B&W Film Moovies

[ruben]

I am looking now through TV at a film with/by Orson Wells, "The Third Man", and I hardly can contain my joy for seeing the master treatment of the spectrum from black to white.

In the past I have censured in these grounds recent films made by George Clooney, BW as well for the poor results in these grounds. In this respect, today I should correct myself and add prize for Clooney good intentions.

But folks, "The Third Man" on my screen, what deep a contrast ! what rich blacks ! what detailed blacks and whites altogether ! what illumination !

Cheers,
Ruben

[Nh3]

This such a coincidence because just the other day I bought a DVD of "The Third Man" because it was mentioned as one of the best photographed B&W films. I'll watch it tonight.

[Franko]

I watch "The Third Man" about once a year on the average, whether on cable or tape and never tire of it. It's such a masterpiece - makes me wish for a time machine and a IIIc.

[xayraa33]

You might like Citizen Kane also with Welles and Joseph Cotton.
nice B&W photography in CK too.

[DougFord]

Watch, WILD STRAWBERRIES, Ingmar Bergman
Excellent contrast and tonality

[Hiyawaan]

The Third man is great and was directed by Carol Reed. Check out Lars von Trier's The Element of crime, its sepia done beautifully. Also A touch of Evil, Citizen Cain and Tarkovski's Ivan's Childhood.

[Haigh]

A couple of such movies are Jim Jarmusch's "Stranger than paradise", filmed I think, by Robbie Muller and also Anonioni's "Eclipse" (in Italian with English subtitles). I checkout any film noir genre movies since they are usually in B&W.

Bets wishes,

Gary Haigh

[mr_phillip]

The Third Man is one of my favourite old movies, not least because it's so beautifully shot.

The best black & white cinematography I've seen in recent years though is Control by Anton Corbijn (himself no mean photographer), the biopic of Joy Division lead singer Ian Curtis. Even if you're not interested in the subject, it's worth watching just for the fabulous monochrome work by cinematographer Martin Ruhe - it's knuckle-bitingly beautiful.

[retnull]

Fave B+W cinematography:
Antonioni: L'Eclisse
Bergman: 7th Seal
Godard: Alphaville (The opening credits even state, "Shot on Ilford HP-5"!)

[le vrai rdu]

"andrei Roublev" by tarkovski :)

[benmacphoto]

Kane was not an impressive movie at all for content. For its lighting, composition, and editing it is amazing. But that does not make up for lousy content. IMHO. One needs to look back at films such as Faust by F.W. Murnau and Cabinet of Dr. Caligari by Robert Wiene.Two great examples of German Expressionism. Pandora's Box by Georg Wilhelm Pabst is amazing. And Fritz Lang's M is amazing as well. But one does not need to go back that far for great b+w films. Jean-Luc Godard's French New Wave film Breathless is excellent. Hitchcock's Strangers on a Train is excellent as well. The list can go on.

[2XLX2]

i was impressed by the stylistic bw cinematography of Double Suicide

http://www.criterion.com/asp/release.asp?id=104

http://www.criterion.com/asp/list.asp?sort=title



moreover, most films by capable directors of the 'BW era' easily satisfies me. antonioni, bergman, godard, resnais, roehmar are among my favorites. i think their color works are equally good.

in the 'color era', woody allen's BW film, Manhattan, was beautifully executed and was praised by critics. i think he made more films in BW

[manfromh]

"Der Himmel Über Berlin" was good. Half of it is b&w.

"La Jetee" is among my favourites.

Im about to watch "Dr Strangelove" in the next few days.

[telenous]

Kane was not an impressive movie at all for content. For its lighting, composition, and editing it is amazing. But that does not make up for lousy content. IMHO. One needs to look back at films such as Faust by F.W. Murnau and Cabinet of Dr. Caligari by Robert Wiene.Two great examples of German Expressionism. Pandora's Box by Georg Wilhelm Pabst is amazing. And Fritz Lang's M is amazing as well. But one does not need to go back that far for great b+w films. Jean-Luc Godard's French New Wave film Breathless is excellent. Hitchcock's Strangers on a Train is excellent as well. The list can go on.



Citizen Kane borrowed (or, was influenced by, shall we say) a lot from the German Expressionist lighting evidenced in the films of Wiene and Murnau but at the same time it is distinctly American in the way lighting is definitely non-stagey (a cinematographic problem that most, if not all, European movies suffered from at the time). I personally find the film very important in terms of content and formal structure as well, so I have to disagree with you on that.



