The kinetic ball of filmmaking energy known as Robert Rodriguez doesn't merely respect George Lucas, he calls him “my guru, my Obi-Wan.” He's referring to Lucas' much-ballyhooed decision to migrate permanently to the world of all-digital filmmaking for his films and beyond, and the impact that decision had onhis own filmmaking career. Yet, as much as Rodriguez admires Lucas and credits the director for convincing him in 2000 that there is no longer any reason to use film to make movies, Rodriguez sees back-to-back 24p HD movie projects — current Miramax release and (Columbia, planned for an early 2003 release) — as ,potentially, more significant in terms of “paving the way” for the feature film industry to finally embrace HD as its primary acquisition medium, while “abandoning its fears.”

During a break from his frenzied, simultaneous editing cycle forboth movies at his home studio in Austin, Texas (Rodriguez writes andedits his own work, served as camera operator on both films, and was DP on ), Rodriguez was eager to discuss this point, preach the gospel of HD, and do his level best to bury what he calls “that crappy old technology” of film.

“When I was doing the sound mix for [the first film] at Skywalker Ranch in late 2000, George showed me some very early stuff shot 24p with a prototype, first-generation Sony camera,” says Rodriguez. “It was not the effects stuff, just simple, live action shots. I was blown away and decided to do my own tests. I loved the fact that I no longer had to wait to see what I was shooting. From that point on, I became convinced it would be stupid to ever shoot film again. But as cool as what George has done, his films are basically animated, and they go through the ILM magic hole. When my movies are released, you'll see two live-action films shot HD that rely heavily on natural colors — especially rich Latin colors. I told George, his movies won't change people's minds about being afraid to shoot HD, but my films might because they are more the type of film that normal filmmakers on limited budgets might make.

it's time for people to stop conducting all these HD/film tests and start making real movies with these cameras. Then, they'll have a real frame of reference, and I'm betting most will never go back to film.”

Film Bad, HD Good

Rodriguez returns to what he considers the central issue of the HDvs. film debate — the fact that filmmakers don't have to wait to transfer film and see dailies to know what their images look like. This, according to Rodriguez, is really “all that matters.”

“Shooting film is like rolling dice in Vegas — you have no idea what you'll get,” he says. “Imagine being a great artist, painting a masterpiece, and not being permitted to see the canvas until the next day. That always seemed crazy to me. Plus, I always felt film was too grainy, too contrasty anyway, and I hated the whole process. Not to mention working with effects and having to scan film into the computer and then trying to match that to other stuff. It never matches properly — I spent so many years looking at bad film. I'm angry that I had to shoot my previous movies on film. This approach is much better.”

Rodriguez's hyperbole aside, his views deserve a listening, given the depth of his experience making digital movies. He is likely the only major director in the world to personally shoot most of his own material for multiple movies using 24p cameras, personally edit that material himself, and then craft it into commercially viable features with big-name talent. He also owns two Sony HDW-F900 cameras that he used to shoot both films..

“Everyone rents cameras, but I bought mine, and they were paid for by the time I finished shooting,” says Rodriguez. “For the film, I used a combination of Canon lenses, zooms only, no primes, and some Angenieux lenses as well. I also made a deal with Panavision to let me try out their cine-style lenses, and they were great. Usually, you can't use their lenses unless you rent the whole camera package, but in my case, they made an exception. By owning my own cameras, I became self-sufficient. We had video engineers with us, and they helped us hot-rod the cameras and try a few different things, and I found that just by experimenting, you could come up with a wide range of unique looks using these cameras. And the beautiful thing was, we knew instantly if we got what we were looking for. It just seems crazy to me that any filmmaker would prefer to wait a day to see what they filmed.”

Defending HD Insisting that he is done being a “blindfolded painter,” Rodriguez essentially snorts at most of the criticisms often leveled at HD as it relates to feature films. Among his retorts:

It's hard to change speeds using 24p cameras.
“I used the Sony cameras, and I didn't change the stop and ended up with 60 frames turned into slow motion. We didn't boost lighting or go with a different stop or anything. We just had to do some work in post, but nothing too complicated. We shot at 60i,captured each field to Targa files, and then output one Targa to one frame, which slowed the image down and gave us the equivalent of overcranking. And besides, by now, these cameras are starting to come with variable frame rates, and they'll only get better.”

These cameras aren't ideal for Steadicam work.
“I prefer HD for Steadicam, and I shoot my own Steadicam. The cameras are lighter, which helps my back, and it's not hard to rig the power units. When you shoot Steadicam with film, you have a crappy video monitor anyway. Here, you can at least see on the big monitor what's going on. That's why I shoot my own stuff — video assist tap systems are usually real crappy for film cameras, so you are guessing anyway. On the first , I shot a lot of Steadicam, but I never knew what I had, so I kept going and shot way more than I had to.For these films, I see it on an HD monitor and know instantly if I need to re-shoot or not.”

HD's superior depth-of-field qualities can be problematic.
“That's irrelevant — like I keep saying, you can see exactly what you are getting on the monitor, so if something needs adjusting, you can do it immediately and not wait a day for dailies. Besides, I rarely shoot widescreen, and in film, most DPs overdo that stuff and end up getting little more than the actor's earlobe in focus anyway. Having said that, is my first widescreen movie, and all I had to do to adjust was use longer lenses. Between that and the monitor, I had no problems.”

HD is not flattering to actors.
“I had the opposite experience. My stars told me they loved what they were seeing on the monitor, and I didn't shoot with any filters , I wanted that feeling of being able to see Lee Van Cleef's pupils sweat, like in those Sergio Leone movies, and HD is perfect for that. I have made five movies with Antonio Banderas, and I never knew he had light brown eyes until I shot him in HD, because on film, his eyes always look black. If eyes are the window to the soul,why would anyone shoot film?