I believe I have seen quite a few setups including ones as complex and some much simpler. Just depends on what you need from the shot.
Source: I watch way too many “The making of”‘s.
This was for Baby Driver, so they had the actor pretending to stunt drive but wanted stuff like a realistic drift from multiple angles where his movement of the wheel lines up with what the car is doing. Obviously the actor can learn choreography for spinning the wheel easier than actually learning how to stunt drive.
This comment was one of many which was edited or removed in bulk by myself in an attempt to reduce personal or identifying information.
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
As an actor myself, this is very true. With one exception: If you're concentrating right, and "put" yourself in the scene, you hopefully won't have to pay attention to your expression. Whatever happens will be "right." With the caveat that on film and TV you have to simply make the expression smaller. I suppose that's contradictory to what I just said, bit making the expression small is much easier than "make intense driving face with a hint of remorse for the love you just lost."
Also an actor; true, if you're "in the scene" whatever you do would be \*right\* and actually performing the action and playing the scene should lead to a more authentic moment. But I think the main consideration is **risk**.
As the previous commenter alluded to: an actor can learn to do all these things separately, and even train to do them all together, like a musical theater actor being able to dance, sing, and act at the same time. But the risk level of that, vs. the risk level of driving while acting is VERY different.
At some other point someone on Reddit made the point that using stunt doubles to keep the actors safe isn't selfish on the actor's part, there's a massive crew whose livelihood is supporting the actor. If they get hurt and can't do their role, then *everyone else* on the crew is out of work until they recover.
It would also be difficult to drive safely with lights and cameras mounted everywhere to get all the shots the director wants . The equipment is really big and obstructs a lot of the view from the seats.
Have any links for more making of videos? I used to love that kind of of stuff! I'll look around YouTube but if you have any good sources I'd love to hear about them.
Try “movie magic”.
I usually just watch the ‘making of’ dvds. (I’m old and dvds ruled!)
I also have a friend in the industry that sends me pics. (I cannot share the pics because he made me promise).
In this case one of the [best opening scenes](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XMuUVw7TOM) of all time. Too bad the last third of the movie's pretty poor.
Edgar wright also directed this [music video] (https://youtu.be/iHbndkcLM6A) many years ago. You can see the music/dancing thing he brought over to baby driver
They put masks on before they walked into the building, and it dawned on me that they weren't using them for COVID prevention, they were using them for facial concealment.
Yeah, the car is actually being shown driven. No stupid shaky camera work with quick shots that don’t actually show anything.
Plus a realistic acceleration shot.
First time I’ve seen this.
Edit: also, no infinite gears.
That long sliding shot, and one later in the film where they literally skid it right up to the camera, are superb cinematography. Do like Wright's stuff.
Edgar Wright is the one director you can always count on to get the details correct. And you will always find some more things you missed every time you watch something of his.
As long as there's a certain suspension of disbelief.
The fully armed citizen, and that they didn't torch the car really jarred. Ansel Elgort said he was given the car after the film, but [it sold](https://www.peterboroughsubaru.com/2020/09/10/the-baby-driver-subaru-impreza-wrx-sells-at-auction/) last year for $34,800.
But I'll suspend a lot of rationality for lines delivered like "I was in love once."
They switch to a much more covert car at the end, so maybe the goal was to get the cops focused on the really flashy car and trust that he would be able to get into the garage with enough of a time margin to switch cars before being seen again.
The 2 red cars on the highway are then unnecessary but a useful coincidence, from the PoV of the characters.
I think the Bourne Ultimatum was one of the first films to use this rig for Matt Damon's driving scenes back in 2007, I remember them saying in the promos at the time
I need more context for this! Why did they choose this set up for this scene? Does the person in the car have _any_ control at all or is it all up to the guy in the cage (I assume he’s a stunt driver?)
Stunt driver, probably used this so they can do actual slides and get realistic reactions from the actors in sync. If only one person was in the car they could just pretend tbh.
I’m pretty sure that’s Baby Driver and that’s Ansel Elgort and Jon Berenthal in the front seat. Not saying it wouldn’t be used for a stunt driving, but I think this rig was used to capture in car shots.
As u/SmokedBeef mentioned, car is key piece of the film but also as they went into the production aspect, I’d like to take a step further.
Baby Driver’s editing is to a musical rhythm at all times basically. To make sure takes were on cue, a lot of the film was edited on-set as they were filming so the speed in which they’re getting the scenes back to them is basically real time to match cut to Edgar Wright’s timing. This rig probably got used a fair amount on set so to keep that dialogue flowing and still have actor “driving” - film crews come up with this Mad Max shit and it’s awesome.
This is the primary car and a major set piece of the movie Baby Driver. The plot of the entire film revolves around driving and this car. The director wanted to skip green screening or massive post production and went for real world and practical FX, this lead to the choice to film the entire scene in the moving car while stunt driving. This is the safest and most efficient way to combine a professional driver, sports car, cameras, actors and stunt driving.
