Interesting; think I'll rent that one when it comes out on DVD. It's got a high rating on IMDB.
Pity it's in B&W though; is there any particular reason for that? If the director's Kubrick or Kurosawa or Welles they can get away with these things, or if it's set in a classical period where we only have B&W photos for reference ... but in modern times I think it's pretentious and you do lose detail from the image.
B&W (film) photography used to be higher resolution than colour but nowadays everything's digital and you have the same resolution on a DVD regardless whether it is colour or monochrome.
See the film, and then judge whether it is pretentious.
As it happens, the director is a still photographer. It may be cliched to use black & white to express a sense of melancholy, but in this case I think it was entirely appropriate.
2 Comments:
Interesting; think I'll rent that one when it comes out on DVD. It's got a high rating on IMDB.
Pity it's in B&W though; is there any particular reason for that? If the director's Kubrick or Kurosawa or Welles they can get away with these things, or if it's set in a classical period where we only have B&W photos for reference ... but in modern times I think it's pretentious and you do lose detail from the image.
B&W (film) photography used to be higher resolution than colour but nowadays everything's digital and you have the same resolution on a DVD regardless whether it is colour or monochrome.
See the film, and then judge whether it is pretentious.
As it happens, the director is a still photographer. It may be cliched to use black & white to express a sense of melancholy, but in this case I think it was entirely appropriate.
Post a Comment
<< Home