he says. "Tim Stipan of Technicolor Creative Services New York did the DI, and the DCDM for Cannes is being done at Technicolor Creative Services in London. And Technicolor Madrid is doing the filmout and video mastering."

http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/2008/05/correction_on_c.php

comment #12

mutinyco says ...

That's not really an answer with regard to how it's screening at Cannes. DI is color correcting. DCDM is the digital mastering for digital projection. And filmout is transferring the digital image out to film. That piece is just a rundown of all the work being done at Technicolor.

I'll assume Cannes is digital. Hopefully they went a full 4k.

comment #13

lazarus says ...

I can't tell if Jack Torrance's post is a parody of what our resident wingnuts usually write, or if he's just another one of them.

comment #14

T. Holly says ...

I'm gonna say they projected prints. Shouldn't you be asking how it was captured, not how it was output?

comment #15

Richardson says ...

"I can't tell if Jack Torrance's post is a parody of what our resident wingnuts usually write, or if he's just another one of them."

if it helps, the typical wingnuts accuse him of all that but say he's left-wing.

Actually, i still can't tell.

comment #16

mutinyco says ...

It was captured at 4k on the RED ONE.

If it was projected via 35mm print, then the digital master was output to film.

comment #17

T. Holly says ...

OK, now you're insulting my intelligence. I still think they went print. It's Cannes afterall.

comment #18

mutinyco says ...

Probably. Though from what I've read, 24 City screened digitally. Whatever.

comment #19

Mgmax says ...

Wow, must really blow The Good German out of the water.

God, what didn't?

I think Jack Torrance's post was a parody of the rightwing hatred for Che and the leftwing everything-bad-is-your-side's-fault school of revisionism, at the same time.

Or an unintentional parody of all that...

comment #20

T. Holly says ...

Oh yes, from the Man/A.O. discussion.

Wingnuts, maybe if Che does well, there's a movie in this book that I'd like to see.

http://tiny.cc/7bIZX

comment #21

Mgmax says ...

Actually, what I'd love to see someone make a movie out of is yesterday's New York Times story about the housewife-blogger in New Jersey who's become a leading figure in the Yemeni freedom movement.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/20/world/middleeast/20blogger.html

comment #22

corey3rd says ...

Che wouldn't appreciate you paying $20 to see 2 movies about him with none of the proceeds going to overthrow non-communist countries. Free the cinema!!!

comment #23

Wrecktum says ...

"DI is color correcting"

You are wrong. It's a 35mm negative made from the digital master. I trust nothing you say now.

comment #24

mutinyco says ...

DI = digital intermediate.

From Wikipedia:

Digital intermediate (often abbreviated as DI) describes the process of digitizing a motion picture and manipulating color and other image characteristics to change the look, and is usually the final creative adjustment to a movie before distribution in theaters.

comment #25

George Prager says ...

But the question remains, is he better than he was in The Fan?

comment #26

T. Holly says ...

Wreck, we know what he meant. If it was just making a negative, the DP wouldn't be there, it's the modern equivalent of timing a print. Who loves ya, mutiny?

Mgmax, it's a global planet. She's from New Jersey via Flatbush.

comment #27

mutinyco says ...

Furthermore, DI no longer refers specifically negative film. It's a generic term now for color timing/gradating in a digital space, whether the footage was shot on film or digitally, and whether it's output back to film or digital.

comment #28

aussieanywhere says ...

I was at the screening. Jeff is spot on - the ratios of the two films are different. It also was definitely projected digitally, with no opening or closing credits or even titles.

However i have to say that i don't share Jeff's enthusiasm for the picture. As skilfully crafted at a technical level as it is, the narrative is punishingly uncompromising to the point of boredom. I nodded off several times. And i wasn't the only one.

I would estimate that 20% of the audience didn't return after the intermission - and another 10-20% walked out after the remaining section started.

It will be fascinating to see who takes on the incredible commercial risks of releasing this film.

comment #29

T. Holly says ...

Re-cut.

comment #30

Josh Massey says ...

"Or an unintentional parody of all that..."

My vote is for unintentional.

comment #31

BurmaShave says ...

I can't wait to watch bootlegs of this, communist style. Fuck Che.

comment #32

D.Z. says ...

Jack: "Just wanted to point out that Che Guevara was a right-wing lunatic masquerading as a leftist hero who murdered and imprisoned countless homosexuals, blacks, liberals, conservatives, artists, and whoever else he deemed unfit to be revolutionary."

And Bush masqueraded as a compassionate conservative while killing one million Iraqis. What's your point?

comment #33

MilkMan says ...

I'd rather see a movie about that lost parrot who gave his home address and directions to a veterinarian.

comment #34

Josh Massey says ...

"And Bush masqueraded as a compassionate conservative while killing one million Iraqis. What's your point?"

And then D.Z. goes and parodies himself! Brilliant!

comment #35

Filipe says ...

Pretty much every film that got finished at the last minute was shown on digital (Blindness, Two Lovers, 24 City). That said, I have talked to more than one critic that think Cannes has the best digital projection they've seen.

comment #36

p.Vice says ...

This snippet from McCarthy's review more or less guarantees another Wells retraction:

Neither half feels remotely like a stand-alone film that would satisfy audiences on its own, while the entirety offers far too many aggravations for the paltry rewards it offers.

comment #37

T. Holly says ...

Like this one better, "far too many aggravations for the paltry rewards it offers. Scattered partisans are likely to step forward, but pic in its current form is a commercial impossibility except on television or DVD."

61 million dollars.

Filipe, thanks, people with odd names come out of nowhere all the time to help me out.

comment #38

Walter Sobchak says ...

Any plans on how the two films will be released, that is, at the same time or spaced apart, a la "Kill Bill"?
(or has this question already been addressed...I'm admittedly a little late to this party)

And dammit, D.Z., for the last time it's been one billion innocent Iraqis killed by BushCo, not a million. That's Billion with a B. And 90 percent of them were babies. Get it right.

comment #39

Dave Polands Gut says ...

Just what the public wants. A 4 hr biopic on a leftist communist. Thank you Hollywood!

comment #40

D.Z. says ...

"Just what the public wants. A 4 hr biopic on a leftist communist"

You have a point, actually. I wonder if most people who buy the Che merchandise even care about reading about him and/or seeing a movie about him, and don't just do it as a fashion statement.

comment #41

siamesecat says ...

"Just what the public wants. A 4 hr biopic on a leftist communist. Thank you Hollywood!"

As long as it's got Warren Beatty, Diane Keaton, and Gene Hackman in it I'm there!

comment #42

Suibne ? says ...

Dear Jeffrey:
....and that Che person is so dreamy.....

comment #43

Suibne ? says ...

Dear Jeffrey:
....and that Che person is so dreamy.....

comment #44

Suibne ? says ...

Dear Jeffrey:
....I agree....it's the best movie I've ever seen.