Mel Gibson "PAYBACK" question...
 

I think that this great flick was done a tremendous disservice in it's DVD transfer...or is it just me? The movie has a "blue tint" all the way through it, which, after awhile, rather than becoming less noticable, becomes nearly intolerable.
Now, the question is this: did I simply get a bad disc, or was this purposely filmed with the blue tint, or is it just a crapola transfer?
Any responses are appreciated... ;)

From what I remember, there is an intentional tint to this movie... somewhat like what is done in the new CSI: NY television show.

Gibson wanted to film it in black & white but the studio didn't let him.

So he filmed it in blue & blue.

Re: Mel Gibson "PAYBACK" question...
 

It was on purpose. The DVD looked like I remembered it in the theater.

I think the blue tint is kind of cool and works really well with this movie...which is underrated IMO.

MATT

Today's young hate black & white films.
And it seems the older crowd hate this blue & blue.
I hate this Green tint that seems to be on just about everything this past 5 years.

The blue tint works well with the atmosphere in this movie. There are all sorts of subtle things in this movie to "confuse" the time period. Big old cars, big black rotary phones, the old soundtrack, etc., are juxtaposed with modern items (the dealer with the pierced nose comes to mind).

Great "hard boiled" flick that's a lot of fun. I could watch this one over and over.

Main Entry: noir
Pronunciation: 'nwär
Function: noun
Usage: often attributive
Etymology: short for film noir
1 : crime fiction featuring hard-boiled cynical characters and bleak sleazy settings

Main Entry: film noir
Pronunciation: -'nwär
Function: noun
Etymology: French, literally, black film
: a type of crime film featuring cynical malevolent characters in a sleazy setting and an ominous atmosphere that is conveyed by shadowy photography and foreboding background music; also : a film of this type

Like everyone else says. It is intentional. It was like that in the theater. What threw everyone is that all the trailers were full color.

Any chance for a SE on this one?

heh, I was JUST gonna ask the same thing. I love this movie!

I need to know before the BBV $8 trade sale is over! :)

Great flick... I love the look of the film, they used the same effect in NARC.

I agree!

I really like Payback too! Director was going for hard edge 70's look. I liked the old telephones, cars, blue tint etc.

I sought out the workprint a few years ago as it contained the original directors cut of the movie with some of the characters portrayed by different actors - no Kris Kristofferson as his character was voiced off screen by Angie Dickinson and the ending/climax is completely different.

Wish I had a better quality video of it, but it was cool getting to see it.

Here's a link to the IMDB with some info on Director Brian Helgeland's original version.

When B&W movies were out when color was available it made the movie look low budget.
Doesn't these blue or green tinted movies look cheap.
Is it cheap film stock that can't pick all the color?

Payback is an excellent movie and the way it was filmed is superb, complete with tint, and I think it captures the spirit of the Lee Marvin original so hats off...

Do you think Saving Private Ryan looked cheap?

Gibson didn't direct 'Payback', Brian Helgeland did, and, as he was a first-time director (though an Oscar winning screenwriter), the studio wouldn't let him shoot B&W. Also, the studio sided with Gibson against Helgeland in re-cutting the movie (and re-shooting a large chunk), so if he had been the one to want B&W, it seems like he would've gotten it.

Yeah, nothing screams low budget like "The Apartment" or "Schindler's List".

And, boy, those elaborate airplane sets in "Strangelove", or the insane battle sequence in 'Paths of Glory', they just look so cheap in black and white.

And, manohman, it's a good thing "El Mariachi" is in color, because it makes it look so much more expensive than "Raging Bull" which, let's face it, has always looked really low budget with those deep shadows and all.

I believe that the Coen brothers said, when asked why "The Man Who Wasn't There" was shot in B&W, "Well, we wanted it to look really, really cheap, so we figured that was the best way, because nothing says cheap like black and white."

No, these doesn't.

No, it's a deliberate choice which often requires buying specifically designed film stock or, more likely, specific film processes. Generally, since they're different from the normal standard, these processes will be more expensive, and often require more trial and error to get right (which also adds to the cost).

Sounds like the copy I got to see. I actually prefer the Mel Gibson cut over the Helgeland one, but I would love to see Criterion get their hands on this movie and do a Brazil-type set with both versions. Of course, that'll happen never.

BUMP! I've read somewhere that a DVD release of Helgeland's cut is being prepared for 2006. Is there any truth to this? I would like to see that, even though I do like the released cut. Speaking of, is it true that Gibson directed the reshoots? I've read that the DP or somesuch did it.

I saw Payback on HBO or something a year or so ago, and have no idea what you guys are talking about. Can't recall any tint at all, or it could be I just didn't notice. Or maybe they had a full color version for TV?

It has a color de-saturated look similar to the way Underworld (2003) was color corrected to give it a kind of "bluish tint"

Haha, you guys that don't like the tint... did you not like movies like The Matrix? That movie had blue and green tint... lots of movies do.

yeah, whatever about the tint...what about, for example, O Brother Where Art Thou? Lots of unusual tints going on there...

So, what about the director's cut of Payback? Anyone have any info? I'd be interested in seeing it, just because I want to see what Mel didn't want released.