In many ways, Citizen Kane was a happy accident. Welles was fresh out of the theatre and radio but (by his own admission) clueless on moviemaking. As a result he had absolutely no preconceptions about what should be done or could be done in a film. Fortunately for him, he had by his side Gregg Toland, a cinematographer that could deliver whatever Welles requested in his wide-eyed cinematographic innocence. If Welles asked for something that could not be done, Toland wouldn't say anything, he 'd just go away and work on it and come back with some sort of solution the next day. There's no denying that Welles himself was a visual genius and this was brought out with all the cinematographers he worked with later. The Magnificent Ambersons (a very important film even in its truncated version), Touch of Evil, and The Lady from Shanghai all show Welles' visual genius. Incidentally, since the film comes up very often, I don't think he had anything whatsoever to do with the cinematography of The Third Man, although the film is justly celebrated for it (it was lucky for Reed to have him to film his scenes for the little that Welles, ever busy with numerous other projects, made available himself for filming - although he did pen the well-known 'Cuckoo clock' lines).



As for other films, I also like very much the B&W photography in Bergman's films (the cinematographer was nearly always Sven Nykvist). It's not just the photography (as in camera movement and angle), it's also that they went for a specific kind of light in Faro island where they were filming most often. Hitchcock is another favourite director of mine but I don't think the photography in his B&W period was anything to write home about. The visual genius was there - the angles, the ability to narrate visually - but the lighting was somewhat average, mostly because light tecnicians in the UK, where he shot most of his B&W films, were lagging behind their counterparts in Hollywood. Most of Hitchcock's films that are now recognised as masterpieces were produced/filmed in the US and were in colour (the one exception being Notorious, which is B&W).



Last, many Soviet films show understanding and appreciation for light never really attained in the West. An off the cuff example is The Cranes are Flying by (the actually Georgian) Kalatozov - the plot is terribly cumbersome (I should say, for my taste) but the photography is jawdropping. In that respect perhaps even better is (again) Kalatozov's Soy Cuba. Exactly why people from the ex-Soviet Union are so sensitive to the changing qualities of light is a mystery to me but I kinda feel it is something deeply entrenched in their visual culture as I see it also in photos from FSU RFF and flickr members who do good photography. Or, may be, that's what photography is partly about anyway.





.

[kevin m]

Our 26" Sony TV died just after Christmas so we bought a 42" Plasma flat screen during the after-Xmas sales, and I have to say it's a joy to watch movies at home now. The Third Man is one of the first movies I rented and the B&W cinematography is so nice. The whole movie's a gem, though, cracking dialog and the xither score. :D

Here are a few more B&W gems:

La Bete Humaine: Shot mainly on trains and in rail yards of pre-WWII France. Jean Gabin evidently actually drove the train himself in some scenes. The lighting and vintage lenses make the massive steam trains seem almost alive. Beautiful.

Rules of the Game: Another Renoir film, this one was banned in France upon its release. Sharp as a scalpel even today, and beautifully shot, too.

Ugetsu: Set in feudal Japan, it's part samurai film, part ghost story and part romance. It works seamlessly and Mizoguchi makes the whole film seem like something dreamed rather than seen.

Orpheus: Cocteau's masterpiece, IMO. It's not technically the best photographed B&W film, but the effects he devised - liquid mirrors, etc., are still very effective even today. Check out the angel of death's henchmen on the WWII vintage Harleys.

La Passion de Jeanne d'Arc: It's hard to believe that a silent B&W film shot eighty years ago could be so emotionally powerful even today, but, my God this movie is powerful stuff. Maria Falconetti actually seems possessed, and the the photography - composition, lighting - is just the best. It's been remastered with a new score and you'll finish wondering why modern movies bother with dialog at all. :D

[kevin m]

Keep the recommendations coming, guys. I'm adding old favorites like "Andrei Rublev" to my Netflix queue, and "Control," which I hadn't heard of, is at the top, now. :)

[telenous]

I agree, 'Control' is very good, I watched it about a month ago. The photography is superb, it transposes you in a very bleak place, which, depending how you look at it, may be the UK of the late 70's or the world inside Ian Curtis' head. Sam Riley's performance as Ian Curtis makes the jaw drop a little. Good stuff.





.

[2XLX2]

...Most of Hitchcock's films that are now recognised as masterpieces were produced/filmed in the US and were in colour (the one exception being Notorious, which is B&W)...

.

i thought Rebecca, Spellbound, Psycho, all BW, were well received. no?

[telenous]

i thought Rebecca, Spellbound, Psycho, all BW, were well received. no?

