MovieChat Forums > 13 Moons (2002) Discussion > shot with a handy cam

shot with a handy cam

posted 19 years ago by ploup1935
9 replies | jump to latest

i only watched the first 35 minutes and it looked like it was shot wit a handy cam, later on does it get more professionally done?

Sic vis pacum para bellum. If you want peace, prepare for war.

[–] 79of96-1 19 years ago

It wouldn't suprise me.
Whilst I watched it, I got a strange Lost in Translation feeling.

[–] i_macmenami 18 years ago

No, it looks terrible all the way through. I rented this movie because I saw Steve Buscemi was in it. I could barely get to the end! It was terrible. The only redeeming part was Sam Rockwell.

[–] willthethrilldirector 18 years ago

I thought the cinematography was great. Its not shot like any other film. I dont know if it was because they were low on money or something else, but I really enjoyed it. I also thought the movie was great. Its worth seeing. But thats my opinion.

[–] rhodri-5 18 years ago

Is it anything like Bamboozled? The cinematography in that was so terrible.

[–] dogout43 17 years ago

Does anyone know the correct aspect ratio of this film? It doesn't say in the technical specifications page.

Are you the Tenia?

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Howdy-34 17 years ago

No, Bamboozled looked much better. This is like a tape to film transfer from the 80s, unless that's their intent.

[–] Totango 17 years ago

you obviously are not a Lars von trier fan, and no it doesn't get more "professional" but you probably already figured that out seeing as it is two years since you postedd this :)

"I'm givin you pearls here"

[–] xenogears_1982 15 years ago

This movie isn't nearly as good as any of Lars von Trier's films or any of the danish Dogme movies for that matter. This movie had its moments, but it's nothing extraordinary.