| Message | Hi, I won't frame sentences to say my admiration, appreciation etc. Yes, this is a good story, yes Mrs. Portman is fabulous... But what are you thinking while shooting the film with Canon DS bla bla or some garbage like that? When I went to cinema, I only saw, good story, good actors and actresses but muddy, soup-like pictures with awful digitalized noise effects. We can't even see the actors faces or attitudes when they are far from the camera. You are, of course, a good director. You don't need a word from a person like me to know that, of course... But i can say that you passed up an oportunity to have a-state-of-the-art film by doing that. Because this is only a TV film. You made that.
Of course nobody cares about the things like that nowadays. Because nobody is aware of what the picture quality is in a digital world like that. But don't you feel indisposed when you see a picture? Did Brannagh, Scott, Wyler or Kurosawa make mistakes when they shot with 65 mm films? Or do I feel wrong when I see these pictures in big theaters and stunned by the picturesque frames? Or do your actors and actresses deserve to see their beautiful performances in a muddy-like picture instead of 35 or 65 mm film's glamorous frames?
Sorry for my English and I hope you'll read that. |