Psycho was a runaway financial and critical success, and I think moneywise the greatest in Hitchcock's long career. He deliberately filmed in B&W to get a gritty, Gothic look that permeates the movie. (And, sorry, I 'd forgotten momentarily about it).

Rebecca won an Oscar for Best Picture but Hitchcock always said that David O. Selznick interfered much more than what he 'd liked. I am not a big fan of Spellbound (too much unsubtle psychoanalytic stuff that were in vogue at the time), although it has its moments. Not one of Hitchcock's great films, I think.


.

[chut]

What a lovely thread. Thanks for starting this Ruben.

I'd like to throw into the mix:

Fellini: La Dolce Vita
Godard: Bande a Part
Antonioni: L'Avventura

[2XLX2]

a few more of my BW favorites. not necessarily for the photography, though


Diary of a chambermaid


http://www.criterion.com/asp/release.asp?id=117


Faces

http://www.criterion.com/asp/release.asp?id=252

The pornographers

http://www.criterion.com/asp/release.asp?id=207


Knife in the water

http://www.criterion.com/asp/release.asp?id=215

My night at Maud's

http://www.criterion.com/asp/release.asp?id=345

Coup de grace

http://www.criterion.com/asp/release.asp?id=192

I am curious

http://www.criterion.com/asp/boxed_set.asp?id=179



Ashes and diamonds


http://www.criterion.com/asp/release.asp?id=285


Fists in the pocket


http://www.criterion.com/asp/release.asp?id=333

[the_jim]

Not to discredit them as being b/w films, but "Control" was shot in color (I believe Kodak 5218?) as was Clooney's "The Good German" and "Goodnight and Goodluck." Still, they are all beautiful.

For more modern b/w movies (actually shot on black and white film), I like "Pi" shot by Matthew Libatique and "Dark Days" shot by Marc Singer.

Both of these films were made with almost no budget. "Dark Days" is especially impressive when you consider that Marc Singer had no training/schooling in film making/photography at all and lived as a homeless person for an extended period of time to create his documentary.

For older films, I recently watched Alphaville again. While the story isnt exactly the strongest, the camera work of Raoul Coutard is very impressive. The opening shot of Lemmy Caution (the protagonist) lighting his cigarette and then the tracking shot, following him from the hotel lobby, then up in an elevator are very very cool.

Also, "Tokyo Story," shot by Yuuharu Atsuta, is a mastercourse in static camera work. The nearly square (1.37?) aspect ratio along with the cramped layout of Japanese households facilitate beautiful internal framing.

This is a cool thread.

[charjohncarter]

Listen to the 'Third Man Theme' (Harry Lime theme), and the black and white looks better. Does anyone play the Zither anymore?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZZHq2JSnnE&feature=related

[oftheherd]

Well, I don't emerse myself enough to know all the directors of all the b/w films worthy of comment. However, b/w been a favorite of mine. I got my oldest daughter interested in watching it for the lighting. I always thought many of the Humphrey Bogart movies had great lighting techniques, but have no clue who directed them. I also thought Hitchcock did well in b/w television.

[bsdunek]

I have found that the old (late 20's into the 40's) B&W movies had very good photography, even if the story line was bad. I am a fan of old B-Westerns. Can't get much more corny than that, but I am always pleased with the composition and lighting of these old films. The new stuff is pretty bad in my opinion.

[Chuck Albertson]

Hud. Brilliant.

[gns]

How about "The Man Who Wasn't There", the Coen brothers' 2001 take on film noir.

Cheers,
Gary

[ruben]

Not to discredit them as being b/w films, but "Control" was shot in color (I believe Kodak 5218?) as was Clooney's "The Good German" and "Goodnight and Goodluck." Still, they are all beautiful.

..........




Can anyone explain me this ?

Cheers,
Ruben

[pesphoto]

Ed Wood was good

[DougFord]

Can anyone explain me this ?

Cheers,
Ruben

"The Man Who Wasn't There", the Coen brothers', was also shot originally in color.
In the Coen brothers instance it was ‘contractual’ that they shoot in color.

[ruben]

Thanks DougFord, my original complain against these latter movies was they don't look good like in the past. I am glad to know the explanation is rather technical than related to skill.

Cheers,
Ruben

[kevin m]

Ruben, I think technical improvements in film stock have had the unfortunate tendency to shrink lighting budgets on many movie sets. When everyone was shooting iso 25 film, there was no option but to light the set. Now, we have iso 500 movie film. :D

[Cale Arthur]

Peter Bogdanovich's "The Last Picture Show" comes to mind..

