35 mm film stock is fantastically expensive to buy and process. $10 million for a cheap movie. Most of it ends up on the editing room floor. Digital = economic freedom from having to grovel to the big money.
Also, Lynch said Inland Empire cost him something like $125,000.00 to shoot and edit and process to 35 mm finished cut. Thus anybody can afford to make a feature length movie if they have a dedicated small crew. Throw in a 4k quadrocopter and skilled pilot and you've even got magnificent moving shots any boom operator could envy.
He's an interesting old guy people can learn from guys like that it's just sad were he not a respected artist people would probably just dismiss him as crazy or tell him smoke less drink less coffee be quiet etc. not let him live his life and share his perspectives. He would be interesting if he just stayed a carpenter or painter I think also but he likes film and music making too very creative and credits meditation for much of that also.
Lynch says about Laura Dern, "A great actress makes it real from a deep place." Arguments about DV aside, shooting this the way he did gave her the freedom to do some of the best work I've seen by any actress in any film.
"Arguments about digital video aside..." What argument? Lynch, who loved (still loves) film finds a practical, creative, and economical need to shoot in digital. He makes no argument. George Lucas notoriously makes arguments in favor of digital because he's invested, but I don't find that Lynch does.
he did once, it was called Dune, and it did not go well because the studio didn't like his vision. I also think he's generally not interested in big budget hollywood productions to begin with. Like when he declined to direct Return of the Jedi.
It is not about film vs digital. It is about shooting interlaced vs shooting progressive, in particular 24p. The DVX100 was released in October 2002. David Lynch shot Inland Empire in 2006. Why did he shoot interlaced with PD150 instead of shooting 24p with the DVX? Oh, right, because he fell in love with the PD150.
Yesterday I completed a four hour breakdown of Twin Peaks. At the end, my mind was blown: it all meant something, the entire show and its characters were metaphors. Incredible. Find it and watch to learn what Lynch was telling us. Brilliant.
thedavecorp - Same. Films like Dune, Blade Runner & Paris Texas helped shape my inner world. I have no idea why it isn’t universally seen as a masterpiece. I watched it alone at 10 on VHS. It was an almost spiritual experience. It also further opened my sensibilities to design and music. As a fan of Jean Giraud, I would have loved to have seen Jodorowsky’s version. But can’t 2 masterpieces exist at the same time? A potential, yet unmade masterpiece and an actual masterpiece. I honestly think most people just jump on a films reputation without giving themselves to it. Or maybe it’s only for some people. Heck, I thought Clan of the Cave Bear was a great film experience.
I was at Cameraimage (a cinematography festival) one year where Lynch was the main guest. He did a Q&A I was lucky enough to see. He was asked by someone "How do you direct your actors?" Lynch's response was "I look at them in the eyes. I talk real slowly. And then I move my hand like this." And then proceeded to move his hand about just as he does at times in this video.
Two thoughts 1a- digital works because it's accessible, and there's a lot of potential with post processing 1b- film is probably better because it forces you to buckle down and pay attention to what you're doing. [ these thoughts are based on my experiences with photography. I have yet to develop film on my own] 2- Tunde Adepimpe had this to say about dreams "Most people don’t want to hear about the weird dream you had. It may be interesting or bewildering to you, but really no one else cares." Don't believe me, try telling your coworkers about a vivid dream you thought meant something, and see how long it takes them to laugh at you.
I think he's more trying to say that you cannot make a film with an specific audience in mind. Rather you just make something and then an audience finds it instead of trying to make something an audience is going to like. For instance something by marvel, dc universe or sequels to great movies that don't need it. That stuff is made for money and people pleasing.
In 2010 Laura Harring was quoted as saying that Lynch was working on a sequel but in a 2012 (I think) interview with Lynch, he said that there's currently nothing that excites his passion... so who really knows.
I do agree with your points, but you must consider the fact: would you rather watch a movie that spent 95% of it's budget on film? Or would you watch a movie that spent 95% of it's money on the actual film itself? Shooting an entire film on 16mm is would amount to $4000 plus transfer to digital tapes, and that's at a 2:1 ratio.
