I was extremely lucky to be cast as Bryan in the film. I remember being there for many of the scenes (even scenes I wasn't in) simply because you had to be there, which makes watching the film again like revisiting a past life. Thanks for your fascinating insight into the cinematography.
I thought your acting ability was outstanding. I could never understand how a child in that age group can be so capable and convincing. Thank you for a great performance.
For me, that was Vincent & Theo. Numerous times during the movie, I realized I was looking at one of Van Gogh's paintings, only then it was alive, with characters walking around in the painting, fields of sunflowers blowing in the breeze, etc.
I was in this movie, as an extra in the battle scenes, which were shot just outside Waterford. I saw Stanley Kubrick and Ryan O'Neil one evening in the Ardree Hotel in Waterford, where they were staying. The family of a friend of mine owned the land where these battle scenes were shot and he got a job re-priming the muskets with gunpowder in between takes. Great times!
Definitely my favorite Kubrick film. However, can't get very many people to sit through this one with me, even though the pace is faster than 2001 which most people adore. I think the fantastical themes and mystery to 2001 are more universal to audiences, but Barry Lyndon is undeniably the top drama set in this period of all time.
I will have to give it a 3rd go. Tried to view it twice before , but I got bored. I love all his other films , but this one is indeed challenging to sit through I must admit.
The same people have never watched 'Gone With the Wind' 'all the way through'. How many Americans have actually read 'War and Peace'? How many have seen all five hours of Bertolucci's '1900'? They would say, "I don't have time," and then rather watch ten people run up and down a basketball court, or wander through a mall, or play Bingo... for the same time.
Agree..., up to some point. "2001" IS NOT a movie. It owns to a different and higher form of Great Art. No attempts (and there has been a good lot) to imitate it in cinema have achieved their purpose, because no filmaker seems to have understood this. "Barry Lyndon" IS a movie and a undeniable all-time masterpiece. I don't remember how many times I've seen it, and every one I enjoy it more.
I must admit I'm not a Kubrick fan; thought I'd die of boredom during "2001" and couldn't get into "Dr. Strangelove" (I need to give those movies another chance after 45 years), nor have I ever cared for Ryan O'Neal, BUT "Barry Lyndon" is one of my all-time favorite movies. I saw it when I was a senior in HS in 1976 and was blown away. Everything about it was perfect: the narration--which was originally going to be by O'Neal--the story, cinematography, costumes, acting, scenery, it all works. Sheer perfection. Each scene is almost like a painting. And I thought Marissa Berenson was so beautiful, she was on the cover of TIME right before the movie was released because critics felt Kubrick was taking a big chance w/a top model in a starring role, but she did a wonderful job. A very underrated movie!
The first time I saw Barry Lyndon, I slipped into a coma. On the second occasion I was fascinated by Kubrick's accomplished (actually unparalleled) cinematography. On the third occasion I was entertained by his dry sense of humour. Thereafter I saw this film more than a dozen times, each involving new discovery about his transcendent genius, far above all his peers.
As a cinematographer, this was the best breakdown of the filming and lighting style Kubrick used in this groundbreaking film that I have seen. Excellent work. Subscribed.
But as a cinematographer, is this information still useful to you? Are Arriflexes still in production, or do you have to settle for Reds and similar digital contraptions? You'd either have to have a director with the same sort of insight and technical legerdemain that Kubrick possessed, or become a director yourself.
@@commandercaptain4664 Kubrick actually knew well about photography because this is how he discovered his passion. He started as a still photographer before getting into movies. So he just had knowlegde about it. It doesn't matter what kind of cameras you work with, wheather it's analog or digital, the rules of photography apply to both of them.
@@commandercaptain4664 jesus, young people with their 10k REDS and raw footage. study more about character blocking and story development instead of focusing which camera is the best and spluring thousands without knowing how to light a scene.
I have been a fan of this film for many years yet this is the first I have heard that artificial light was used outside the windows during interior shots. Excellent video.
An often overlooked masterpiece of Kubrick's, amongst a career of masterpieces. These films were nowhere near as expensive as those of nowadays... but they're far superior not only aesthetically, but narratively and more importantly, dialectically.
Not overlooked anymore, finally the world is beginning to appreciate its brilliance. I think it is one of the very few films without ANY flaws whatsoever. Not a single one! Not a single superfluous second. Even a game-changer like 2001 COULD have used some slight shortening of a few scenes, but with Barry Lyndon it is impossible to think of any such cuts.
It's interesting to note that you exclaimed, "It's not boring" ... This may of course depend on who's watching the film, as I have never actually watched Barry Lyndon all the way through, yet now watching this great recap of all the camera and lens work I'm fascinated to watch the entire film, as I've done a lot of experimentation with cameras and artwork since I was a young Jr High student in the mid-1960s. I've since then become a big Kubrick fan because of his 2001: A Space Odyssey, which I saw at age fourteen in Portland Hollywood movie big screen just st after it's debut earlier than year. I had just bought my first astronomy telescope as a 13 and a half year old in 1967. So this was my experience of seeing my first Kubrick film at age 14, in the summer of 1968. I couldn't believe that I later heard people walked out of the theater after the first 20 minutes, of 2001: A Space Odyssey. Imagine that they were actually bored. I was also playing with our family's Kodak box camera that my parents allowed me to use when I was a young child. And by now at age 14, I had attached the camera to the top of my meager 60mm Tasco refractor telescope to take time exposure photos of the night sky. I probably saw Dr Strangelove, soon after 2001, on late night television. Being an astronomer and early artist in childhood, led to my artwork being shown in NASA websites quite often, about 10 years ago. So by my college days, in the early 1970s, I was already performing experimental photography with time exposures of the night sky. It's also interesting to note here that they recently reported in the news, the audio interview with Stanley Kubrick in 1965 done by the New Yorker magazine, about the time he just started working on 2001, you can look this up and listen to over an hour of him speaking about his early development of movie making in the early 1950s. Kubrick could not pass college entrance exams earlier, about the time he was working for LOOK magazine in the late 1940s. So he went to take night college courses in science. It's an amazing hour long interview with him in 1965, by the New Yorker magazine.
i was blown away by this film. couldnt really have cared less about the story or characters, but every single shot was just so masterfully composed and edited that it could bring a tear to your eye. i think the reason why it was so emotional was because of the brilliant score.
This is often overlooked by Kubrick fans as they're going after the more (online) popular features, but this flick is GORGEOUS in every way. I feel that the core of Kubrick is his photographers mind, just as with David Lynch with his painters mind, are the keys to understanding these mens' work.
It's only a 'masterpiece' if you can watch it in the comfort of your own home, pausing for bathroom breaks as necessary. Viewing it in the theatre at the time was an ordeal few moviegoers cared to endure! I saw it in a big city theatre that should have been packed. It was mostly empty and few of the audience stayed 'til the end. To be honest, I don't even remember if I walked out or not. I think word of this stinkeroo got out before the day I went. IOW, audiences stayed away in droves. And, remember, Kubrick's prior film had been a hit, so that's saying something.