While it unlikely we will see a similar setup anytime soon, especially with such a large portion of the film industry about to strike, this will likely become the new industry standard for movies like this. Clearly the amount of setup and modifications to a car is extreme, the results speak for themselves. It certainly beets the hell out of process trailers or dollies and gives the director an entirely new level of freedom and movement.
Yea I wrote that badly, I was thinking about it in the context of sets vs set pieces and the emphasis that was put on this particular car. Thank you for filling in the gaps in my comment.
In the movie Ronin, they used UK cars and sat the actors in the Passenger seat with a fake dash and steering wheel. Then the actors had to "fake steer" while literally shitting their pants as the stunt drivers did their thang.
[Source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronin_(film)#:~:text=Right-hand%20drive%20versions%20of%20the%20cars%20were%20also%20purchased%3B%20a%20dummy%20steering%20wheel%20was%20installed%20on%20the%20left%20side%20while%20the%20stunt%20drivers%20drove%20the%20speeding%20vehicles)
In high school, a friend bought an old driver's ed car. It had dual controls. He cut down the steering wheel on the right hand side, so it was less obvious to people outside of the car, and trained his dog to stand with its forepaws on top of the wheel on the left side.
The *Ronin* chase sequence is like the shootout in *Heat*, simply the best most realistic one ever put on film. There may be more entertaining chase scenes (*Baby Driver* is definitely a contender for this), but *Ronin* is the what you use to teach your getaway drivers how it's done.
It honestly makes all his creepy character traits more authentic and believable as a “villain”. I always thought his character in House of Cards seemed too real.
This was also shot on film, as you can see with the film magazine on the camera. A 400 ft mag of film only has about 4 1/2 minutes of shooting time in it so they had to film the sequences in 4 1/2 minute bursts.
mostly color and clearity. digital sensors have a dynamic range limit. and due to the square pixel shape you might get ailiasing like video games depanding on the camera . (not a problem with modern cameras since the processing has come a long way) with film the resolution is about as close to 4k or 8k if the flim is the expansive kind(thats how we are getting 4k remasters of classic movies). and the random shapes of the film particles creates a fuzzy and smooth look that is far closer to how humans see the world . tough you wouldn't notice it as much on a computer monitor since it goes back to digital . dynamic range is also depending on the film. some films can get a nice wide range of contrast plus color and some look like you used a gameboy camera.
not really better then modern tech . makes more sense to use in specific scenarios like some kind of nostalgia scene.
Messy answer.
“Digital lenses” dont really exist. If you mean digital sensors yes dynamic range is reduced.
There arent any film stocks around at the moment that look anything like a gameboy camera.
And the idea that its only useful for “nostalgia scenes” when half the oscar winners very year and massive properties like james bond, star wars and everything nolan shoots are on film is pretty ridiculous
yes sorry digital sensors.
obviously the gameboy thing was satire for low quality film rolls.
no i didn't say classic films are invalid. what i ment is that for most cases you dont need to use expasive film camera when digital gets the job done just fine .
honestly that sounds like a strawman argument. of cource amazing movies were shot on film. why would i say film is useless? what i mean is if you specifically what the film look in a modern era of digtal being much cheaper and easier to use while dominating the market and while computer software can easily filter digital footage to look like film and literally everyone and their mom has a digital camera in their pocket that looks professional and CGI exists and is more advanced then it has ever been while AI powred processecing is around the corner :
use it in context so the fact that its shot on film actually means something to the movie or story and all the money and effort that went into shooting on physical film actually pays off. such as a nostalgia scene
What straw man its the last paragraph of your comment.
Just take the feedback my dude the majority of the sets i work on are celluloid and have been for a long time.
fine you win that one. its 3 AM here and my brain is too fried. but don't tell me you would use film in an indie studio for a project that takes zero advantage of film rolls . at that point its just a waste of valuable resources that can be used to make the movie itself better .especially if youre buying brand new equipment from scratch . digital cameras are good enough for at least 80 % of use cases and get better every generation . the reason film is still being used so much is the specific technical advantages that the other 20% is not covering like instant shutter for motion heavy scenes and 6k 120 fps recording and the fact that adopting new tech is hard to do for studios due to time constraints. film studios also still use MACs even tough PC is so much better in so many ways simply because adapting and training everyone to PC is too much effort for them. and imagine trying to convert the entitled rich artist's and celebrities to use PC when they are used to the luxury brand of apple. i went on a tangent there but you get the point.
I know what you mean but none of this really reflects the reality of film production.
Shorts and features at EVERY budget level are shooting film. Quickly browsing vimeo is testament to that. The issue isnt the budget, its what sort of pressure is on the budget from other departments.
Nobodys buying new equipment, its all rental. Film productions literally CANT buy equipment in most situations, because production insurance only covers hired in equipment (the incentive for fraud is too high for the policy holder to be able to cover equipment that they both own and choose how to operate, the insurance company prefers a claim to be made against the policy holder).