Narcissists eventually get to the point that the attention they had dies down, and the need to be seen and heard becomes overwhelming. You don't have to be seen or influential 24/7...it's too much. This is a dose of a healthy mindset. "I have enough. I've done enough. I am enough." Jim Carey.
In my opinion, one of the greatest benefits of seeing a film shot on celluloid in a digital medium like a 4K disc or digital projector is that when the film is scanned from the original negative, all the grain one sees is what originated on the negative. When a film is projected on celluloid, additional grain is introduced, even if the print is a second generation away from the negative. So ironically, when a filmmaker like Tarantino champions that his films should be seen on celluloid, digital projection can in some ways represent more accurately what the negative captured. One advantage celluloid has had over digital projection for a long time is in contrast and resolution. But with 4K laser projectors I think that advantage will slowly disappear. Especially considering that 99.99% of all movies shot on celluloid today are finished using a Digital intermediate. Which means that even if celluloid prints are being made, they will be struck from that DI and be limited to the resolution of the DI, which most likely will be lower than the resolution of the film print. If you then add on the extra grain and softness that get introduced from the print I think that a film that was shot on celluloid and then receives a 4K DI will look better on a 4K laser projector than on a film print. But I do believe celluloid has the advantage when it comes to older movies that were finished photochemicly and shoot on large formats like 65mm and VistaVision. Because then the true resolution of film is being taken advantage of (as long as the print doesn't come from a digital restoration of that movie, even 2001 a space odysseys 8K restoration probably don't take full advantage of a 65mm print, but digital restorations has of course other benefits, like damage removal.) After the introduction of the Digital intermediate the full potential celluloid has been lost when it comes to resolution, but has also given the filmmaker more freedom with color grading and special effects. I look forward to the day when 8K,10K,12k DIs are the norm.
One look at a Blu-Ray Lawrence of Arabia or Doctor No from original negative shows me the perfect marriage of film and digital. Tarantino shoots on film then transfers to digital, losing nothing.
Folks, the idea and style dictates what you use--aside from budget. The Red Epic or the Arri Alexa or film or a Canon 5D MIII or even an iPhone 6 depending on the project.
David Lynch has given us so much, he gave us Kyle MacLachlan and Eraserhead for fucks sake ! There should be a cult devoted to him, I'd choose that over Christianity any old day.
4k minimum for the big screen I'd say. The Alexa is good for TV. I'm really tired of people saying no one cares about the way it looks, they just want to be entertained.
As someone who too uses the Sony PD150 model he used back then, it makes perfect sense why he fell in love with that workflow. The camera itself is very fun to use thanks to all the easily accessible function keys and buttons. And the 3CCD Image sensor of that camera (and that goes for most sony videocameras in general) is very light sensitive so you can shoot wonderful shots even with low light and mostly available light conditions. The fact that you instantly see what you get is also very rewarding and for a visual artist VERY encouraging and motivating to do more in a lot less time since you don't really depend on a huge crew. The only downside is the DV material of the PD150 doesn't look as good if upscaled to HD. Unlike material shot on the similar Panasonic DVX100 which looks much better if upscaled to HD & Full HD. Still thou, thanks to that carefree workflow we got one of his most unbound and interesting films that is "Inland Empire" because the digital workflow can indeed be very liberating. Especially since digital Video only uses either inexpensive videotapes or solid state storing mediums, you are not wasting precious filmstock but just use digital filespace that can be easily deleted and used again. Something you cannot do with filmstock. Shooting film really isn't for everyone and David clearly found his perfect workflow thanks to that camera. And i'm very happy for him. Personally i realized that i'd much more prefer to shoot on film rather than digital video.
The DVX has insufficient resolution for widescreen, but it has 24p. The workflow is the same. Choosing between the two, the DVX is the clear winner for movies, and it was available for FOUR YEARS prior to Lynch started shooting Inland Empire. Unbelievable.
@@ConsumerDV Yeah the DVX really depended on the anamorphic lense that was available for it, if you wanted to shoot widescreen. Then it could look really fantastic, like Wim Wender's "Land of Plenty" shows.