Yes - if people don' t enjoy this quality of cinema let them sod off and watch the rubbish they do enjoy. I have no problem with that. But some of us need something more intellectually or artistically challenging be it in cinema or literature. Does that make us wrong??? I don't think so.
I wasn't old enough to go and see "Barry Lyndon" when it was first released- but I do remember that the reviews - in Britain at least - were almost uniformly terrible( "too slow" "boring" etc.) When I finally saw it for myself as an adult I was mesmerised by its beauty , It's still one of my favourite Kubrick movies.I'm glad it's now recognised as the masterpiece it always was. The character played by Ryan O'Neal is far more sympathetic than Thackeray's original Redmond Barry in the novel - who was apparently based on a real life 18th century chancer.
TheDativeCase to be fair it is really slow. The movie is an incredible achievement, but I can understand why someone who’s just in it for the story i.e. most people would find it boring. The film was always regarded as an incredible technical achievement, but outside of a few movies buffs no one is saying “oh I want a good evening, let’s watch Barry Lyndon”.
Boring, eh? Let's see... The film opens with Barry's father getting killed in a duel. Then it kicks off with Barry falling for a girl, losing said girl to another man, "killing" said man in a duel, and going on the run. From there he gets robbed a gun point, joins the army, gets into a fistfight, survives a skirmish and watches a close friend die, deserts, has a brief affair with a peasant woman, gets caught and shanghaied into service by the Prussians, saves a Prussian officer's life in a battle, gets roped into being a spy, joins up with another spy, disguises himself so he can be smuggled out of the country, runs a con game, engages in a sword duel, seduces a noblewoman (without even saying a word to her), marries, and finally retires to his cushy new estate to enjoy the finer things in life. And that's just the first half of the movie.
I was at a screening of the doc, KUBRICK REMEMBERED, and Leon Vitali (who played adult Lord Bullingdon) revealed that Kubrick bought into the critical trashing the film took, and it wasn't until he happened across it on TV during the filming of FULL METAL JACKET that he sat down and watched a good chunk of it, and said to Leon, "I did make a good film, after all."
I was actually in this movie, along with my younger brother an my dad. My brother and I only did a couple of days on a couple of sets, as peasant children. My dad was on it for months, playing various roles as a redcoat, and gambling gent.. Infact he had a fight scene with Ryan O'Neil. Great doc btw,,and loved the Alien ones too. Keep up the sterling work
Pretty quality video on Kubrick and the techniques he used, especially with lighting. Not knowing a lot about film, I never really took into account lighting as a whole and it's importance but this really helped me. Keep up the good work.
Not to quibble, but the film was also shot in locations in Germany and Scotland. This film, of course, allowed Kubrick to do something with the research which went into his cancelled Napoleon film. It's also worth noting that, although he did a great deal of work with other writers in preparing his screenplays, this is the only film he wrote a screenplay for on his own. In his memoir, Kubrick's driver, Emilio D'Alessandro, writes a great deal about this film's production and about Kubrick's logistical brilliance. The cost of transporting the huge number of extras and actors would have been enormous using the standard method of leasing a huge number of vehicles. Kubrick discovered it would cost much less to buy a fleet of Volkswagen buses and have them available at any time. When production ended, Kubrick had them sold - and made a profit.
Thank YOU for Tylerizing UA-cam! You're a genuine Mr. Know-It-All, but you're not a jerk about it. I mean, you could crush us all with the sheer majesty of your gigantic brain . . . but you don't! You're a role model for all of us. :) I'm a cinema geek on three subjects: Kubrick, Truffaut, and silent cinema. I make films, too. I'm about to step up to 4K. It's going to be annoying as hell since I create silent films - in black and white. All that technology at my fingertips - and I'm using it to make films that would've been cutting edge - in 1925. What a waste!
I have a soft spot for Dwan. He wasn't an artistic director in any way, but he was a man who made films, and some of them very good, for half a century. I learned about him in Kevin Brownlow's BBC series about the history of the silent cinema. Dwan became a director after being sent from New York to find out what was going on with a film being made in California. He arrived and found the cast and crew doing nothing - and being paid for it - because the director was drunk and nowhere to be found. Dwan's employers told him he was now a film director, whether he liked it or not. As Dwan tells it, he told the cast he was now the director of the film and they'd better accept it - or the film would be shut down and they'd be unemployed. One crew member said, "You're the best damn director we've ever seen."
When I saw this film on first run in an America theater, no one laughed. It got mixed reviews (Pauline Kael called it a coffee-table movie) and it was not a financial success. It won Oscars for cinematography, art direction/set decoration, costume design, and music/scoring, but it was more admired than liked. When I saw the film six years later in London, England, the audience often laughed; they followed its wry and sly humor, and were with it every step of the way.
Tyler. Your technical analysis of Kubrick's work are by far the best on the web. You will do his greatest work great honor if you continue exploring it further. And we will cheer your exploration. Please keep up the good work!
As a man of Kubrick’s films (alongside others). I’m going to say the same thing everyone else is saying.. Beautiful. Not because I am boring, but because I’m still stunned 17 years later ☺️☺️💛
This is a wonderful presentation. Kubrick's genius is justifiably acknowledged, but you have given new insights into this often overlooked masterpiece. Thank you
Emilio D'Alessandro pointed out that on Lyndon Kubrick would often wait for things like a cloud to pass for lighting purposes but keep it to himself and it got to the point where the crew was extremely frustrated wondering what the hell was the wait up was
Reminds me of the story of Bergman making "The Seventh Seal." Bergman or his cinematographer (can't remember which) noticed a certain cloud formation toward the end of the day that was perfect, and they hurriedly staged the final iconic "dance macabre" scene along the crest of a hill.
Thank you so much for posting this brilliant and informative video. "Barry Lyndon" is one of my favourite films, and I thought I knew a lot about it... until I saw your video. I live in Wicklow in Ireland, and a lot of "Barry Lyndon" was filmed in this area. You've done a great job explaining the exquisite lighting effects in this masterpiece. Thanks again, from a Kubrick Fan in Ireland
More Barry Lyndon please. Each time I watch this movie I like it more and more. I can't believe how little bonus material there are on the DVD / Blurays.
Oh, you posted this very recently! "Barry Lyndon" is my favorite Stanley Kubrick film. As a movie it's boring but the shots are really something to behold. Very 'panterly'. You explained everything so well. I enjoyed this very much.
The ultimate movie craftsman...an artisan. NO FILM these days at your big box office has been made by anyone who comes close to Kubrick. His dedication, work ethic, and sense of responsibility should inspire anyone.
Thank marvel for that. Ruining the industry (actors, directors, special fx) but also ruining the minds of consumers and spoonfeed these junkfood movies which people forget the moment they leave the cinema.
Thank you so much for putting this together. Barry Lyndon is my favorite Kubrick picture, I wish it received more attention than it does. Thank you also for correcting a myth that I have also spread: that this film was lit only with natural light.
Im so happy he made the first part in Ireland. I often travel around to certain parts of my country and just imagine some kind of great movie being short there. To be fair we've had Starwars, we had a not very well known one by Francis Ford Coppola, we were supposed to have one with Brando and Johnny Depp shot in Cork but that fell apart, and lots of brilliant Irish movies were of course shot in Ireland none the less and they are some of the best movies ever made and i challenge anyone to prove me wrong; we have made some classics. But im glad Kubrick enjoyed his time here, which was something like 300 days!?, until the dopey Ira told him to leave.