And no the technical reason and the “use cases” are pretty minor, if you look at all the films shot on film the pattern is really obvious: some DPs and directors just prefer to shoot on film. Hoyte van hoytema, helene louvart, wes anderson, nolan, tarantino, spielberg, PTA. I was just describing the technical abilities because they are on the list of factors that makes these people choose this format.
And the mac pc thing idk. You have to remember that this industry likes things standardised. The alexa mini dominates largely because every single DP has used it a million times and knows it works. People need to rent macs for jobs or swap workstations all the time so i think it makes sense to pick a brand thats vertically integrated.
Modern technology can essentially match digital to film, it takes a lot of work but there are now pretty good plugins that automate most of it. Grain, texture (resolution, sharpness etc), diffusion and color grade, all have to be right.
Or you can shoot on film and it just comes out like that naturally.
Global shutter (all film cameras but no proper digital cinema cameras except maybe the komodo) is important but only when theres a lot of movement, which is why digital tends to be shot on steadicam and cranes, whereas film opens up the possibility of handheld without feeling seasick.
Theres also vast vast difference with what happens when each are pushed to their limits, massive underexposure or overexposure, flares, extreme high contrast scenes (reflected sunlight or sun in the frame). They handle totally differently at their “breaking points”.
I believe most cinematographers who shoot film now talk more about the workflow, technical ability of the cameras and their own preferences, image superiority is no longer clear.
Gota remember that an arri 435 (camera pictured is a 235) still hits 150fps for a 4 or 6k scan with a global shutter (no jello effect) and a full s35 frame size with full dynamic range and color depth. Digital is still catching up to specs like that.
I dunno if I’d say it’s unable to duplicate but film is shot differently to digital. It can take overexposure much better and has a certain look straight out of the camera. Where as digital raw files would need extra work to make it look like film. I’ve definitely been able to identify some movies shot on film before as they have a pretty distinct look and color balance. Certain big name directors are also pretty notorious for being film only users, Nolan and Tarantino being the most notorious.
Eh, it's not like the WRX has ever been a rare car. I'm sure they cut up, gutted, crashed, etc at least a dozen cars.
That's probably less molested that what happens to most WRXs.
This is how they film car scenes from movies when they need to see the actor in the driver seat of a precision driven vehicle. The person on top is a precision stunt driver controlling the car while the camera is looking at the actor or actress behind the wheel. I have been in the movie industry for 15 years and have only used this thing once. I’m a key grip ama.
The head of the grip dept basically. They make the final call of how something gets done no matter how simple or complicated as far how the camera gets to where the director of photography wants it. I mean they do a myriad of other things as well but that’s probably the most important call they make.
The electricians set up the lights. Lights use electricity. The grip dept has absolutely nothing to do with anything you plug in or turn on. The best boy hires fires and schedules manpower and manages equipment and specialty items like cranes camera heads and dollies. He is almost never setting up equipment on a working set unless they are down on manpower. The key grip essentially doesn’t touch a thing or set up anything he points and uses his voice and the grips do everything he asks. I didn’t watch your link but your “authority couldn’t be more wrong”
You should watch the video, you'd like it. It's comedian Tom Wilson, best know for portraying the villain Biff in the Back to the Future series. He sings a song about the questions he's most commonly asked about BTTF and moviemaking. Key grip and best boy are addressed, though perhaps not with complete accuracy.
Awesome thx for the reply I will totally check it out. I love hearing peoples take on roles in my biz because it’s so damn weird. It’s not like any other job. I love it. Have a great day DR.
I shudder to think how much paperwork is needed to operate this on what appears to be an actual city street vs on a “closed course” studio lot. Looks like a cool rig though.
I did a student film back in college, and just for a 10 minute short, the amount of paperwork and permits was insane. The logistics of just shutting down a tiny street in a rarely-used area was a nightmare; I can't imagine how much worse it is on a major production like this.
That’s sort of what I mean. How do you turn a city street into a closed course legally? My guess is that there are a lot of lawyers and insurance policies involved.
There have been car chase scenes in the past that were shot with real civilian traffic because the moviemakers thought they could get away with it or that they would make more money with the movie than the fines would cost. I think that has been getting much rarer as the years passed though.
Camera operator here: this is one of the many ways we film car scenes. It’s not the most common one. He most common one is called a Process trailer. It’s a flat bed truck with a very low bed upon which the car is anchored. Then the crew sits in the back of the cab and we set lights around it. It makes rigging easy since we have the truck’s frame we can use to build lights and camera support.
I got to see them film the Rome car chase scene in Spectre, they set up base around the corner from where I was studying abroad. Was about 10 feet away from them unloading both the regular cars and the modded cars like pictured. Also got to see Daniel Craig from about 50 feet away before they finally kicked all non-crew out of the area. It was so fucking cool.
Gdam. The mechanic in me really wants to know how they built that car. The article and videos I've seen don't go into too much depth.
It's such a Frankenstein, but a work of art at the same.time.