Idea is when hand shows it floating when he puts the idea in cinema his hand places it on an imaginary shelf. Kind of like capturing a butterfly. Oh wow.
I hadn't heard anything about a sequel. Some have said that Lost Highway, Mulholland Drive, & Inland Empire are sort of a trilogy. Inland Empire is my least favorite.. but I'd defend Lynch's position on digital video. There's just too many reasons to use it.
some scenes from "Blue Valentine" were shot digitally. it can look very nice, so I don't think digital is too recognizable if it's done with the right style and right directing. what Lynch needs to know is that he needs a better budget in order to film, and he should try and experiment with other digital cameras. ones that don't look like cheap student films.
"Blue Valentine"? What the hell are you talking about? Its about story. yes, the actors have to execute and lighting must be right for the scene but the format or medium the image is captured on doesn't make it "good" or "bad." Its Blue Velvet, Dumbass.
Tim Jones I'm not talking about Blue Velvet shithead, I'm talking about this film called Blue Valentine. its a film that details the deterioration of a marriage. scenes that take place in the present are shot digitally, and scenes that are shot as flashbacks were shot on film. also, Drive was shot digitally. also, I'm talking about the quality of the image, not the story. not to mention, the photography of Inland Empire turned it into something that could of been extraordinary and changed it into some guys home movie. if he wants to go digital, that's fine, but at least make the photography tolerable. story is one thing, the way its told is another.
arthousefanatic I like Blue Valentine, but it's not a Lynch movie so it doesn't seem so relevant here. Blue Velvet was the movie David Lynch directed and is quite good.
arthousefanatic I get what you are saying about the feel of his movies and it may be a result to his choice of cameras. I tried watching several DL movies over a 2 week span and it was tough. After that I still think Eraserhead was the most unique IMO and may favorite. I still have half I haven't seen including the whole Twin Peaks series. I did see the TP movie. I liked it. Weird and what you'd expect. His movies seem odd and it may be due in some parts to the kinds of cameras he uses, but I'm not too sure. I do think it has this "amateurish" feel that he seems to pull off. He's a brilliant man, but some of his films require a little effort. His storytelling is bizarre, but a major influence in a lot of different artistic genres including painting and music. I think Charles Burns and Mark Ryden have been touched by the odd worlds Lynch invented and Lynch has to have been influenced by surrealism because there is always a level of that in his films. Almost like he's aware of us watching his films. Like he's watching it with us. A way of making films that other film makers seem to have no grasp of. Maybe Kubrick or Lars von Trier. Each in a specific way taking us through emotional voyages.
@@vitors9198 the observer can determine what art is and intention is only part of it. You have to be able to identify what makes it artistic for it to be art
@@vitors9198 intention is not art or even close to the definition. Art requires skill and is in the form of things like movies, shows, paintings, and sculptures. Basically anything that is visual and requires skill and effort is art. It's not just visuals, also sound. Take music for example or even here on RUclips a lot of people are taking stories and narrating them and they combine it with music and it creates art. I'm not sure what you even mean by "intention"
Abraham Ibarra Anything that requires skill and effort? That's basically every single task a human can perform I mean the artist's intention is what determines if it is art or not a carpenter can make a chair but if his intention is not to treat it like art then he just made a chair i think it's very unproductive to use art as a synonym for something good or exceptional Art is art despite liking it or not corporate pop songs are as much art as la monte's well tuned piano rothko is as much of an artist as michelangelo
@jonsands films is not dead, still very much alive. most hollywood productions are still made on 35mm film so get the thought the digital has already surpassed film out of your head. i can still easily tell the difference between them. Digital has made great strides though and one day i can see it happening
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
His hand is trying to control my mind
that hand has a mind of its own. it controls your mind via telepathy
i know it !!! that his stand '' the piano fingers " it might even rivel gorge lucas "the swipe hand'' or harrison ford ''the 1 finger''
_trying_
Nah it’s just the italian subtitles
So true! It’s cracking me up so much watching this now
It’s interesting that he really likes digital. Most filmmakers of his age love film
35 mm film stock is fantastically expensive to buy and process. $10 million for a cheap movie. Most of it ends up on the editing room floor. Digital = economic freedom from having to grovel to the big money.
