What else is shot on video?

[Kanadian_kev]

Wolf Creek convinced me to keep shooting on video. It's cheap and if done well it still looks great.

My question is: Do you guys know of any other good horror movies that were shot on video? I seem to remember listening to the Bubba Ho-Tep commentary and hearing it was shot on video, but I watched it again and it sure as hell doesn't look like it.

[X-Nightcrawler]

Skelletons In The Closet, I believe.

[adamjohnson]

Theres lots and lots on video. Not all good, but most DTV stuff is.

[levi elijah]

28 Days Later

[Servo]

28 Days Later is the best example. It proved the theory that, as long as you have great performers, effective lighting, a decent screenplay and can actually utilize locations and sets well, the format it's shot in won't matter.

[Cyd V]

Originally posted by Kanadian_kev
Wolf Creek convinced me to keep shooting on video. It's cheap and if done well it still looks great.

My question is: Do you guys know of any other good horror movies that were shot on video? I seem to remember listening to the Bubba Ho-Tep commentary and hearing it was shot on video, but I watched it again and it sure as hell doesn't look like it.

On Bubba's com Coscerelli said he DIDN'T shoot on video, and explains why he likes film better than video.

And video looks like shit projected, it doesn't even come close to looking as good as film, it looks to pornoish...

[Kanadian_kev]

Considering that the average person didn't know Wolf Creek or 28 Days Later was shot on video, I wouldn't say it looks like 'shit.' To a film buff it might, but most people couldn't care less what format it was shot on, HD or Film.

[Lovecraft 21C]

Session 9 and The Last Broadcast were both shot on video (and are both worth checking out). Also the recent film Evil Aliens was shot on hi-def (I haven't seen this, but have heard mixed reviews).

[tylerzx2002]

In my high school movie production class we only shoot with video, and not in film, although i'd personally like to try out film, because as Cyd V put it the movies do look kinda pornoish.

[AdNauseum]

Films like Wolf Creek etc are shot on high end HD cameras, don't delude yourself into thinking that the quality of the video is easy to pull off.


28 Days Later was shot on MiniDV (SD not even HD), on a camera that is relatively affordable to amateur film makers.
But then again the cameras were adapted to use 35mm lenses and the lighting/post production was fantastic.
Poor camera work and lighting can make video-shot films unwatchable.

[Donnie_Darko]

November, which isn't horror, more "horrorble", was shot on the Panasonic AG-DVX100 (http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ModelDetail?displayTab=O&storeId=11201&catalogId=13051&itemId=94944&catGroupId=14571&surfModel=AG-DVX100B), which was also used on these (http://www.imdb.com/SearchTechnical?CAM:Panasonic%20AG-DVX100) films.

I personally can't see ANY reason for an indie film to shoot on film. It's WAY to expensive, cumbersome, and if you really want that washed out grainy look of film, you can do that with DV. Hell, you edit digitally, so why ad the extra step of conversion? Shoot on DV... it's the 21st Century people.

edit
Originally posted by AdNauseum
Poor camera work and lighting can make ANY film unwatchable.

[T.M.A.]

Crack was shot on HD, besides two slow mo shots. Same with Star Wars 2 and 3, Miami Vice, Collateral, and everything Robert Rodriguez has done since Spy Kids 2 (or 3) to Planet Terror.

One of the reasons why filmmaker don't like HD is because it lacks some of the old stuff you can only do on film. You can't do slow motion, everything is in focus, and day time scenes look too TV Video. I also heard you can't do zooms, though I could be wrong. Some of these are getting fixed, so filmmakers can have more options. But HD is definitely best used at night, since everything can be self lit and still look great. On film, you wouldn't see anything unless you over lit your scenes, which takes forever. Film also looks more flatten, while HD can capture more texture and detail. And unlike film, you'll know exactly what you shot on the day, what the end result is, and still keep filming. While film on the other hand, has to get developed first before you know what you shot. And if you're a amateur filmmaker, you're going to have to keep you're film in a fridge till you got the money to do it. :D

There is a big difference between SD and HD, but they are both Digital Cameras. Really, it doesn't matter what you shoot in, as long as it's something you can afford, and the end result is great.

[!MorganOnyx!]

T.M.A. is right. I'm no expert on film techniques etc but I do sell SD and HD camcorders. All HD does is improve your overall contrast, brightness, colour and detail. I know it sounds like alot, but if you guys love the horror genre and want to start off with horror shorts, SD is definately the way to go. You don't need your whites to be competely white, blacks will still look good, a grainy horror flick never hurt anyone and any horror buff will tell you a brighter picture does not mean better! Plus, any cheap ass effects or make up will be under more scrutiny on HD, and will more than likely look cheap as fuck and unprofessional! Not good! :cool:

Start with SD and if investors start throwing cash your way to do more, HD is your boy!

[Kanadian_kev]

The group who helps produce/distribute my films just got a Canon XL-H1. I sold my 16mm Bolex to rent that sucker out on my next shoot. Goodbye film stock, hello video!

I agree with you Donnie, there's no point in shooting on film anymore unless you have a huge budget, which I don't. The money I used to spend on film stock can now go into other places. Like feeding people.

[Donnie_Darko]

You can do anything on HD, you can do on film... only cheaper and easier. You CAN do slowmo, you just need to know what you're doing. Watch the special features on Once Upon A Time In Mexico, Robert explains how HD made him decide to NOT quit the biz.

I agree, graininess isn't all that bad, especially in horror, and if you want that, you can "post" it. But unlike film, if you DON'T want that, you can have crystal clear pictures too. Some "old schoolers" say, "HD is too clear, too clean, too many colors"... what? How can an image be "too clear"? Fine, then "film it up" in post if you want. Add grain, dull the color, strip the piss out of it. Me, I want a clear, clean, crisp image, that if I want to degrade, I can. Try to make a film image as crisp as HD... ain't gonna happen.

Hey, everybody likes what they likes. :cool: