DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   The TOTEM Poll: Totally Off Topic, Everything Media (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/totem-poll-totally-off-topic-everything-media/)
-   -   Borat what was the format used to film it? (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/totem-poll-totally-off-topic-everything-media/80017-borat-what-format-used-film.html)

Hamad Abdulla November 20th, 2006 02:58 AM

Borat what was the format used to film it?
 
Anybody knows what format and camera were used to shoot the new Borat feature film? I'll bet it's not 35mm, it must be some form of DV or HDV, anyone got any idea?

Cheers.

Russell Pearce November 20th, 2006 04:28 AM

Found this on IMDB

Technical Specifications for
Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan (2006)

Film negative format (mm/video inches)
Video (HDTV)
Cinematographic process
DV (partly)
HDV
Printed film format
35 mm
Aspect ratio
1.85 : 1

Russ

Eric Darling November 20th, 2006 05:17 AM

It's definitely mostly HD - in a certain chase scene near the very end of the film, I remember actually seeing a pro video lens from a second camera creep into the shot for a split second. I think total budget on the film was $17M.

Brian Wells November 20th, 2006 05:40 AM

There is a post on Cinematography.com which indicates that much of "Boret" was shot on Panasonic VariCam rentals from Abel Cinetech. The person who wrote the post works there, so it must be true...

Leo Pepingco November 20th, 2006 10:13 PM

Monitary facts for your enjoyment.

COST = $27M (US$)

Opened in 1/3 of movie studios. Due to the flop of the Ali G film "Ali G in Da House" FOX was very worried of this film. Especially the controversy surrounding.

On the first opening week, the Movie shot to No.1

Because FOX did not release the film in all the cinemas, FOX lost over $500M US$. The following week, Fox opened the film everywhere it could.

I love anything that pokes fun at fox... Especially Fox news.

"No You're wrong. Who listens to the UN?"
"I'm sorry, but I think there are people other than FOX who know more about the facts."
"Just shut up - you dont know nothing"
"Let me finnish"
"Shut up, just shut.... up ok.."
"No, you wont let me finnish"
"Shut up.... Cut his mic."

Jason Lowe December 1st, 2006 02:26 PM

How could this thing have cost $27M to make? No sets, two actors, no CGI, nothing.

Richard Alvarez December 1st, 2006 06:16 PM

Crew hast to get paid, transportation costs money, gear has to be rented, insurances has to be bought, actors get paid, inverstors get paid, editing and finishing costs money, film transfers cost money.

27 million seems high though, I'd have put it closer to 15.

Eric Darling December 1st, 2006 07:48 PM

Don't forget rights and clearances and craft services.

Ethan Cooper December 2nd, 2006 01:59 AM

I know a guy in Jackson Miss. who helped shot a few segments of the movie. They shot the segments he worked on with Varicams.
Fun little side note:
The shooters were given a supply of dummy tapes to give to the cops if they were taken into custody.
Thats about all I know and about all he'll divulge.

Robert Knecht Schmidt December 2nd, 2006 02:03 AM

I agree with the above skepticism about the budget. You simply don't see $27 million on screen in this film, and it seems unlikely anyone would ever finance such a risky investment to that kind of money.

$27 million total including P&A--that I'd believe.

Ethan Cooper December 2nd, 2006 11:40 AM

Does that $27 Million figure include distribution and advertising? Thats about the only other expense I can think of.

Richard Alvarez December 2nd, 2006 12:01 PM

Yeah, P&A, distribution and such can double a films 'production' budget. It's important to keep that in mind when looking at figures like this. It's not uncommon in Hollywood to DOUBLE the overall costs in this manner.

It's also important to remember, as we look at how 'inexpensive' it is to 'make a movie' these days... that PROMOTING the movie can cost far more than the production costs.

Because filmmaking is such a collaborative effort, and involves SO many aspects of different crafts... from office work, to catering, to advertising, to insurance, to duplication, to MORE insurance, to transportation, music rights etc... it's easy to 'forget' about those hidden costs when shopping for our next toy. Often, people get fixated on how much 'cheaper' it is to shoot video over film. WHich is true. And there is a certain economy of scale involved with small projects. IF purchasing and processing film is going to triple the budget for your project, then yeah, shooting video saves tons of money.

But on a big budget, the cost of film is WAY down on the list expenses to worry about. Sure, there are still savings to be had, but it has to be balanced against other 'departments' craving money... and the long term 'pay off' can be the deciding factor.

Brian Luce December 16th, 2006 03:47 AM

I think "Kiss Kiss Bang Bang" with Robert Downey and Val Kilmer and an
A list screen writer, cost 22 million.

So I don't see how "Borat" could have been that expensive.

Chris Hocking December 17th, 2006 03:18 AM

Lawyers cost a lot of money!

John Vincent December 18th, 2006 09:49 AM

It's budget has been listed as $16 Million U.S.

Advertising budgets are never included in budgets.

john
evilgeniusentertainment.com


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:28 PM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2024 The Digital Video Information Network