An absolutely wonderful discourse on the making of Barry Lyndon, especially the detail on the cameras and lighting. Pure genius by Kubrick, a towering artist of the 20th Century. I am going again to some these locales in Ireland - and video like this makes it more meaningful.
I had never seen this movie and then one year when staying with a friend in Beirut he projected it onto the wall and I lay on a huge sofa covered in blankets drinking tea and watching it. The ambience contributed to my appreciation of the movie.
this is the most beautiful movie to look at and listen to, ever. The slow pace was perfect as it allows for the audience to obsorb the opulence of the senses.
This is great - might also mention the use of graduated neutral density filters (dark on top fading to light below) in almost every wide exterior shot. Also - large banks of non-practical candles with reflectors were also being used to light the candlelight scenes.
Yes. The are called graduated filters, or grad for short. They are used to darken part of the frame and are very useful when trying to darken the sky, which often photographs brighter than it appears to the eye when exposing for the things below the sky (ground, people, trees) static.bhphoto.com/images/images750x750/1456508311000_292653.jpg
Tyler, I hope you are or will be a film class instructor. This was an amazing master class in how complicated film making was before the digital era, and how inspired Kubrick was. Brave for sharing your passion and your keen eye.
In addition to the unrivaled cinematography, Barry Lyndon is full of sarcastic sense of humour, making this film doubly more enjoyable. We will never have a director of Kubrick's calibre in every element of film-making. Incidentally Ryan O'Neal followed the path of Barry Lyndon in his real life, sadly.
A.J. Anderson-Yakowicz ABSOLUTELY AGREED! The wardrobe department nailed it. The historical atmosphere of the movie makes one feel as though one truly is indeed in 18th century. Just a masterpiece of cinematic photography. It's my favorite of Mr. Kubricks work. Even more than 2001.
Not enough emphasis placed on Cinematographer John Alcott in this video. English cinematographer Alcott was one of the very best, and _he_ won an Oscar for _his_ work on Barry Lyndon.
I never saw Lyndon when it came out, only as an adult. BUT WHAT A MOVIE!!! Gorgeous, moving, brilliant, and all in spades. I never thought of Ryan O'Neal as a great actor, but he certainly rose to the occasion in this cinematic masterpiece. It's indescribably beautiful, on every level-story, casting, cinematography. This is a monumental film for the ages. Watch it, and fall in under the spell of Stanley Kubrick... again.
I've heard people say Kubrick was bored while filming this movie that's why it was so bad. I think it's a masterclass in cinematography, every shot is a work of art. I watch it at least twice a year to remind myself what framing and composition is all about. It's a perfect example of " Moving Pictures ".
A beautifully researched and detailed analysis of the film, thank you for taking so much effort and time. It's appreciated, I assure you. You reiterate what I've often heard said, that you could stop Barry Lyndon on any frame and click print. Any frame could be hung with pride in your house, showing that's it's composition and light that make the image. Thank you again; Kubrick would give you the nod of approval.
The zoom lens is a 20:1! Still the only cinema lens that exists today that can do 20:1 is the Canon 50-1000, which was just released a couple of years ago.
@@JohnDoe-ev9kt Having had an identical 25-250 Angenieux, I can attest to John Doe's answer being correct. From the moment the film was announced to be in production, to my purchase of the American Cinematographer Barry Lyndon issue at Samuelson's Film Services in London and long afterward, I almost feel like I was completely absorbed by the project. You can imagine how pleased I am that my son teaches film and video production, and is as enthusiastic about the work of Stanley Kubrick as I am. I think our conversations at dinner have left many friends and family members feeling quite left out.
Knowing nothing about this film the first time I saw it, I was transfixed and mesmerised. Especially the scenes with this musical piece (Franz Schubert - Piano Trio No. 2 in E-Flat Major, Op. 100, D. 929), changed everything for me. I love this film, and I appreciated watching your great analysis of it.
My no.1 favourite movie of all time, he used some NASA lenses usually for satellite cameras only at the time because they were the only ones which could give a low enough f-stop (small camera aperture) to get the correct exposure on film given the low light given by candlelight (I've watched the video and you refer to the Zeiss lense I see, the one with the lowest f-stop in the world at the time). My no.1 director of all time also, an extraordinary man, amazing.
first time i watched this, the colours mesmerised me....... 20 years later, I have forgotten the plot and the actors, but the colours stay with me........ it's like when you have strawberry-flavoured ice cream but then have a fresh room-temp strawberry - there's colours in movies and then there's this masterpiece
I always thought Barry Lyndon was closest to his photography work, this flick may just be the epitome of 'moving pictures'.
5 років тому+1
One of my favorite films of all time. Though at the time I had not a clue about lighting, I so enjoyed its raw and realness. This is real life. Moment by moment. All these challenges shine supremely through the genius of collaboration by so many of the creatives who worked on this project. I have so much admiration for Stanley Kubrick's work!
Tyler, Thanks so much for such an amazing piece of the cinematography...You have gotten a new subscriber. I would love to know where you got all the behind the scenes photos of Barry Lyndon also. Keep up the amazing work.
Thanks, Scott! A lot of the wonderful photos came from the post Cinephilia & Beyond did on Barry Lyndon (link in the description). Others came from the Stanley Kubrick Archives book and various other books.
Fell absolutely in love with film at 2am in the late 90s not even knowing what it was... just seeing that Kubrick directed it in the description. It is a slog to the uninterested or uninitiated, but it has the most beautiful shots and wardrobe(authentic too) ever caught on film. Absolute master work by the maestro and crew.
One thought that always comes back to me is what if Kubrick originally made the Napoleon film he was working on. What an epic that would have been...At least we got Barry Lyndon out of it.
Kudos for this clip! I'm very glad that this was not only above the Zeiss lens. There is so much more to say about the technical aspect oft this film, and a lot of it was covered in this well researched video!
Most excellent, thank you! Could not help but notice how often Kubrick had the camera dead still and let the actors move through the frame, especially landscapes. Some directors and DPs just can't stand a static camera, it's always gotta be moving and panning.
Very well done. Possible correction, most lenses have an aperture control ring on the exterior of the lens. Minus specialty lenses that are fixed aperture and some historical lenses where aperture plates are dropped into the lens. Also T stops and F stops are two separate things. T being the amount of light the glass and any coatings allows through the lens and a correction of the F which only measures how wide or narrow a lens can open. The camera body for the "NASA" lenses which were extras left over from a custom order NASA placed, also has some unique history in that the owner didn't want them sold as they are considered unreplicable and was horrified to discover a staff member sold them. Due to their unique construction and considered one of the best film video cameras ever made.
Glad you liked it! Thanks for the correction. If I remember correctly, in the interview with John Alcott, he mentioned that they were able to control the aperture via something mounted on the side of the camera. I'm not too familiar with the differences in T stops and F stops, but whenever I mentioned a T lens or an F lens, I am actually quoting directly from a source.