Also, Lynch said Inland Empire cost him something like $125,000.00 to shoot and edit and process to 35 mm finished cut. Thus anybody can afford to make a feature length movie if they have a dedicated small crew. Throw in a 4k quadrocopter and skilled pilot and you've even got magnificent moving shots any boom operator could envy.
He also wants a smaller crew to get better hold on things.
Yeah, digital is much more practical. Still surprised though.
I think that's mainly because early digital cameras were notorious for having bad contrast in low lighting.
David Lynch being one of the few directors to praise the absolute convenience and reliability of digital is so refreshing.
Not a director, but still very important, Richard Deakins has also praised digital.
he such a poetic speaker, I could listen to this guy speak all day
Even if you aren't into film, you can learn a lot about what it means to be alive from David Lynch.
He's an interesting old guy people can learn from guys like that it's just sad were he not a respected artist people would probably just dismiss him as crazy or tell him smoke less drink less coffee be quiet etc. not let him live his life and share his perspectives. He would be interesting if he just stayed a carpenter or painter I think also but he likes film and music making too very creative and credits meditation for much of that also.
Best head of hair in Hollywood
at that age aswell i dont understand how its possible lol
Kyle Johnson Transcendental meditation apparently.
Watching Inland Empire again and I can’t understand how he made that SD digital camera look so amazing. It’s proves he’s truly a master of his craft.
Appreciate ur music g
It's all about lighting.
Goddamn, that hair is MAGNIFICENT
fingers....fingers.....
I think it's how he catches those ideas. His fingers are antennae to the eldritch depths of existence and non-existence.
He's going to cast a spell.
I thought it was Parkinson's.
Watch it Peewee! We all know where fingers got you the last time...
Lynch loves dreams and factories. And Hollywood is the dream factory. Perfect
It's also a rape factory which a little less whimsical.
@@KaiserSchuldig I don't think he loves those.
All his movies about ruined life
INLAND EMPIRE and the new Twin Peaks both look absolutely gorgeous in digital. And both are very specifically digital, not "wannabe film"
Nobody:
Absolutely no one:
.
David Lynch's fingers: ~~~~~ ~~~~~~
Jazz hands.
Where did you get that interesting comedic premise? It's such a fresh, new take. I've never seen it before.
Ever.
@@getsome4806 LOL, I'm a natural I guess.
He forgot to put on his sock puppet.
canturgan so good
Like a regular sock?
I agree, that smell of night blooming jasmine and the warm breeze in spring and early summer is magical.
his hand's growing a little Brain. He and David Cronenberg should get together and write about it.
Brilliant
a match made in heaven
We can only dream on that duo. I have dreamt this for many, many years.
James Bigica Hey, if David Lynch could team up with Werner Herzog, anything's possible
Actually - if their offspring was Japanese - it would probably be called "Tetsuo - The Iron Man".
Lynch says about Laura Dern, "A great actress makes it real from a deep place." Arguments about DV aside, shooting this the way he did gave her the freedom to do some of the best work I've seen by any actress in any film.
My mother thinks she's the worst actress ever...
JohnDaWhale3 and Now shes nominated..
@@ruipedrofonseca1043 LOL
How she fuck up in the last Jedi theb
"Arguments about digital video aside..." What argument? Lynch, who loved (still loves) film finds a practical, creative, and economical need to shoot in digital. He makes no argument. George Lucas notoriously makes arguments in favor of digital because he's invested, but I don't find that Lynch does.
How beautiful, serene, sparkling, and refreshing. Thank you So Much
Hell is David Lynch doing the wiggle fingers on your belly for all eternity.
*Heaven
I hope that he'll somehow continue the Twin Peaks story...
as long as he doesn't use a GODDAMN FLIP CAM TO FILM IT WITH!!!!
arthousefanatic lmao
looks like your dream came true
Rasmus Juul Jensen hello from 2017...I have good news
Yeah, it's awesome :-D
I feel like I'm being tickled by David Lynch watching this.
