A woman is seen sleeping with two different guys which both are her husband. Nothing is shown sex is only implied.
It is suggested several times that a boy and a girl are having sex, but there are no sex scenes.
A woman’s legs are seen as she is removing her stockings before going to bed.
A “belly-dancer” is briefly shown in a skirt and bikini top wiggling her breasts.


Film review:Translated by www.rabudo-ru.com


As a film photographer, naturally I will be attracted by the works of directors who pay attention to pictures. I think there are three American directors who have master level in visual expression. They are: King Vidor, Josef von Sternberg and John Ford. They are interested in setting design, photography angle, picture composition and lighting design, and combine them into their own creation. The created film works have innovation and performance that can stand the test of time.

Although the above visual directors are praised for their complex and detailed aesthetics, they all adhere to the principle of simplicity in using lamps.

In their films, the combination of lighting and scene scheduling (mise en SC è NE) makes lighting a part of scene scheduling. This high integration of vision and lighting can always guide me, and this artistic preference leads me to Terrence Malick and his work, the day of heaven.

When producers Harold and Bert Schneider first contacted me about heaven day, I asked to see Malick’s previous film badlands. After reading it, I immediately realized that I could establish a unique and fruitful cooperative relationship with the director. Later, I learned that Terry admired my work in L’Enfant Sauvage. Although it was a black-and-white film, it was quite similar to the day of heaven, which was also a period movie. In fact, it was because of this Francois Truffaut film that Malick thought of asking me to make heaven day.

In the process of film shooting, the communication between the director and the photographer often produces confusion and misunderstanding because the director does not understand the technical details required by film photography. But working with Terry would never happen. He always accurately understands my preferences and explanations in photography. And he not only allowed me to make an attempt that I wanted to do for a long time – using much less artificial lighting than the old school practice in shooting time dramas (I don’t use it at all most) – in fact, he was forcing me to do so. This kind of creative support personally excited me and directly promoted my work level.

The main insistence of our creation is simple Photography: clean up the artificial lighting in recent films. We refer to the films in the silent film era (the works of Griffith, Chaplin and others). Photographers at that time had a basic and unique use of natural light.

Using natural light as much as possible means using only the light from the windows when shooting indoor scenes during the day, just like the painting of the great Dutch painter Johann Vermeer. When shooting an indoor play at night, only a single reasonable source is used for Limited lighting, such as a lantern, candle, or light bulb.

Therefore, in a sense, the day of heaven is a tribute to the photographers before the birth of audio films, to my favorite rough texture, and to the lack of artificial refinement and luster.

Film art – the image display of film – became very mature and complex in the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s. As a movie fan, I like the photography of those films, especially the early audio films, but that’s not the style I want to seek.

All the films I made were inspired by the great painters. I was mainly influenced by American painters, such as Andrew Wyeth and Edward Hopper.

In addition, as a person who understands art, Terry Malick is also a collector of classic hard photos. He collected some guides on the integration of photography in the late 19th century and early 20th century for us to design clothes and feel the atmosphere of that era.

Finally, considering the influence of these photos, we decided to put them in the title as the audience’s first impression of the film, so as to establish the atmosphere and feeling of that era in the film.

Bill Weber edited these clips. The photos at the beginning of the film are presented in front of the audience one by one with a slow and solemn staccato like vibrato, accompanied by a classical melody full of picture feeling.

In order to find the layout and style of this special film, when I set foot on the location of Canada, the first consideration is how to use natural light in this film.

In France, the washing powder is placed in the red country. Because there are thick clouds covering the sky and the sun is very soft and delicate, it is very easy to shoot the location. You don’t need to make any adjustment for the continuous play of shooting lenses from different angles.

In North America, the air is more transparent and the texture of sunlight is harder. But when using backlight to shoot a person, his face will be shrouded in a shadow in the film.

Usually, when shooting outdoor scenes during the day, people will use reflective or artificial lighting (such as arc light) to fill in the light, reduce the shadow and reduce the contrast of the picture.

But when shooting this film, Malick and I felt that we should not follow the old shooting method, no lights, and shoot more with the shadow part as the exposure standard. This will over expose the sky and make the blue sky less blue. Terry likes this effect very much.

Malick, like Truffaut, follows the current trend of fading, and the blue sky will annoy them. Because the blue sky makes the scenery like postcards and vulgar tourism advertisements.

Direct exposure to the shadow part of the backlight will make the sky overexposed and lack color. If the arc lamp or reflector is used to fill the light, the whole picture will become flat, without focus, and visually boring.

I decided to abandon all reflective and artificial lighting, and then measure the light of the sky and shadow respectively, and expose them according to the light difference compromise between the two. As a result, the human face will be a little underexposed, and the sky will be a little overexposed, so that the sky will not be too blue, but it will not become dead white.

But to my surprise, this innovative decision has become the main focus of debate among the crew.

As a European photographer, working for a (Hollywood) film studio, I can’t choose the technicians who are willing to work for me. Instead, the technicians of the film are appointed and recruited by the producer. With a few exceptions, the entire crew is composed of typical old Hollywood technicians.

These people are used to polished lighting and photography. For them, the face should never be shrouded in shadow, and the sky should always be blue. I found that when I went to the shooting scene, the arc lights were already in place and ready for each scene. My job is to cut down on lighting, that is, to remove false and traditional lighting fixtures.

I can see that the crew are very dissatisfied with the innovative methods we use for this film. Some people began to publicly criticize us for having no clue about our work and not being “professional”. At these times, in order to show goodwill, we will take two shots for one lens, one with arc lamp and the other without arc lamp. After that, we invited those skeptics to watch Mao, which distinguished other film materials (rushes) to compare the effects and give comments.