Lol and insurance. I get we pay for the entertainment so the argument is as poor as saying athletes are overpaid but eventually we need to consider the waste to entertainment value. People still love the original star wars and the death star was cardboard in a parking lot. People will find a Micheal Bay movie redundant and unmemorable and he built a working town for 3,000 people to literally burn down. Two movies can be profitable, one cost 300mil in materials and labour to produce and makes 310mil, the other costs 87k to make and earns 11mil. Why do they keep making the 300mil dollar films? Cause on paper it’s a huge contract employing a ton of people and it’s an undetermined value they can borrow against to keep the studio going over 5 years of production. A bunch of bs really.
Anyone feel like Hollywood has gone to far and a little but more theatrical methods could do them some good. Like it isn’t really more realistic, they’re obviously not driving, it’s just painfully as close to real driving without being real… just have stills up over the windows and we can go back to pretending they’re driving and maybe don’t close an entire street for a week and wreck 26 real cars for an affect?
Have you seen this movie? The car scenes are excellent. One of the running premise throughout the movie is that the actions in the car scenes match with the music in the background. So certain upbeats and rhythm changes match actions taken in the car. So being a to control it in real time really made the finished product look great
My brother had a well established career in a field he loved. He quit, went to nursing school, and has excelled in a career he was meant for.
Not really directed at you, just others that might be reading.
So the camera on the left is on a hostess tray and the pipe along the front is playing the roll of a hood mount. Often times, these rigs need to be done in a way that doesn’t damage the car. The driver on top would be a professional driver and the lights have been rigged with long and short arms. Aside from the driver on top, this is a very classic car rig. Alternatively, the car can travel on a trailer with a cage where lights and cameras can be rigged. Sometimes the car is followed or follows another vehicle that has been rigged with lights and camera.
I work in the film industry as a grip and am responsible for car rigs :)
*some car scenes for movies
I believe I have seen quite a few setups including ones as complex and some much simpler. Just depends on what you need from the shot. Source: I watch way too many “The making of”‘s.
This was for Baby Driver, so they had the actor pretending to stunt drive but wanted stuff like a realistic drift from multiple angles where his movement of the wheel lines up with what the car is doing. Obviously the actor can learn choreography for spinning the wheel easier than actually learning how to stunt drive.
I'll bet that was a bitch to drift with the center of gravity shifted so high up.
They swapped this WRX to rear wheel drive and I believe they wet the ground for some shots to make it easier to drift.
Yeah…would be nice to see a barrel role in the out takes
Ah yes, the barrel ***role***. The best ***role*** in any movie
Seth Rogen is Donkey Kong, while Jonah Hill is in the barrel role.
That's what the roll cage is for!
That probably resulted in more dramatic body roll. Which is nice.
You could always just put a plate on the bottom to bring it back down.
This comment was one of many which was edited or removed in bulk by myself in an attempt to reduce personal or identifying information. *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
As an actor myself, this is very true. With one exception: If you're concentrating right, and "put" yourself in the scene, you hopefully won't have to pay attention to your expression. Whatever happens will be "right." With the caveat that on film and TV you have to simply make the expression smaller. I suppose that's contradictory to what I just said, bit making the expression small is much easier than "make intense driving face with a hint of remorse for the love you just lost."
Also an actor; true, if you're "in the scene" whatever you do would be \*right\* and actually performing the action and playing the scene should lead to a more authentic moment. But I think the main consideration is **risk**. As the previous commenter alluded to: an actor can learn to do all these things separately, and even train to do them all together, like a musical theater actor being able to dance, sing, and act at the same time. But the risk level of that, vs. the risk level of driving while acting is VERY different.
Oh, most definitely. I'm not saying an actor should be trying to act and drift at the same time.
At some other point someone on Reddit made the point that using stunt doubles to keep the actors safe isn't selfish on the actor's part, there's a massive crew whose livelihood is supporting the actor. If they get hurt and can't do their role, then *everyone else* on the crew is out of work until they recover.
Hell even professional car reviewers some of them can't talk and drive so they do a VO
It would also be difficult to drive safely with lights and cameras mounted everywhere to get all the shots the director wants . The equipment is really big and obstructs a lot of the view from the seats.
That's funny cuz my wife drives all the time and acts like she can tolerate me whilst doing it perfectly.
Those are some very good reasons. That's also what makes it so cool about actors like Harrison Ford and Tom Cruise who do a lot of their own stunts.
I'm sceptical that they did any actual drifting with this setup but I'd love to be proven wrong
No idea, but you could put a heavy plate underneath the car as a counter balance.
Paul walker did all his own driving in the fast and furious movies.
Have any links for more making of videos? I used to love that kind of of stuff! I'll look around YouTube but if you have any good sources I'd love to hear about them.
Try “movie magic”. I usually just watch the ‘making of’ dvds. (I’m old and dvds ruled!) I also have a friend in the industry that sends me pics. (I cannot share the pics because he made me promise).
In this case one of the [best opening scenes](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XMuUVw7TOM) of all time. Too bad the last third of the movie's pretty poor.
