How the fuck does Heat still looks so good, even by todays standard?

How the fuck does Heat still looks so good, even by todays standard?
I mean this looks like it was released yesterday, not in the fucking 90s.

I unironically think it has to do with Val Kilmer looking like shit.

what the fuck was waingro's problem

Michael Mann's films have a certain look to them.

anamorphic photography

Dante Spinotti

Heat was shot in early 1995 with brand new Panavision Primo lenses IIIRC, on EXR stock which really defined the look of '90s movies and started having really fine grain levels at higher sensitivities (plus Heat was anamorphic which further reduced grain), so combined with the very naturalistic lighting it's within continuity of what you think of as the 'modern' look in terms of resolution and so on. Mid-'90s is around when film emulsions started to hit their peak, and lenses stick around for a really long time so we're still sort of in that era of Panavision. In terms of the aesthetic qualities of the technology, Heat is closer to to the movies of 2017 than to the movies of 1973 basically, even though it's not digital.

Explain.

YOU JUST HAD TO FUCK WITH ME

he was a hot head who couldn't handle the bantz

I don't know anything about film or lenses but this sounds plausible to me

Thanks user, appreciate it.

Nothing. That guy was making a move. That's why he had to get it on, man. He HAD to get it on.

Im flashing back to 2012 Sup Forums when there were like amateur filmmakers who actually knew shit

I had to get it on

It doesn't rely on CGI to deliver another groundbreaking, blurry scene in which a CGI human in a goofy costume flies into the air and punches another CGI human for hours

Heat is without a doubt the best heist film ever made. It just nails everything, the look, the mood, the music and especially the sounds. Also top tier casting, acting and direction.

Yeah, stop talking, ok slick?

Is this your first time watching an old movie in HD or something?

The cinematography, and the fact that it was all location shooting, no soundstages.

Kek'd

It looked as modern in theaters on release as it does on DVD. Comparatively a lot of films from the same time and before still don't look or feel like modern films even in HD.

Most films from the 90s look like films from the 90s. Same goes for any decade, no matter if you watch it in 4K or not.

He's right though, even if film has a high resolution there's more into what defines a shot than the film stock. That user above me is clearly more well versed than I am but basically the lenses play a big part in the final product. In addition to the natural lighting the scene in the OP is shot and edited in a modern way that blends kinetic shots and static shots. But I have a fleeting grasp on all this shit

In all seriousness, memes aside. What the fuck was his problem?

>5 minutes into armored car robbery and chill and he gives you this look

>The cinematography
While you're not wrong that's a very broad statement

It was actually ahead of its time. Heat has the same gritty realism that movies would take on in the 2000s.

Kek'd

This. The cinematography is amazing. It almost look digital. It maybe looks even better.

Why did she overcook the chicken? Was she being passive aggressive?

because she had a GREAT ASS

you guys should watch L.A Takedown. Manns Heat before Heat

Great Post user.
A question since you seem competent: I read that 70 mm film has the quality of 4k or something in comparison, so wouldn't be it that movies like "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" also would work for today standards in terms of cinematography? I think Nolan or Tarantino stated that it would be the case.

he was a sociopath user

AND YOU GOT YOUR HEAD ALL THE WAY UP IT

Your post is a ray of sunshine on an otherwise cloudy board.

Fuck it I'm gonna be rewatching Heat tonight with the speakers up, hope my neighbors don't mind.

Good, the Bad and the Ugly wasn't shot on 65mm, it was 2-perf Techniscope, which is even smaller than regular 35mm film. All of Leone's movies were shot that way until Once Upon A Time in America, which just goes to show you that "muh format" is a meme, because Leone is still considered one of the best widescreen composers ever and his movies feel huge in scale.

You'll get lots and lots of opinions about what film actually resolves to, and people get into temporal resolution and shit like that about what it 'looks' like it resolves to. I think 35mm is around 3-4k. There is a 4k DCP of Good the Bad and the Ugly.

I just want to know what he does that gives all his films that great texture. Its not just film grain because his digital movies have it as well.

what were they thinking ?

They knew that Vincent was an ass man

that's a akward thing to say specially near you coworkers and the suspect

he was high on cocaine

are you a retard? Films from the 1930's looked better than films made in the early 2000's

Just a weird little thing, but the sister of the president of my college owns that stilt house from the movie.
I had a cool substitute professor who came in and told us all about it one time and also showed old pixar test footage.

I remeber that mission on gta5

10/10 post

>putting a house on stilts on a hill on the San Andreas fault

This is Danny Trejo's house in the movie right? Years after the movie the owners pulled up the carpet and found a huge fake bloodstain.

They put a ton of effort into the realism of all the props they used as well as naturalistic lighting and location shoots. What generally dates 90s movies is either the shitty special effects or weird lighting that gives it the "90s look". Mann wanted it to look like real life, so there was none of that and it's aged terrifically.

