MovieChat Forums > Lola rennt (1999) Discussion > Camera Quality?

Camera Quality?

posted 14 years ago by scarface130
14 replies | jump to latest

How come the camera quality seems to change through out the film? sometimes its crystal clear as if it was shot on film, then it looks like it was shot on DV?

N.E.R.D
Nostalgic
Egomaniac
Raging agianst the machine
Dramatically

[–] puschit-1 14 years ago

That's another element of style. Sometimes steady cam, sometimes shaky cam, sometimes with filters and sometimes animation sequences.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] meininki 14 years ago

No, it was done on purpose. All scenes involving Manni and Lola were shot on film, the ones involving Lola's dad and his mistress, the bum, the bicycle thief, etc. were shot on video. Tom Tykwer explained it further in an interview, but I can't remember it properly now.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Link6321 14 years ago

by - tyrexden on Mon Mar 28 2011 10:01:34

Thats what they'll have you 'believe', that it was intent, but it was clear some sequences were shot on video. They must have run out of budget.

All the scenes with the mistress, for instance were probably shot at the same time on video, after principal photography had already wrapped.

Same with the scene of the bum finding the money.

by - tyrexden on Tue Apr 5 2011 18:22:20

well yea... I don't doubt it was done on purpose. I'm just saying it was a crafty way to save some budget.

You're contradicting yourself.

Besides, unless you can provide legitimate facts, what you said in the first quote above is basically just an assumption with nothing real to back it up with.

If you ask me, the film already has many different elements of style as it is (shaky cam, steady cam, clear shots-noisy shots, animation, different direction for particular scenes, etc.), so it's really not AT ALL that farfetched that the "noisy shots" were done on purpose for creative reasons (again, considering that the film itself already has many different style approaches even if we left out the noisy shots).

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] don savant 14 years ago

It is a factor that makes this film ground breaking. Different style per different scenario.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] salmanp0020 13 years ago

If they had such a restrained budget they wouldn't have gone for so many different styles, would have just stuck with one. You have assumed something and creating your own theories to support it.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] andu-00 13 years ago

The scenes with the mistress look strikingly like from any of the many European soap series, so I always assumed the director wanted to give us that feeling. It's a very nice mix of genres, each coming with it's own connotations: drama, action, animation, soap opera, and music video.

[–] npetrie76 13 years ago

That's what I was thinking, except it doesn't just happen in that scene. It happens a couple of times - the last car crash, the bum and bike thief meeting, a few random shots of lola running. Also that scene with the dad and mistress is intercut with film, it's not all video.

http://www.youtube.com/user/npetrie76

[–] andu-00 13 years ago

Agreed, hence my mention of the strong feeling of a mix.

[–] meininki 13 years ago

Tom Tykwer explained it like this:

[..] So, visually speaking, we followed a logical path, and gave each level its own look. The sequences with Lola and Manni are shot on 35mm, and the others, where Lola and Manni are not on location were shot on video, in an almost synthetic, artificial world. It turns Manni and Lola into the centre of their world, in which cinematic miracles are possible. The cinema image is true, the others are almost untrue. When Lola runs through a video image, it becomes film.

http://www.tomtykwer.com/Filmography/Run-Lola-Run