MovieChat Forums > Public Enemies (2009) Discussion > Anyone agree the Digital Camera Killed t...

Anyone agree the Digital Camera Killed this movie?

posted 14 years ago by jacarec
65 replies | jump to latest

I think the movie would have been way better in maybe an old style, or similar to the camera's used for say Mobsters. Mann's digital Camera style worked well for Collateral and dare I say it...Miami Vice..but this one..not so much...Sorry Mann.... but hey, your still uhhhh "the man".

[–] rohonnag 14 years ago

absolutely, the digital cam look made it seem a made for TV movie!

An Idea is the most resilient parasite - Inception

[–] screen14 14 years ago

The aesthetic value is what deterred me from paying for a theater viewing, and now that I'm finally able to see the movie on cable TV, I'm still turned off and distracted by the choice of camera.

[–] charlesdusk 14 years ago

No. Disagree. Old style is cliched style. Go have a look at real life footage of the 30s, you can find plenty on youtube. That's what Mann was going for.

[–] Antoine_Bugleboy 13 years ago

>>"Old style is cliched style. "<<

That is so played. You Mann ass-kissing fanboys need to come up with a better line of horsezhit.

There are many ways this could have looked natural and better on 35mm. The only way Mann shoots anymore is to make it look like a SyFy TV movie. That is hack, THAT is cliche.

The goal was "hyper realism". Fine, whatever. The result was a major distraction that took you out of the movie and made you hyper conscious you were watching a movie, and an ugly movie at that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQP9QjNjeR4

[–] msaiu78 8 years ago

There are many ways this could have looked natural and better on 35mm. The only way Mann shoots anymore is to make it look like a SyFy TV movie. That is hack, THAT is cliche.

The goal was "hyper realism". Fine, whatever. The result was a major distraction that took you out of the movie and made you hyper conscious you were watching a movie, and an ugly movie at that.

Perfectly said.

I wanted to see cinema, as in 'cinema-tography', but instead I got camcorder made-for-TV crapola.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ravenosa 14 years ago

Same here. I probably only watched about 30 minutes of it. Love Bale and Depp, though. Not really a big Mann fan, so I had no problem turning it off. Life is too short...

[–] Blitzerg 14 years ago

i saw this movie in theaters and i loved it. not a 10 but its pretty damn good i thought. i actually didnt even notice the camera while i was watching it and i havnt seen it since so i dunno.

last film viewed The Social Network 10/10

[–] SouthStreet 14 years ago

Agree. I am a big Michael Mann fan from the Miami Vice days but the digital camera doesn't work in this film. It was an on-going distraction.

[–] rnmboon 14 years ago

It didn't kill the movie but it did make for some pretty ugly scenes. Fortunately most of the film was shot either at a normal frame rate or with more traditional equipment.

[–] kikirriki 13 years ago

You can't kill something that is dead in the beginning.

One day I am going to grow wings.

[–] Yorick_Brown 13 years ago

I never understood why this film had to be in digital.

"Why don't we both blow this joint and then each other?"

-Love and Other Drugs (2010)

[–] pegasusgiraffe 13 years ago

I totally agree. Not only did it look like crap, but it really destroyed the the period feel.

[–] plasmic_steve 13 years ago

It didn't.