With the deepening of shooting, this creative contradiction is becoming more and more intense. Fortunately, Malick not only supported me, but also was braver than me. When shooting some scenes, I initially thought it was necessary to reflect the sunlight to the actor’s face with plastic foam board to reduce the contrast. Malick asked me not to use the reflector.

Because we can immediately see that Mao is different from other film materials, we find that the shooting effect is obviously conducive to the visual performance of the story. We also become more and more bold, constantly reduce artificial lighting and pursue rough and natural image texture. Some staff began to understand our pursuit and gradually participated in the creation. Others never understood.

If there are contradictions with some technicians, at the artistic level, I am lucky to work with some of the top collaborators I can imagine.

Each film will have a team that is really responsible for the “creation” of the film. In heaven day, the group consists of six to seven people:

Production designer Jack Fisk, who designed and built farmers’ homes and wooden houses for migrant workers.

Fashion designer Patricia Norris, with her excellent taste and superior touch, reproduces the clothes of that era.

Jacob Brackman, an assistant of Malick, was responsible for the shooting of the second unit (most of which took the cut scenes in which the main actors were not involved). In addition, of course, there are producers, Harold and Bert Schneider.

Several of us drive a truck from the hotel to the wheat field every day. It’s an hour’s drive, so we always discuss the film on the road. In this way, our small group holds impromptu meetings on film production every morning. The effect of such a unified set of creation in a large-scale film can not be ignored.

In terms of scene decoration, props and clothing, we chose a softer color scheme, because from a historical point of view, the color reflected in the film is not as bright and intense as that in today’s era.

Patricia Norris designed some old-fashioned clothes, which have no appearance and texture of chemical synthetic clothes under today’s mechanized production.

The farmer’s house is solidly built in the wheat field. It is a complete building with inside and outside, rather than just outside, as in most movies, to provide the appearance for location shooting. Even the selection of its color and wood is full of a sense of the times, all of which are dark realistic styles.

Many people in the film industry believe that photography guidance only needs to care about camera control and related technology. And I think the photography director must work closely with all personnel related to the visual performance of the film. In fact, unless you work with set and fashion designers, you can’t achieve good photography, that is, photography with specific style and beauty.

If the selection of objects in the painting has a mediocre taste, no matter how hard the photographer tries, the visual power of the picture will always be weakened by the ugliness or untimely of the objects in the painting.

You can’t find beauty from ugliness unless you pursue the “ugly beauty” of Andy Warhol’s oxymoron.

The film has several camera operators. Unlike my work in Europe, (the American photographers Union) does not allow me to operate the camera myself. Of course, I did the lens arrangement and rehearsed the visual design of the lens with Malick (i.e. the movement of the camera and the movement of the actors). Considering this situation, I am lucky to have four camera operators with outstanding skills and talents: John Bailey of Hollywood; Rod Parkhurst of Canada; Eric van Haren noman, the professional who operated the panaglide (①) camera, and Paul Ryan, the operator of the second photography group.

To be fair, the praise for my work should be given to the above camera operators and some other unknown technicians, especially in those scenes with multiple positions, when one camera uses a wide-angle lens, another machine uses a telephoto lens, and a hand-held panaglide camera shuttles through flames and crowds. Finally, I would like to mention Haskell Wexler, who supervised the shooting in the last three weeks when I left the crew due to a prior appointment. And all this was finally unified by Malick’s outstanding talent; We should thank him for his technical knowledge and his impeccable taste.

When I first contacted producer Harold and Bert Schneider, I informed them of my commitment to Truffaut. Truffaut’s new film will start shooting just when Heaven day was originally planned to be completed.

The Malick and Schneider brothers accepted this condition because they hoped that the progress of Truffaut’s film l’homme qui aimait Les femmes (1977) would be delayed in the pre production stage. This did not happen. At the same time, due to various complex factors, autumn tiger weather appeared in Canada, so the snow scene we need came late.

When the situation became clear and I knew I couldn’t finish the film, I immediately tried to find a good American photographer in my mind. I think of Haskell Wexler. I appreciate his works very much and regard him as a friend. I asked him if he could finish my work. Fortunately for me and the film, he accepted the invitation.

We worked together on the crew for a week. During this period, he observed our shooting style, watched all the photographed materials, and felt our creative pursuit.

Finally, I filmed for 53 days; Haskell filmed the rest of the 19 days. I believe no one can distinguish the parts we shoot.

His direct responsibility includes the scenes taken in the city after the death of Richard Gere’s character; All the snow scenes; And some paragraphs that need to be supplemented with alternate angles and coverage.

The coherence he achieved was an unusual achievement; The talent he showed in it makes me grateful all my life.

In movies, it often happens that the plot is not in the original set field, but in a different place with similar appearance. Heaven’s day fits this kind of situation.

Although originally set in panhandle, Texas in 1919, the film was shot in southern Alberta, Canada. As often happens in film production, the elements of this area are completely in line with the original settings of the film.

The selected shooting site is a vast and undeveloped beautiful landscape, which is occupied and cultivated by hitterites, a sect that immigrated here many years ago due to religious dissent in Europe. Like Mennonites and amists in the United States, these believers live in different regions with us.

They collectively own and use this elastic land and grow higher wheat than that obtained by modern agricultural methods.

Their supplies are made of natural materials, including their humble furniture. They don’t have radio and television. They eat natural food grown at home. Even their looks are different from ordinary people (which is shown in the film). The one hour journey from the hotel to the shooting site brings us back to the 19th century from the 20th century.

There is no doubt that the atmosphere of this land adds a sense of reality to the image of the film.

In addition, we also borrowed wine red silos and steam driven antique tractors and harvesters from some private collections nearby as props in the film.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here