Cool News
Check Out Keanu Reeves' Produced SIDE BY SIDE Trailer
Hello ladies and gentlemen, Muldoon here with a trailer for (as the title suggests) Keanu Reeves' SIDE BY SIDE. The film centers around the new-age dilemma of film vs. digital. While I personally embrace digital filmmaking and think film is on its way out (or at the very least think it will be more of a lost art in ten years), I'm truly curious as to where the pros stand. Sure some, like Rodriguez and Cameron, have almost gone out of their way to sing the praises of shooting digitally, but what about people like Scorsese, Lynch, or Christopher Nolan? It looks like we'll get definitive stances from those A list directors along with countless other heads of industry. Check out the film's website for a list of everyone appearing in it if you're curious and prepared to drop your jaw.
(Lynch and Reeves, together at last...)
And here we go:
Side by Side Official Trailer (2012) from Company Films on Vimeo.
I think the movie looks like fun and can't wait to check it out. Special thanks to the folks at IndieWire for first posting this cool little bit of news. Its world premiere is in a few weeks at the Berlin International Film Festival on February 15th, so hopefully we'll get a few reviews in. At the very least, everyone seems to be smiling, so no "Sad Keanu." What do you guys think?
-Mike McCutchen
"Muldoon"
Mike@aintitcool.com
Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus-
+ Expand All
-
Keanu and documentaries on film vs. digital . Can't. Wait!
-
Production will be film's last stand. Post-production went digital. Exhibition is well on its way to going completely digital. But when it comes to shooting, there will be hold-outs for years to come because it has a different texture. BTW, Kodak is preparing to file Chapter 11.
-
First Tome Cruise impresses me with the tall building stunts, and now Keanu Reeves impresses me with this. Has the whole world gone topsy-turvy?
-
I instantly thought, I wanna hear what he has to say. I know he has expressed reluctance to digital in the past, but I wonder if his opinions have changed.
-
I like the concept of films top talents speaking out about the pros and cons of film vs. digital.
-
I mean, we know what Cameron and Lucas are going to say.
-
I find this to actually be of interest. Ain't it cool news? Me thinks that it is.
-
Let the fucking filmmaker decide which is best on a per project basis! If film is better for my movie about Napolean Bonaparte, then I will use film. If digital is better for my cyberpunk action flick, then guess what, I am going to shoot that fucker on a digital cinema camera. Why does it have to be one or the other? Yes of course shooting in 3D doesn't make much sense on film. Or if I am a poor as film student or independent filmmaker, then of course I'll go buy a DSLR like the Canon 5DmkII or a Panasonic GH2 or whatever floats my boat! But nooooooo!!!!!!!! We must endlessly argue about one or the other, and pigeonhole creative people within a narrow medium and toolset because of shiny new technology that has our dicks hard! Also: David Lynch should make another film, and have Keanu Reeves star in it. Lynch talks about how he loves all the digital stuff, yet the only digital movie he's made is Inland Empire, which was shot on a fucking ancient Sony PD-150. If you don't know what a PD-150 is compared to more recently developed DSLR's, HD cams, and digital cinema rigs; think of the difference between a pre-WWI era biplane and a freaking WWII P51 Mustang.
-
Jan. 18, 2012, 10:56 p.m. CST
this trailer is the most excited i have been for any movie in YEARS
by antonphd
-
Their names are on the list. Wow.
-
Tarantino did an interview once where he ripped digital filmmaking but said he was almost convinced to like it when he guest directed a sequence in "Sin City." Honestly, I could listen to Tarantino talk for 2 hours about it, hope he makes an appearance, but if not, these directors will still draw a ton of interest from me. Anything Keanu I'll watch. BRING IT!!!
-
Jan. 19, 2012, 12:31 a.m. CST
the real question is...what was side by side shot on?
by Jonathhan Kana
hmmmm
-
Jan. 19, 2012, 12:40 a.m. CST
James Cameron is full of shit and so is the entire 3D craze
by JimmyJoe RedSky
its fake immersion - its not even "3D" - its ham fisted trickery - the tech stacks 2D images on separate planes and forces your eyes (almost to the point of injury) to focus where the camera wants them to, the viewer has no say
-
the fact is any no talent student can by a red camera and a powerful mac and make a movie - that doesnt make them an artist - i studied fine arts in college - i dropped out - but while i was there i noticed that the students that were intimidated by the discipline required to grasp the basics (time tested classical drawing or sculpting from life) flocked to abstract expressionism - not because they were better at it - but because they felt it didnt require the same demands from the artist - it appeared easier - the fact is its harder - you cant paint like Picasso, Pollack or Johns until you can successfully draw a life like bowl of fruit or sculpt an anatomically correct nude - the same thing goes for film making - the digital film transition has more than anything done one thing - it made millions of people decide to be film makers because it has made movie making easier - notice how more movies suck now more than ever?
