Borat what was the format used to film it? at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > And Now, For Something Completely Different... > The TOTEM Poll: Totally Off Topic, Everything Media

The TOTEM Poll: Totally Off Topic, Everything Media
Let's talk about anything media related.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old November 20th, 2006, 02:58 AM   #1
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain
Posts: 82
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.
Hamad Abdulla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 20th, 2006, 04:28 AM   #2
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Birmingham England
Posts: 69
Images: 1
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
Russell Pearce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 20th, 2006, 05:17 AM   #3
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Savannah, GA
Posts: 456
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.
Eric Darling is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 20th, 2006, 05:40 AM   #4
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 143
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...
Brian Wells is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 20th, 2006, 10:13 PM   #5
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 275
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."
__________________
I told you to get an alabi
Leo Pepingco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 1st, 2006, 02:26 PM   #6
Major Player
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Smithfield, Pennsylvania
Posts: 226
How could this thing have cost $27M to make? No sets, two actors, no CGI, nothing.
Jason Lowe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 1st, 2006, 06:16 PM   #7
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Mateo, CA
Posts: 3,840
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.
Richard Alvarez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 1st, 2006, 07:48 PM   #8
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Savannah, GA
Posts: 456
Don't forget rights and clearances and craft services.
Eric Darling is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 2nd, 2006, 01:59 AM   #9
Trustee
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Houma, La.
Posts: 1,400
Images: 5
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.
Ethan Cooper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 2nd, 2006, 02:03 AM   #10
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 1,929
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.
__________________
All the best,
Robert K S

Search DVinfo.net for quick answers | The best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors
Robert Knecht Schmidt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 2nd, 2006, 11:40 AM   #11
Trustee
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Houma, La.
Posts: 1,400
Images: 5
Does that $27 Million figure include distribution and advertising? Thats about the only other expense I can think of.
Ethan Cooper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 2nd, 2006, 12:01 PM   #12
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Mateo, CA
Posts: 3,840
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.
Richard Alvarez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 16th, 2006, 03:47 AM   #13
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,290
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.
Brian Luce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 17th, 2006, 03:18 AM   #14
Major Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 595
Lawyers cost a lot of money!
Chris Hocking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2006, 09:49 AM   #15
Trustee
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,063
It's budget has been listed as $16 Million U.S.

Advertising budgets are never included in budgets.

john
evilgeniusentertainment.com
John Vincent is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > And Now, For Something Completely Different... > The TOTEM Poll: Totally Off Topic, Everything Media

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:35 PM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network