CinemaTyler Yeah unfortunately the lingo gets used incorrectly but correctly when randomly interviewed confusing things for everyday readers. Basically the T stop is a more precise way to measure how much light is actually hitting the film or digital sensor compared to F stop which also adjusts the focal plane. With historical movie films they only had low ISO film stock available for use for a long time making it vitally more important to measure in T stops since film based movies was/is more expensive to redo a scene. Whereas a digital system, they can just adjust it more easily in post as long as it's within a stop of where they need to be. Then they can even do HDR blending to adjust the sky and other elements that need adjustment but they try to do as much in camera with correct lighting of all the elements to save on post costs. Seven Samurai is a good film to review as well known for its deep focus like Citizen Kane but done differently. With the low ISO film stock they had, they used very bright lights to accommodate the narrow F stop and then factor in the T stop for correct exposure. If I recall correctly it's almost all done at F 64!
A follow focus can be used to control aperture as well, as long as the lens has a geared aperture ring. The follow focus would be mounted on 15mm or 19mm rails.
Of course, but most motion picture lenses have no need to be fitted with a remote f/stop control. Generally once the director of photography calls the stop for a given shot it remains set for the take, if not the entire angle.The constant tweaking to compensate for continual brightness variations during often very long takes is what led to it's use in Barry Lyndon. I think that was the point being made here.
Both adjust the depth of field - in that regard f/stops and T/stops are similar. T/stops are f/stops with a 'fudge factor' to allow for light scattered and absorbed by the optics. A lens set to f/4 which loses a half stop of light would be said to be said to T/4.5 to compensate for exposure - however depth of field must always be based on the f/stop, not the T/stop. T/stops were developed by the Technicolor company when they used to shoot colour motion pictures with camera that shot 2 or 3 black and white negatives simultaneously back in the 20s and 30s (hence the "T"). These early colour camera systems were rated at somewhere around 5-12 ASA, and light losses in the special lenses they required meant they devised a sort of pseudo f/stop used for setting exposure (but not depth of field). I don't see how this would have a bearing on the need to ride the aperture during Barry Lyndon though.
Fascinating. I thought I knew quite a bit on the production - but it was a delight to uncover further detail I had missed - such as the projection lens fitted over the 50 for the candlelit scenes. Very cool. Would love to see any video you make on Kubrick in the future.
Since as we know Kubrick never made a mistake, the visible modern light outside the window must really be part of a code or a signal to some persons, if we could but decipher it.
That person was me. His message I can now disclose since a sufficient period of time for discretion has passed, epecially in respect of his family. The message, deciphered, is "I have made a terrible mistake. I have shone a false light on the world. I repent of this and my many other sins, especially over-sized babies. And must return one day to do penance by making zombie movies.". I willfully attest that this is the full, accurate, and final message of Stanley Kubrick.
Kubrick made many mistakes, which are fully visible in the finished film. Where did you get the idea he never made mistakes? That statement is simply not true.
Quite an old post, but I finally watched this movie. Simply stunning, and it did not disappoint. Such beautiful cinematography. The movie left me melancholy.
I was extremely lucky to be cast as Bryan in the film. I remember being there for many of the scenes (even scenes I wasn't in) simply because you had to be there, which makes watching the film again like revisiting a past life. Thanks for your fascinating insight into the cinematography.
Why didn't you obey me Bryan
I thought your acting ability was outstanding. I could never understand how a child in that age group can be so capable and convincing. Thank you for a great performance.
Great acting
Omg! Is this true! Is this really you! Incredible! 😊❤ You were absolutely outstanding… What a movie!
What was it like working with Kubrick?
This movie is the closest experience you'll ever have of walking through an art gallery without leaving your home.
Davey Givens beautifully stated.
an art gallery of 18th century masterpieces....
For me, that was Vincent & Theo. Numerous times during the movie, I realized I was looking at one of Van Gogh's paintings, only then it was alive, with characters walking around in the painting, fields of sunflowers blowing in the breeze, etc.
@@GregConquest even better said
Caravaggio is notable for recreating many of his paintings into the film.
Martin Scorsese commented about this masterpiece: "Barry Lyndon is the most beautifully filmed movie ever made in History".
All said.
I just said that above before reading this quote.
Perhaps Martin Scorsese never saw _Ryans_ _Daughter._
@@Obladgolated i bet he saw that Scorsese watch worldwide movies he even saw most of the movies of satyajit ray's
Ivan Ahmed it is said that scorsese watches one to two movies every day even during the days of shooting
knowledge share how
I was in this movie, as an extra in the battle scenes, which were shot just outside Waterford. I saw Stanley Kubrick and Ryan O'Neil one evening in the Ardree Hotel in Waterford, where they were staying. The family of a friend of mine owned the land where these battle scenes were shot and he got a job re-priming the muskets with gunpowder in between takes. Great times!
Def a great time working for stanley as i did many years later.stew fmj crew.
Very cool story!
It's hard to imagine "normal people" owning property in such a masterpiece of cinematography!
Awesome! Thanks for sharing. ✨✨✨
So how was it like to work as an actor in Kubrick`s movie? Was it as exhausting as people say?
@@wonka3209 I heard it's just a lot of waiting around and boredom
Definitely my favorite Kubrick film. However, can't get very many people to sit through this one with me, even though the pace is faster than 2001 which most people adore. I think the fantastical themes and mystery to 2001 are more universal to audiences, but Barry Lyndon is undeniably the top drama set in this period of all time.
nolanb21 agreed, I think start to finish this is his best work
I will have to give it a 3rd go. Tried to view it twice before , but I got bored. I love all his other films , but this one is indeed challenging to sit through I must admit.
The same people have never watched 'Gone With the Wind' 'all the way through'. How many Americans have actually read 'War and Peace'? How many have seen all five hours of Bertolucci's '1900'? They would say, "I don't have time," and then rather watch ten people run up and down a basketball court, or wander through a mall, or play Bingo... for the same time.
Agree..., up to some point.
"2001" IS NOT a movie. It owns to a different and higher form of Great Art.
No attempts (and there has been a good lot) to imitate it in cinema have achieved their purpose, because no filmaker seems to have understood this.
"Barry Lyndon" IS a movie and a undeniable all-time masterpiece.
I don't remember how many times I've seen it, and every one I enjoy it more.
it's very dangerous to assume what ones exposure to culture and fine art is based on their nationality. What a childish statement to make.
I must admit I'm not a Kubrick fan; thought I'd die of boredom during "2001" and couldn't get into "Dr. Strangelove" (I need to give those movies another chance after 45 years), nor have I ever cared for Ryan O'Neal, BUT "Barry Lyndon" is one of my all-time favorite movies. I saw it when I was a senior in HS in 1976 and was blown away. Everything about it was perfect: the narration--which was originally going to be by O'Neal--the story, cinematography, costumes, acting, scenery, it all works. Sheer perfection. Each scene is almost like a painting. And I thought Marissa Berenson was so beautiful, she was on the cover of TIME right before the movie was released because critics felt Kubrick was taking a big chance w/a top model in a starring role, but she did a wonderful job. A very underrated movie!
feel free to work on kubrick for ever
tru
More Kubrick on the way!
forever and ever and ever.
ua-cam.com/video/9Gtc4DHYvc0/v-deo.html
yes please
The first time I saw Barry Lyndon, I slipped into a coma. On the second occasion I was fascinated by Kubrick's accomplished (actually unparalleled) cinematography. On the third occasion I was entertained by his dry sense of humour. Thereafter I saw this film more than a dozen times, each involving new discovery about his transcendent genius, far above all his peers.
barry lyndon is his best.
