• LemmySoloHer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    2 months ago

    According to Schipper, the first attempt was dull because the actors were too cautious, being afraid to make mistakes; the second attempt was the opposite, as the actors went “crazy”. Schipper says he became “angry” and “terrified” after seeing the second take and realizing he had only one chance left; in a subsequent meeting, he gave the cast a “hairdryer speech … [it] was not a meeting that ended in hugs and ‘good talk.’ It was crazy. But the tension was built on knowing we wanted the same thing”. Schipper believes the final attempt was successful because there was an element of “aggression” missing from the other versions.[7]

    Added to my watch list, I’m super intrigued to see how the final cut turned out.

  • TheImpressiveX@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    2 months ago

    The film was shot in a single long take by Sturla Brandth Grøvlen from 4:30 to 7:00 A.M. on 27 April 2014 in the Kreuzberg and Mitte neighborhoods. The script consisted of 12 pages, with most of the dialogue being improvised.

    To get financiers onboard, director Sebastian Schipper promised to deliver a version using traditional shot cutting as “plan B” if he couldn’t achieve the final product in a true single take. The cut version was filmed first, over 10 days, as a series of 10-minute takes, so that Schipper would have a completed film even if the one-take version failed. Schipper has characterised the cut version as “not good”. The budget permitted only three attempts at the one-take version. According to Schipper, the first attempt was dull because the actors were too cautious, being afraid to make mistakes; the second attempt was the opposite, as the actors went “crazy”. Schipper says he became “angry” and “terrified” after seeing the second take and realizing he had only one chance left; in a subsequent meeting, he gave the cast a “hairdryer speech … [it] was not a meeting that ended in hugs and ‘good talk.’ It was crazy. But the tension was built on knowing we wanted the same thing”. Schipper believes the final attempt was successful because there was an element of “aggression” missing from the other versions.

  • iamjackflack@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    1917 is very similar. May be more than one due to the main character getting knocked out. Highly recommend watching. Great War movie

    • MeatsOfRage@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      1917 actually had a lot of cuts, they were just well hidden…

      I mean I guess I wouldn’t necessarily call 37 cuts a lot but it’s still more than 1

    • unknowing8343@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      Victoria is way more technically interesting because it is truly one shot, all dialogs improvised, and literally in Berlin, no closed sets (mostly).

  • flux@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 months ago

    Great movie. I’ve seen many with the “one take” premise. Time code, Russian Ark and the ones that pretend but don’t really. Rope and snake eyes. Victoria is an amazing feat of filmmaking.

  • Romkslrqusz@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 months ago

    While the two are alone inside, Sonne notices a piano, tinkles a bit on it and then dares Victoria to also play something

    Victoria pissfingers