I'm in Trouble! R: So Sang-min Land: Republik Korea 2009 Drehformat: HD Format: HDcam, Farbe Länge: 98 Minuten Sprache: Koreanisch mehr Informationen

"I'm sorry" – mehr hat er selten zu sagen. Schon wieder hat Sun-woo das Rendezvous mit seiner Freundin verpatzt, wieder verspricht er Besserung und landet doch nur beim nächsten Saufgelage.
Es scheint sie überall auf der Welt zu geben, die etwa Dreißigjährigen, die partout nicht erwachsen werden wollen. So wie der junge Möchtegern-Dichter Sun-woo aus Seoul. Er lehnt jede Verantwortung ab, lebt in den Tag hinein und erweist sich als beziehungsunfähig. Wenn Sun-woo durch die Straßen und Kneipen der koreanischen Hauptstadt zieht, erinnert er ein wenig an die Tagediebe der französischen Nouvelle Vague. Auch seine Verweigerung scheint Trotz gegen eine Gesellschaft zu sein, die ihre Jugend mit permanentem Leistungs- und Erfolgsdruck bedrängt. [aus dem Forumprogramm]

How would you describe the aesthetics of your film?
Bringing out the natural and realistic performances from the actors is the aesthetic to my film. I scout for the locations that fit well with the characteristics of the roles the actors play, delivering the very emotion that particular location holds. In addition, I enjoy shooting long takes in order to prevent the choppiness of the acting. When observing a movie from afar, I believe you can see sparks of charming moments when actors and locations are harmoniously combined.

Why did you choose to shoot on a digital format (was it solely for financial reasons, or did aesthetics play a role)?
Financially, shooting on a digital format was the best option. Plus, the format our Korean Academy of Film Arts requires us to shoot in is digital. Therefore, we had no choice but to shoot in digital. However, after having shot this film in digital, I began to have many thoughts on possibly shooting my future films this way. Aside from the cost-effectiveness of shooting in digital, the mobility as well as the accessibility of digital cameras allowed me to shoot more raw images. If film is described as oil painting then digital would be more like water color painting. It was not until I finished shooting that I realized the significance of these minute differences.

Which format exactly did you choose (MiniDV, DVCAM, HDV, HD...), and why?
I shot in HD. Wanting a more stable scene in all my shots, I thought HD was the best option.

What was special about shooting with Red (e.g. compared to 35-mm or
other digital formats)? Was it your first time with Red / digital or are
you used to it?
I have never worked on a project using a 35mm camera. I do have experience filming on a super 16mm camera. If I had to compare my experience with film, I don’t think there’s that much of a difference using a digital camera. However, I do remember being frustrated over the fact that I had limited shots to take with prior required rehearsals in order to not waste film. With a digital camera, we didn’t have to waste time with rehearsals and we would just shoot capturing the many yet different improvised acting. Some of the single shots in our film lasted 10 minutes, making it a lot more easier to do on a digital camera. If I had used the same method with a film camera, I’m sure the crew would have complained a lot.

What was your shoot-edit ratio?
Roughly 17 hours were shot, final film length is 98 minutes.

One good word about DV / HDV / HD (or two):
Cost-effectiveness would be the biggest reason as to shooting in digital. The mobility of using a digital camera is a lot more effective than shooting in film especially in low budget projects. Therefore, by effectively filming on location, we were able to bring out the actor’s internal emotions with ease.

One bad word about DV / HDV / HD (or two):
I’m not quite sure. Digital cameras have rapidly progressed over the years compared to film that I believe the crews’ skills as well as quality of digital cameras will soon surpass film.