As if u r a fuckin movie lord with ur 10 bucks
It's John Alcott's cinematography.
I watched it for the 1st time a few weeks ago and I´m still in a coma.
As a cinematographer, this was the best breakdown of the filming and lighting style Kubrick used in this groundbreaking film that I have seen. Excellent work. Subscribed.
I have understood only half of what was explained. I am learing, well I am willing to learn the work of a cinematographer.
But as a cinematographer, is this information still useful to you? Are Arriflexes still in production, or do you have to settle for Reds and similar digital contraptions? You'd either have to have a director with the same sort of insight and technical legerdemain that Kubrick possessed, or become a director yourself.
@@commandercaptain4664 Kubrick actually knew well about photography because this is how he discovered his passion. He started as a still photographer before getting into movies. So he just had knowlegde about it. It doesn't matter what kind of cameras you work with, wheather it's analog or digital, the rules of photography apply to both of them.
@@commandercaptain4664 jesus, young people with their 10k REDS and raw footage. study more about character blocking and story development instead of focusing which camera is the best and spluring thousands without knowing how to light a scene.
I have been a fan of this film for many years yet this is the first I have heard that artificial light was used outside the windows during interior shots. Excellent video.
An often overlooked masterpiece of Kubrick's, amongst a career of masterpieces. These films were nowhere near as expensive as those of nowadays... but they're far superior not only aesthetically, but narratively and more importantly, dialectically.
@Rob C A lot of movies with CGI (animated movies) are phenomenal.
@Rob C ok boomer
Not overlooked anymore, finally the world is beginning to appreciate its brilliance. I think it is one of the very few films without ANY flaws whatsoever. Not a single one! Not a single superfluous second. Even a game-changer like 2001 COULD have used some slight shortening of a few scenes, but with Barry Lyndon it is impossible to think of any such cuts.
@@ulfingvar1 6:21 wants a word with you...
2001 was less expensive than what we have today?
It´s not boring , it´s bretchian, slow, profound, melancholic, disatached, like a sage recalling an old and moving story. One of Kubrick´s best films.
It's like a multi course meal in a fine restaurant. Most films nowadays are like fast food.
Fuck Brecht
It's interesting to note that you exclaimed, "It's not boring" ...
This may of course depend on who's watching the film, as I have never actually watched Barry Lyndon all the way through, yet now watching this great recap of all the camera and lens work I'm fascinated to watch the entire film, as I've done a lot of experimentation with cameras and artwork since I was a young Jr High student in the mid-1960s. I've since then become a big Kubrick fan because of his 2001: A Space Odyssey, which I saw at age fourteen in Portland Hollywood movie big screen just st after it's debut earlier than year. I had just bought my first astronomy telescope as a 13 and a half year old in 1967. So this was my experience of seeing my first Kubrick film at age 14, in the summer of 1968. I couldn't believe that I later heard people walked out of the theater after the first 20 minutes, of 2001: A Space Odyssey. Imagine that they were actually bored.
I was also playing with our family's Kodak box camera that my parents allowed me to use when I was a young child. And by now at age 14, I had attached the camera to the top of my meager 60mm Tasco refractor telescope to take time exposure photos of the night sky.
I probably saw Dr Strangelove, soon after 2001, on late night television.
Being an astronomer and early artist in childhood, led to my artwork being shown in NASA websites quite often, about 10 years ago. So by my college days, in the early 1970s, I was already performing experimental photography with time exposures of the night sky.
It's also interesting to note here that they recently reported in the news, the audio interview with Stanley Kubrick in 1965 done by the New Yorker magazine, about the time he just started working on 2001, you can look this up and listen to over an hour of him speaking about his early development of movie making in the early 1950s. Kubrick could not pass college entrance exams earlier, about the time he was working for LOOK magazine in the late 1940s. So he went to take night college courses in science. It's an amazing hour long interview with him in 1965, by the New Yorker magazine.
Alex, that's a great way of putting it.
One reviewer at the time called it "cinematic wallpaper." I love the movie.
i was blown away by this film. couldnt really have cared less about the story or characters, but every single shot was just so masterfully composed and edited that it could bring a tear to your eye. i think the reason why it was so emotional was because of the brilliant score.
This is often overlooked by Kubrick fans as they're going after the more (online) popular features, but this flick is GORGEOUS in every way.
I feel that the core of Kubrick is his photographers mind, just as with David Lynch with his painters mind, are the keys to understanding these mens' work.
your channel is grossly underrated compared to other film analysis channels. Thank you for these videos, keep up the amazing work
Thanks so much for your kind words! I really appreciate it!
hi, could you recommend me some other analysis channels.
Yeah! This guy is really good!😁👍
Among the many gems of the 70's Barry Lyndon is a diamond. Timeless art.
Barry Lyndon is an eternal Masterpiece, period.
Tony Gazza they don't movies like they use to.
It's only a 'masterpiece' if you can watch it in the comfort of your own home, pausing for bathroom breaks as necessary. Viewing it in the theatre at the time was an ordeal few moviegoers cared to endure! I saw it in a big city theatre that should have been packed. It was mostly empty and few of the audience stayed 'til the end. To be honest, I don't even remember if I walked out or not. I think word of this stinkeroo got out before the day I went. IOW, audiences stayed away in droves. And, remember, Kubrick's prior film had been a hit, so that's saying something.
Indeed.
Russ and Zak. It went over your head is what you are really saying.
Yes - if people don' t enjoy this quality of cinema let them sod off and watch the rubbish they do enjoy. I have no problem with that. But some of us need something more intellectually or artistically challenging be it in cinema or literature. Does that make us wrong??? I don't think so.
I wasn't old enough to go and see "Barry Lyndon" when it was first released- but I do remember that the reviews - in Britain at least - were almost uniformly terrible( "too slow" "boring" etc.) When I finally saw it for myself as an adult I was mesmerised by its beauty , It's still one of my favourite Kubrick movies.I'm glad it's now recognised as the masterpiece it always was.
The character played by Ryan O'Neal is far more sympathetic than Thackeray's original Redmond Barry in the novel - who was apparently based on a real life 18th century chancer.
Andrew Robinson Stoney.
TheDativeCase to be fair it is really slow. The movie is an incredible achievement, but I can understand why someone who’s just in it for the story i.e. most people would find it boring. The film was always regarded as an incredible technical achievement, but outside of a few movies buffs no one is saying “oh I want a good evening, let’s watch Barry Lyndon”.
@@drunkenmasterii3250 Yeah, and that comes from a lack of appreciation of art. People want entertainment and not art. Nothing wrong with that.
