Deakins has just kind of evolved into a digital guy. If you look at any of his interviews since SKYFALL or so, he gives plenty of reasons, but honestly, as wonderful as the guy's work usually is, I am not impressed with his digital stuff, because it does look digital (have covered several films he shot, starting with O BROTHER and MAN WHO WASN'T THERE, up through SF and BLADE RUNNER 2049.) Now Fraser can emulate film to a certain degree when he shoots digital, but I guess Deakins embraces the different aesthetic. Deakins didn't think Bond needed to be on film because he didn't really care about the history of the franchise (hadn't seen a Bond film since the mid-60s when he got hired to shoot SKYFALL.)
I think Fraser would work well with Nolan, because I think Fraser would have no problem shooting film again. That's just going by the times I have talked with him (about DUNE and MANDALORIAN, both digital shows.)
We all have our preferences and tastes and I won't begrudge you yours, but of course Deakins' work looks "digital," he's not interested in trying to reproduce celluloid. As you say, he embraces the new medium. He's not Steve Yedlin. My issue with Deakins, I suppose, is that his work has become less varied since he switched to digital, but I wonder how much that's more to do to age than just switching formats.
For my money, I tend to connect more with digital work when the filmmakers are using the latitude and freedoms found within the digital workflow than folks who try to create a filmic look with digital. Dion Beebe's work being perhaps the high water mark there.
And for the record, Dune and The Batman both are extremely "digital" looking movies, at least in to my eyes.
batman and dune are interesting because both were printed out to 70mm film and then scanned back to digital. provides an interesting look with the shadow detail of digital that has this added bit of analogue texture to it - without trying to just “copy” a film look
while i generally prefer the look of films shot on film (the default kodak look, at least), plenty of DP’s do great work on digital. however, the shadow latitude has also created an unfortunate trend where we don’t really light things properly anymore or it’s alllllllll soft light at a T2 with nothing in focus (nolan and hoyte are guilty of the latter on this movie shot on film a lot - give the focus puller a chance!!!)
For my money, I tend to connect more with digital work when the filmmakers are using the latitude and freedoms found within the digital workflow than folks who try to create a filmic look with digital. Dion Beebe's work being perhaps the high water mark there.
And for the record, Dune and The Batman both are extremely "digital" looking movies, at least in to my eyes.
-Vader
First time this didn't go through, so here is the short version.
First digital movie I loved was Hoyte's HER, which made for a very different followup to equally awesome shot on film TINKER. So it isn't like digital is an auto-lose for me, though the Beebe / Mann stuff is definitely a non-starter for me.
While I prefer the film look, there are plenty of films that misuse celluloid, like Dan Mindel's work on the Trek films and DOMINO. I really miss blue skies and white clouds and contrast.
Nolan's IMAX fetish greatly reduces the number of cinematographers he can work with to only Hoyte, basically. I would like to see him get out of his comfort zone and work with Emmanuel Lubezki (Birdman, The Revenant), Greig Fraser (The Batman, Dune), Roger Deakins (Blader Runner 2049, No Country For Old Men), Rodrigo Prieto (Barbie, The Wolf of Wall Street). Hoyte has now shot 4 Nolan films back to back in a span of 10 years. I don't see how this collaboration has any juice gas left in the tank.
imax absolutely does not limit nolan to working with hoyte at all. in fact, the only time hoyte ever has anything to do with the camera is when he’s operating during the takes or rehearsals. the camera is built and looked after by his camera assistants and imax techs and lugged around by the first AC or dolly grip. hoyte is an incredible DP, but the DP’s job is to direct the photography - it’s his crew that takes care of the technical side of making sure he can print the image he wants. if nolan wanted, he could work with someone else, but i think nolan and hoyte make a great pair with similar sensibilities. moving on from hoyte after all his brilliant work wouldn’t make any sense
imax absolutely does not limit nolan to working with hoyte at all. in fact, the only time hoyte ever has anything to do with the camera is when he’s operating during the takes or rehearsals. the camera is built and looked after by his camera assistants and imax techs and lugged around by the first AC or dolly grip. hoyte is an incredible DP, but the DP’s job is to direct the photography - it’s his crew that takes care of the technical side of making sure he can print the image he wants. if nolan wanted, he could work with someone else, but i think nolan and hoyte make a great pair with similar sensibilities. moving on from hoyte after all his brilliant work wouldn’t make any sense
This is true, but I know that Hoyte works hands-on in developing specific lenses and rigs for the cameras on a level far beyond what even Pfister did. I'm sure Nolan could find DP's to step up if Hoyte wasn't available, but I think that engineer's mindset is part of why they get on so well.