This man is a genius and it's very sad he doesn't have the budget to make on film what he has in his mind.
bullshit
total fucking bullshit
he did once, it was called Dune, and it did not go well because the studio didn't like his vision. I also think he's generally not interested in big budget hollywood productions to begin with. Like when he declined to direct Return of the Jedi.
“The absence of limitations is the enemy of art”- Orson Welles
He should start a kickstarter or something, if he actually likes making movies.
Showtime gave him an insane budget for twin peaks season 3
I'm watching this high, and his hand gesticulations are cracking me up, hahahahah.
What a genius.
+Stormy Molnjavichen My high is in the middle of gestation. Hope I make it somewhere before this video ends.
Stormy Molnjavichen How does his hand gestures make him a genius?
Henry Jackson you have to be high to understand that
Stormy Molnjavichen Lynch is a fucking genius artist, one of a kind for sure
I also smiled and then laughed. It was like he was tickling me in the brain.
amazingly lit shoot here
Really has the mannerisms of a wizard or something.
His hand is like painting, playing music, picturing his words into images!
+Dimitris Avramidis I love it too
Dimitris Avramidis Oh shut up
with his magik hand he's casting spells......
David Lynch is some lightning away from becoming Darth Sidious
Light Sidious
sus manos interpretan y unen las palabras e ideas, gracias David por tu generosidad!
I love what he says at the end about dreams - So true ! Good one Lynchey
It is not about film vs digital. It is about shooting interlaced vs shooting progressive, in particular 24p. The DVX100 was released in October 2002. David Lynch shot Inland Empire in 2006. Why did he shoot interlaced with PD150 instead of shooting 24p with the DVX? Oh, right, because he fell in love with the PD150.
I lived in Hollywood near the cemetery. The city was a nightmare. One day I will make a film about it. Love this guy.
Falling in love with ideas
I hope to have that head of hair when I reach his age
When he goes to the barber he should save the cuttings and sell them he would make a fortune it's so glorious.
Best director by far
David Lynch casts a spell everytime he uses his hands.
I'm simple-minded. I see a cow and a placard, I recognize a great actress
Truly inspiring words of wisdom
great film maker.. .absolute genius
sanch Sanchayan What makes him a genius?
Henry Jackson Watch Twin Peaks season 3 episode 8 to know
Derlanger Omg yes
I watched Eraserhead, Dune and Blue Velvet recently. Love his style.
Lost highway and mulholland drive are great too
Also check out Wild at Heart! Nic Cage at his finest and freest, plus Laura Dern, Diane Ladd (Dern's mother), Willem Dafoe, and Harry Dean Stanton.
@@marcelinhuguet7853 I want to watch ALL of his movies :D
@@adamlane6453 yup, great cast in that one, love the music also
Yesterday I completed a four hour breakdown of Twin Peaks. At the end, my mind was blown: it all meant something, the entire show and its characters were metaphors. Incredible. Find it and watch to learn what Lynch was telling us. Brilliant.
I saw it too. It changed my mind about the show completely.
The fingers... THE FINGERS!!!!!
Im sad we live in the reality where he didn't make a ton of cheap digital movies after Inland Empire but i love what we got with Lynch anyway
This is lovely, thanks uploader.
DUNE is my favorite movie. I own TWO copies.
thedavecorp - Same. Films like Dune, Blade Runner & Paris Texas helped shape my inner world.
I have no idea why it isn’t universally seen as a masterpiece. I watched it alone at 10 on VHS. It was an almost spiritual experience. It also further opened my sensibilities to design and music.
As a fan of Jean Giraud, I would have loved to have seen Jodorowsky’s version. But can’t 2 masterpieces exist at the same time? A potential, yet unmade masterpiece and an actual masterpiece.
I honestly think most people just jump on a films reputation without giving themselves to it. Or maybe it’s only for some people. Heck, I thought Clan of the Cave Bear was a great film experience.
David Lynch is my spirit animal.