Boring, eh? Let's see...
The film opens with Barry's father getting killed in a duel. Then it kicks off with Barry falling for a girl, losing said girl to another man, "killing" said man in a duel, and going on the run. From there he gets robbed a gun point, joins the army, gets into a fistfight, survives a skirmish and watches a close friend die, deserts, has a brief affair with a peasant woman, gets caught and shanghaied into service by the Prussians, saves a Prussian officer's life in a battle, gets roped into being a spy, joins up with another spy, disguises himself so he can be smuggled out of the country, runs a con game, engages in a sword duel, seduces a noblewoman (without even saying a word to her), marries, and finally retires to his cushy new estate to enjoy the finer things in life.
And that's just the first half of the movie.
I was at a screening of the doc, KUBRICK REMEMBERED, and Leon Vitali (who played adult Lord Bullingdon) revealed that Kubrick bought into the critical trashing the film took, and it wasn't until he happened across it on TV during the filming of FULL METAL JACKET that he sat down and watched a good chunk of it, and said to Leon, "I did make a good film, after all."
I was actually in this movie, along with my younger brother an my dad. My brother and I only did a couple of days on a couple of sets, as peasant children. My dad was on it for months, playing various roles as a redcoat, and gambling gent.. Infact he had a fight scene with Ryan O'Neil. Great doc btw,,and loved the Alien ones too. Keep up the sterling work
It truly is incredible how almost every scene in the movie looks like a beautiful and dramatic painting.
"I have not received satisfaction..." Great touch! Fantastically informative video
Pretty quality video on Kubrick and the techniques he used, especially with lighting. Not knowing a lot about film, I never really took into account lighting as a whole and it's importance but this really helped me. Keep up the good work.
If you are interested about Kubrick's Practical Lighting, check Entertain The Elk's video which is about
Not to quibble, but the film was also shot in locations in Germany and Scotland.
This film, of course, allowed Kubrick to do something with the research which went into his cancelled Napoleon film.
It's also worth noting that, although he did a great deal of work with other writers in preparing his screenplays, this is the only film he wrote a screenplay for on his own.
In his memoir, Kubrick's driver, Emilio D'Alessandro, writes a great deal about this film's production and about Kubrick's logistical brilliance. The cost of transporting the huge number of extras and actors would have been enormous using the standard method of leasing a huge number of vehicles. Kubrick discovered it would cost much less to buy a fleet of Volkswagen buses and have them available at any time. When production ended, Kubrick had them sold - and made a profit.
Thanks for the info!
Thank YOU for Tylerizing UA-cam! You're a genuine Mr. Know-It-All, but you're not a jerk about it. I mean, you could crush us all with the sheer majesty of your gigantic brain . . . but you don't! You're a role model for all of us. :)
I'm a cinema geek on three subjects: Kubrick, Truffaut, and silent cinema.
I make films, too. I'm about to step up to 4K. It's going to be annoying as hell since I create silent films - in black and white. All that technology at my fingertips - and I'm using it to make films that would've been cutting edge - in 1925. What a waste!
TheStockwell Where in Scotland, first I've heard of it.
What do you think of Allan Dwan?
I have a soft spot for Dwan. He wasn't an artistic director in any way, but he was a man who made films, and some of them very good, for half a century. I learned about him in Kevin Brownlow's BBC series about the history of the silent cinema. Dwan became a director after being sent from New York to find out what was going on with a film being made in California. He arrived and found the cast and crew doing nothing - and being paid for it - because the director was drunk and nowhere to be found. Dwan's employers told him he was now a film director, whether he liked it or not. As Dwan tells it, he told the cast he was now the director of the film and they'd better accept it - or the film would be shut down and they'd be unemployed. One crew member said, "You're the best damn director we've ever seen."
One of THE greatest achievement of 20th century art.
When I saw this film on first run in an America theater, no one laughed. It got mixed reviews (Pauline Kael called it a coffee-table movie) and it was not a financial success. It won Oscars for cinematography, art direction/set decoration, costume design, and music/scoring, but it was more admired than liked. When I saw the film six years later in London, England, the audience often laughed; they followed its wry and sly humor, and were with it every step of the way.
Tyler. Your technical analysis of Kubrick's work are by far the best on the web. You will do his greatest work great honor if you continue exploring it further. And we will cheer your exploration. Please keep up the good work!
As a man of Kubrick’s films (alongside others). I’m going to say the same thing everyone else is saying.. Beautiful. Not because I am boring, but because I’m still stunned 17 years later ☺️☺️💛
This is a wonderful presentation. Kubrick's genius is justifiably acknowledged, but you have given new insights into this often overlooked masterpiece. Thank you
Emilio D'Alessandro pointed out that on Lyndon Kubrick would often wait for things like a cloud to pass for lighting purposes but keep it to himself and it got to the point where the crew was extremely frustrated wondering what the hell was the wait up was
Reminds me of the story of Bergman making "The Seventh Seal." Bergman or his cinematographer (can't remember which) noticed a certain cloud formation toward the end of the day that was perfect, and they hurriedly staged the final iconic "dance macabre" scene along the crest of a hill.
Thank you so much for posting this brilliant and informative video. "Barry Lyndon" is one of my favourite films, and I thought I knew a lot about it... until I saw your video. I live in Wicklow in Ireland, and a lot of "Barry Lyndon" was filmed in this area. You've done a great job explaining the exquisite lighting effects in this masterpiece. Thanks again, from a Kubrick Fan in Ireland
YESS!! Ive been waiting for a vid on Barry Lyndon. It is truly an amazing film. Thank u for making this
A Barry Lyndon essay that is about the cinematography but isn't JUST about the zeiss lenses. Praise be to Tyler!
More Barry Lyndon please.
Each time I watch this movie I like it more and more. I can't believe how little bonus material there are on the DVD / Blurays.
More Barry Lyndon please
what an excellent presentation, absolutely riveting throughout,
with amazing technical dteails
The scene where Bryan is dying on death bed and talking to his parents about loving each other brought tears to my eyes. This film is a masterpiece
Oh, you posted this very recently! "Barry Lyndon" is my favorite Stanley Kubrick film. As a movie it's boring but the shots are really something to behold. Very 'panterly'. You explained everything so well. I enjoyed this very much.
Only boring people get bored.
its definitely not boring
The ultimate movie craftsman...an artisan. NO FILM these days at your big box office has been made by anyone who comes close to Kubrick. His dedication, work ethic, and sense of responsibility should inspire anyone.
RodCornholio I agree, nobody these days comes close.🤔👍
Thank marvel for that. Ruining the industry (actors, directors, special fx) but also ruining the minds of consumers and spoonfeed these junkfood movies which people forget the moment they leave the cinema.
Paul Thomas Anderson
Thank you so much for putting this together. Barry Lyndon is my favorite Kubrick picture, I wish it received more attention than it does. Thank you also for correcting a myth that I have also spread: that this film was lit only with natural light.
