Maybe this should be in the Inland Empire thread but I have a couple of specific issues that I hope some informed discussion will shed light on.

 Firstly, what does everyone think of digital video? For me, watching the clip on the dvd proved slightly disappointing, the footage seemed amateurish for the most part. However in the clip when things go very lynch, (the darkening sky bit)  the format shows an encouraging aspect of what it is capable of.

 Secondly, does anyone think that the clip is definitely from IE? The three actors are apparently in IE and the dvd states that the footage is from a DV feature. Personally I don't think it is. I have faith in DL making something alot more professional looking.

 Thirdly, I can't wait to see if Kyle Mac appears in IE!!!

I have made most of my thoughts about the Room to Dream DVD known in the IE thread but let me say again that I am pretty sure the clip on the DVD IS from Inland Empire.

In the new V Magazine interview with Kristin Kerr, she describes a scene in IE very similar to the one on the DVD. Also, they make reference to a circus in the clip and we know from the advance screencaps from French TV that IE features a Polish circus.

I know the footage seems a bit amatuerish but logically, it seems to fit in the IE world. Perhaps it was shot for IE but won't make it in the final cut?

Keep in mind that the DV will probably be transfered to film eventually so it will improve the look a bit.

I know what your saying and it sounds logical, but I just can't reconcile the screen caps with the clip. They just don't feel like they belong in the same universe. Also, knowing how particular the man is about secrecy, it doesn't seem consistent with his past behaviour that he would put a part of his film out there before he the project is even finished. Suppose we'll just have ta wait and see!! 

you can order it off here:

http://www.digidesign.com/news/details.cfm?story_id=3822

The DV quality on the DVD was actually pretty to me. It should be awesome transferred to film print.

I know a lot of people complained about the acting quality of the actors in the scene. I disagree. In my mind everything feels correct.

Keep your eye on the doughnut, not on the hole -- DL

I'm confused, aren't you the same board member who, about a year ago, commented about hating FWWM?

I might be wrong I guess. But I could have swarn it was you.  

I am. FWWM is a hard picture to embrace. After seeing that one scene I doubt IE will be the critical darling that was MD. The scene played extremely pretentious and outright bizarre. I loved it. I want to see David Lynch go further with the weirdness than ever before.

For some reason I always questioned his sense of humor. As though things that were funny to me didn’t tickle him.

I read that he did laugh during the filming of the simulated rape scene in BV. I went to a screening of that picture a year and a half ago and my cousin and I found our selves laughing at that moment.

Wish we still had the ability to poll on the Gazette. Even though I'm not big on polling, I tend to disagree with this assessment and here's why. Yes, the story is key. For me, the story is always the most important part of any film.

BUT, the problem for David Lynch is history. IF no one knew who was assembling this film then yes, it's possible the audience would be swept away (or not) by the story alone and disregard the format. But if you are accustomed to the brilliance of the Lynch's past film imagery, then the contrast will be striking regardless of the storytelling.

So, here is the poll question without a real poll format...

Agree or Disagree: "If the story in Inland Empire is any good, five minutes into it, no one will even think about the look."

For the reasons stated above, I reluctantly DISAGREE.

Susan

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

Basically, all this means it will be so damn crazy following the plot that no one will notice lower quality of cinematography?!!! This statement is sort of letting me down. I hope Lynch put all himself in this project to achieve good photography, because okay Dv is quite weird and fascinating too, but it's not a full throttle in the greatness and magic of 35 mm cinematic quality. They're not the same thing. I hope Lynch is not that Informalist and I doubt he is for he is painting, projecting furnitures and stuff.

Whatever....

"Did they scoff the whole damn Smörgåsbord?" (Audrey) 

"Gimme a donut!" (Coop)

Ahahah , you're really weird!

Anyway, that was intended as a sort of "raspberry blowing"...

"Did they scoff the whole damn Smörgåsbord?" (Audrey) 

"Gimme a donut!" (Coop)

"Did they scoff the whole damn Smörgåsbord?" (Audrey) 

"Gimme a donut!" (Coop)

Thanks John for the precision and the quote, but just like some other members here, I have yet to be convinced.

To make a quick comparison, let's take an example with music, as this is your department

As a record reviewer (and big fanzine editor-in-chief), I've been sent along the years tons of bands demos. Before the time of the "home studios" with a simple PC (or Mac). And even with the habit, it's been always very hard to judge the inner quality of a song when it was badly produced or engineered. I known this is the job of A&R heads at labels.

Anyway, in the end, you can often tell the difference between records engineered at home with Pro-Tools usual plugins and records engineered by producers such as Rick Rubin's or David Bottrill's teams with their incredible talent and equipment. I know it's not the same price 

So there I go to my point. So far, Lynch has been one of the unique filmmakers to approach very close the visual perfection of, let's say, Kubrick's movies. Not only the stories and great, but the technical aspect is at the very top of the game.

It's killing me to think that maybe this will be over with DV (I'm not judging before I've seen it, thus the "maybe", but the scene from the Room To Dream DVD - if from IE - frightens me about that aspect). Just like I have some records  that are musically great, but would have been a true masterpiece if engineered by a household producer.

I'm found of hi-fi, and fidelity is a big part of my pleasure when I listen to a record. Well, it's the same for me with movies and its image. Hope I've been clear enough despite my non-native English 

"Did they scoff the whole damn Smörgåsbord?" (Audrey) 

"Gimme a donut!" (Coop)

I hope so  !

I was totally in awe of Michael Mann when I saw Collateral, but it was HD, and I'm not sure that IE is DV in HD (anyway, the cameras used are very different and way more expensive in the case of Collateral). I wish I could have seen raw footage of the movie to compare, but there was no any in the DVD extras.

Thanks for the precision, it gives me hope

I'm afraid I disagree with you on this, lynched*skinned.  Otherwise why woudn't everyone shoot on good old cheap DV and simply transfer to 35mm later if the look was the same?

The other "otherwise" can be found in David Lynch's own comments about "If the story's good, five minutes in no one will notice the look." Why mention the "look" if no one could distinguish the two. John said he likes the grainy 8 mm look. Obviously he's not aiming for the old filmic imagery we have come to know and love.

Up until this point in movie theater history, the main reason to transfer to 35 mm is because so few theaters are capable of projecting digitally. That's changing. I saw an article in Variety the other day that said thousands of theaters will be installing new digital projection units. But the plain fact is, blown up to 35 mm screening print, a digital image shot on a 3 chip camera will not be anywhere close to an image shot on 35 mm.

So let's put a stop (knock, knock!) to THAT rumor right now!

Susan

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

I never said the look would be the same! I said many here would stop complaining once they saw the footage projected from a Release Print. Film will add texture to the naked eyes perception of the projected image.

Lesser quality captured imagery is what Lynch is preaching about gives new artists Room To Dream.

No Inland Empire will not look like his pervious films: a velvety texture (no pun intended) but we will feel like we are in the Lynch universal, and you’ll feel very comfortable and by the end of the screening you won’t care that Lynch has no intentions of going back to film.

All this talk and comparisons of the medium the film is being shot in, how it will look and all that does make me a little more eager to see it but it boils down to Lynch putting out a new film and that is enough for me, but I am still intrigued of what the overall look will be.

p.s. love that quote, Susan. I love finding places to use it although it normally goes over everyone's head.

"Every day holds a new beginning and every hour holds the promise of an Invitation to Love."