Posted on Thursday, October 8th, 2015 by Jack Giroux
Woody Allen has directed around 50 movies. Manhattan, Annie Hall, Crimes and Misdemeanors, and even his most recent efforts have all been shot on film. For the first time in his career, the writer/director isn’t shooting on celluloid. Read more about the first Woody Allen digital movie after the jump.
The Untitled Woody Allen project, due out next year, stars Jesse Eisenberg (The Social Network), Blake Lively (Savages), Parker Posey (Irrational Man), Kristen Stewart (American Ultra), Corey Stoll (Ant-Man), and more. Steve Carell (Foxcatcher) also had to replace Bruce Willis (Die Hard) during shooting, who most definitely did not have to leave the project over a reported scheduling conflict.
The film is also being shot by legendary cinematographer Vittorio Storaro (Apocalypse Now), on Sony’s F65 4K digital camera. In a statement released to The Hollywood Reporter, the DP discussed how it was his initially his decision to make this Woody Allen’s first digital movie.
I had seen that the Sony F65 was capable of recording beautiful images in 4K and 16 bit-color depth in 1:2, which is my favorite composition. So when Woody called me this year asking me to be the cinematographer of his new film with the working title ‘WASP 2015,’ my decision was already made. I convinced him to record the film in digital, so we can begin our journey together in the digital world.
Roman Polasnki (Chinatown) recently shot Venus in Fur on the F65. Bigger titles, such as Oblivion and Tomorrowland, used the camera as well. As for Allen, earlier this summer he discussed with Deadline having no reservations about not shooting on film.
I have no strong feeling on it. I’m happy to go whichever way everyone is. Digital looks very good to me if it’s done well. Film always looks great if it’s done well. I’ve never shot anything in digital, but I think I will shoot my next film digitally to see what that’s like. It is more than the wave of the future; it’s the wave of the present, really.
With a few exceptions, like Manhattan or Match Point, Allen’s camerawork is generally invisible. He’s a great director, of course, but he’s always been regarded more for his scripts and the performances he gets than his visual mastery. Whether a movie of his is shot on digital and film, especially nowadays, doesn’t really matter. To Allen, the differences between digital and film aren’t that obvious anyway.
Cool Posts From Around the Web:
They seem minimal. It’s all the after-stuff of not having to cut celluloid, but digital is really not cheaper and it’s not faster. It’s just that that’s the way everything has moved and it looks pretty. I see digital shot by good cameramen that is beautiful and I wouldn’t be able to tell the difference, so I don’t mind it. I like that I can edit fast. You just punch electronics where it used to be you’d cut and then have to splice it and tape it and then look at it and un-tape it. Now, it’s bang, bang, bang, bang, bang and it’s done.