Superman Returns

I can't remember the last time I saw a DVD all the way through. Usually I have to watch a bit here and there. Anyway, I'm about 20 minutes into Superman Returns. The first thing I noticed was how dingy it looked. I have to believe this was due to an aesthetic decision and not related to the fact that it was shot HD on a Panavision Genesis. That makes two ugly films in a row--Superman and The da Vinci Code. I'm wondering if it's because I don't like soft light that much. Both films looked alike to me: murky and grayish with poor blacks. At least I'm not alone when it comes to the da Vinci Code. Here's an excerpt from DI Studio magazine:

The Da Vinci Code is one of those movies that had a DI — this one at Efilm – but probably needn't have. OK, the fact that it was shot in Super 35mm necessitated a DI for the digital blow-up. But the look? That was determined by the combination of production design (by Allan Cameron) and cinematography (by Salvatore Totino) that confused the color black with suspense and the lack of detail in said blacks with mystery. Why else was frame after frame a jigsaw puzzle of large swathes of black broken up by a face, a painting, or an object? And the use of atmospherics — fog, mist, etc. — made sure that any detail in the blacks was lost to history. Don't blame the DI colorist for decisions made — poorly in my opinion — in production that darkness would heighten the drama. After the umpteenth time that Audrey Tautou's very dark hair obscured more than one-third of the screen in a two-shot, I was just plain annoyed.

There's a part of Superman that looks just like the problematic area of our film. You see Ma Kent. Then there's rumbling, things start shaking, the radio goes haywire and whooosh, there's an explosion outside. The scene isn't suspenseful, it indicates suspense. It's efficient and gets the job done and it's probably appropriate for a film like this. But for ours, the suspense should be expressed, not indicated.

The Lex Luthor intro scene was problematic. I saw a bit of a promodoc showing Bryan Singer directing Brandon Routh. He was micro-directing the way Routh did a specific action. I remember thinking at the time--wow, it's amazing that this scene will cut OK and not look over-directed like when I try to do that. Then, when I saw the Lex Luthor scene I realized that it was probably shot in the same way. And it does look over-directed. The direction/performance seemed stiff.

I'm realizing it's not the stylization of typical mainstream films that doesn't look right for our project but the stiffness and overindicating. That's what's making this film project so interesting to me. It's a lot about discovering the medium's potential in light of one's own sensibilities.