Im so happy he made the first part in Ireland. I often travel around to certain parts of my country and just imagine some kind of great movie being short there. To be fair we've had Starwars, we had a not very well known one by Francis Ford Coppola, we were supposed to have one with Brando and Johnny Depp shot in Cork but that fell apart, and lots of brilliant Irish movies were of course shot in Ireland none the less and they are some of the best movies ever made and i challenge anyone to prove me wrong; we have made some classics. But im glad Kubrick enjoyed his time here, which was something like 300 days!?, until the dopey Ira told him to leave.
An absolutely wonderful discourse on the making of Barry Lyndon, especially the detail on the cameras and lighting. Pure genius by Kubrick, a towering artist of the 20th Century. I am going again to some these locales in Ireland - and video like this makes it more meaningful.
I had never seen this movie and then one year when staying with a friend in Beirut he projected it onto the wall and I lay on a huge sofa covered in blankets drinking tea and watching it. The ambience contributed to my appreciation of the movie.
this is the most beautiful movie to look at and listen to, ever. The slow pace was perfect as it allows for the audience to obsorb the opulence of the senses.
This is great - might also mention the use of graduated neutral density filters (dark on top fading to light below) in almost every wide exterior shot. Also - large banks of non-practical candles with reflectors were also being used to light the candlelight scenes.
Much like most things mentioned, grad liters are 'standard issue' in any cinematographer's kit, not some magical item invented by Kubrick.
Thanks! I haven't read anything about non-practical candles. I was wondering if they did anything like that. Where did you find that info?
The density filters I was completely unaware of. Thanks!
Yes. The are called graduated filters, or grad for short. They are used to darken part of the frame and are very useful when trying to darken the sky, which often photographs brighter than it appears to the eye when exposing for the things below the sky (ground, people, trees)
static.bhphoto.com/images/images750x750/1456508311000_292653.jpg
Yes the graduated filters have been around for decades but Kubrick made big use of them.
Tyler, I hope you are or will be a film class instructor. This was an amazing master class in how complicated film making was before the digital era, and how inspired Kubrick was. Brave for sharing your passion and your keen eye.
In addition to the unrivaled cinematography, Barry Lyndon is full of sarcastic sense of humour, making this film doubly more enjoyable. We will never have a director of Kubrick's calibre in every element of film-making. Incidentally Ryan O'Neal followed the path of Barry Lyndon in his real life, sadly.
Some of Paul Thomas Anderson's films are outstanding in their own class
I have waited all of my life for this exact description and history of the making of this film. Thank you.
Brilliant video. Barry Lyndon is, in my mind, Kubrick's masterpiece.
A.J. Anderson-Yakowicz ABSOLUTELY AGREED! The wardrobe department nailed it. The historical atmosphere of the movie makes one feel as though one truly is indeed in 18th century. Just a masterpiece of cinematic photography. It's my favorite of Mr. Kubricks work. Even more than 2001.
This is well made. Barry Lyndon is one of my favorites. Your attention to detail is impressive
Not enough emphasis placed on Cinematographer John Alcott in this video. English cinematographer Alcott was one of the very best, and _he_ won an Oscar for _his_ work on Barry Lyndon.
There is a definite lack of Barry Lyndon on UA-cam. Anything else you can add will make my day. great video!
"I have not received satisfaction." Brilliantly placed.
I never saw Lyndon when it came out, only as an adult. BUT WHAT A MOVIE!!! Gorgeous, moving, brilliant, and all in spades. I never thought of Ryan O'Neal as a great actor, but he certainly rose to the occasion in this cinematic masterpiece. It's indescribably beautiful, on every level-story, casting, cinematography. This is a monumental film for the ages. Watch it, and fall in under the spell of Stanley Kubrick... again.
It's not just beautiful to look at but the story is so damn awesome. Humbling is the word for me.
I love this movie through and through.
Magnificently done Tyler, great analysis and a lot of new information.
Barry Lyndon painting masterpiece in movement.
I've heard people say Kubrick was bored while filming this movie that's why it was so bad. I think it's a masterclass in cinematography, every shot is a work of art. I watch it at least twice a year to remind myself what framing and composition is all about. It's a perfect example of " Moving Pictures ".
Light was such an integral element of this film it feels as important as the dialog or acting. Great video, thank u.
Terrific video. Lots of things new to me and so well presented.
A beautifully researched and detailed analysis of the film, thank you for taking so much effort and time. It's appreciated, I assure you.
You reiterate what I've often heard said, that you could stop Barry Lyndon on any frame and click print. Any frame could be hung with pride in your house, showing that's it's composition and light that make the image. Thank you again; Kubrick would give you the nod of approval.
the best cinematography ever in film, such complex craft and beauty.
Dearest Tyler... I WANT MORE BARRY LYNDON!!!!!
Thank you again!!! I watch this again and again!
The zoom lens is a 20:1! Still the only cinema lens that exists today that can do 20:1 is the Canon 50-1000, which was just released a couple of years ago.
Alcott used an Angenieux 25 - 250 t/3.8 ( Which you also note is a 10:1 ratio. )
@@JohnDoe-ev9kt Having had an identical 25-250 Angenieux, I can attest to John Doe's answer being correct. From the moment the film was announced to be in production, to my purchase of the American Cinematographer Barry Lyndon issue at Samuelson's Film Services in London and long afterward, I almost feel like I was completely absorbed by the project.
You can imagine how pleased I am that my son teaches film and video production, and is as enthusiastic about the work of Stanley Kubrick as I am. I think our conversations at dinner have left many friends and family members feeling quite left out.
Knowing nothing about this film the first time I saw it, I was transfixed and mesmerised. Especially the scenes with this musical piece (Franz Schubert - Piano Trio No. 2 in E-Flat Major, Op. 100, D. 929), changed everything for me. I love this film, and I appreciated watching your great analysis of it.
My no.1 favourite movie of all time, he used some NASA lenses usually for satellite cameras only at the time because they were the only ones which could give a low enough f-stop (small camera aperture) to get the correct exposure on film given the low light given by candlelight (I've watched the video and you refer to the Zeiss lense I see, the one with the lowest f-stop in the world at the time). My no.1 director of all time also, an extraordinary man, amazing.
first time i watched this, the colours mesmerised me....... 20 years later, I have forgotten the plot and the actors, but the colours stay with me........ it's like when you have strawberry-flavoured ice cream but then have a fresh room-temp strawberry - there's colours in movies and then there's this masterpiece
I always thought Barry Lyndon was closest to his photography work, this flick may just be the epitome of 'moving pictures'.
One of my favorite films of all time. Though at the time I had not a clue about lighting, I so enjoyed its raw and realness. This is real life. Moment by moment. All these challenges shine supremely through the genius of collaboration by so many of the creatives who worked on this project. I have so much admiration for Stanley Kubrick's work!
Tyler,
Thanks so much for such an amazing piece of the cinematography...You have gotten a new subscriber. I would love to know where you got all the behind the scenes photos of Barry Lyndon also. Keep up the amazing work.
Thanks, Scott! A lot of the wonderful photos came from the post Cinephilia & Beyond did on Barry Lyndon (link in the description). Others came from the Stanley Kubrick Archives book and various other books.