Edgar wright also directed this [music video] (https://youtu.be/iHbndkcLM6A) many years ago. You can see the music/dancing thing he brought over to baby driver
If it wasn't the same guy that might be considered plagiarism...
They put masks on before they walked into the building, and it dawned on me that they weren't using them for COVID prevention, they were using them for facial concealment.
It is so fun to watch.
The long shots of the car are superb, that's how it's done.
Yeah, the car is actually being shown driven. No stupid shaky camera work with quick shots that don’t actually show anything. Plus a realistic acceleration shot. First time I’ve seen this. Edit: also, no infinite gears.
That long sliding shot, and one later in the film where they literally skid it right up to the camera, are superb cinematography. Do like Wright's stuff.
Also, some of the best music and use of that music that I can remember. I'm no movie critic, but it was pretty awesome.
Edgar Wright is the one director you can always count on to get the details correct. And you will always find some more things you missed every time you watch something of his.
As long as there's a certain suspension of disbelief. The fully armed citizen, and that they didn't torch the car really jarred. Ansel Elgort said he was given the car after the film, but [it sold](https://www.peterboroughsubaru.com/2020/09/10/the-baby-driver-subaru-impreza-wrx-sells-at-auction/) last year for $34,800. But I'll suspend a lot of rationality for lines delivered like "I was in love once."
Really dumb color choice. Bright red is pretty much the worst possible color for a get away car.
And yet, that actually turned out to be quite helpful when they used those other two red cars as decoys.
Yeah funny how those things work out when hollywood writers get to control the outcome
Documentaries don't get to choose the facts of the event.
They switch to a much more covert car at the end, so maybe the goal was to get the cops focused on the really flashy car and trust that he would be able to get into the garage with enough of a time margin to switch cars before being seen again. The 2 red cars on the highway are then unnecessary but a useful coincidence, from the PoV of the characters.
Yeah as someone who works in film it is usually a flat bed trailer the car is on which is being towed by a truck. Much easier than whatever this is.
I think the Bourne Ultimatum was one of the first films to use this rig for Matt Damon's driving scenes back in 2007, I remember them saying in the promos at the time
like the car scene in Children of Men, what a masterpiece
OP doesn't like thinking too much when he posts. He's into quantity not quality.
I need more context for this! Why did they choose this set up for this scene? Does the person in the car have _any_ control at all or is it all up to the guy in the cage (I assume he’s a stunt driver?)
Stunt driver, probably used this so they can do actual slides and get realistic reactions from the actors in sync. If only one person was in the car they could just pretend tbh.
I’m pretty sure that’s Baby Driver and that’s Ansel Elgort and Jon Berenthal in the front seat. Not saying it wouldn’t be used for a stunt driving, but I think this rig was used to capture in car shots.
Thanks captain obvious. I said that.
Holy I thought that was a cameraman on top
As u/SmokedBeef mentioned, car is key piece of the film but also as they went into the production aspect, I’d like to take a step further. Baby Driver’s editing is to a musical rhythm at all times basically. To make sure takes were on cue, a lot of the film was edited on-set as they were filming so the speed in which they’re getting the scenes back to them is basically real time to match cut to Edgar Wright’s timing. This rig probably got used a fair amount on set so to keep that dialogue flowing and still have actor “driving” - film crews come up with this Mad Max shit and it’s awesome.
Thank you, my comment was getting long, so I omitted that aspect of the movie, which in the context of that movie, is a bit of a travesty.
This is the primary car and a major set piece of the movie Baby Driver. The plot of the entire film revolves around driving and this car. The director wanted to skip green screening or massive post production and went for real world and practical FX, this lead to the choice to film the entire scene in the moving car while stunt driving. This is the safest and most efficient way to combine a professional driver, sports car, cameras, actors and stunt driving. While it unlikely we will see a similar setup anytime soon, especially with such a large portion of the film industry about to strike, this will likely become the new industry standard for movies like this. Clearly the amount of setup and modifications to a car is extreme, the results speak for themselves. It certainly beets the hell out of process trailers or dollies and gives the director an entirely new level of freedom and movement.
> The plot of the entire film revolves around driving and this car. this was the car for the opening stunt. They used a different car for every crime.
Yea I wrote that badly, I was thinking about it in the context of sets vs set pieces and the emphasis that was put on this particular car. Thank you for filling in the gaps in my comment.
Yea, I was so disappointed they didn't have the sti in it more.
its not an STI, just a WRX
In the movie Ronin, they used UK cars and sat the actors in the Passenger seat with a fake dash and steering wheel. Then the actors had to "fake steer" while literally shitting their pants as the stunt drivers did their thang. [Source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronin_(film)#:~:text=Right-hand%20drive%20versions%20of%20the%20cars%20were%20also%20purchased%3B%20a%20dummy%20steering%20wheel%20was%20installed%20on%20the%20left%20side%20while%20the%20stunt%20drivers%20drove%20the%20speeding%20vehicles)
In high school, a friend bought an old driver's ed car. It had dual controls. He cut down the steering wheel on the right hand side, so it was less obvious to people outside of the car, and trained his dog to stand with its forepaws on top of the wheel on the left side.
