Actually, the first time I talked to David about the film, I was working on The Cell. David had this plan that he would previs the entire movie. Then one of the things about planning for that was, in David’s mind, let’s previs the whole thing. Probably more than anybody would be willing to do now, but at the time, it made a lot of sense. Panic Room took from that a big use of photogrammetry and texture mapping by BUF. Remember, Fight Club was, should they be CG refrigerators or should they be macrotures? There were all these tests to try to decide whether or not the CG world was worth touching or not. Frankly, Panic Room was the outcome of everything that we had figured out on Fight Club.
He had also done a bit of previs near the end of Fight Club. He does kind of think like a camera, so boards work for him. Can you talk a bit about the planning, whether there were boards as well, or something else that David Fincher had done, going into the previs? I remember there was a significant previs effort involved in those. And then if you want to count digital color correction, which was still in its infancy, we had 2000 shots, really.ī&a: Panic Room is of course known for its long shots, its impossible camera moves, which still felt so ‘real’. I remember when the FYC ads started showing up in magazines, I remember calling the studio and saying, ‘Aren’t you going to put one in the visual effects rags?’ And they were like, ‘Well, this isn’t a visual effects movie.’ But there were hundreds of shots, which at the time was a big deal. But that wasn’t the issue with Panic Room, they didn’t even know. You know, a lot of action films used to actively hide the fact that there were visual effects, because they felt somehow it took away from the magic of the stunts and special effects. B&a: What I remember so vividly about Panic Room was knowing going in that there were a lot of visual effects in the film but that so many people didn’t realize the extent of the VFX after watching it.
0 kommentar(er)