"They're not necessarily going to change their vote if they see me with a cow, either".
Ah David Lynch. Can't fault his logic, mind.
I was at Cameraimage (a cinematography festival) one year where Lynch was the main guest. He did a Q&A I was lucky enough to see. He was asked by someone "How do you direct your actors?"
Lynch's response was "I look at them in the eyes. I talk real slowly. And then I move my hand like this." And then proceeded to move his hand about just as he does at times in this video.
*Ethereal finger motion intensifies*
Protect this treasure at all costs.
Can someone add magical sparkles to his fingertips?
Two thoughts
1a- digital works because it's accessible, and there's a lot of potential with post processing
1b- film is probably better because it forces you to buckle down and pay attention to what you're doing.
[ these thoughts are based on my experiences with photography. I have yet to develop film on my own]
2- Tunde Adepimpe had this to say about dreams "Most people don’t want to hear about the weird dream you had. It may be interesting or bewildering to you, but really no one else cares." Don't believe me, try telling your coworkers about a vivid dream you thought meant something, and see how long it takes them to laugh at you.
yes, people suck, big deal. some care.
“You cannot make an abstract film. People would go nuts.”
Proceeds to make tons of abstract films.
I think he's more trying to say that you cannot make a film with an specific audience in mind. Rather you just make something and then an audience finds it instead of trying to make something an audience is going to like. For instance something by marvel, dc universe or sequels to great movies that don't need it. That stuff is made for money and people pleasing.
His films are not abstract. There are characters and action happening. An actually abstract film is very hard to watch for an average person.
The only filmmaker in Hollywood
I don’t know any of his work I just like hearing him talk lmao
I love his hair.
Such an epic human being.
In 2010 Laura Harring was quoted as saying that Lynch was working on a sequel but in a 2012 (I think) interview with Lynch, he said that there's currently nothing that excites his passion... so who really knows.
David Lynch and his hand! Hahahaha... Amazing director, amazing guy, one of the most recognizable hair(cuts) in the history of cinema!
If he attached his hand to his face he would be Zoidberg.
These are not the droids you're looking for :D
I do agree with your points, but you must consider the fact: would you rather watch a movie that spent 95% of it's budget on film? Or would you watch a movie that spent 95% of it's money on the actual film itself? Shooting an entire film on 16mm is would amount to $4000 plus transfer to digital tapes, and that's at a 2:1 ratio.
Narcissists eventually get to the point that the attention they had dies down, and the need to be seen and heard becomes overwhelming. You don't have to be seen or influential 24/7...it's too much. This is a dose of a healthy mindset. "I have enough. I've done enough. I am enough." Jim Carey.
In my opinion, one of the greatest benefits of seeing a film shot on celluloid in a digital medium like a 4K disc or digital projector is that when the film is scanned from the original negative, all the grain one sees is what originated on the negative. When a film is projected on celluloid, additional grain is introduced, even if the print is a second generation away from the negative. So ironically, when a filmmaker like Tarantino champions that his films should be seen on celluloid, digital projection can in some ways represent more accurately what the negative captured. One advantage celluloid has had over digital projection for a long time is in contrast and resolution. But with 4K laser projectors I think that advantage will slowly disappear. Especially considering that 99.99% of all movies shot on celluloid today are finished using a Digital intermediate. Which means that even if celluloid prints are being made, they will be struck from that DI and be limited to the resolution of the DI, which most likely will be lower than the resolution of the film print. If you then add on the extra grain and softness that get introduced from the print I think that a film that was shot on celluloid and then receives a 4K DI will look better on a 4K laser projector than on a film print. But I do believe celluloid has the advantage when it comes to older movies that were finished photochemicly and shoot on large formats like 65mm and VistaVision. Because then the true resolution of film is being taken advantage of (as long as the print doesn't come from a digital restoration of that movie, even 2001 a space odysseys 8K restoration probably don't take full advantage of a 65mm print, but digital restorations has of course other benefits, like damage removal.) After the introduction of the Digital intermediate the full potential celluloid has been lost when it comes to resolution, but has also given the filmmaker more freedom with color grading and special effects. I look forward to the day when 8K,10K,12k DIs are the norm.
