Release List Reviews Shop Join News DVD Giveaways Video Games Advertise
DVD Reviews | Theatrical Reviews | Adult DVD Reviews | Video Game Reviews | Price Search Buy Stuff Here
DVD Talk
DVD Reviews DVD Talk Headlines HD Reviews


Add to My Yahoo! - RSS 2.0 - RSS 2.0 - DVD Talk Podcast RSS -


Go Back   DVD Talk Forum > Entertainment Discussions > Movie Talk

Movie Talk A Discussion area for everything movie related including films In The Theaters

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-19-13, 02:16 PM   #1
Solid Snake
DVD Talk Hero
 
Solid Snake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Formerly known as "Solid Snake PAC"/Denton, Tx
Posts: 28,672
How real did Rear Projection look?

I'm watching all these old Hitch films on BD. And I see a lot of these shots in this films. Sometimes too much for my taste. They stand out badly in The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) to me.

Rear Projection to those who may not know is just a shot with a filmed background on a screen behind the foregrounded actors.

These shots have been around since the 1930s and I think they grew out of favor in the 1960s at some point. I could be wrong but I don't see them used much as a standard once we get later into the mid to late 1960s. Someone can follow up on that. I'm just heavily assuming based on the films I've seen and to what point they stopped for me.

We see it used every once in a while today still. Tarantino does it. Though it's not to achieve a reality but to convey the style he wants for it. Pulp Fiction made very nice use of it. It's use today is now the greenscreen background now applied with CGI. Which does look better and at times looks pretty damn real as well. But can still look off at times.

My thoughts though...did it EVER look real?

I'm only 26, so that stuff looks fake today to me especially because it's grown out of favor. I can understand WHY they would do that but did it ever look real? Some shots I've seen look pretty damn good but as a standard I haven't seen many that would fool me well. For those of you that are older and saw these films as they were released, did you think they were real backgrounds?

It's not a criticism on people believing the trick nor the process but more of a viewing of the historical implementation of the process and the way people saw it as it used more and more as they grew up.

Rear Projection has always fascinated me. Very nice technique but a process that hasn't aged well in creating a reality for whatever world that needed to be created in the eyes of the modern.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-13, 02:22 PM   #2
Supermallet
Time Lord
 
Supermallet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Termite Terrace
Posts: 46,593
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

I don't think it ever looked particularly real, but realism wasn't always the greatest concern of filmmakers from the period. Also, often you just couldn't afford to put the real actors into real locations to do the things they're doing in front of the projection screens.
__________________
"You already knew this, Mallet, but you're obviously a better man than I (expect this to be quoted in a sig). " -creekdipper
Watch me squawk on Twitter: @Supermallet
Check out my vinyl collection!
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-13, 02:24 PM   #3
bluetoast
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
bluetoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,874
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

Yeah I'm pretty sure nobody thought they were real, at least the walking on a treadmill as the background passes you by type. For car stuff some of it can look good depending on the footage and the way the actor handles the wheel.
__________________
Uh oh...
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-13, 02:51 PM   #4
Why So Blu?
DVD Talk Legend
 
Why So Blu?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,211
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

I think the North by Northwest shot of Grant running from the biplane still holds up nicely. I'd say green screen and soundstage have replaced the rear projection technique. Movies like Sky Captain and Sin City, etc...
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-13, 02:55 PM   #5
bluetoast
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
bluetoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,874
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

Yeah that biplane shot was pretty good. Hell...wait...it fooled me.
__________________
Uh oh...
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-13, 03:17 PM   #6
Solid Snake
DVD Talk Hero
 
Solid Snake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Formerly known as "Solid Snake PAC"/Denton, Tx
Posts: 28,672
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

That was actually the one that I was alluding to as well. Damn find work on that one. Man, I love that BD.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-13, 04:43 PM   #7
dugan
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,147
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

The prologue to Terminator 2 uses rear projection extensively. It looks completely real, even after it's pointed out.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-13, 05:04 PM   #8
inri222
DVD Talk Legend
 
inri222's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 17,731
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

Hitchcock preferred to shoot in a controlled enviroment thus his preference of indoor filming that is why his films have alot of rear projection. Sometimes I like it when it gives a film this surreal feeling (like when Bruce Willis is in the taxi in Pulp Fiction or the scene that John Travolta is high as a kite). But most of the time it looks fake, especially by today's standards.
__________________
Morality is doing right, no matter what you are told. Religion is doing what you are told, no matter what is right. - H.L. Mencken
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-13, 05:30 PM   #9
Roybq
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 1,201
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?



This is real as it gets.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-13, 07:05 PM   #10
Ash Ketchum
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Ash Ketchum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,690
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solid Snake PAC View Post
I'm watching all these old Hitch films on BD. And I see a lot of these shots in this films. Sometimes too much for my taste. They stand out badly in The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) to me.

Rear Projection to those who may not know is just a shot with a filmed background on a screen behind the foregrounded actors.

These shots have been around since the 1930s and I think they grew out of favor in the 1960s at some point. I could be wrong but I don't see them used much as a standard once we get later into the mid to late 1960s. Someone can follow up on that. I'm just heavily assuming based on the films I've seen and to what point they stopped for me.

