DEADLANDS 3 UPDATES - May 6th 2010

[DjfunkmasterG]

Dude, shoot on film. Not many people take films on video serious. that is because most SOV films look like THEY WERE shot on Video Deadlands 2 is an example of how to do it and make it look like bad 16mm Deadlands 1 looks like SOV

[fulci fan]

I see what you mean, but the only SOV movie that looks like actual film to me is 28 Days. Even Laid to Rest looks like it was SOV and they used some fancy ass cameras but they were still video. 35 mm will make it looks that much more epic.

[EvilNed]

Dude, shoot on film. Not many people take films on video serious. Quite the opposite, alot of films are shot digitally these days. The Red One is a remarkeable camera. It's slightly cheaper to shoot on a Digital Medium as well, as you won't have to worry about film transports or developing and scanning it.

[fulci fan]

Quite the opposite, alot of films are shot digitally these days. The Red One is a remarkeable camera. It's slightly cheaper to shoot on a Digital Medium as well, as you won't have to worry about film transports or developing and scanning it. Yeah, I heard that was a good camera.

[DjfunkmasterG]

Survival of the Dead was shot on the RED and it doesn't look all that great, but The Book of Eli was shot on the RED as well and that looks great so when it comes to the RED it is all in the knowledge and operator, plus DP.

[MinionZombie]

I thought Survival looked rather good. A few times it looks like it's on Red, but most of the time it looked rather spiffing. It's a beautiful looking film, and the shots are just lovely.

[kchertu]

It's slightly cheaper to shoot on a Digital Medium as well, as you won't have to worry about film transports or developing and scanning it. Slightly cheaper? More like tremendously cheaper. As far as not many people take SOV movies seriously, that's a statement that was valid 6 years ago, but things are a changin my friend. 99% of movies will be SOV within a few more years and the reason is with the new amazing cameras coming out all the people clinging to film are being won over... it's almost ridiculous at this point to shoot on film if you have a low budget (anything under $3M) because you have such little funds to work with, why put 1/4 of it towards film when you can shoot on video at a fraction of the cost and look 97% as good? They shot the last episode of House on the "still camera" that I own and it looked absolutely amazing. "Laid to Rest" really looked SOV... I'm not sure why, but it did. But, my movie "Ghosts Don't Exist" was shot on the Red, it did not look SOV. A lot of it comes down to having a crew who knows what the heck they are doing with lighting and using the space you have correctly. Also, a lot of the magic happens in post to make the image look right.

[EvilNed]

Survival of the Dead was shot on the RED and it doesn't look all that great, but The Book of Eli was shot on the RED as well and that looks great so when it comes to the RED it is all in the knowledge and operator, plus DP. Well, that, but the lenses play a huge part in it too. I thought Survival looked great, too, tho. Slightly cheaper? More like tremendously cheaper. Well, alright, I'm not that into the economics of the whole thing. I just know it's cheaper. Both for economical and logistical reasons. I think the RED is a great camera, overall.

[kchertu]

That's true, lenses are extremely important. I just finished acting in a film that cost around $24,000. It was a short and they shot it on 35mm.... with one camera. $18,000 of that budget was spent on film, that doesn't include the processing, and all things that have to be done after the images are captured. I could have shot the movie for exactly $18,000 less with reusable media (CF cards) in my camera and I guarantee you most people watching would never be able to tell the difference. And, again, that's just using one camera... we all know, Gary, that you like to use 10 cameras at a time, so it'll be hard to do that with film. haha For real though, with the way we can make video look and with the flexibility of being able to do a shot 10 times knowing all you gotta do is delete 7 of them that are not usable as opposed to getting a shot 2 times and then freaking out because every time after that you are chewing up more money every second you roll that precious 35mm film... I just don't get reason to shoot on film.

[DjfunkmasterG]

Well KRYSTIAN, the DP from DEADLANDS 2 is coming aboard and has connections with 35mm, and I know people with REDS. If I can't have at least 2-3 cameras on set at all times it will be a long shoot. I like to cover every angle possible, and believe me if I could get every Movie Cam 35mm SUPER 35 Camera on set for the shoot I would do it just to cover 250 angles at one time when it comes to the zombie footage.

[DjfunkmasterG]

NEW UPDATE: 20th Century Fox has requested the screenplay for Deadlands 3 and the original script for the remake of Deadlands 1. We are in talks and I will update accordingly.

[BillyRay]

Wow, Dude. Fox? Well, they could always option DL3 for a tv series, then cancel it halfway through the first season...

[bassman]

After Avatar's success they're looking for stuff to throw money at for tax purposes. Billy - I just now figured out what your avatar is and spit coffee on my monitor. Hilarious...

[LouCipherr]

If 20th Century Fox picks up the DL franchise, THE NEXT ONE BETTER BE EPIC!

[MinionZombie]

If 20th Century Fox picks up the DL franchise, THE NEXT ONE BETTER BE EPIC! hahaha ... otherwise you can imagine the fan fury and goading ... oh boy, now that would be a big ol' stick doing a lotta pokin' Kick ass news dude. If they take up Deadlands and want another zombie script to read for 'cash-in follow-up' purposes, then tell them to come to me with my undead epic ... I'd re-write it, natch ... but yeah.