-
There will probably be labs manufacturing and processing film for *the arts* and until IMAX or other digital projection formats can handle over 12K-16K, so everyone will have a chance to transition gradually or quickly depending on their needs. Glad Keanu's doing this for the insights of all involved, though.
-
Jan. 19, 2012, 1:52 a.m. CST
I can't believe they actually included a talkbacker in the trailer.
by gotilk
Who was that guy? The one talking about 3d as a fad/marketing scheme? As always, please pluck one of your eyeballs out, whoever you are. Your choice. But one of 'em has got to go. All these years I had no idea. I thought I as seeing in 3d, but it turns out I was seeing in MARKETING. Thanks for the heads up , genius.
-
Yeah, and RGB isn't really color, it's TRICKERY! (I heard it steals your soul, too... watch out)
-
Oh NO .... Its not 3D!!!! .... Must be dead and shit!
-
Jan. 19, 2012, 2:13 a.m. CST
I'm not sure what Cameron meant by *film can't do 3-D*. I think he meant *...as well as digital* regarding stability, interocular adjustments, convergence pulling, etc.
by justmyluck
Which is probably why he's cocky about it.
-
Jan. 19, 2012, 2:16 a.m. CST
*You can't shoot 3-D on film* ... which is why we want you to see TITANIC again in 3-D!
by justmyluck
-
aka Cinematographer on Nolan's films (among others), and probably one of the best working today.
-
*barf*
-
Jan. 19, 2012, 3:39 a.m. CST
Well, digital IS better than film...I can't believe people will still refute it
by Mel
The "resolution" is about the same...and as far as color goes, I think 16.7 million colors is plenty. Plus, film WILL have flaws and it degrades. You know there are actually idiots that think vinyl is better audio than digital? lol. Yes...records. It's just how it is. People just think digital is bad for everything, when in fact it's better. The reason WHY they say digital is bad is because of this mythical "warmth" that film and analog recordings are supposed to have. It's not "warmth"...it's fucking NOISE.
-
Where are they gonna get the $25,000?!?!
-
Most films shot digitally just don't look as good as something shot on film. Even Soderbergh's stuff has it's moments where shit gets strobey and things look just a little too clean that I feel like I'm watching a live tv show.
-
But with the succes of MI4 and the flopping of even good 3-D films like Hugo and Tintin, doesn't it seem that maybe digital 3-D is kind of losing out to IMAX?
-
Jan. 19, 2012, 9:23 a.m. CST
samuel fulmer, you may have a point, but it's easier for theaters to convert to 3D than have the space for a proper IMAX screen.
by P
-
It's not often you see the words Keanu Reeves, documentary and film vs digital in all one sentence. I think this is going to be a fascinating documentary to watch. The move from film to digital is a similar transition from the silent movie to the talkie. Plus, all the projectionists are being fired as the digital systems can be operated by computer, so all our experiences can be homogenic. Would Stanley have used digital. No - he'd have stuck to film just to piss everyone off. I know, he told me so from the spirit world...
-
In a good way. He just went and made a doc on the most relevant topic for newcomers in filmmaking nowadays. Great going Mr. Anderson!
-
Jan. 19, 2012, 9:36 a.m. CST
melgibsoncalledmethenword, like any technology, digital works best when people use it correctly. When it comes to exhibition, this is often not the case.
by P
Many theater managers have made a practice of leaving on the 3-D lenses when playing a 2-D film. For 3-D showings a special lens is installed in front of a digital projector (Sony 4K for example) that rapidly alternates the two polarized images needed for the 3-D effect to work. When you’re running a 2-D film, that polarization device has to be taken out of the image path, otherwise you’ve got a big polarizer that absorbs 50 percent of the light. People have come to expect a dimmer image with 3-D due to this, but oftentimes they are getting the same dimness in a 2-D digitally project film. So a filmmaker can uses the most cutting edge equipment available to produce the best possible image only to have it fucked by some lazy projectionist.