Speaking of "The Third Man", wasn't that shot on Eastman XX? There's still a few of us using that wonderful stock (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=52426)..

--c--

[DougFord]

Thanks DougFord, my original complain against these latter movies was they don't look good like in the past. I am glad to know the explanation is rather technical than related to skill.

Cheers,
Ruben
I’m in agreement with you.
While I’m a huge Coen brothers fan and maybe a bigger Roger Deakins fan,
none of the afore mentioned modern ‘B&W’ films impacted my visual sensibilities the way that Wild Strawberries or Touch of Evil did.
The studios want the option of releasing these modern films in color in some markets if they choose, after the fact. I guess that shooting the film on B&W stock is too risky for some. Artistic preferences take a back seat to financial concerns.
One could argue that the cinematography and not the color to B&W conversion is solely responsible for the visual impact. But that’s another can of worms.:-)

[NickTrop]

Most recently seen with great black and white:

Hour of the Wolf
Sven Nykvist, Cinematographer
Ingmar Bergman, Directed

Also, the 1990's French film, Girl on the Bridge, just outstanding
black and white work by Paul Ivano

Too numerous to mention. Conrad Hall was great. Great work on the original Outer Limits. Great work of the German expressionists in the silent era. Mario Bava was incredible - color and black and white.

The list goes on and on...

[nixarma]

Another Bergman mention and a movie with a look that I aspire to replicate in my still camera work - "The Seventh Seal".

Thank you very much, Ruben, for this thread. I had been thinking of starting a similar thread for some months now but I am very happy to read this today :)

N.

[Nh3]

In Cold Blood

All of Kurosawa's B&W movies.


I'm all for a movie section, I'm a big fan of good cinema.

[gns]

Doug , Ruben,

Agree that these newer films have a different look than the older ones whether because of the film stocks or other production practices, but I don't agree that it is necessarily a lesser one.

I guess that in any great film (or any art work), the over-all "Look" and all the details that go into its makeup must contribute to and support the whole.

I remember viewing the Coen Brothers' movie and being struck with the sort of deliberateness of every shot. The light, the framing, the camera position and movements, etc. being almost too perfect.

Cheers,
Gary

[WoolenMammoth]

Ruben, I think technical improvements in film stock have had the unfortunate tendency to shrink lighting budgets on many movie sets. When everyone was shooting iso 25 film, there was no option but to light the set. Now, we have iso 500 movie film. :D

respectfully, this is a completely ignorant statement.

when people were shooting low iso motion picture stock you didnt have lots of options, the rule of the day was carbon arc (or worse mercury) which just spilled light everywhere. I havent had the pleasure of working on a set with carbon lights but apparently its a thing to see. Problem was, if you DIDNT want that look you were well out of luck as fresnels were in their infancy and magnetic ballasts for hmi werent even someone's fantasy yet.

You were also dealing with an era where most movies were part of the studio system (when it meant something) and there was no lighting budget because everything was owned by the production company, which was also the stage which was also the distributor, which was also, it goes on... Totally different system from what we have today.

Cut to today, there has probably never been a time where line items for lighting were greater. There are more toys and more variety of lights available and not only available but in standard use, than ever before. I havent worked on a movie in a very very long time that did not have full tungsten, HMI and kino flows on our trucks which discounts all the crap that is rigged on the stages.

There isnt a DP alive that wouldnt be offended by your statement. The last feature I did, the DP did everything she could in her power to keep her stop at 2.8 for all her interiors and the gaffer was in some kind of race to use virtually EVERY light he had in his package, I have *never* seen that many heads used to light the way that he did.

f16 at 24fps at 500 iso is equivalent to 1/60th at f16 at 500 iso.

no matter how you cut it, you need *alot* of light to light a movie set. Much much more than you might consider practical if you've never done it before. Film speed has very little impact on the amount of heads required. The size of them, perhaps, but practically speaking, not really. Alot of people will use a given head for the look it has even if it provides 100 times more light than you need. I worked with a gaffer years ago that would use a 10K bounce regularly where anyone else would have just put up a Baby and be done with it.

On topic, I was going to mention knife in the water, the movie looks amazing and also feels like available light to me. Paths of Glory is another that is incredible.

