@@tsydamian2025 he didnt do the cinematography for The Creator. Thats a misconception that has spread on the Internet for some reason. He planned it a bit, consulted remotely throughout but couldn't do anything himself as far as the shoot goes due to doing Dune 2. He brought on the actual cinematographer, Oren Soffer, who did the work with the director.
When I watched this movie in cinema I had tears in my eyes, because its so well done...nice cinematography, editing, acting and Soundtrack....impressive movie
Greg Frasier should be the new standard for cinematography quality and intentionality in Hollywood blockbuster movies because his work since Rogue One, to The Batman, to The Creator, to the Dune franchise is unparalleled imo. A side note: Hey Greg! If the film is shot for IMAX then please make a plea to the studios to release the blu-ray in IMAX quality.🙏🏿
As Fraser said, no scene in this movie was easy. To tell such a rich story like Dune in 5 hours, you need to include subtle hints and details in every frame that your mind pick up while other things are going on. Dune with all it's layers of complexity, you need to plan every single shot to perfection. I still think the movies are too short, I want to see the 4 hour cuts of each movie, but all in all I think Denis and his crew did a fantastic job on these films. Now I eagerly await Dune Messiah which right now seems to start filming next year and releases in 2026.
I didn't consciously realize this while watching, but yeah, looking back, I've never seen a tracking shot like this of something clearly real that cannot possibly be actually moving. That shot is so instrumental in selling the effect, and it does seem rather complicated.
To whoever edited this video: Cutting between the medium and the close up of Greig every few words is extremely distracting. What he’s saying is interesting enough, I don’t need a million cuts to keep my attention.
I've watched this scene too many times. My problem is the continuity of where the sunlight is coming from and hitting Paul doesn't just shift a little, the sunlight jumps from one side of the sky to the other. In one cut, sunlight is lighting Paul's left side, next cut sunlight is lighting Paul's right side, back and forth throughout the scene. Paul's shadow is casting left, cut, then it's casting right, back and forth. Even in the CGI environment of the worm, the sunlight source switches from shining on the worm's right side to then the worm's left side. The continuity team was on the spice that day. I can't unsee it now. Oh well. Feel free to watch the scene yourselves and carefully jot down the direction the sun is hitting Paul and or the worm, left side right side. It's a fun little game. Let me know your results.
It’s the inconsistency of Paul’s goggles between his run and jump on the worm… such a brilliant film, but this is so obvious it’s hard to see how it got by them
I have a few questions for Greig Fraser. How excatly did he create the LUT for the film, he talked about the skip bleach process for the highlights and the digital part for the shadows (how did he combined two formats into one LUT?). What also interest me is the lighting process, did he over or underexpose because of the LUT (skip belach typically increases contrast)? Also I want to say Greig you are the GOAT :) (hope I can meet you one day)
He specifically mentioned Fotokem who did the colour science and grading for Dune. There's a whole team of colourists and colour scientists who collaborated on developing this look and the LUT. So, probably no easy answer that you can replicate with a simple LUT :')
@@AronBagel Thank you, thats a good hint :) I wll ask the guys at Fotokem maybe they will explain it. I would sell my car to get my hands on this LUT ;)
Fraser was absolutely snubbed for The Batman so the least the academy can do is give him the oscar for this…and maybe a second one for the batman as a “hey, our bad bud”
Greig Fraser would be a better cinematographer if he stopped using filters and bleak indoor lightings, like 99% of the movies after the 2010. He and all the other modern cinematographers should watch the Outlander TV show which came after the 2010 which is one the most beautiful shows I've seen. Song to Song, Tree of Life and A Hidden Life, and The Last Samurai. These are some great movies without filters, we see nature in its original form. These days we don't get the vibe of nature that it exudes through the screen.
If you want that type of cinematography, watch those shows and not Frasers, it’s really personal preference, like I personally love something more gritty than clean and perfect, but you might not, doesn’t mean it’s right or wrong
@@AxTechs Just look at his movie Bright Star, that movie demands to show the original form of nature, but the movie look so bleak I can't even revisit that movie and a mainly because of his cinematography. I think these days most of the movies do not have re-watchable value because of the filters and lighting they use. Modern lightings are bleak. Earlier they used decorative warm lights colour in its original form those pleasant to eyes and brain. There is no place for these kinds of cinematography when you are showing nature. Bleak lighting should be only used for moments not for the entire movie. Look at Blade Runner 2049 how beautiful indoor lighting is when he is in his apartment or at NYPD, it's gritty but beautiful, pleasing to the brain and has re-watchable value.
@@DDR131 blade runner is a much darker lit film than Dune 2, so not sure what you mean by that, but yeah, it’s shot with cleaner lenses and just ND, nothing else. But in terms of which looks better, both look equally as great to me, so we’ll just have to agree to disagree
It always makes me laugh when people watch movies. And they think that they've spotted something incorrect like the goggles, not being on when all you have to do is think for a second and realize that that particular scene where he takes the goggles off or on has been cut from the movie to make it shorter. You're not watching reality people. You're watching a movie which is clips that are acted out over time. It's very easy to have something that you don't see. Just be off screen, so stop being so anal and just let it go.
The movie doesn't resemble the book for several segments. It was unfaithful and missed key elements. What happened to the weirding section of the book? It was one of the most important parts of the story...
