Ridley Scott og filmselskabet 20th Century Fox er tilsyneladende på kollisonskurs, når det gælder produktionen af den planlagte “Alien”-prequel.
Ifølge ScriptFlags kræver Scott at få et budget på 250 mio. dollars til at lave filmen – svarende til 1,3 milliarder kroner. Til sammenligning kostede den første “Alien”-film 11 mio. dollars at lave.
Filmselskabet skulle efter sigende have kalkuleret med et langt lavere budget end de 250 mio. dollars – og skulle derudover have planer om, at filmen skal laves som en PG-13 ligesom den første “Alien vs. Predator”, så den kan få en større omsætning fra det unge biografpublikum. Scott insisterer dog på den hårdere R-rating (forbudt for unge under 17, medmindre de er i følgeskab med en voksen), ligesom den første “Alien” havde.
Damon Lindelof er for tiden i gang med at omskrive filmens manuskript, men medmindre Scott og 20th Century Fox kan nå til enighed, ser det ud til, at filmen kan have lange udsigter.
Klik her for at læse flere nyheder om “Alien”-prequelen.
#101 cans 13 år siden
#102 filmz-Myrepip 13 år siden
#103 cans 13 år siden
#104 filmz-Myrepip 13 år siden
#105 filmz-ab 13 år siden
#106 Fynboen 13 år siden
Lysere? Kan man ikke lave dunkle scener med 3D?
#107 filmz-Myrepip 13 år siden
As deep as the screen business goes and as exciting as the experience of the third dimension might be, it remains an undisputed fact that all single-projector 3D systems in the market are “very inefficient,” Robinson admits. “They lose up to 85% of the available light compared with the same projection system operating in 2D mode.” Whereas for the latter viewing at “14 foot-lamberts is recognized as the norm for digital projection, for 3D it is expected only to achieve 4.5 foot-lamberts and films are color-graded accordingly.” The light loss, he explains, “is a result of having to create separate images for each eye, which immediately loses 50%. Then there are further losses from the filters in the system. Therefore, high-gain screens can be very useful to boost light levels”—not to mention more economical.
Artikel
#108 Fynboen 13 år siden
Takker...
#109 Michael Andersen 13 år siden
Man skal bruge en masse lys til fremvisningen af 3D, ja, men det at skyde i 3D tvinger ikke instruktøren til at lave en lysstærk film.
Man kan både indspille en glansfuld film med masser af farvelade som "Avatar", men samtidigt kan man også gå i den anden dunkle retning, som f.eks. i "Tron: Legacy" der efter sigende er den flotteste 3D-film siden "Avatar", og det er også den vej Ridley Scott vil fortsætte ud af:
AICN: "But will it effect the lighting? My understanding is you have to light 3D brightly for it to really work, which doesn’t seem to fit into the atmospheric mold of an Alien film."
Sir Ridley Scott: "You need a stop more. This new (film) stock is running at 800 ASA (ASA being American Standards Association, which sets film speed standards globally). I think when it melts down is will be about as fast (as standard film stock). Normal stock is 500 ASA, so even that is going to be equalized.
I think what people forget is that sometimes you want to fill a little bit more so you have the information in the blacks. So then later, when I grade it, the digital grading will have something to pick up. If there’s nothing to pick up, there’s nothing to pick up.
So, you protect yourself, particularly if you’re doing a film where you see a lot of effects shots you want to protect your negative. If I was just pure film, I would worry less about that and shoot for what I want, but because I’m going to go through a phase, or a generation, digitally I have to protect the negative by having information."
AICN: "So, as long as the information is there you can go in during post and put whatever shadows you want."
Sir Ridley Scott: "Yes. Then later I can take it, if the information is there, and crush it and contrast it."
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/45468
#110 filmz-Myrepip 13 år siden
Men hvis Ridley foretager "crush it and contrast it", for at tydeliggøre information i sortniveauet, så man kan få øje på det i 3D, hvad så med 2D versionen? Jeg tvivler meget på, at man grader to forskellige versioner af filmen, men hvis man gør, så er jeg selvfølgelig meget tilfreds.