Oh also to note, if you dig through old copies of American Cinematographer you can find interviews with some DP's who have shot color negative for black and white positive just based on the look (as many here do), you can add schindlers list to that list. Its very very rare to find a black and white movie these days originated on 5222. In addition to the look, hollywood having absolutely no balls to commit to a decision, another factor is processing cost and infrastructure- as you can run your color negative with everything else. I would also consider the idea that everyone knows how to light for the color emulsions we have today, and while a good team would get up to speed on black and white negative, these guys have a routine that not only works with the emulsion and lights, but also with whatever they have figured out with the labs, so its a lot of dont fix whats not broken. Its pretty much excactly the opposite of where we were in the 60's when everyone knew how to light for black and white and not a soul could get up to speed on color to save themselves, so you had everything looking like the batman tv show for a while until the industry figured it out...

[john341]

The Third Man! What a film! I have a copy on Super-8 (dupe sadly but still ok) and two on tape. I still think that this film is number 1 and never tire of looking at it. The two versions are interesting with opening voice over by Carol Reed and for the US marker, Joseph Cotton. Will we ever see a "Director's Cut" I wonder..I am sure that they must have shot more than one ending.."see you around, Holly"

[steamer]

I just saw Visions of Light: The Art of Cinematography on DVD. You can only sit there stunned by the brilliance of the great cinematographers. It left me feeling more than a little nostalgia for the days of black and white.
Here is a review:
http://www.reelviews.net/movies/v/visions.html

[the_jim]

I would also consider the idea that everyone knows how to light for the color emulsions we have today, and while a good team would get up to speed on black and white negative, these guys have a routine that not only works with the emulsion and lights, but also with whatever they have figured out with the labs, so its a lot of dont fix whats not broken. Its pretty much excactly the opposite of where we were in the 60's when everyone knew how to light for black and white and not a soul could get up to speed on color to save themselves, so you had everything looking like the batman tv show for a while until the industry figured it out...

This is a great point.

Take a look at "Dial M for Murder," which had to have been one of Hitchcock's earlier color movies. The lighting would have worked for black and white, but in color, it looks atrocious.


...hollywood having absolutely no balls to commit...

Sad, but true. I wonder how any 'good' movies actually get a budget. "Transformers" made tons of money. "Meet the Spartans" opened at number one, etc. It seems like all this funding is being directed at weak, cookie-cutter junk, that have more producers on-set than crew.

Back on topic: "The Good German" was apparently shot using some kind of vintage optics, probably Cooke Speed Panchros or Baltars. These are cool lenses that would certainly lend themselves to a more vintage look.

"Good Night and Good Luck," on the other hand was shot using modern optics. But ultimately, just like still photography, the overall look has a lot do with what you do in post.

[benmacphoto]

Everyone should check out I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang by Mervyn LeRoy. The story, lighting, camera positions, are all amazing.

Though A Trip to the Moon/La Voyage dans la Lune by Georges Méliès. 1902. This movie was ground breaking. It had the first true close up. It was the first sci-fi movie. It was a parody on the science community. And was the longest movie of its time, at 7 minutes, I believe. For its time it was revolutionary, since the only other films were a few seconds of the waves moving or people walking. Méliès utilized The Lumière brothers equipment, where the camera doubled as the projector. Its a very interesting movie. I believe it is on youtube now.

[sockeyed]

Jim Jarmusch's "Stranger than Paradise" has already been mentioned. I would also like to add his films "Dead Man" for its disturbing and brilliant portrayal of the American West, and "Down By Law" which creates a palpable hot and humid New Orleans. The DoP in both cases was the the brilliant Robby Müller (also DoP of Mystery Train, Breaking the Waves and Dancer in the Dark).

[polaski]

"The Thrid Man" was not only a masterpiece of B&W cinema, but might I also point out that Welles broke new ground (not counting silent films) in using the single zither played by Anton Karas for the entire soundtrack. I have the movie, but I also found a CD if Karas' music.

[kxl]

B&W Film Moovies

= film noir about cows?

[kevin m]

respectfully, this is a completely ignorant statement.

Or, alternately, that you misread my statement then took the opportunity to toot your own horn. :D

A lot of lower budget stuff isn't even shot on film anymore, it's shot on DV. There's a mentality among some production people that shooting video is "free," or nearly so, and the technology of both high speed film and DV allows shooting to be done under conditions that were unimaginable using low iso film, which absolutely had to be lit. If you're shooting high-end commercials and features, then the rules - and the budgets - are different.

[WoolenMammoth]

please, I dont even post my photography here, this is the last place I go to impress people. As needlessly argumentative as you are with people routinely on this board, I'll humour you once.

Your intital post did not address video. It specifically addressed 25 vs. 500 iso film and inspired my response which incidentally was not intended as a dig on you. Regardless, your new statement is a strawman to your original point and still, my response is similar.