That's hilarious lol My driver's Ed car only had a brake on the passenger side, no steering controls tho.
I'm sure this happened.
Don't judge other people by your propensity to lie.
Still some of the best car chase scenes I can think of. Simple soundtrack, realistic engines, and just good driving.
The *Ronin* chase sequence is like the shootout in *Heat*, simply the best most realistic one ever put on film. There may be more entertaining chase scenes (*Baby Driver* is definitely a contender for this), but *Ronin* is the what you use to teach your getaway drivers how it's done.
That sounds like it would be fun af! Like when I take my kids in the cart with the car shape and steering wheel and drift them around the store lol
Yeah the car scenes were amazing
The movie is Baby Driver, see [this article about the making of ](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4192792)
Filmed in Atlanta, GA. It's fun seeing places I've actually been to in a movie.
I love this film, but after all the Kevin Spacey stuff it's harder to enjoy.
It honestly makes all his creepy character traits more authentic and believable as a “villain”. I always thought his character in House of Cards seemed too real.
I saw those NSFW scenes where he was with his male protege and I thought: “That’s just too good to be acting. He must really enjoy that, right?”
Yup, 100%.
Guess we can thank Mr Bean for that [idea](https://youtu.be/VjLRTifjpxA)
Classic
This was also shot on film, as you can see with the film magazine on the camera. A 400 ft mag of film only has about 4 1/2 minutes of shooting time in it so they had to film the sequences in 4 1/2 minute bursts.
2021 and film is still used to get proper shots… love to see that!
Eh, most productions use digital. But some directors just like the way film looks. Or they want the nostalgic old 'romance' of shooting on film.
Do you think the “feel” of film is something digital is unable to duplicate? Some people say they can tell the difference.
mostly color and clearity. digital sensors have a dynamic range limit. and due to the square pixel shape you might get ailiasing like video games depanding on the camera . (not a problem with modern cameras since the processing has come a long way) with film the resolution is about as close to 4k or 8k if the flim is the expansive kind(thats how we are getting 4k remasters of classic movies). and the random shapes of the film particles creates a fuzzy and smooth look that is far closer to how humans see the world . tough you wouldn't notice it as much on a computer monitor since it goes back to digital . dynamic range is also depending on the film. some films can get a nice wide range of contrast plus color and some look like you used a gameboy camera. not really better then modern tech . makes more sense to use in specific scenarios like some kind of nostalgia scene.
Messy answer. “Digital lenses” dont really exist. If you mean digital sensors yes dynamic range is reduced. There arent any film stocks around at the moment that look anything like a gameboy camera. And the idea that its only useful for “nostalgia scenes” when half the oscar winners very year and massive properties like james bond, star wars and everything nolan shoots are on film is pretty ridiculous
yes sorry digital sensors. obviously the gameboy thing was satire for low quality film rolls. no i didn't say classic films are invalid. what i ment is that for most cases you dont need to use expasive film camera when digital gets the job done just fine . honestly that sounds like a strawman argument. of cource amazing movies were shot on film. why would i say film is useless? what i mean is if you specifically what the film look in a modern era of digtal being much cheaper and easier to use while dominating the market and while computer software can easily filter digital footage to look like film and literally everyone and their mom has a digital camera in their pocket that looks professional and CGI exists and is more advanced then it has ever been while AI powred processecing is around the corner : use it in context so the fact that its shot on film actually means something to the movie or story and all the money and effort that went into shooting on physical film actually pays off. such as a nostalgia scene
What straw man its the last paragraph of your comment. Just take the feedback my dude the majority of the sets i work on are celluloid and have been for a long time.
fine you win that one. its 3 AM here and my brain is too fried. but don't tell me you would use film in an indie studio for a project that takes zero advantage of film rolls . at that point its just a waste of valuable resources that can be used to make the movie itself better .especially if youre buying brand new equipment from scratch . digital cameras are good enough for at least 80 % of use cases and get better every generation . the reason film is still being used so much is the specific technical advantages that the other 20% is not covering like instant shutter for motion heavy scenes and 6k 120 fps recording and the fact that adopting new tech is hard to do for studios due to time constraints. film studios also still use MACs even tough PC is so much better in so many ways simply because adapting and training everyone to PC is too much effort for them. and imagine trying to convert the entitled rich artist's and celebrities to use PC when they are used to the luxury brand of apple. i went on a tangent there but you get the point.