We see it used every once in a while today still. Tarantino does it. Though it's not to achieve a reality but to convey the style he wants for it. Pulp Fiction made very nice use of it. It's use today is now the greenscreen background now applied with CGI. Which does look better and at times looks pretty damn real as well. But can still look off at times.

My thoughts though...did it EVER look real?

I'm only 26, so that stuff looks fake today to me especially because it's grown out of favor. I can understand WHY they would do that but did it ever look real? Some shots I've seen look pretty damn good but as a standard I haven't seen many that would fool me well. For those of you that are older and saw these films as they were released, did you think they were real backgrounds?

It's not a criticism on people believing the trick nor the process but more of a viewing of the historical implementation of the process and the way people saw it as it used more and more as they grew up.

Rear Projection has always fascinated me. Very nice technique but a process that hasn't aged well in creating a reality for whatever world that needed to be created in the eyes of the modern.
I remember seeing Hitchcock's SPELLBOUND in an auditorium at Berkeley in 1974 and when it came to the shot of Ingrid Bergman and Gregory Peck "skiing" against rear screen, the audience burst out laughing. Students in film class watching Tippi Hedren ride a "horse" in MARNIE had a similar reaction. Hitchcock's rear-screen shots were notoriously fake-looking.

As a young moviegoer myself, I generally noticed when it was rear-screen and when it was on location. The early Bond films had lots of obvious rear-screen shots. It didn't bother me; it was a convention of the times. Besides, we'd seen all those Bob Hope/Bing Crosby "Road to" movies on TV and we knew damn well that Hope and Crosby never went to Morocco, Singapore or Zanzibar. And Johnny Weissmuller's Tarzan never went to Africa. (Although he did go to Mexico to shoot TARZAN AND THE MERMAIDS.)

I think more recent movies have sometimes suffered by going on location when they could have used rear-screen projection. I'm thinking of SPIES LIKE US (1985), a modern-day "Road" movie with Chevy Chase and Dan Aykroyd (with a cameo appearance by Hope) that went on location to Finland! I don't want a film like that to look "real." It would be funnier if it looked a little more artificial.
__________________
“Civilization exists by geological consent, subject to change without notice.” - Will Durant
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-13, 07:49 PM   #11
Solid Snake
DVD Talk Hero
 
Solid Snake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Formerly known as "Solid Snake PAC"/Denton, Tx
Posts: 28,672
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

Again watching this Hitch set. I think Rear Projection actually looks better in B&W than Color. The Colors bring out it's flaws much more than B&W. Most likely due to well...colors. The older B&W films look better also to being old. Old film looks old. Rear Projection ages well w/ that. Color not so much.

Funny that you brought up Marnie. Finished seeing it today. Rear projection w/ all those riders and some actors in front looked weird as fuck to me.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-13, 08:37 PM   #12
Drexl
DVD Talk Legend
 
Drexl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 15,258
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solid Snake PAC View Post
Again watching this Hitch set. I think Rear Projection actually looks better in B&W than Color. The Colors bring out it's flaws much more than B&W. Most likely due to well...colors. The older B&W films look better also to being old. Old film looks old. Rear Projection ages well w/ that. Color not so much.

Funny that you brought up Marnie. Finished seeing it today. Rear projection w/ all those riders and some actors in front looked weird as fuck to me.
I think it also depends on the type of scene, as in, how much can you actually see what you're projecting and how clearly? In an open convertible in sunlight, it's probably going to look fake. But in a car with a roof, in the rain, with the windows up, and at night it can be a different story. I believe the car crash scene in Fight Club is a good example.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-13, 03:32 AM   #13
UAIOE
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
UAIOE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: LV-426
Posts: 6,479
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roybq View Post


This is real as it gets.
I was watching "Goldfinger" and it got to some of the rear projection car scenes,I couldn't help but think of the part of that "Airplane" scene where the background footage speeds up and then turns to the guys on the horses.

What really bothers me in "Goldfinger" is why they used rear projection for Bond's scene by the pool in Miami. You can fly off to all these other far off places and get shots there, but you guys can't film two guys in a hotel courtyard by the pool?
__________________
Oh I'm serious, baby. I am Yahoo Serious. I'm Serious FM. Welcome to the world serious of seriousness sponsored by Honey Nut Seerioes. - Jeff Winger
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-13, 04:58 AM   #14
Boba Fett
DVD Talk Reviewer
 
Boba Fett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,770
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

"Aliens" had some decent Rear Projection effects.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-13, 05:46 AM   #15
gmanca
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,696
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boba Fett View Post
"Aliens" had some decent Rear Projection effects.
Yeah, the sequence where the second drop ship interacts with the ATV crash site is great, but the part where Ridley is standing behind the melting background is not, mainly due to the camera movement.