Also, I love Mindel's stuff, especially when he worked with Tony Scott. Different strokes.
imax absolutely does not limit nolan to working with hoyte at all. in fact, the only time hoyte ever has anything to do with the camera is when he’s operating during the takes or rehearsals. the camera is built and looked after by his camera assistants and imax techs and lugged around by the first AC or dolly grip. hoyte is an incredible DP, but the DP’s job is to direct the photography - it’s his crew that takes care of the technical side of making sure he can print the image he wants. if nolan wanted, he could work with someone else, but i think nolan and hoyte make a great pair with similar sensibilities. moving on from hoyte after all his brilliant work wouldn’t make any sense
This is true, but I know that Hoyte works hands-on in developing specific lenses and rigs for the cameras on a level far beyond what even Pfister did. I'm sure Nolan could find DP's to step up if Hoyte wasn't available, but I think that engineer's mindset is part of why they get on so well.
Also, I love Mindel's stuff, especially when he worked with Tony Scott. Different strokes.
-Vader
oh yeah my intention is not to diminish hoyte. he’s like a top 3 working DP and certainly does a lot of collaborative work in preproduction with his team and the rental houses to make the seemingly impossible possible. your point in engineering is also great - perhaps what makes the nolan/hoyte pairing work so well. just wanted to point out that the IMAX system shouldn’t really prevent a switch-up, should there ever be one
Has anyone ever claimed that The Batman and Blade Runner 2049, who were shot on digital and non-IMAX film cameras, look worse than Interstellar and Oppenheimer?
I have always found Nolan’s obsession with the giant IMAX screen and shooting on film to be quite bizarre. It seems like a form of self-indulgence and ego-inflation. All this trouble will be insignificant for how the viewers appreciate his films in the future, long after their releases in theatres. Whether audiences watch Interstellar now or in decades, they will likely stream it or rent it and see it with black bars on the screen and they will not discern wether something is shot on film or not. It is similar to how audiophiles who assert they hear a huge difference between their expensive gear and everyone else's.
I love "Nolan’s obsession with the giant IMAX screen and shooting on film as a form of self-indulgence and ego-inflation"... and the fact that Oppenheimer is the fifth highest-grossing IMAX films of all time
Nolan's IMAX fetish greatly reduces the number of cinematographers he can work with to only Hoyte, basically. I would like to see him get out of his comfort zone and work with Emmanuel Lubezki (Birdman, The Revenant), Greig Fraser (The Batman, Dune), Roger Deakins (Blader Runner 2049, No Country For Old Men), Rodrigo Prieto (Barbie, The Wolf of Wall Street). Hoyte has now shot 4 Nolan films back to back in a span of 10 years. I don't see how this collaboration has any juice gas left in the tank.
I think the 'adventure' of making a Nolan film, especially under the stringent conditions he seems to enforce, probably weeds out possible choices for crew, but is also tremendously exciting for those who buy in.
A couple of the crew guys on OP went on at length (far more than in the article) about the push-me/pull-you aspect ... one likened it to Sheen's Capt. Willard voiceover at the start of APOCALYPSE about 'Saigon.' You're worried all time from the start of prep, trying to figure out how to plan to get through the day, then you're bushed at the end of each day, relieved when it is over ... and then can't wait to get called back to do the impossible all over again.
I imagine it was a load of fun for the DP to get hands-on when shooting all the macro/micro stuff, which seems to only happen every decade or two (TREE OF LIFE was the last one I can think of, and before that, 2001, SUPERMAN and ALTERED STATES, along with the little known PULSE.)
I wonder how these films would have differed if Wally had stayed on. Can't begrudge him taking his chance as director, just wish it had been for a more worthy project. Also wonder if Nolan warned him about the script, since he was acting as some kind of producer on TRANSCENDENCE (and this is I guess where he got hooked on the idea of shooting in New Mexico, too.)