Fell absolutely in love with film at 2am in the late 90s not even knowing what it was... just seeing that Kubrick directed it in the description. It is a slog to the uninterested or uninitiated, but it has the most beautiful shots and wardrobe(authentic too) ever caught on film. Absolute master work by the maestro and crew.
Reminds me of that Simpsons joke: "Old Man Yells at Cloud"
HAHA!
A most impressive upload, one which those of us who work in the motion picture industry appreciate to the fullest. Keep up the great work.
Love this video. It does reflect the artistic process he had and that is rare. Kubrick wasn't just a director.. he was an artist. Thanks
10:15 This section about not planning camera movements until after the scene is blocked out is brilliant. thanks.
One thought that always comes back to me is what if Kubrick originally made the Napoleon film he was working on. What an epic that would have been...At least we got Barry Lyndon out of it.
Great video! Barry Lyndon is my most favourite film of all time. Thank you!
A large reason why the tracing paper bloomed like that was because Alcott used a Tiffen No.3 Low Contrast filter throughout the whole film.
Wow! The technology is incredible.
Whatever they did it worked marvellously. It is like watching a full length painting. A true masterpiece.
11:19 _Kubrick also wouldn't plan any shot until everything was _*_lit_*
These are valuable contents that we want on UA-cam. The civil, interesting and enriching discussions in the comments are evidence. Thank you.
BL is one of the best cinematography I have seen. Unforgettable.
I routinely come back to watch Barry Lyndon. Not just because it's a great movie but mainly because it's great art
really awesome detailed video
Kudos for this clip! I'm very glad that this was not only above the Zeiss lens. There is so much more to say about the technical aspect oft this film, and a lot of it was covered in this well researched video!
of course we want more barry lyndon, what kind of quesion is that?? :D
Most excellent, thank you! Could not help but notice how often Kubrick had the camera dead still and let the actors move through the frame, especially landscapes. Some directors and DPs just can't stand a static camera, it's always gotta be moving and panning.
The most beautiful movie ever filmed.
I love your Kubrick videos! Please never stop making them! Even when you run out of things to cover. Just remake the videos and I'll watch again!
Yes I want more Barry Lyndon
I remember watching this movie as a young boy ,and even at the age of around 12 I was totally mesmerized by the beauty of the film.😊
I adore this movie. Great work.
Thanks!
Masterpiece is an often overused word, but in the case of Barry Lyndon, it is entirely appropriate. A beautifully shot film
Very well done. Possible correction, most lenses have an aperture control ring on the exterior of the lens. Minus specialty lenses that are fixed aperture and some historical lenses where aperture plates are dropped into the lens. Also T stops and F stops are two separate things. T being the amount of light the glass and any coatings allows through the lens and a correction of the F which only measures how wide or narrow a lens can open. The camera body for the "NASA" lenses which were extras left over from a custom order NASA placed, also has some unique history in that the owner didn't want them sold as they are considered unreplicable and was horrified to discover a staff member sold them. Due to their unique construction and considered one of the best film video cameras ever made.
Glad you liked it! Thanks for the correction. If I remember correctly, in the interview with John Alcott, he mentioned that they were able to control the aperture via something mounted on the side of the camera. I'm not too familiar with the differences in T stops and F stops, but whenever I mentioned a T lens or an F lens, I am actually quoting directly from a source.
CinemaTyler Yeah unfortunately the lingo gets used incorrectly but correctly when randomly interviewed confusing things for everyday readers. Basically the T stop is a more precise way to measure how much light is actually hitting the film or digital sensor compared to F stop which also adjusts the focal plane. With historical movie films they only had low ISO film stock available for use for a long time making it vitally more important to measure in T stops since film based movies was/is more expensive to redo a scene. Whereas a digital system, they can just adjust it more easily in post as long as it's within a stop of where they need to be. Then they can even do HDR blending to adjust the sky and other elements that need adjustment but they try to do as much in camera with correct lighting of all the elements to save on post costs. Seven Samurai is a good film to review as well known for its deep focus like Citizen Kane but done differently. With the low ISO film stock they had, they used very bright lights to accommodate the narrow F stop and then factor in the T stop for correct exposure. If I recall correctly it's almost all done at F 64!
A follow focus can be used to control aperture as well, as long as the lens has a geared aperture ring. The follow focus would be mounted on 15mm or 19mm rails.
Of course, but most motion picture lenses have no need to be fitted with a remote f/stop control. Generally once the director of photography calls the stop for a given shot it remains set for the take, if not the entire angle.The constant tweaking to compensate for continual brightness variations during often very long takes is what led to it's use in Barry Lyndon. I think that was the point being made here.
Both adjust the depth of field - in that regard f/stops and T/stops are similar. T/stops are f/stops with a 'fudge factor' to allow for light scattered and absorbed by the optics. A lens set to f/4 which loses a half stop of light would be said to be said to T/4.5 to compensate for exposure - however depth of field must always be based on the f/stop, not the T/stop.
T/stops were developed by the Technicolor company when they used to shoot colour motion pictures with camera that shot 2 or 3 black and white negatives simultaneously back in the 20s and 30s (hence the "T"). These early colour camera systems were rated at somewhere around 5-12 ASA, and light losses in the special lenses they required meant they devised a sort of pseudo f/stop used for setting exposure (but not depth of field).
I don't see how this would have a bearing on the need to ride the aperture during Barry Lyndon though.
4:08 Vivian is also present at the dance near the beginning, and at the magic show.
more and more barry lyndon
Fascinating. I thought I knew quite a bit on the production - but it was a delight to uncover further detail I had missed - such as the projection lens fitted over the 50 for the candlelit scenes. Very cool. Would love to see any video you make on Kubrick in the future.
Since as we know Kubrick never made a mistake, the visible modern light outside the window must really be part of a code or a signal to some persons, if we could but decipher it.
I am certain that if we had the appropriate Rosetta Stone, we would learn of his confession here about faking the moon landing footage.
That person was me. His message I can now disclose since a sufficient period of time for discretion has passed, epecially in respect of his family. The message, deciphered, is "I have made a terrible mistake. I have shone a false light on the world. I repent of this and my many other sins, especially over-sized babies. And must return one day to do penance by making zombie movies.". I willfully attest that this is the full, accurate, and final message of Stanley Kubrick.
LOL, it takes a really critical eye to find such mistakes, and it proves that too much film education can destroy a person's enjoyment of film.
Kubrick made many mistakes, which are fully visible in the finished film. Where did you get the idea he never made mistakes? That statement is simply not true.
@@ingvarhallstrom2306 The nobleman losing at cards says "Je suis fatigue but the correct French is J'ai fatigue (I have fatigue)
Quite an old post, but I finally watched this movie. Simply stunning, and it did not disappoint. Such beautiful cinematography. The movie left me melancholy.
Oh, minor mistake right at the beginning. Some of the locations were in Germany too.
Thanks for the correction. Apparently I left out Scotland as well. It was that dang Time article I used...
You have these amazing details that I've never heard in any other channel. Keep up the good work, teach us more tricks.
I can't wait for the Criterion BLU-RAY release in October.
Great work on this video! When I saw Barry Lyndon the first time, I was amazed by how awesome it looked. Really wonderful movie.