I'd say the worst Rear Projection use from Hitchcock is seen in any of the driving scenes in To Catch a Thief.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-13, 06:55 AM   #16
Jaymole
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Jaymole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: N.Y, N.Y
Posts: 6,822
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

I know I posted this once before but this thread reminded me of it again

Go to the 3:15 minute...between Kirk's overacting and the bad rear projection, you will have a classic in unintenionally funny scenes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbNSvOTaBAk
__________________
Feast Your Eyes, Glut Your Soul on My Accursed Ugliness!
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-13, 11:29 AM   #17
Jules Winfield
DVD Talk Legend
 
Jules Winfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: wandering the earth like Caine in the Kung-Fu
Posts: 19,926
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

I've always wondered also if previous generations of movie goers found this effect to look realistic. I like to think that they didn't give a fuck and just went with it. I've always liked the way it looks even though it looks fake.
__________________
The critics are raving about the return of Jules!!
"Go fuck yourself!"- Bandoman
"And maybe Jules should have just stayed away?"-d2cheer
"...you judgmental prick."-Abob Teff
"Oh, great...another crazy cat lady around here."-Mikael79
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-13, 02:10 PM   #18
kefrank
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: St Louis, MO
Posts: 4,060
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

I think it's akin to the early days of CGI effects - contemporary movie-goers knew it didn't look real at all, but most of them suspended disbelief as they knew it was roughly the best available way to accomplish the on-screen action.
__________________
--Kevin--
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-13, 05:01 PM   #19
obscurelabel
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lower Appalachia
Posts: 2,820
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash Ketchum View Post
... Hitchcock's rear-screen shots were notoriously fake-looking. ...
I think this is a subject for further discussion, if it hasn't already been talked about. Some of the rear projection shots in Rebecca look as if Hitchcock went out of his way to make them look fake. Especially one of Olivier and Fontaine walking in the Monte Carlo prologue, the background isn't moving in sync with the actor's steps (it's moving faster), in fact it appears that they are doing the mincing steps consistent with walking in place. There had to be treadmills available for this sort of thing, and Rebecca was a grade-A Selznick production with budget to spare for them if needed.

The most extreme example of this with Hitchcock is the rear projection shots of the exteriors in the 3-D Dial M for Murder, which are in 2-D. I don't think it would have been that big a deal to create some dimensional backdrops (no need to build full sets) that would have been more "real" looking than this.

My favorite intentionally fake looking rear projection is at the end of The Testament of Dr. Mabuse -- during the car chase, the cars are driving along in front of a backdrop that is a) moving faster than the cars and b) is filmed from a lower angle than the live action, giving the scene a weird dislocating effect.
__________________
Be careful what you don't wish for. You may not get it.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-13, 05:22 PM   #20
DeFan
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 190
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

Quote:
Originally Posted by UAIOE View Post

What really bothers me in "Goldfinger" is why they used rear projection for Bond's scene by the pool in Miami. You can fly off to all these other far off places and get shots there, but you guys can't film two guys in a hotel courtyard by the pool?
Connery couldn't leave England due to other commitments. Oddly enough the commitment was Marnie.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-13, 06:36 PM   #21
Dan
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: More drinks, more fun!
Posts: 8,742
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

If Cosmopolis is a modern day example of rear projection in use, then I'd say it still looks pretty terrible.
__________________
"Only YOU can start forest fires," says Smokey the Bear in his new ad campaign to entice kids to play outside for one god-damn minute - VectorBelly
XBL GamerTag: SomethingMore
PSN: Apple_Berry
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-13, 06:41 PM   #22
Matthew Chmiel
DVD Talk Legend
 
Matthew Chmiel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 12,569
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SomethingMore View Post
If Cosmopolis is a modern day example of rear projection in use, then I'd say it still looks pretty terrible.
Cosmopolis used CGI. Shit, they were better off using rear projection.
__________________
Facebook / Instagram / Letterboxd / Spotify
Find me on Nintendo Network / PlayStation Network / Xbox Live / Steam: cupboardoflove
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-13, 06:48 PM   #23
Troy Stiffler
DVD Talk Legend
 
Troy Stiffler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Phoenix, AZ, Passively angry as heck but gosh darn I'll sit back and take it you know, whatever
Posts: 12,423
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

Fine by me. It's all about the material.

__________________
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-13, 06:56 PM   #24
Why So Blu?
DVD Talk Legend
 
Why So Blu?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,211
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew Chmiel View Post
Cosmopolis used CGI. Shit, they were better off using rear projection.
I thought Cosmopolis looked really good in terms of the CGI sets used.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-13, 08:04 PM   #25
dhmac
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
dhmac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 5,697
Re: How real did Rear Projection look?

I think rear-projection was mainly used in older movies because they preferred shooting films on sets at the studio instead of going on location (which both cost more and is less easy to control), so it was the only technology back then that allowed certain scenes to be filmed on the studio lot.

I think audiences accepted rear-projection because they really didn't know any better. But once filming in color and going on location to shoot films got more common, then the fake look of rear-projection (particularly in color films) began to really stand out and that's when it became a less popular technique with filmmakers.
__________________
One man's awesome is another man's teh suck
  Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:00 PM.

Rules - DVD Talk - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0
Copyright 2011 DVDTalk.com All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.