Serenity - You have to see it to believe it

I may have mentioned before that January and February are usually the worst times of the year to go to the movies. The first two months of the year are commonly relegated by the Studios for things like reluctant contract obligations and films they don't have any faith in doing well. The assumption being that because it's right after the Holidays, and many people have already spent an abundant amount of money on gifts and food, people are less likely to go to the theaters. So they release the movies they don't really care about just to maintain a regular schedule and box office returns be damned. Even so, every once in a while, there is a movie released in this dumping ground period that turns out to be a real diamond in the rough. Today's film may not be precisely that, but it is pretty damn close. 

Framed as a neo-noir thriller the story follows a down on his luck fishing boat captain named Baker Dill (Matthew McConaughey) who spends his time taking on odd quests and hiring his boat out to tourists looking to make a big catch. That all begins to change when he is greeted by his ex-wife Karen Zariakas (Anne Hathaway) who Dill has not seen or heard from in ten years, nor from his young son. Turns out that Karen has found herself in an abusive marriage (both emotionally and physically) and seeks an escape for herself and their son. She offers to pay Dill one million dollars to take her husband out on his boat and leave him for the Sharks. Now, Dill must carefully consider this complicated situation as he weighs the consequences. 

To say any more about the story or the plot would constitute spoilers and I intend to keep this a spoiler free review. What I will speak about the story, without spoiling anything, is that I very much appreciated the way it depicted and represented a specific form of technology as a means of coping with harsh times and as a means of healthy escapism rather than as the central cause of evil action. 

This is actually one of those rare occasions where the less I can tell you about the movie, the better your experience will likely be with it. Aside from a few issues I personally had with the editing, this movie genuinely delivers a unique experience. Add to that some compelling performances, competent writing and directing, gorgeous cinematography, and a profound message about some of the more harsh things in life, you have a January release that is actually worth your time. 

Is this movie worth seeing? 

Yes 

Is it worth seeing in theaters? 

Yes 

Why? 

It is a one of a kind film that must be seen to believed. 

Ladies & gentlemen, I am TheNorm, thank you all for reading. 

Bring on the noise - the ignored cinematic aesthetic of video

Take a look at this image. Don't pay attention to the composition or the color or the subject matter. Turn up the brightness on your screen, enlarge this image as much as possible, and take a good long look. What you're looking for is something that digital filmmakers seem to have overlooked or disregarded. This image you just starred at for a moment contains what is called grain or texture, which are small bits of seemingly random sand-like bits spread throughout the image. When shooting movies on celluloid, grain is pretty much inevitable! It is part of the real film, and while you could use some digital effects to mask it or outright wash it away, this sandy texture is actually what many filmmakers, especially older and more experienced ones, have loved the most. Digital cameras, even the most expensive and powerful ones, also have this kind of texture to it, except for one difference. In digital, this texture is called noise. Also, many digital filmmakers hate it with a vengeance. This feeling towards this aspect of digital cinematography is understandable as some forms of noise are not very aesthetically pleasing, but this notion, at least to me, does not apply to all types of noise. 

For those of you who may not be familiar with camera technology, noise is a phenomenon found in most, if not all, digital video cameras. Even those built for high-quality cinema. In most cases, it is the result of pushing the sensitivity of the sensor, which is adjustable according to the amount of available light. Some camera sensors are better at creating incredible images in even the smallest amount of light while others don't have it as good. Most of the time, digital filmmakers will opt to keep the sensitivity as low as possible to prevent too much noise. Also, there are lots of computer programs available to clean the images up. When it comes to getting a crisp and sharp image, the options are through the roof. 

Even so, why do most digital filmmakers want to get rid of the noise? 

The most obvious answer would be to have the cleanest and best-looking image possible, which is, of course, an understandable goal. I work hard to make my pictures look as gorgeous as possible. In the world of HD and 4K, it is reasonable to expect that digital seems crisp and sharp just like film. However, celluloid has never really been sharp at all. Sure, lots of Hollywood movies and independent films shot on celluloid look incredible and intense, but that has more to do with the time and money they all had to properly light their scenes and apply proper cleanup tools to the footage before release. And even then, it's still damn near impossible to not notice the grain. Take a look at these screenshots from the movie Blade Runner. Pay particular attention to the shadows. 

Chances are you noticed the grain particularly in the lighter parts of the shadows. Even though Blade Runner had an incredible budget and lots of production value, the grain is still present in the images, and it mostly has to do with the nature of its capture format. Celluloid film is an emulsion of silver alloy crystals that react when exposed to light creating an image. Though they are microscopic, they can still be seen by the naked eye in the form of grain. Much like how boosting a digital sensors sensitivity will usually yield more noise, using high gauge film stock will generally provide more grain. Even so, there have been some cases where, despite using lower sensitive film stock, there is a ton of grain. It can be seen best in the film The French Connection which was captured using low gauge film stock and nominated for an Academy Award for Best Cinematography. 