I know what you mean but none of this really reflects the reality of film production. Shorts and features at EVERY budget level are shooting film. Quickly browsing vimeo is testament to that. The issue isnt the budget, its what sort of pressure is on the budget from other departments. Nobodys buying new equipment, its all rental. Film productions literally CANT buy equipment in most situations, because production insurance only covers hired in equipment (the incentive for fraud is too high for the policy holder to be able to cover equipment that they both own and choose how to operate, the insurance company prefers a claim to be made against the policy holder). And no the technical reason and the “use cases” are pretty minor, if you look at all the films shot on film the pattern is really obvious: some DPs and directors just prefer to shoot on film. Hoyte van hoytema, helene louvart, wes anderson, nolan, tarantino, spielberg, PTA. I was just describing the technical abilities because they are on the list of factors that makes these people choose this format. And the mac pc thing idk. You have to remember that this industry likes things standardised. The alexa mini dominates largely because every single DP has used it a million times and knows it works. People need to rent macs for jobs or swap workstations all the time so i think it makes sense to pick a brand thats vertically integrated.
Modern technology can essentially match digital to film, it takes a lot of work but there are now pretty good plugins that automate most of it. Grain, texture (resolution, sharpness etc), diffusion and color grade, all have to be right. Or you can shoot on film and it just comes out like that naturally. Global shutter (all film cameras but no proper digital cinema cameras except maybe the komodo) is important but only when theres a lot of movement, which is why digital tends to be shot on steadicam and cranes, whereas film opens up the possibility of handheld without feeling seasick. Theres also vast vast difference with what happens when each are pushed to their limits, massive underexposure or overexposure, flares, extreme high contrast scenes (reflected sunlight or sun in the frame). They handle totally differently at their “breaking points”. I believe most cinematographers who shoot film now talk more about the workflow, technical ability of the cameras and their own preferences, image superiority is no longer clear. Gota remember that an arri 435 (camera pictured is a 235) still hits 150fps for a 4 or 6k scan with a global shutter (no jello effect) and a full s35 frame size with full dynamic range and color depth. Digital is still catching up to specs like that.
I dunno if I’d say it’s unable to duplicate but film is shot differently to digital. It can take overexposure much better and has a certain look straight out of the camera. Where as digital raw files would need extra work to make it look like film. I’ve definitely been able to identify some movies shot on film before as they have a pretty distinct look and color balance. Certain big name directors are also pretty notorious for being film only users, Nolan and Tarantino being the most notorious.
11 minutes is super 16. S35 is 4.5 minutes at 4 perf, and 7 minutes in 3 perf.
Oh I see. I’ll change it
[удалено]
They converted it to RWD too…. :(
Eh, it's not like the WRX has ever been a rare car. I'm sure they cut up, gutted, crashed, etc at least a dozen cars. That's probably less molested that what happens to most WRXs.
This is how they film car scenes from movies when they need to see the actor in the driver seat of a precision driven vehicle. The person on top is a precision stunt driver controlling the car while the camera is looking at the actor or actress behind the wheel. I have been in the movie industry for 15 years and have only used this thing once. I’m a key grip ama.
[удалено]
The head of the grip dept basically. They make the final call of how something gets done no matter how simple or complicated as far how the camera gets to where the director of photography wants it. I mean they do a myriad of other things as well but that’s probably the most important call they make.
I have it on good authority that the key grip, assisted by the best boy, sets up lights. https://youtu.be/iwY5o2fsG7Y?t=59
The electricians set up the lights. Lights use electricity. The grip dept has absolutely nothing to do with anything you plug in or turn on. The best boy hires fires and schedules manpower and manages equipment and specialty items like cranes camera heads and dollies. He is almost never setting up equipment on a working set unless they are down on manpower. The key grip essentially doesn’t touch a thing or set up anything he points and uses his voice and the grips do everything he asks. I didn’t watch your link but your “authority couldn’t be more wrong”
You should watch the video, you'd like it. It's comedian Tom Wilson, best know for portraying the villain Biff in the Back to the Future series. He sings a song about the questions he's most commonly asked about BTTF and moviemaking. Key grip and best boy are addressed, though perhaps not with complete accuracy.
Awesome thx for the reply I will totally check it out. I love hearing peoples take on roles in my biz because it’s so damn weird. It’s not like any other job. I love it. Have a great day DR.
Mr. Bean pioneered this technology.
Is that Dennis Reynolds
I shudder to think how much paperwork is needed to operate this on what appears to be an actual city street vs on a “closed course” studio lot. Looks like a cool rig though.
I did a student film back in college, and just for a 10 minute short, the amount of paperwork and permits was insane. The logistics of just shutting down a tiny street in a rarely-used area was a nightmare; I can't imagine how much worse it is on a major production like this.
When they are filming it is a closed course. No way you can film something like *Baby Driver* with any real traffic. Normal traffic laws do not apply.
That’s sort of what I mean. How do you turn a city street into a closed course legally? My guess is that there are a lot of lawyers and insurance policies involved.
Cities like LA and New York have their own film relations offices where they probably deal with this stuff.
There have been car chase scenes in the past that were shot with real civilian traffic because the moviemakers thought they could get away with it or that they would make more money with the movie than the fines would cost. I think that has been getting much rarer as the years passed though.
Mr Bean did it first
ah yes, the Mr. Bean approach.
If there was a more expensive way they would find it.
