Discland
edited by Jonathan Doyle
Cloverfield [BLU-RAY] (Paramount Home Entertainment, 6.3.2008) Disguised under deliberately goofy, yet deliciously edible-sounding, aliases such as Cheese and Slusho, Matt Reeves' Cloverfield was produced and rushed into theaters under an equally appetizing shroud of secrecy. From last year's incredibly elusive Super Bowl ad to the film's viral marketing campaign, Cloverfield had everybody scratching their heads and drooling in anticipation. Aside from the as-yet untitled title and the Blair Witch-ian visual style, the film's biggest appeal was the enigmatic creature who was last (un)seen hurling the decapitated head of the Statue of Liberty onto the crowded streets of New York City. All we knew about the mysterious beast was that it was big and angry. Now that the highy-anticipated project has come and gone, one question has fortunately been answered: Cloverfield was a major success. (continued)

Quiet, Tender, Ultra-Wide

I've never seen On A Tuesday, a short film about a thirtysomething couple getting married at San Francisco City Hall on a work day. I'm only aware of it because a good friend, Svetlana Cvetko, shot it and a friend of hers (and an acquaintance of mine) named David Scott Smith directed and co-wrote it. But interest has been aroused by an American Cinematographer article (July issue, page 16) about Cvetko's unusual lensing of it.


On A Tuesday dp Svetlana Cvetko

The gist is that Svetlana decided to shoot this intimate little piece in the widest aspect ratio I've ever heard of -- 3.18 to 1. The widest moving image I've ever seen is the 2.76 to 1 aspect ratio of Camera 65 or Ultra Panavision 70, which you can see on the Ben-Hur or Mutiny on the Bounty DVDs. I suppose I just love the perversity of an ultra-widescreen composition being used for a "small" film, or a format not necessarily mandated by the subject matter. Svetlana's reasons were her own, of course, but that's what makes a ballgame.

It's a shame On A Tuesday isn't viewable online. I'd love to see it for this aspect alone. Here's a site with some nice frame captures.

Of course, I don't know how a film this wide could projected on a screen in the right fashion. The screen would have to be fairly large and, I would think, slightly curved to deliver the right composition.

I just love the idea of making a quiet, soft-spoken subject seem exceptional by using some kind of vivid technique. I would have loved it, for example, if David Jones' Betrayal ('83), a 100% pure-dialogue movie based on a highly admired Harold Pinter play, had been shot in the 60 -frame-per-second Showscan format. Unnecessary, of course, but it would've been amazing.


Here's Iain Stasukevich's American Cinematographer article on a page-by-page basis -- page 1, page 2and page 3 .

Not For Us<< previous | next >>Hold Out

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on July 8, 2008 at 5:34 PM

comment #1

Edward Author Profile Page says ...

I love the framing of the still at the lead of the article. I look forward to reading this.

Posted by Edward Author Profile Page at July 8, 2008 6:52 PM

comment #2

Amazing Larry Author Profile Page says ...

Damn, that's a narrow image. This is the kind of thing that would drive a telecine operator to drink when it came time to do the pan-n-scan version.


Good on these folks. I like the idea of little, low-budget movies using strange processes to make their film stand out. Hopefully they're able to get some funding to make a feature, because they're obviously not afraid to try new things.

Posted by Amazing Larry Author Profile Page at July 8, 2008 7:14 PM

comment #3

p.Vice Author Profile Page says ...

Sorry, but there's still no topping 1.66:1.

Posted by p.Vice Author Profile Page at July 8, 2008 7:50 PM

comment #4

JD Author Profile Page says ...

No ofense to your friend -- I certainly appreciate her innovative spirit -- but every single one of those frame grabs has either too little head room or too much space on the sides.

Posted by JD Author Profile Page at July 8, 2008 9:02 PM

comment #5

bryce_david Author Profile Page says ...

Thanks, Jeff. Cool stuff.

Posted by bryce_david Author Profile Page at July 8, 2008 10:01 PM

comment #6

JPlatt Author Profile Page says ...

I programmed ON A TUESDAY for a film festival in early 2007. It was a lovely viewing experience.

Posted by JPlatt Author Profile Page at July 8, 2008 10:55 PM

comment #7

JoshNY Author Profile Page says ...

Actually, a friend pointed out to me that Abel Gance's 'Napoleon' has an aspect ration of 4:00:1. Wider!

Posted by JoshNY Author Profile Page at July 9, 2008 6:27 AM

comment #8

Edward Author Profile Page says ...

JD, I have to respectfully disagree about the framing. I guess it comes down to personnal esthetics. We're going to be switching from 4x3 to 16x9 when we move to new editing software in the fall, I'm looking forward to explore the new framing possibilities; although you can only do so much with talking heads.

Posted by Edward Author Profile Page at July 9, 2008 7:54 AM

comment #9

nemo Author Profile Page says ...

Reminds me of Robert Preston's remark about the difficulty of filming How the West Was Won in Cinerama: "Every time you move the camera two feet, the set decorators have to dress two hundred acres of land."

Apparently John Ford frequently photographed his own arm while shooting his section of that film.

Posted by nemo Author Profile Page at July 9, 2008 10:44 AM

Post a comment