Time to call a halt to 4:3

A forum for sharing views on the art of film, video and AV sequence making as well as on competitions, judging and festivals.
ned c
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 3:39 pm
Location: Dammeron Valley USA

Post by ned c » Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:07 pm

I know this is "off topic" but the point has been raised. As non-commercial film makers we don't actually have to please an audience; we just have to please ourselves. I believe this desire to please an audience is why so many "anglo-saxon" films are so unadventurous. Carefully designed to offend no-one and to please a board of judges made up of aging amateur film makers. Give me the stuff that is coming out of Eastern Europe and made by the young film makers. It seems that many n-c film makers feel comfortable with "amateurish" films. Yes, some films are made to appeal to an audience, often a specialized audience, but we should break free and have the guts to appeal to an audience of one!! Viva la revolution!

ned c

User avatar
billyfromConsett
Posts: 489
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 3:27 pm
Location: Consett

Post by billyfromConsett » Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:59 pm

I make no apologies for making films that are designed to offend no-one. But then I want my movies to be shown.

But variety of film-making needs to be there, or we'd all be watching the same kind of stuff.

tom hardwick
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 9:59 am

Post by tom hardwick » Mon Dec 03, 2007 5:12 pm

One of my wedding films shot a few years ago offended the bride, and very much so. My opening scene was of the first guests arriving - unfortunatley this included 'the other woman' (spit) and I had to re-edit her out of the entire movie. I do feel it would have been polite to inform me up front.

User avatar
billyfromConsett
Posts: 489
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 3:27 pm
Location: Consett

Post by billyfromConsett » Mon Dec 03, 2007 5:40 pm

Did you read that book "how to ruin marriages with the wedding video?" :evil:

There's always something to learn. That would be to ask the future couples if any of their ex'es are coming?

User avatar
FILM THURSO
Posts: 241
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 1:37 pm
Location: Thurso
Contact:

Post by FILM THURSO » Mon Dec 03, 2007 7:05 pm

Some degree of singular thinking goes on with topics of this sort. Clubs are often dominated by old-hands who are well past changing.
Where has that spark of IMAGINATION gone? To pot with this whole 'ditch a format' caper. They all have their uses even if not all of us can find one. I'm no electrician but I still have a screwdriver!
Each format is like every other ingrediant in the cake. I say this so often- READ THE SCRIPT- it'll tell you how best to make the film and how it should be viewed. Each story has an intended destination both in the plot and the expected audience. I've seen movies that have been better put straight to TV and TV that had great potential for the cinema screen.
I tend to find my films are at one end or the other with no in-between format. But like I say, I have made one film in 16:9 simply because of a technical reason that was good for the film to be that way.
I've always seen film as boundless in it's capability. It is an artform that encompasses all other arts and is therfor the most creative. It is sad to see people stiffle their own creativity by sticking to one format. :shock:


Tom, have you considered releasing a 'director's cut' of that wedding video?

User avatar
Dave Watterson
Posts: 1679
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 11:11 pm
Location: Bath, England
Contact:

Post by Dave Watterson » Mon Dec 03, 2007 9:50 pm

Hi Guys

I have started a new thread for this part of the discussion because we are a bit off-topic here and this thread is already three pages long.

Dave

User avatar
FILM THURSO
Posts: 241
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 1:37 pm
Location: Thurso
Contact:

Post by FILM THURSO » Mon Dec 03, 2007 10:16 pm

Off the thread! Really, I am surprised :shock: :lol:

User avatar
FILM THURSO
Posts: 241
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 1:37 pm
Location: Thurso
Contact:

Post by FILM THURSO » Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:48 am


Ray Williamson
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 3:08 pm

4:3

Post by Ray Williamson » Tue Dec 04, 2007 9:58 am

Silent 35mm was always 4:3. When sound came they just made the picture smaller at the same ratio, leaving a large frameline to hide the splices.
Television CRTs were circular to start with (the same when colour tubes first arrived later on). This suited a square-ish format.
Simple as that!
Ray Williamson, East Sussex.

Post Reply