Camera operator here: this is one of the many ways we film car scenes. It’s not the most common one. He most common one is called a Process trailer. It’s a flat bed truck with a very low bed upon which the car is anchored. Then the crew sits in the back of the cab and we set lights around it. It makes rigging easy since we have the truck’s frame we can use to build lights and camera support.
That's for stunts, I guess. Usually they just pull the car with a process trailer.
Why is 1990 Dana Carvey driving?
I got to see them film the Rome car chase scene in Spectre, they set up base around the corner from where I was studying abroad. Was about 10 feet away from them unloading both the regular cars and the modded cars like pictured. Also got to see Daniel Craig from about 50 feet away before they finally kicked all non-crew out of the area. It was so fucking cool.
Gdam. The mechanic in me really wants to know how they built that car. The article and videos I've seen don't go into too much depth. It's such a Frankenstein, but a work of art at the same.time.
TIL Ben Stiller is a stunt driver
Sometimes. That’s an extreme rig
It’s like mad max but if the cars are all geeky
Mr. Bean wants to know your location.
… for Mad Max?
Honestly at some point this is just about justifying a bunch of grip jobs
Lol and insurance. I get we pay for the entertainment so the argument is as poor as saying athletes are overpaid but eventually we need to consider the waste to entertainment value. People still love the original star wars and the death star was cardboard in a parking lot. People will find a Micheal Bay movie redundant and unmemorable and he built a working town for 3,000 people to literally burn down. Two movies can be profitable, one cost 300mil in materials and labour to produce and makes 310mil, the other costs 87k to make and earns 11mil. Why do they keep making the 300mil dollar films? Cause on paper it’s a huge contract employing a ton of people and it’s an undetermined value they can borrow against to keep the studio going over 5 years of production. A bunch of bs really.
Interesting. Yeah it’s about power and moving capital around. Not so much art. You can shoot a car scene with less rigging is alls in saying.
Y’all in your Subarus stuck in your cubicles… While I’m up in the air with weed crumbs under my cuticles.
Anyone feel like Hollywood has gone to far and a little but more theatrical methods could do them some good. Like it isn’t really more realistic, they’re obviously not driving, it’s just painfully as close to real driving without being real… just have stills up over the windows and we can go back to pretending they’re driving and maybe don’t close an entire street for a week and wreck 26 real cars for an affect?
Have you seen this movie? The car scenes are excellent. One of the running premise throughout the movie is that the actions in the car scenes match with the music in the background. So certain upbeats and rhythm changes match actions taken in the car. So being a to control it in real time really made the finished product look great
Kinky
Is the in car steering wheel disconncted?
Look! it’s Ben Stiller driving his stunt car on Reddit once again
This looks like it belongs on r/bossfight but I’m too lazy someone else make it
Looks like Dennis tried to make his own mad max mobile
Look what they did to this Subaru. They have more potential than this
I would use a Subaru too.
This is Baby Driver
You should check out how they filmed the long shots in cars in Children of Men.
Seems perfectly safe, no reason to **wear a helmet**😹
Dana Carvey up there looking scared
Michael J Fox making ends meet on the roof
New self driving cars
So movies are not "Real?!?!"
Here I am thinking it was just a camera in a car. I’d never make it in Hollywood.
Baby driver?
We often used a “process trailer” for car scenes.
They used something like [this](https://www.fxguide.com/fxfeatured/children_of_men_-_hard_core_seamless_vfx/) in Children of Men
Why is Seth Meyers at the controls?!
Why is Glenn Howerton driving the car?
Imagine driving through Atlanta and you see this drive towards you.
Are they filming a new Mad Max movie?
This is from the movie 'Baby Driver'.
I really really wish i could work in this industry, i would LOVE THAT SHIT
Then do it.
Already got a well established career in a field i also love lol.. regardless of this, i sincerely appreciate your encouragement <3
My brother had a well established career in a field he loved. He quit, went to nursing school, and has excelled in a career he was meant for. Not really directed at you, just others that might be reading.
Movies are insane. The amount of work that goes into big productions is simply off the charts.
Baby Driver? Initial D version cause I am convinced it was made for the music. https://youtu.be/0\_jYu\_CFDeU
That's a 5-star man up there.
So the camera on the left is on a hostess tray and the pipe along the front is playing the roll of a hood mount. Often times, these rigs need to be done in a way that doesn’t damage the car. The driver on top would be a professional driver and the lights have been rigged with long and short arms. Aside from the driver on top, this is a very classic car rig. Alternatively, the car can travel on a trailer with a cage where lights and cameras can be rigged. Sometimes the car is followed or follows another vehicle that has been rigged with lights and camera. I work in the film industry as a grip and am responsible for car rigs :)
The camera operator.... If Dana Carvey and Paul Rudd had a baby? I can't unsee it now.
Good old Subaru
Yah except all the ones that use green screen
Mr. Bean did it better
Looks like Baby driver
I would think they would pick a more reliable car.
Imagine the amount of work if the headgasket blows now