-
Jan. 19, 2012, 9:57 a.m. CST
Anybody see that video floating around of the botched Hugo screening
by Samuel Fulmer
Where in the last few minutes of the "film" the commericals from the beginning started playing over Hugo?
-
Jan. 19, 2012, 10:01 a.m. CST
I Love This Website, Flawed As It May Be Sometimes, Because...
by Crow3711
It's filled with people who find watching something like this awesome, and not boring or tedious. I'm giving us a pat on the back for being interesting, because this looks fucking phenomenal and I can't wait for my chance to watch. Most of the people I know wouldn't sit down and be enthralled by this for the life of them.
-
Jan. 19, 2012, 10:02 a.m. CST
Well said Crow. At the end of the day, there is more that unites us than divides us.
by P
-
A subject I care very deeply about, featuring great filmmakers I love and it's all done by Keanu? OMG!Geek Jizz everywhere!
-
Jan. 19, 2012, 10:27 a.m. CST
I appreciate a good doc and its nice to see ole Dave Lynch
by Gore_monkey
-
Jan. 19, 2012, 11:13 a.m. CST
If they would develop a quiet IMAX camera they could shoot dialogue with it would change the game.
by JackSlater4
-
A Reader named Adrien shot me an email with this link for a full length film streaming on Vimeo that's along the same lines of Side By Side and might be interesting to check out. http://vimeo.com/34608191
-
Seem to agree that Cameron is a dick, please top making film you asshole, your giving Canadians a bad name.
-
INTRODUCE YOURSELF! :P you new writers here really need to start doing that, Nordling never did it either for that matter.
-
Avatar may have been a visual triumph, but man the plot and dialogue was even worse than the Star Wars prequels.
-
Jan. 19, 2012, 2:20 p.m. CST
Just when I was ready to write Muldoon off with his Shylaman shenanigans...
by Tikidonkeypunch
He posts a trailer for this...and totally redeems himself.
-
when i was in school in the 80s there were quite a few students that lived off campus in decent apartments and went on trips over the atlantic or pacific every chance they got, all on mom and dads wallet - some even had cars and garages to park them in - and i dont remember any of them working or having to while not in class - one student i knew personally had a great car and very expensive still cameras and equipment - she made no secret of the fact that they were bought for her - the point is, its not impossible for a student to get a red camera and not personally pay for it - plus, theyre modular and can be bought piece by piece - and students get discounts etc
-
digital is better than film at capturing high resolutions and billions of colors - but film is better than digital at capturing a movie - the swimming film grain, process of rapidly moving still images and consciously imperceptible momentary absence of light between frames cannot be done digitally
-
as do you
-
Jan. 19, 2012, 11:22 p.m. CST
I wonder if Keanu could address the KODAK bankruptcy before his project's Berlin premiere.
by justmyluck
Truly a statement on the issue of film-vs-digital if there ever was one.
-
Sorry, couldn't help myself.
-
It's called the 'Phantom 65', makes fantastic, high-res images.
-
Jan. 20, 2012, 4:32 p.m. CST
the real question is...what was side by side shot on? by johnathankana
by M.
what does the camera in these photos look like? http://sidebysidethemovie.com/press/ there's your answer.
Top Talkbacks
- Spoilery early review of MAN OF STEEL!! -- 310 total posts 278 posts
- Holy Crossover!! Magneto’s Boy Quicksilver To Speed About In Whedon’s AVENGERS 2 And Singer’s X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST?? -- 300 total posts 88 posts
- A review of Refn and Gosling's ONLY GOD FORGIVES, direct from Cannes!! -- 101 total posts 82 posts
- Jon Stewart casts Gael Garcia Bernal for his directorial debut, ROSEWATER!! -- 40 total posts 38 posts
- Green-Band and Red-Band trailers for the new Jason Sudeikis & Jennifer Aniston VACATION ripoff, WE'RE THE MILLERS are here!! -- 126 total posts 34 posts
- Ron Howard's latest trailer sure is a RUSH!!! -- 63 total posts 34 posts
- Harry dives into STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS' spoilers to reveal the truth behind the blockbuster we're seeing! -- 1433 total posts 26 posts
- Papa Vinyard thinks that HANGOVER: PART III was a paycheck grab for a buncha people who are already rich!! -- 199 total posts 24 posts
- The METALLICA THROUGH THE NEVER Teaser! -- 206 total posts 21 posts
- That rumor about Sony selling SPIDER-MAN? Don't you believe it for a second! -- 447 total posts 19 posts