Noise, like grain, is also inevitable. However, as I stated at the beginning of this article, there are some types that, at least in my opinion, are not all that ugly and genuinely add to the cinematic aesthetic of the image. One kind in particular which is unquestionably ugly and does not belong in an image, let alone one meant for cinema, is what I will refer to as Rainbow Noise. This phenomenon usually occurs in cameras with smaller sensors especially when the sensitivity is pushed too high. As a result, the image gets flooded with multi-colored pixels that no amount of color correction or image cleanup will effectively eliminate. Here's an example from the feature film The Purge: Anarchy. 

Another kind of noise, which I personally find to be aesthetically pleasing, is referred to as "Mosquito Noise." This is the type which I argue is more akin to film grain. A kind of fine sand particle especially noticeable in the brighter ends of shadows. This, in my opinion, is one of the many things that makes digital video inherently like film. Having a light amount of seemingly random bits of sand-like particles flying around the image is part of digital videos charm. It is even present in feature films made within the last few years captured on digital video. Take a look at these screenshots pulled from Angry Video Game Nerd: The Movie and The Raid: Redemption. 

Both of these films were captured on the same camera. The Panasonic AG AF100. 

Now, I'm willing to bet that a lot of you who have examined these images closely likely had a hard time noticing the noise or the grain. I can assure you, it's not because I tried to fool you. It's actually because things like grain and noise are difficult to really notice in still images. It is there and can be seen if you look carefully enough, but it's usually easier to notice when viewing it in motion, and even then, it's really only noticeable when looking at a clip frame by frame. When watching a movie, provided the story has done its job in grabbing your attention with sympathetic characters and a compelling narrative, the overall asthetics of the images don't matter. Yes, it is best to have as good looking a picture as you can get, but that does not mean that you are required to shell out hundreds or thousands of dollars for a camera that delivers noise-free images. Mostly because aside from maybe a few cameras manufactured by Sony and Canon, there is no such thing. Perhaps someone will develop such a device in the future, but even so, why are we wasting our time whining about noise when it looks more like cinematic grain? 

Part of our perception of digital noise is conditioning. We tend to be suckered into believing that our images should look absolutely pristine and have no unsightly blemishes at all. We see this visual idea in commercials, display TVs in electronic stores, and even in our motion pictures. Many people would have us believe that the most cinematic image is one that replicates how we see the world accurately. A perfect presentation. Except for one problem: We don't live in an ideal world. 

I personally believe that art should always reflect the natural and beautiful imperfection of people and the world as a whole. Movies should still have some kind of character flaw about them which makes them more relatable and enjoyable. For me, that beautiful imperfection is in the noise, the digital equivalent to film grain. 

Screenshot from Public Enemies captured on early digital cameras. 

The good news is I do not appear to be alone in this belief. Phil Rhodes, a regular contributor to Red Shark News (an online magazine for digital cinema production), posted an article expressing his own take on noise. You can find a link to that article at the end of this one. Also, Rachel Morrison, the cinematographer for Black Panther, wanted to capture that film in a higher than usual level of sensitivity to get what she called "digital grain," but ultimately didn't do so at the request of the special effects team, who asked her to not go past a certain level. Also, just last year, Steven Soderbergh made an entire feature film on an iPhone using no external recorders. Producing images that not only had a good deal of noise but also contained the least amount of color information to work with. And yet, the film looks spectacular. 

There is no such thing as a perfect camera or a flawless image. There is only the art we create and the tools we use to do so. In painting, different brushes will leave specific kinds of strokes based on their materials. You cannot control the subtle marks they will make, but you can determine the direction they will go. Despite this inability to control precisely how the brush will create the strokes, very seldom does the artist complain about it. Because, after all, it is the eye of the artist that will make it into something amazing to behold. The same can be said for filmmaking. If you genuinely want to create incredible art, you must embrace imperfection. 

Ladies & gentlemen, I am TheNorm, thank you all for reading. 

Red Shark article on noise. 

Worst Movie Theater EVER!!!