>this post
>on Sup Forums

>get a new set of speakers
>tfw I pump up the volume once the heist scene starts and wake up the entire state

Based Panavision poster

uhhh, you don't get to bring actual film discussion

bet no one here knows how danny trejo got the bit part in the movie

Noice mate. It pains me that so much is shot on digital now. Film is still the goat Medium as when properly preserved it last for years.
Also you can scan 35mm film at 4K and 65/70mm film at 8K resolution. Shoot something digital and you're stuck at that resolution.
Until they start filming everything at 8K film will still rule in my books.

>You'll get lots and lots of opinions about what film actually resolves to, and people get into temporal resolution and shit like that about what it 'looks' like it resolves to.

Should be noted that the reason for this is that nobody accurately defined what counts as information on film. Film is incredibly dense if you were to try to translate it to "pixel" terms, because film doesn't have cells in that way. The trouble is that instead you get things like grain which is essentially devoid of information, it's noise. So are you counting with or without noise? A lot of people WANT film grain because they see it as part of the finished product.

Short answer is that nobody knows and it's all academic anyway.

>I think 35mm is around 3-4k.

Or put another way, once you get up to 4k and beyond the limits of vision, and viewing distance become such huge players that arguing about media source is irrelevant. On the flipside there are so many error sources on traditional film projection (especially now that nobody knows how to do it), digital has overtaken it and we'll never go back.

It's just a perfectly crafted film

They needed a mexican guy?

I'm going to rewatch this today. This scene looks like it could be from True Detective if not a modern big budget release.

Bet no one here knows how the real Wayne Grow died.

I would argue that even True Detective looks more dated than Heat tbqhwy

I agree.

there wasnt a real waingro but there was a real neil mccauley

Yeah there was listen to Manns commentary on the film.

True Detective, like almost everything ever filmed, looks significantly worse than Heat

I don't know what it is about this shot but it's fucking perfect

I was talking in terms of scope and execution but point taken.

>I don't know what it is about
It's literally the most memorable scene in a movie full of memorable scenes.

Will there ever be a director as kino as Mann?

He made a move?

Who wants pie?

oh ok i just found it. he was killed by the mob for being a rat. nailed to a shed

no, I'm not talking about the scene. I'm talking about the shot. the composition of it really; The eye is drawn to Deniro even though he's not in the center of the frame because of the lights, and his collapsed postures indicates his weakness/defeat yet he isn't flat on the ground giving which allows him to take up vertical space in the frame. Pacino is standing there as the victor, yet his slim and passive stance shows that he is not proud or strong. him holding hands with the man he just shot affirms the meaning behind not just these two characters but the entire film. add to that the flat and expansive skyline as the background to all of this happening

fuck it I do know why this shot is so god damned incredible, I just didn't feel like sperging out before now

It's almost as if movie quality is determined not by passing years but by the effort and talent the filmmaking put into.

I've been watching too many liveleak videos, man. People getting shot in movies just doesn't look accurate at all.

>you'll never be a badass professional criminal in a light gray suit

>It's literally the most memorable scene in a movie full of memorable scenes.

I don't know, man. It's a great scene, and I love what they do with the moving lights from the airport, but I think the best scene is the bank heist. Especially with that perfect music.

There was a real Waingro. He's based on a guy who ended up literally nailed to a wall out in the desert.

I'm just happy Heat exists.
Nothing comes close. Maybe some other Mann movies but Heat will be the one he's gonna be remembered for especially considered his bad luck in recent years.

Is that his son? He passed his pants down to?

no he was a crime consultant for mann on the movie but there was another ex con turned screen writer who was also a consultant to mann on the movie and the character of nate was inspired by him. edward bunker was an ex con who became friends with trejo when they were in folsom. bunker wrote the screenplay for runaway train which voight starred in and also bunker gave trejo his first acting gig in the movie

That operator stance

Good post user. I see what you meant. Especially agree about the starless sky, great choice.

I just love how huge it feels, kind of goes with both characters feeling empty at the end I suppose.

No, that's not right.

So what do you guys consider Mann's worst film?

Airport field is a terrific location.
And those dreamy dot lights.

looking through his IMDB page out of the one's I've seen Ali. If we're including TV he directed the first episode of Lucky and that's by far his worst effort. That whole show was such a fucking let down.

>"What, you seriously didn't notice the big swastika tattoo on my chest, you fucking nigger? How does it feel having the superior white man fuck your niggslave asshole?"

>then he kills her

Was he, dare I say it, /OURBOY/?????????

>from De Palma and Micheal Mann to JJ Abrams and Joss Whedon

How did we let this happen

We just got made

why

...

...

>quality thread
>quality movie

Sup Forums is full of surprises

...

idk bout that b0ss

I really, really wish assault rifles would sound like they did in Heat in every movie.