Non-documentary producers and directors are grateful that the members
of this group and discussion are so very very very atypical of average
movie goers, to be noticing, considering and discussing this minuncia
Eric Goldstein
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 2:27 PM, `Richard Knoppow <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
My limited experience with the movie business leads me to be amazed---
that they get made at all. I did a stint as a property master in a small
production. Among other things we needed some horse exhaust for dressing a
period street. Guess who went around to the local stables to collect the
stuff. Out of that I met the retired head of sound for RKO-Radio pictures.
Sometimes finding period props is difficult because they are rare. I
rather think the gun shown in "The Maltese Falcon" is an example. In the
novel Hammett describes the gun as a "Webley-Fosbery automatic revolver, 38
caliber, 8 shot. They don't make them any more". Well, the gun shown in a
very brief close up in the movie is a Webley-Fosbery all right but its the
.455, 6 shot version which is much more common. The .38 is extremely rare
and was then too. Well, few would have noticed. BTW, I think the choice of
this gun by Hammett was a sort of joke on his readers some of whom probably
thought he didn't know the difference between an automatic and a revolver.
This gun is both. Well, I guess we are now able to describe our favorite
camera as a "Rolleiflex, they don't make them any more."
On 6/1/2015 11:11 AM, David Sadowski wrote:
Or music from way before the events in the film... like how The Sting, set
in the 1930s, featured the music of Scott Joplin, which was popular about 30
years earlier.
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Jon Stanton <jon.stanton@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
It also happens with music... A dance scene for example.. The couple might
be dancing to a tune written years after the event
Olympia, WA
On Jun 1, 2015, at 10:48, `Richard Knoppow <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>---
wrote:
This may all be true but too much anachronism will spoil the
illusion. Some attention is usually paid to costume, its details that get
lost. If you want to translate some period piece to modern dress its not
only possible but done often but at some point errors will get a horse
laugh
and there goes your dramatic impact.
OTOH, a lot of movies depend on the social and cultural conditions of
the time they were made to work. An example is a favorite bit of film noir
called "Leave Her to Heaven" a Fox epic of the late 1940s. Modern
audiences
giggle at it.
On 6/1/2015 10:41 AM, Eric Goldstein wrote:
Movies that are not documentaries are an illusion of reality.
Movie makers do not understand why if the characters are fictitious,
the costumes are fictitious, the sets are fictitious, why historical
authenticity is important.
What they do consider important is that it all hangs together as a
plausible illusion, and except for us rollei nuts no one will care
about why there is a cord III in the Gatsby movie
Eric Goldstein
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 1:29 PM, `Richard Knoppow---
<dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The picture on the page below also shows a Speed Graphic
mis-identified
as a Graflex. It has its bellows almost fully extended, common in
movies,
and there a couple of flashguns. Flasbulbs did not appear until the
early
1930s. Speed Graphics were made but most press photographers used
Graflex
SLRs until a bit later than this. For the most part movies makers are
hopeless about authenticity; they just don't care. I suppose they
think
the audience will never notice or will be to ignorant to know. Or
maybe its
the movie makers who are ignorant.
On 6/1/2015 3:13 AM, CarlosMFreaza wrote:
I forgot to mention a link about the topic:
http://camerasinthemedia.tumblr.com/page/16
Carlos
2015-06-01 6:40 GMT-03:00 CarlosMFreaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>:
"The great Gatsby" (2013) is a movie set in 1922, however there is a
scene
where a Rolleicord III is used to take photographs; the Rolleicord
III was
made from November 1950 up to July 1953; you can see it's a III and
it's not
a IV because it does not have the "M-X" button below the taking lens
and it
does not have the double exposure button below the viewing lens. The
Rolleicord III in the movie is an anachronism clearly.
"The great Gatsby" 2013 version with Leonardo di Caprio has others
anachronisms like the cars model. A previous version (1974) with
Robert
Redford had less anachronisms, if my memory serves me good; both
versions
are based on the Scott Fitzgerald's novel.
Carlos
--
Richard Knoppow
dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
WB6KBL
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
--
Richard Knoppow
dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
WB6KBL
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe' in the
subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in
the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
--
Richard Knoppow
dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
WB6KBL