 

A few weeks ago this Icon Theater opened up close to my hometown. Naturally, out of curiosity, I decided to go see a movie there and get a sense of what this brand new theater was like. I wasn't sure what to expect as I have grown accustomed to my regular theater (Cinemark at Shoreline) and was kind of looking forward to seeing what advancements this theater offered that could make it a potential competition. To my utmost dismay, and grave disappointment, this theater, as it turns out, is entirely awful! Even with its technological advancements and sleek modern design, it is not enough to hide the most amount of mass misdirection, poor organization, and unwelcoming atmosphere I have ever encountered in a public space, let along a movie theater. I know that the location itself doesn't really matter so long as the movies are good, but I cannot in good conscience let anyone I care about share my horrible experience in this horrid place. And if you have a moment, I will gladly explain why.

To best describe the experience, allow me to take you on a sort of guided tour of the theater. As you enter the front door, you make your way up two sets of escalators leading to a large open room. Down the other end is where you may purchase tickets and concessions. The entire system is automated, but there are some people there to help you through the process if need be. You are able to select your movie tickets and your concessions at the same kiosk. Once you have purchased your tickets and selected your snacks, you then proceed to the actual snack stand to pick up your food and drink. Once you're finished there, you may then continue to the theater itself where you get to enjoy heated reclining seats for your comfort. Then, the movie theater experience can begin. 

The ticket kiosks are to the left, and the snack bar is to the right. 

Sounds pretty cool, right? Well, here's how they managed to mess it all up. 

First of all, as I said, the ticket kiosks are fully automated and require you to either manually punch in the movie you want to see or, provided you purchased your tickets online already, scan a provided barcode into the machine. However, when you arrive at the device, there can be anywhere from four to eight employees crowded around them telling you how to use the system. When I said that I had purchased my ticket online an had the barcode in my email (which had not been made clear to me upon my initial purchase at home) I was told by one person to find said barcode and scan it. Then, just a few seconds later, another employee looked at my phone which had the ticket information and said that I actually didn't need to scan anything and could go straight to the snack bar if I wanted. Upon doing so, I was then told by another employee behind the counter that they could not actually perform any transactions for snacks and instructed me to return to the ticket machine to select my items. So I did, then I went back to the snack bar again, and they presented me with the popcorn I had purchased but were puzzled when I politely asked where my drink was as well. It wasn't until they looked at my receipt that they realized I had indeed purchased drinks. Once I finally got my cup, I went to the soda machine they have and, much to my horror, it was one of those touchscreen multi-choice soda machines that never works. The drinks always come out too flat, they never taste well, and they never have even the most basic selection available.

Already these issues raise some important and relevant questions. First, if their goal was to remove the need for a ticket teller and have it all fully automated, then why do they have eight people walking around the large hall hovering over the customers as they try to work the machines? I mean, I would understand if they had two or three if one of the devices breaks down or a customer has a question, but if you already have as many people as you have machines, what's the point of a fully automated system in the first place? Second, why do you have people at the concessions stand if they can't actually take customers orders? This would be like taking a table at a restaurant waiting for the menu only to be told that we have to place our order on a tablet outside the front door. Third, these multi-choice soda machines just do not work and are overbearing. I understand the idea is to have as many options as possible, but again, these machines just don't work. Purely because they never produce anything even remotely tasty. Which I realize is a first-world problem, but the point still stands. 

I know that all of these complaints sound like the ramblings of a bitter old man who can't stand the modern technological age, but I want to assure you that is not the case at all. I happen to enjoy much of the advancements made in this generation and will likely continue to do so for a long time. I am also aware that many of the people working at this theater are just there for a decent day job and are likely struggling to make ends meet and are very probably not getting paid very well, thus are not entirely happy to be working there, which I totally understand and relate to. These issues and more are, in actuality, symptoms of an even bigger problem which is starting to take hold of just about every aspect of society: automation. 

We are progressing to the point that businesses are trying to save more money by adopting a sort of "humans need not apply" approach. Where machines and algorithms take over customer service as much as possible. This in and of itself is not necessarily a bad thing, but the way society is trying to adapt it is, at least in my opinion. Rather than trying to work out a way in which technology and manpower can coexist, companies are just throwing the technology out there expecting everyone to just go with the flow and consequences be damned. Except there's one small problem with this approach: Humans will always be required. 

No matter how far technology advances, or how socially inept more people become, or how much money is saved in the long run, the plain fact is that human beings are, by nature, social animals. We require regular human contact to remain mentally and emotionally healthy. This is one of the reasons people go to the movies: to have some kind of interaction with other people. Be it with friends and family or total strangers. 

Making things more convenient with automation is not a bad idea. So long as it does not come at the cost of human interaction. This theater tries to be more convenient, but in doing so, it forgot that movie theaters are a communal space, and as such requires opportunities for human interaction. Because even in the age of mobile phones, social media, and video games, we will always need external stimuli from other people in one form or another. 

Please do yourself a favor and don't bother with this theater.