MovieChat Forums > Shade (2004) Discussion > The 'look' of the movie

The 'look' of the movie

posted 14 years ago by transmentalist
4 replies | jump to latest

Finally saw this and I can see why funding was pulled. It was amateur night all around. Seemed like the writer/director was trying to fit every urban legend con game into it he could, whether it served the story or not.

But my question is about the "look" of the film. Why does it look like a soap opera? There's something off-kilter about it, like it's made-for-TV or something.

Why is it some movies look like movies while others, like this one, look like TV shows?

Is it color, filter, focus? Not sure.

[–] LTUM 11 years ago

i wonder that too. im a beginning cinematographer so i'm no expert, but i think it has soomething to do with the camera setups they used. that plus the lighting and the ratio shot in.

i would also guess that they used too short lenses for the full shoot. it appears that way. if you think of how some other films look, this one had the camera right up in the actors' face the whole time. no wides, that i can see. few midrange shots. i'd say it's mainly the cropping and the lighting/colors that make it look like a tv soap

maybe some other guy will come along and offer more, but this is my guess thus far

-------------
"You are literally too stupid to insult."

"Thank you."

[–] YeahThisIsMyID 11 years ago

Yeah, i could not believe i was watching a movie with such big stars, and the cutting is all off, the story is like ''what'' and in general it is like a 12 year old handled the camera, lights, cutting, everything. It is not only bad, it is really very bad. A movie this bad in all aspects would not even get you into a program where you become a moviemaker, director, anything. ''Thanks for your application, but we don't see you have any talent regarding moviemaking 101. Perhaps a job where less attention to timing, detail and continuity is required, would suit you better''.

---------

[–] spookyrat1 9 years ago

The film didn't have a big budget whilst at the same time it did feature an experienced, deep cast, that presumably was paid from the budget.

Having said that I saw no problem with a film that, because of its narrative content, was mainly shot in interior locations that I had no trouble seeing ("lights"). It had a good soundtrack and I also liked the design of the beginning and end credits. I also liked the intercutting of the different character's backstories.

You want to talk bad movies that are difficult to watch, I'd be talking about some of the fashionable DIY home-made "horror" movies, long before I'd be bringing up Shade into the conversation.🐭

[–] HarlemEagle42 (16135) 2 years ago

Shitty filmmaking, plain and simple. This is the director's only film listed on his IMDb profile.