Why do Brit films look different?

[phishaholik]

I'm watching one of my favorite old movies, The Company of Wolves, for the first time on DVD and I can't get over how different it looks from modern American films. Why do British films look so different? Is it different film or different transfer or what?

Mike

[Matt_W]

Lower budget

[JimB52]

Sound speed film in the UK is 25 frames/second, in the US it's 24 fps. I assume they might not use Kodak film stock, perhaps Agfa instead. The studio shoots in Britian, such as the old Pinewood Studios, do have a different feel than the US shot studio scenes.

[peterbright]

They use lorries instead of trucks

[duo8675309]

You would be shocked at the effect proper dental care can add to the feel of a movie.

[Tegzsa]

It could be the transfer.

Is it a PAL (Phase Alternating Line) DVD or NTSC (Never Twice the Same Colour)?

[Fun Size Nick]

Originally Posted by JimB52

Sound speed film in the UK is 25 frames/second, in the US it's 24 fps. I assume they might not use Kodak film stock, perhaps Agfa instead. The studio shoots in Britian, such as the old Pinewood Studios, do have a different feel than the US shot studio scenes.

Are you sure you're not getting that mixed up with television frame rates? Certainly the frame rates for television are different between the UK and US (25fps/30fps), but AFAIK there's no difference in film speed (I'm open to being corrected here).

To the OP - keeping in mind that you're comparing a 24 year old film to modern US productions, I think there is something there that is different, but I don't know what it is. I tend to notice it much more in older British TV than in films though, especially in any outdoor scenes, however I imagine that the lack of available sunlight probably has something to do with that

[i_got_a_mohawk]

Originally Posted by Tegzsa

It could be the transfer.

Is it a PAL (Phase Alternating Line) DVD or NTSC (Never Twice the Same Colour)?

Thats what i was going to suggest.

[Cairobill]

I think the Company of Wolves is very unusual - simply different full stop - Crazy Angela Carter story turned into a mad film by Neil Jordan.

It's one of those films where the colours are tweaked in the grade (post processing of the colour balance of the film) to make it look hyper-real. Especially the reds - it's very heavy on the symbolism that film, and hence looks different (red for death, sex, rebirth etc etc ). One of my favourite films from back in the day when I was a kid.

Nice quote here about it...(from http://www.reverseshot.com/legacy/wi...yofwolves.html)

"The majority of the film is a laundry list of Freudian symbolism, including but not limited to the color red representing, Sixth Sense-style, blood, death, danger, and, non-M.Nightly, menstruation; the shattering of childhood toys; lipstick and a mirror found in a bird’s nest"


CB

[srh]

sorry kind of a tangent ... ive always been curious about this.. why is it that movies look different than tv shows? Is it the fps? If so, anyone know the difference? And why is it that all soap operas looks different than other tv shows? haha im guessing its the fps as well...

[Lalabadie]

Originally Posted by Fun Size Nick

Are you sure you're not getting that mixed up with television frame rates? Certainly the frame rates for television are different between the UK and US (25fps/30fps), but AFAIK there's no difference in film speed (I'm open to being corrected here).

If I remember correctly, there are different standards. I don't know if there is a geographical distinction concecrning their use, but there certainly is a difference between the 60i (29,97 fps) and 50i (25 fps) filming once processed. I, for one, am totally lost when it comes to integrating both within a single production.

Originally Posted by srh

sorry kind of a tangent ... ive always been curious about this.. why is it that movies look different than tv shows? Is it the fps? If so, anyone know the difference? And why is it that all soap operas looks different than other tv shows? haha im guessing its the fps as well...

Yes, on TV the image usually is given a good deal of motion blur and the fps goes down to 24.

[i_got_a_mohawk]

Originally Posted by srh

sorry kind of a tangent ... ive always been curious about this.. why is it that movies look different than tv shows? Is it the fps? If so, anyone know the difference? And why is it that all soap operas looks different than other tv shows? haha im guessing its the fps as well...

Movies generally using higher quality film and equipment, aswell as more post production (most of the time).

[bryan bailey]

The color temp in england is different than the US too, since its in a different part of the world with a different angle from the sun and probably a thicker ozone layer.

[slugworth]

It's because their cameras have Lucas electronics, and leak a lot of oil, just like every other British made electromechanical device.

Click Here:
http://www.hermit.cc/mania/tmc/articles/lucas.htm

[FL Knifemaker]

Originally Posted by slugworth

It's because their cameras have Lucas electronics, and leak a lot of oil, just like every other British made electromechanical device.

Click Here:
http://www.hermit.cc/mania/tmc/articles/lucas.htm

And they probably look into the wrong end of them when filming

[IanStephenson]

Film is film, and it's universally (or at least globally) shot at 24fps.

Also remember that a LOT of US films are shot at pinewood, and the other west London studios, so it's not really about the place/equipment.

It's more to do with the guys behind the camera - those films look like that because someone wants them to. "British" film is a difficult concept (my wife's Ma Dissertation was on the difficulty of examining Harry Potter as a "british" film), but the films you call British fall within a certain style. They're not in that style because they're British, but rather they're British because they're in that style.

TV (particularly Soaps) are shot on video which is very different to film. It just works differently in all sorts of subtle ways which produce a different look. Interlacing and grain/noise play a big part, but as noted video camera's have very different motion blur and depth of field.

Ian

[Skeletomania]

How about the movie Miami Vice, or that other movie with Tom Cruise as an assassin, and Jamie Fox as a taxi driver. Both movies are shot like soap opera.

[Tegzsa]

Originally Posted by FL Knifemaker

And they probably look into the wrong end of them when filming

Unlike Hollywood, where they merely "look" into the wrong end of, and probably drip oil on, impressionable starlets of both genders.

[Geddyfleaharris]

Originally Posted by peterbright

They use lorries instead of trucks

They eat bangers and mash instead of sausages and mashed potatoes

[Bruce Lindfield]

Originally Posted by phishaholik

I'm watching one of my favorite old movies, The Company of Wolves, for the first time on DVD and I can't get over how different it looks from modern American films. Why do British films look so different? Is it different film or different transfer or what?

Mike

As people have said - it's nothing technical - as a lot of films that are seen as American are actually made in Britain and many British technicians work in movies in the US!


I think as people have hinted, it is that most US Movies are the result of big teams virtually on "production lines" and they are huge enterprises managed by corporate executives and are part of big business!

Whereas many British films are just the inspiration of a few geniuses working on a shoestring, who are not restrained by big business,"focus groups" or anything else!

So what you are seeing(identifying) is the difference between low budget "art" films and big business "product" ..