One look at a Blu-Ray Lawrence of Arabia or Doctor No from original negative shows me the perfect marriage of film and digital. Tarantino shoots on film then transfers to digital, losing nothing.
Grain is a defect.
Folks, the idea and style dictates what you use--aside from budget. The Red Epic or the Arri Alexa or film or a Canon 5D MIII or even an iPhone 6 depending on the project.
you know cameras?? wow!
Evan O'Brien no sir I don't.
penile 1 i w
One can argue this approach is a variation on automatism, a classical method of surrealism:)
David Lynch has given us so much, he gave us Kyle MacLachlan and Eraserhead for fucks sake !
There should be a cult devoted to him, I'd choose that over Christianity any old day.
Eraserhead is terrible
Kyle MacLachlan was given to the world by God with the cooperation of his parents.
AND HE GAVE US CRENDORS AMAZING IMPERSONATION
Deal with it
Amen
Porco-Dio FIlm You don't know what you're talking about.
I am alone..and I feel twin peaks in Ilola Finland---It will happen again--
The hand shows us the workings of his mind.
Love him!
David: Speaks
Hands: ✋🏻
Okay, now tell us what you think about watching movies on your telephone?
I love this guy
"Celluloid no more: distribution of film to cease by 2013 in the US"
This is the water and this is the well. Drink full and descend. The horse is the white of the eyes and dark within.
Those wiggly fingers, This entire interview has been one long jedi mind trick!
His fingers are actually speaking, the head is just a distraction.
I love his hair
Night-Blooming Jasmine - deeply moving in SoCal
4k minimum for the big screen I'd say. The Alexa is good for TV. I'm really tired of people saying no one cares about the way it looks, they just want to be entertained.
His movies are beyond my understanding.
Like this chap way more than his films, lol. Charismatic dude.
is he trying to summon something?
Someone should make an edit where the video only tracks the hand up close.
god i love him
'Ideas'!
As someone who too uses the Sony PD150 model he used back then, it makes perfect sense why he fell in love with that workflow. The camera itself is very fun to use thanks to all the easily accessible function keys and buttons. And the 3CCD Image sensor of that camera (and that goes for most sony videocameras in general) is very light sensitive so you can shoot wonderful shots even with low light and mostly available light conditions. The fact that you instantly see what you get is also very rewarding and for a visual artist VERY encouraging and motivating to do more in a lot less time since you don't really depend on a huge crew. The only downside is the DV material of the PD150 doesn't look as good if upscaled to HD. Unlike material shot on the similar Panasonic DVX100 which looks much better if upscaled to HD & Full HD. Still thou, thanks to that carefree workflow we got one of his most unbound and interesting films that is "Inland Empire" because the digital workflow can indeed be very liberating. Especially since digital Video only uses either inexpensive videotapes or solid state storing mediums, you are not wasting precious filmstock but just use digital filespace that can be easily deleted and used again. Something you cannot do with filmstock. Shooting film really isn't for everyone and David clearly found his perfect workflow thanks to that camera. And i'm very happy for him. Personally i realized that i'd much more prefer to shoot on film rather than digital video.
The DVX has insufficient resolution for widescreen, but it has 24p. The workflow is the same. Choosing between the two, the DVX is the clear winner for movies, and it was available for FOUR YEARS prior to Lynch started shooting Inland Empire. Unbelievable.
@@ConsumerDV Yeah the DVX really depended on the anamorphic lense that was available for it, if you wanted to shoot widescreen. Then it could look really fantastic, like Wim Wender's "Land of Plenty" shows.
it's a beautiful thing
Idea is when hand shows it floating when he puts the idea in cinema his hand places it on an imaginary shelf. Kind of like capturing a butterfly.
Oh wow.
has he always had the wiggly finger thing? it's driving me nuts. oh, but I adore Mr. Lynch.
I hadn't heard anything about a sequel. Some have said that Lost Highway, Mulholland Drive, & Inland Empire are sort of a trilogy.