In the mid 90's NYC was flooded with DV features, little piddly $100K things that were all the rave once swiss effects did the transfer on "the celebration" and everyone thought that video was the new wave, like it was some kind of new thing and hadn't existed since the late 70's in widespread commercial form. I worked on TONS of those little movies and the lighting budgets on those things were no different than jobs of similar ambition shot on 16mm. If you are shooting live action, you have to cover often large areas and you need lots of heads to do this. The *size* of those heads is grossly different, but you still need just as big of a truck to make it happen.

What digital video brought, in terms of your lighting rental, was a shift from lighting with tungsten to lighting with flourescents. You still had primarily the same amount of heads on a job. What kino flows DID allow you to cut was a significant portion of your grip budget if you found a gaffer that would let that happen. Since the light source is softer you can get away with less modifiers. You still need the lights though.

If you are talking about blair witch and the rest of the garbage that followed it that nobody will ever see, these movies werent lit in the first place and really dont factor into this discussion.

As a general rule, ISO, be it film or tape does not have nearly the impact that one would think it would have on a motion picture of any budget. If you are lucky enough to have a first camera assistant who is good enough to pull it off and you elect to shoot your whole movie wide open at 500 iso ("changing lanes" comes to mind) you *still* need to light the hell out of a set. I dont know how many of you guys here have experience using hot lights in a scenario where actors need to move around but by the time you put a 1K out of the cameras view and diffuse that light to taste, you'd be pretty shocked at the stop you get at the actors mark and unless your whole movie is all about people standing in pools of light, which would be righteous, you need a lot of heads to light a set if you want it lit somewhat evenly, which %98 of what you watch is.

[ampguy]

by Jim Jarmusch.

Another good (mostly) b&w movie was Rumble Fish.

Jim Jarmusch's "Stranger than Paradise" has already been mentioned. I would also like to add his films "Dead Man" for its disturbing and brilliant portrayal of the American West, and "Down By Law" which creates a palpable hot and humid New Orleans. The DoP in both cases was the the brilliant Robby Müller (also DoP of Mystery Train, Breaking the Waves and Dancer in the Dark).

[kevin m]

As needlessly argumentative as you are with people routinely on this board, I'll humour you once.

Insulting and condescending! Great conversation starter! :D

I'll never understand this internet tendency to assume that whatever bailiwick one inhabits is the whole world. You have your experiences, and I have mine. Sounds like you work on big budget stuff, and I assume that what you're reporting is accurate. (sounds like fun, too) But photography is a really, really big field, and there's TONS of experience out there. I distinctly remember working on projects where every aspect of the budget - including lighting - was heavily scrutinized. And high speed film DOES allow DP's to do things simply not possible with low iso film. I remember getting 2nd unit shots with an Arri 435 loaded with Vision 500T and a PA holding a bounce card, and I'm pretty sure I couldn't have done that with iso 25 stock.

Your point that most movie sets are highly lit is, of course, accurate. But it doesn't contradict the fact that faster speed movie stocks offer options that simply weren't possible back in the studio days.

[ruben]

Perhaps I may help the discussion by stating that a few days ago I saw on the same tv anotther famous movie: Maltese Falcon, directed by John Houston and played by Humphrey Bogart and Peter Lore. This film was done at 1941.

This film may represent the average Hollywood ligthing set. Mostly you don't have undetailed blacks or bleached whites, I still prefer its lighting to Clooney's latter films. But dear folks - much below the league of The Third Man...

So my personal, PERSONAL, conlusions are as follows. Filming today in color and transforming it to BW is for my viasual taste a fiasco. Any average BW film moovie will be seen better. The Third Man belong to another league, the upper one among BW.

I hope not to have offended anyone and if more upper league BW filming is remembered - please refer all of us.


Cheers,
Ruben

[peterm1]

Ruben, why on earth do you not like Cooney's efforts. From my recollection (and here, I presume you are referring to "Good Night and Good Luck" and the "The Good German" which I have on DVD but have not watched for a while) they were both shot using specific film stock designed to match the old films and old uncoated lenses.

I vaguely recall watching TGG and being enchanted by the realisation that he must have used uncoated pre war lenses as the rendition of light was quite reminiscent of old Summars and Elmars that are uncoated - eg goodly amounts of flare from direct light sources and a nice fim noire look. I thought that this added greatly to the film's verisimiltude (hows that for a ten dollar word!)

