The big picture
When it came time to select a proscenium through which to tell the story of the Raines brothers, Sena asserts that he had to "think about it for all of about three seconds before I decided to go anamorphic. I just love the way the 2.35:1 image looks. When I was doing videos, I would always be doing them 1.85:1, at least. Even on commercials, I would try to talk [the clients and agencies] into shooting a wider format whenever I could. I shot Kalifornia in Super 35 because I knew the film was going to be a run-and-gun, low-budget production. There would be no going back once we shot at each of the locations.
"With anamorphic, there can be a lot more problems that might require a reshoot or additional coverage: a hair in the gate pretty much means that the shot is gone, and the focus is a lot tougher," he continues. "But for Gone in 60 Seconds, I knew we were going to have a bit more breathing room. Actually, I was a little tentative about telling the studio that I wanted to go anamorphic, but when I did, they just said, 'Sure. What else would you shoot?' I didn't really stop to think that for most of the people who make movies with Jerry Bruckheimer, it's pretty much a given that they're going to shoot anamorphic!"
Jimmy Muro, the A-camera and Steadicam operator on Gone in 60 Seconds, has also worked with Oliver Stone (Any Given Sunday), James Cameron (Titanic) and Michael Mann (Heat), among others. "Every time I start an anamorphic show, I always have a lengthy conversation with the [director and cinematographer], asking, 'Are you sure you want to do this?' It was especially important to ask that question on this show, since we were going to shoot mostly at night and put the camera in some cramped spaces, like under a dashboard. Why would you want a huge lens that needs a great deal of light when you can get the same format in Super 35? Let's face it: with Super 35, you get better depth of focus and the gear is smaller.
"I do love anamorphic, though," Muro enthuses. "I love the look of the image, and if the production is willing to accept the challenge, like this one did, then we go for it. It does take a while to get used to the format, though in our first week of shooting, we were doing a lot of 180mm close-ups, but by the final week of shooting, most of our close-ups were [75mm to 100mm], so you can see the actors in addition to what is going on beyond them in the frame. It really adds depth to the image. Also, I absolutely love the look of the [Panavision] C-Series lenses we used; even though they breathe a little bit, they have beautiful, beautiful flares."
Cameron notes that first assistant cameraman Danny Gonzales thoroughly tested the Panavision lenses during preproduction, a task that proved to be a saving grace. "He learned all of the intricacies about these lenses that you can imagine. He not only thoroughly tested them in prep to get the best possible set, but he also learned the optics inside and out. We would be shooting a close-up, and he would be able to say that the B-camera 100mm would be a better choice for the focus range and frame size because the breathing was minimized at that focal area.
"Of course, we read all the articles we could get our hands on regarding anamorphic shooting, and developed our own philosophies on how to best maximize the optical qualities of these lenses," the cinematographer continues. "We had both the C-series and E-series lenses on this show. I was shooting the night exteriors at about a T-2.8/3.2 on the C-series and at more of a T-5.6/8 for day exteriors. It was an extreme challenge to not only work in anamorphic, but also to always work with multiple camera setups. I would have a Steadicam, a 40mm on a crane and a 180mm on a dolly, all running at the same time, so we were lighting and composing for everything at once. That means we often made slight compromises for one angle or the other, but on a film of this scale, you've got to get the shots. I also ended up taking more risks with my lighting to make sure that the masters look good. The overall approach to this film has been somewhere between the commercial, guerrilla and big-budget-feature concepts of filmmaking."
Commercial savvy
"This film has been done in much more of a 'commercial' style than a typical feature," affirms key grip Scott Robinson (L.A. Confidential, Terminator 2: Judgment Day), "but it's a choice that worked out well. Dominic is very comfortable in that style, and most of my guys have done a lot of commercials, so our skills are honed in that department as well. We'd often break off into splinter units, where we'd simultaneously do a crane shot, make a couple of dolly shots and have a guy working with Jimmy Muro on Steadicam. Meanwhile, I had guys working with lighting and doing car mounts. It was an eclectic approach; one minute we were in feature mode and setting up through full rehearsals, but from that point on it would diversify into three different segments. It was like playing jazz Dominic set that beat, and we'd go with it.
"It's also a bit tougher with anamorphic lenses to do multiple mounts and multiple cameras without each one getting into the other's shot or seeing a lamp somewhere," Robinson observes. "We were always looking for more exciting places to put the camera. I'd be running a Technocrane off of a Titan, more often than not just to get the range of movement we were looking for. This show required a bit wider thinking than normal features, but it was a blast."
When asked to elaborate on his commercial-style approach to filmmaking, Sena comments, "I suspect that if you look at Tony or Ridley Scott or one of those guys who do commercials quite a bit, our approach isn't going to be much different. I don't subscribe to the single-camera approach at all, unless we're doing a huge Steadicam shot or something where it's just impossible to get other cameras in there. However, to be honest, I haven't been around that many other features. The filmmakers I do know, like David Fincher, work in the same kind of style. I knew I wanted to go with multiple-camera setups from the outset for a number of reasons, but one of the foremost was because great performances are sometimes very hard to re-create. If you get it, you get it, and there's no going back. If we've got that moment covered in several angles, then we move on; I'm not stuck trying to replicate that same feeling three or four more times half a day later in other setups. But at the same time, I'm not going crazy with the camera. If we've got a dialogue scene or a shot of a guy reading the newspaper, I'm not spiraling all over the place with the camera to cover that. That way, when you do unleash the camera on an action sequence, the audience appreciates it more than [they would] if you've been swinging it around for two hours."
"Dominic is an extreme visualist," asserts Cameron. "He has very high photographic expectations. On another production, you might sacrifice a throwaway shot in order to keep the project moving, but with Dominic, every shot had to count. That, in addition to multiple-camera setups, was really a challenge, but I'm very proud of the result." The cinematographer chose Eastman Kodak's Vision 500T 5279, rated at 400 ISO for a little extra exposure, for nighttime work, and Vision 200T 5274 for his daytime sequences. Although a handful of show prints will be struck using the Technicolor Dye Transfer printing process, the majority of the final prints will be on Kodak's Vision Premiere (2393) stock.
A film about a band of car thieves is, of course, going to feature a number of exciting chases. Although the production did not attempt to re-create the 40-minute chase of its predecessor, Gone in 60 Seconds does feature its share of high-speed pursuits and a climactic nine-minute chase that will be aiming for the record books.
[ continued on page 3 ]