Inland Empire is my least favorite.. but I'd defend Lynch's position on digital video. There's just too many reasons to use it.
Don't you wish you could Vulcan mind-meld with him just to get an inkling of the magical brilliance of his brain??!
He has his own MO. Modus Operandi
some scenes from "Blue Valentine" were shot digitally. it can look very nice, so I don't think digital is too recognizable if it's done with the right style and right directing. what Lynch needs to know is that he needs a better budget in order to film, and he should try and experiment with other digital cameras. ones that don't look like cheap student films.
"Blue Valentine"? What the hell are you talking about? Its about story. yes, the actors have to execute and lighting must be right for the scene but the format or medium the image is captured on doesn't make it "good" or "bad." Its Blue Velvet, Dumbass.
Tim Jones I'm not talking about Blue Velvet shithead, I'm talking about this film called Blue Valentine. its a film that details the deterioration of a marriage. scenes that take place in the present are shot digitally, and scenes that are shot as flashbacks were shot on film. also, Drive was shot digitally. also, I'm talking about the quality of the image, not the story.
not to mention, the photography of Inland Empire turned it into something that could of been extraordinary and changed it into some guys home movie. if he wants to go digital, that's fine, but at least make the photography tolerable. story is one thing, the way its told is another.
arthousefanatic I like Blue Valentine, but it's not a Lynch movie so it doesn't seem so relevant here. Blue Velvet was the movie David Lynch directed and is quite good.
Luis Diaz I thought we were discussing digital filmmaking.
arthousefanatic I get what you are saying about the feel of his movies and it may be a result to his choice of cameras. I tried watching several DL movies over a 2 week span and it was tough. After that I still think Eraserhead was the most unique IMO and may favorite. I still have half I haven't seen including the whole Twin Peaks series. I did see the TP movie. I liked it. Weird and what you'd expect. His movies seem odd and it may be due in some parts to the kinds of cameras he uses, but I'm not too sure. I do think it has this "amateurish" feel that he seems to pull off. He's a brilliant man, but some of his films require a little effort. His storytelling is bizarre, but a major influence in a lot of different artistic genres including painting and music. I think Charles Burns and Mark Ryden have been touched by the odd worlds Lynch invented and Lynch has to have been influenced by surrealism because there is always a level of that in his films. Almost like he's aware of us watching his films. Like he's watching it with us. A way of making films that other film makers seem to have no grasp of. Maybe Kubrick or Lars von Trier. Each in a specific way taking us through emotional voyages.
How does he get more handsome the older he gets 😅
He has been messing with us since the midnight movies in the 70s. Only a real artist can do that.
I feel it’s wrong to call him a filmmaker unlike others. He’s an artist.
oh man that's kinda wrong to say because art is not something the observer can determine it is art, what defines art is the intent of who creates it
@@vitors9198 the observer can determine what art is and intention is only part of it. You have to be able to identify what makes it artistic for it to be art
Abraham Ibarra Yeah but what is art? if not the intention
what would be the definition of art?
@@vitors9198 intention is not art or even close to the definition. Art requires skill and is in the form of things like movies, shows, paintings, and sculptures. Basically anything that is visual and requires skill and effort is art. It's not just visuals, also sound. Take music for example or even here on RUclips a lot of people are taking stories and narrating them and they combine it with music and it creates art. I'm not sure what you even mean by "intention"
Abraham Ibarra Anything that requires skill and effort? That's basically every single task a human can perform
I mean the artist's intention is what determines if it is art or not
a carpenter can make a chair but if his intention is not to treat it like art then he just made a chair
i think it's very unproductive to use art as a synonym for something good or exceptional
Art is art
despite liking it or not corporate pop songs are as much art as la monte's well tuned piano
rothko is as much of an artist as michelangelo
Performing spells with the red right hand.
He looks like a doll in a dream
Once you go digital, you don't go back - Dievid lyncher
@jonsands films is not dead, still very much alive. most hollywood productions are still made on 35mm film so get the thought the digital has already surpassed film out of your head. i can still easily tell the difference between them. Digital has made great strides though and one day i can see it happening