As mentioned elsewhere "The Third Man" is another great classic that TGG is very reminiscent of. But I have to reveal a secret shame. Although I have Citizen Kane. I have just never been able to get into it despite several attempts and probably have never seen it from beginnning to end without wandering away from the screen or dozing off.

PS entirely uinrelated but if you want to enjoy a visual treat in which the film makers cosciously try to emulate old film making techniques and succeed (not only my view judging by the great number of awards it gleaned) watch the film, "Shadow of the Vampire" starring John Malkovich and Willem Dafoe. It is spooky, drmatic and lots of fun. (Despite its name it is not a teenage shock film but a serious drama.)

[Rick Waldroup]

One of my favorite films is All Quiet on the Western Front made in 1930

[onur77]

My favorite bw movie is "La Haine" Mathieu Kassovitz (1995)

[helenhill]

'GAS LIGHT' 1944 directed by George Cukor
starring Charles Boyer & Ingrid Bergman
The opening Scenes are MAGNIFICENT ......
the B&W trippy cinematography
Out of focus / Into focus is pure Magic :)

(and of course Akira Kurosawa B&W samurai flicks are Divine)

Best- h

[lic4]

Philippe Garrel's "Regular Lovers"
Came out a few years ago--usually you don't see B+W films shot so well these days.

[kevin m]

I don't think "The Good German" looks so much like a classic B&W movie. I don't know how it was shot (B&W or color stock) or what work was done in post, but the overall effect is like a Photoshop trick applied too heavily.

[WoolenMammoth]

From my recollection (and here, I presume you are referring to "Good Night and Good Luck" and the "The Good German" which I have on DVD but have not watched for a while) they were both shot using specific film stock designed to match the old films and old uncoated lenses.


Peter, both good night and good luck and the good german were both shot on the run of the mill kodak color vision stock. There was a ton of chroma key in the good german and you *need* to shoot in color to do that. The movie could not have been shot on black and white negative. The whole look of the movie was achieved with the digital intermediate used for the color timing.

The good german was shot on Panavision primes. I know it was shot on an older set of lenses, but odds are they were coated, probably single coated. It is doubtful that they used prewar anything, panavision started up in the mid 50's... Thats a lot of conjecture on my part as I wasnt part of that production, but it would be out of character for panavision (if you understand the mentality of the company) to take some old ancient lens and put a pana mount on it just to satisfy the mighty aliased peter andrews.

The Maltese Falcon and Casablanca to me, are good examples of a job being put through the formula grinder, the look of those movies and the thousands like them are very much about just getting it done, these are very bright movies with not alot of detail put into cutting light everywhere, which of course is what the third man is all about. I always kinda felt that "the desperate hours" is a better example of "get it done" look done right.

Kubrick served noir right with the killers kiss and especially the interiors on the killing.

[ruben]

Ruben, why on earth do you not like Cooney's efforts. From my recollection (and here, I presume you are referring to "Good Night and Good Luck" and the "The Good German" which I have on DVD but have not watched for a while) they were both shot using specific film stock designed to match the old films and old uncoated lenses. .....



Hi Peter,
For sure Clooneys effort to keep B&W on the agenda, are to be taken for good, supported, and even followed for his nex trial.

But as a matter of fact "my problem" started with Good Night and Good Luck. When seeing it I immediately perceived "something bad" in the BW treatment. If I was to see the film for a second time (and I cannot because I don't own a copy) there is a chance I would discover that the main reason was in the lighting, and not only in type of BW, as I assumed first.

Nevertheless, I was not sure at the time what the problem was, beyond the explanations given at RFF, until I saw some week ago The Third Man.

I think that perhaps now the issue may be that you are short of a copy of The Third Man, but the gap in quality indeed exists - to my eyes.

As said, I have nothing against Clooney, on the contrary. My prizing of The Third Man doesn't imply that this is the example to be copyied nowadays. But ceirtainly this can be the standard.


Cheers,
Ruben

[sweathog]

"Der Himmel Über Berlin" was good. Half of it is b&w.That film is amazing. Just amazing. as an extra bonus, it stars Peter Falk. The English language title of the film is "Wings Of Desire"
I want to add my support of The Third Man. Just a fantastic film. beautifully shot, great story, and that zither!

[the_jim]

The good german was shot on Panavision primes. I know it was shot on an older set of lenses, but odds are they were coated, probably single coated. It is doubtful that they used prewar anything, panavision started up in the mid 50's... Thats a lot of conjecture on my part as I wasnt part of that production, but it would be out of character for panavision (if you understand the mentality of the company) to take some old ancient lens and put a pana mount on it just to satisfy the mighty aliased peter andrews.


