DVD Review HTF REVIEW: Elephant (HIGHLY RECOMMENDED). (1 Viewer)

[Matthew Chmiel]

IIRC, all film festival showings projected the film in 1.33:1. When I saw the film during it's brief theatrical run, the theater I saw it at framed it at 1.85:1. I saw no problems with the film being matted, but I will be watching it in 1.33:1 when I get my copy.

 

[JohnRice]

After the fact. Damn my not knowing what he was going to say before he ever said it. How can I ever be forgiven?


Tell me Matt, what am I thinking now? :p)

 

[Matthew Chmiel]

That you want to punch me in the face?

 

[JohnRice]

Or, maybe send you where your YMDB list is. You do live in Vegas after all, don't you?



Now, back to our regularly scheduled programming.

 

[JohnRice]

Herb, I'm surprised by your assessment of the audio and video. The image often looked soft and flat. Part of it was due to the heavy use of selective focus, but the rest I took as quite intentional. I don't knock the choice to give this soft, often desaturated image, which was an interesting creative decision, but by reading your review, I think a lot of people will be unpleasantly surprised.

Also, the audio is often quite unusual. The dialog often starts echoing and even moves entirely to the surrounds and muddles around the back of the room. Also, there is considerable distortion at the end of one of the killers playing Fur Elise on his piano at home. None of these things is a negative, but interesting creative decisions. It's just that from your review, it sounds like an always clear, crisp soundtrack.

 

[Lew Crippen]

What was your take on the overexposure when the camera followed the students outside? Personally, it put me off, but I allow for the possibility that it was intent.

Overall I was not a fan of the cinematography in this movie—and I’m not one who demands ‘beauty’ in order to get high marks.

 

[JohnRice]

This may surprise you Lew, but I definitely enjoyed the cinematography. Look closely at the scene early in the film where Nathan (the football jock) walks from inside to outside, before going back inside, where the three girls gawk at him. There are several ways this transition could have been done. The most common, "Hollywood" way would have been to light the interiors to the point where there wouldn't have been too much of a shift in light level. That would have looked artificial and, well, Hollywood, and probably would have been too expensive anyway. Another would be to adjust the exposure quickly to adapt, which would have been abrupt. What they did is adjust the exposure so slowly it is almost undetectable, which I thought was pretty cool. Notice the exposure has only just about gotten to where it is corrected when he goes back inside.

 

[Herb Kane]

Hi John:

Looking back at my video summary, I stated that the overall appearance was "slightly soft throughout the entire movie". Beyond the results of the stylized techniques etc., I felt the image was quite good. Again, as I stated in the final sentence of my video summary, with the "budget being an obvious consideration", that has to be taken into account. Bottom line, this entire film had a 3M dollar budget. If anyone goes into an indy film with a 3M budget with hopes or expectations of a modern day 30 million dollar budgeted film, they aren’t being very realistic.

As for the audio portion, I'll be honest, I don't recall making any notes about distortion at the end of the piano piece, doesn't mean to say it's not there, I just didn't pick up on it. I will say however, I was most impressed with the details and the dynamics of the track throughout the film.

Perhaps my expectations were low - hard to say, but personally I was pleasantly surprised with the presentation of this disc - again, with financial constraints in mind.

Herb.

 

[Lew Crippen]

I’m not particularly surprised John. Although I indicated that I was not a fan, I have to admit the fact that I can call up the work for discussion months after having seen it in the theater is an indication that I am probably not giving it enough credit.

Perhaps I need to watch the movie again and reconsider some of these points—it would not be the first time that I ever changed my mind.

I knew that there had to be come choices in that tracking shot—I assumed all along that using traditional lighting was not one they would make—budget or no. It just would not have been the look they were trying to achieve. OTOH, I thought that they might have decided to cut, rather than continue the tracking shot—also I admit not an editing choice that was entirely consistent with the feel of the film.

I think that I agree that a quick change would also have had negative consequences.

In the end Von Sant and Savides, like all other filmmakers made their choices out of what was available—I’d not say that their choices were the wrong ones—only that the one they did make, was one that momentarily brought me out of the movie and started me thinking about technique.

I’ll also admit that by the time we got to that point I was thinking that the tracking shots of students through the halls was wearing a bit thin—I would have welcomed a cut, even though I am sure it would have been counter to the filmmaker’s intent.

