Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile | my password | register | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum   » Community   » Film Handlers' Movie Reviews   » Bagger Vance

   
Author Topic: Bagger Vance
Rick Fowler
Film Handler

Posts: 17
From: Richmond, VA, USA
Registered: Sep 2000


 - posted 11-06-2000 05:40 AM      Profile for Rick Fowler   Email Rick Fowler   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Surprised I'm the first to post about this film. I would have to give it thumbs up. Redford's direction and vision was good. Smith and Damon did a very good job. Theron however was disappointing her southern accent was horrible. Was pleasantly surprised that Jack Lemon was the narrator. It does the book justice which is hard to say about alot of movies today. Well that's my opinion let's here what everyone else thought.

------------------

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 11-08-2000 07:47 AM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I saw "Legend of Bagger Vance" at ShowEast last month, and really enjoyed it. The theme of a "man who's lost his game" and needs to find it again is similar to that of Redford's "The Natural". Cinematography was beautiful, treating the natural beauty of the golf course like the scenery in "A River Runs Through It". Kind of wish Redford had decided to make it in scope, rather than 1.85:1 flat, though.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com

 |  IP: Logged

Dave Cutler
Master Film Handler

Posts: 277
From: Centennial, CO
Registered: Jun 2000


 - posted 11-09-2000 09:11 AM      Profile for Dave Cutler   Email Dave Cutler   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I whole heartedly concur. I thought it was a wonderul movie as well.

 |  IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17666
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99


 - posted 11-09-2000 02:16 PM      Profile for Brad Miller   Author's Homepage   Email Brad Miller       Edit/Delete Post 
Being a fan of Mr. Redford, I enjoyed the movie, but felt the first 30 minutes was rushed and had a "thrown together" feeling to it. Perhaps the movie was 4 hours and Redford had to cut 90 minutes into 30? Who knows.

The chemistry between Will Smith and Matt Damon has that trademark Redford style that he does so well and the movie as a whole is very good, "if" you like these sort of movies, which many of the younger crowd does not seem to care much for. I did wish Mr. Redford had been in the film himself in one capacity or another.

I have only 2 beefs with this flick. First, it was recorded in EX. What? The lack of surrounds stood out to me as I was watching it. I can only remember hearing one good EX effect in the entire film. I hope Mr. Redford isn't getting Woody Allen syndrome with respect to sound mixing.

Second, I kept waiting and waiting and waiting for the movie to suddenly burst into full 2:39 scope...but it never did! (Remember the Horse Whisperer?) Movies such as Bagger Vance NEED to be in scope and I still feel strongly that any film shot flat should not be capable of getting an Academy Award for cinematography. Why DPs insist on shooting flat is beyond me. It's knowingly losing resolution on the release prints, losing light output over scope in theaters and making sure that any registration errors during printing will be exaggerated.

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 11-10-2000 08:23 AM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
One factor that leads many distributors to prefer "flat" is the eventual video release. The 1.85:1 aspect ratio requires much less cropping or pan-and-scan for 1.33:1 NTSC or PAL video, and is almost a perfect fit for future 16:9 (1.78:1) HD video. When "letterboxed" video transfers are made (more common with DVD than VHS tape), the letterboxing is less constricting with 1.85:1 than 2.39:1. Often today, more money is made on the video release, than from the original theatrical release, so "the horse is driving the cart", and the "inmates have taken over the asylum".

Regardless, many people still want to "fill the screen" of their TV sets, despite the availability of "letterboxing" on DVD. This unfortunately favors 1.85:1.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com


 |  IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17666
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99


 - posted 11-10-2000 04:48 PM      Profile for Brad Miller   Author's Homepage   Email Brad Miller       Edit/Delete Post 
Yeah, I know, but it's VIDEO! Who cares? Shoot Super35 if you're worried about video transfer. Don't sacrifice the presentation of the theatrical engagement.

I knew those HDTV guys screwed up when I heard they settled on the "widescreen" (ha) 16:9 format.


 |  IP: Logged

Dwayne Caldwell
Master Film Handler

Posts: 323
From: Rockwall, TX, USA
Registered: Apr 2000


 - posted 11-11-2000 11:03 PM      Profile for Dwayne Caldwell   Email Dwayne Caldwell   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I thought the first fifteen minutes was boring. Then it picked up when Matt and the kid were first introduced and then it really picked up when Will Smith was on the scene.

Not much use out of the surrounds except when it was thundering. And maybe it was just the print I saw, but I didn't think the cinematography was all that great. Redford's The Horse Whisperer was better in that department IMHO.

I actually thought this movie was about the first black caddy or something. But what was cool was that their wasn't any hint of racial strife (unlike Remember the Titans or Men of Honor, or for that matter any Denzel Washington flick), and I find that very refreshing.

------------------
The man with the magic hands.


 |  IP: Logged

Michael Barry
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 584
From: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Registered: Nov 1999


 - posted 11-13-2000 08:11 AM      Profile for Michael Barry   Email Michael Barry   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The cinematographer is Michael Ballhaus, whose work I loved so much in Martin Scorsese's film 'After hours'. Every shot in that movie is just superb! He worked with Scorsese on many films during the 80's.

I haven't seen 'Legend of Bagger Vance' yet (it hasn't been released here) but will probably see it. Hope this isn't too 'off topic'.

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12401
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 11-13-2000 12:52 PM      Profile for Mike Blakesley   Author's Homepage   Email Mike Blakesley   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
I didn't think the cinematography was all that great. Redford's The Horse Whisperer was better in that department IMHO.

Dwayne,

That's 'cause Horse Whisperer was shot in Montana!

 |  IP: Logged

Rick Fowler
Film Handler

Posts: 17
From: Richmond, VA, USA
Registered: Sep 2000


 - posted 11-14-2000 01:34 AM      Profile for Rick Fowler   Email Rick Fowler   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Well the camera work in Horse whisperer may have been better and nicer being shot in Scope but was IMHO Redford's worst film just a deplorable story. Mom having an affair with her daughter's trainer after she had a horrible accident. that story bugs me

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)  
Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2018 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.