To continue the conjecture (and as I previously stated), my bet would be that Cooke Speed Panchros were used for "The Good German." You can find a whole bunch of internet-whooey about how this movie made use of a 32mm lens. 32mm lenses are very common amongst modern lenses, but for vintage lens sets they are probably unique to the Cookes. I say probably because I am not familiar with all vintage cine lenses, but I can say, with a good degree of certainty that the Speed Panchros are probably the most available vintage lens set containing a 32mm lens.

Every major rental house in L.A. has these lenses. They are are single coated and produce an excellent flarey/low contrast look, wide-open. Even today, the Panchros see quite a bit of work in everything from advertising (a certain matchdotcom ad from a while back) to music videos and features (close-ups of Angelina Jolie in "Mr and Mrs Smith).

[Andrew Howes]

Fellini's 8 1/2 I think is brilliant, every scene is moving and flows seemlessly to the next, the b&W looks great for most scenes but my copy has a few bad transfers I think. La dolce vita has some pretty scenes, especially the night scenes in the city, but I did not like the movie that much.
I recently saw the Bicycle Theif, cant remember the name of the director, late 1940s italian movie. Depressing story but interesting to watch, almost all available light, sunny roman streets, rainyday, early morning light. Quite common in Italian movies of that era to film out of the studio because the studios were mostly wrecked during the war, from what I understand.

[KEH]

Here's an off-the-wall suggestion: Les Vacances de Monsieur Hulot. I found the BW entirely beautiful, and Tati's quirky humour a delight.

Kirk

[WoolenMammoth]

To continue the conjecture (and as I previously stated), my bet would be that Cooke Speed Panchros were used for "The Good German." You can find a whole bunch of internet-whooey about how this movie made use of a 32mm lens. 32mm lenses are very common amongst modern lenses, but for vintage lens sets they are probably unique to the Cookes. I say probably because I am not familiar with all vintage cine lenses, but I can say, with a good degree of certainty that the Speed Panchros are probably the most available vintage lens set containing a 32mm lens.

Every major rental house in L.A. has these lenses. They are are single coated and produce an excellent flarey/low contrast look, wide-open. Even today, the Panchros see quite a bit of work in everything from advertising (a certain matchdotcom ad from a while back) to music videos and features (close-ups of Angelina Jolie in "Mr and Mrs Smith).

thats a fully reasonable asessment. I should see if I can get a definitive answer one way or another...

[shiro_kuro]

Sword of Doom By Kihachi Okamoto

Seven Samurai By Akira Kurosawa

[thomasw_]

Strawberries, Stalker, La Notte, Tokyo Story, Ugetsu, Ikiru, Joan of Arc 1928, Sacrifice, Andrei Rublev, A Man for All Seasons (http://flickr.com/search/people/?m=extras&q=%22A+Man+for+All+Seasons%22), Seven Samurai (http://flickr.com/search/people/?m=extras&q=%22Seven+Samurai%22), Seventh Seal (http://flickr.com/search/people/?m=extras&q=%22Seventh+Seal%22), Red Beard (http://flickr.com/search/people/?m=extras&q=%22Red+Beard%22), Rear Window (http://flickr.com/search/people/?m=extras&q=%22Rear+Window%22), The Third Man (http://flickr.com/search/people/?m=extras&q=%22The+Third+Man%22), Rashomon (http://flickr.com/search/people/?m=extras&q=Rashomon), Lady from Shanghai (http://flickr.com/search/people/?m=extras&q=%22Lady+from+Shanghai%22), La Dolce Vita (http://flickr.com/search/people/?m=extras&q=%22La+Dolce+Vita%22), Citizen Kane (http://flickr.com/search/people/?m=extras&q=%22Citizen+Kane%22), Browning Version (http://flickr.com/search/people/?m=extras&q=%22Browning+Version%22), Leaves from Satan's Book (http://flickr.com/search/people/?m=extras&q=%22Leaves+from+Satan%27s+Book%22), The Killers (http://flickr.com/search/people/?m=extras&q=%22The+Killers%22), 8½ (http://flickr.com/search/people/?m=extras&q=8%C2%BD), Bad Sleep Well (http://flickr.com/search/people/?m=extras&q=%22Bad+Sleep+Well%22), Mirror (http://flickr.com/search/people/?m=extras&q=Mirror), Vertigo (http://flickr.com/search/people/?m=extras&q=Vertigo), Godfather I/II.
(http://flickr.com/search/people/?m=extras&q=%22Godfather+I%2FII.%22)