 

[Felix Martinez]

I'm glad that both options are provided on the disc, because to my eyes, I find the 16:9 framing very pleasing. I found quite a few shots in the OAR 4:3 format to have excessive headroom - but perhaps that was what was intended.

The audio I found unremarkable, but appropriate - in fact it sounds like the audio was recorded with the mics from a DV cam - very wide, very dynamically limited. The gunshots sound very compressed, with typical "breathing" from over compression (or like when the auto-gain on camcorders clamp down on loud, transient noises). But this is eerily appropriate. it sounds very "real" in a non-audiophile way. I guess, this is similar to how we feel grainy, fast-shutter footage makes combat scenes feel "real."

 

[Mattias_ka]

The movie was made for 4:3 ratio, so that's the way it should be seen! The 16:9 version is a "joe sixpack" delux version

 

[James David Walley]

It shouldn't matter which version you choose, because (IMHO), the "way it should be seen" for maximum appreciation is with your TV and receiver off!

 

[Nick Sievers]

Powerful stuff, I thought it was great filmmaking. I must admit the structure caught me off guard for about 20mins but once I caught on it was fascinating to watch. What also surprised me was the tension for what we knew was going to happen.

I didn't read this thread beforehand so I just naturally chose the Widescreen option even though the Full Screen option says 'Theatrical Presentation' under it. Oh well, i'll be definitely watching this a few more times.

 

[JohnRice]

Anyone who cares to read it, my review is available Here.

I hope it's OK for me to post that.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

John,

Actually we prefer that members don't use this
forum to promote personal reviews on other websites.

We will let it slide this time

I just received this DVD -- bought it blind based
on Herb's review.

I kind of feel embarrassed to say this, but I
wasn't particularly drawn into this film as it
didn't seem to grab me emotionally.

I'm disappointed to feel this way because I
do feel this is a film that delivers a very
important message.

The problem I had was the way the film was
acted out. We meet a small handful of teenagers
who we watch go on for long stretches of minutes
at a time during an eventful school afternoon.

I understand the reasons for the filmmaker to
keep a handheld camera constantly moving with
these actors. As a viewer, I found myself more
bored than getting caught up with how I knew
the film was going to end. I was particularly
upset with a sequence that didn't seem to be
emotionally realistic...


Cut to the Gay study class. The black teacher
clearly sees the kid at the door getting shot and
a pool of blood spilling beneath him. The teacher's
reaction seemed very too calm and unrealistic.


I sort of feel foolish arguing these points. The
film has obviously connected with far more people
than not, and I stand as a minority of those that
while appreciated the message, didn't quite connect
with any of the film's characters.

Transfer was very good, though I am surprised
there was a DTS option on this DVD given the fact
that the audio is a bit on the raw side (with a
good sense of detail).

 

[Herb Kane]

Ah man! I can't handle this pressure...

Sorry it didn't work for you Ron. For me, not connecting with the students seemed to add to the sense of realism. These were just kids attending school one day as they did every day carrying on with their daily routine. Similarly, if "known" actors were used, they'd have been a distraction.

Obviously the ending was pretty "unrealistic" (graphically speaking), yet it was most effective -- low key, but effective.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Still love yuh, Herb and have the utmost
faith in your reviews. Heck, you sold me on
quite a few other titles that I loved.

 

[JohnRice]

Ron, I wasn't sure about that, but then I remembered I have seen links from some members to their own newspaper reviews several times, so I thought it might be OK. Obviously I wasn't completely sure, as I said in the post.


Regarding you opinions of Elephant, particularly the spoilered section, have you ever watched news footage of people in a situation like that before they know what is going on? They often act exactly as was shown in the movie.

Elephant is completely non dramatic and that may have thrown you a bit.

 

[Andrew Bunk]

Don't feel bad Ron, you're not the only one...

I had intentions of buying this well before I read any reviews, purely based on the reviews of the film itself. Maybe this is one of those cases were I would have been better off if I just stumbled upon it instead of having expectations build up.

I thought the flm was well done, but I honestly did not find myself caring about any of the characters. And I also agree with Ron about his spoilerized comment-that seemed very strange to me as well. I don't regret seeing it, but I wish I would have rented it instead of blind buying it. Oh well, nothing ventured...

 

[Lew Crippen]

I sort of felt that I needed to turn in my ‘art house’ card after watching this in the theater Ron--you are not alone in your view, as I found this film to be more annoying than enlightening. To be sure my wife was very positive about the film—I kind of thought that this was just me.