Posted by skunksmokinsnoogans at 205.165.42.66 on January 13, 2003 at 21:56:08:
In Reply to: Vincent--the cinematography of "Jersey Girl" posted by Brunetta--aka Badassfuckinetta on January 13, 2003 at 21:36:12:
: I know you saw it on an Avid and all but I was wondering what you thought of the look of "Jersey Girl"? In just terms of framing and camera movement is there really a huge difference compared to Kevin's other 2.35:1 films?
I don't know if those folks are running on a shoestring budget over there, but I rented the dvd the other day and I can't tell if it's the lighting or the film they are using or the camera angles or even the director...but something just don't look right about them movies they make over there. I can't say the acting was bad, but the storyline and the way they pieced it together needed lots of professional help. I can't say they didn't try, their crew gave it a damn good try, but the FX department was lacking and it was a good attempt at moviemaking, but it still came out looking amaturish to me. Seemed like they put a lot of time and effort into nothing. Kind of a shame.