Seriously, guys, watch "Blair Witch Project" again, instead. I did recently after almost 20 years and it holds up so well, I was to my utter surprise legitimately amazed by it once more and now regard it as the most believable found footage film there is: No *clunky* exposition, no awkward explaining why there needs to be a camera. Believable actors being natural instead of acting 'natural', likeable characters even in their flaws, and an ambiguity that so many found footage films afterwards did not achieve or even pursue. Plus, that the whole of SICKHOUSE is filmed vertically tells me just one thing: All the characters in it are morons :D.

Aside from al the technical aspects who speak in favor of ARRI, they also marketingwise seem just 2 times more classy to me than RED, and less technical than Sony. And in parts that class comes from the simple fact that, yeah, they know they are the best. They are f***in' ARRI.

Everything that can be changed, will be changed. That's post production rule, at leastwhen when given the time and/or money. I've also used this technique, but I was always terribly, horribly, painfully aware that it was simply to mask my mistakes in directing. I feel like a lot of people through the possibilities of post production nowadays feel tempted to not do their homework before the actual shoot or are much more at ease with not so great takes. And let's face it: This technique compliments Finchers style, but not neccessarily yours or mine. So shooting from tripod with no camera movement and actors with enough non-moving space in between to pull this teqnique off - i don't know: You are really creating a limitation for yourself, just to get control in post while you SHOULD first an foremost be in control on set and pre-production, rehearsals and what not. And you are deliberately giving away a big part of you narrative toolset.

It's a fix-it-in-post attitude that will not be a part, at least of my strategy, because this paradoxically moves the workload towards postproduction, a moment when you are more or less just reacting to existing material, while the emphasis should pre-production, to have as little seems and mistakes to cover up as possible. There are examples of trying to speed up things in post from the predigital era, even in a film by Mr. preproduction himself, Steven Spielberg. The bedroom scene in the beginning of EMPIRE OF THE SUN comes to mind. But in my experience your project benefits extremely when you just prepare, prepare, prepare beforehand - beacause a lot of long takes from that same movie show, how beneficial this can be to your movie, too. So, if you are going for a Fincher look, which too many young filmmakers who are NOT Fincher do, fine. But don't go for that look just because it looks cool on Finchers films and because it gives you more control in post. You should be in control ALL THE TIME, at least that's the principle that you stick to as if your life depended on it.

Of course this opinion is just from a German perspective and does not want to extend to to other European film comissions. But German film funding spends huge amounts for sure and is pretty messed up at times.

I'm not saying this wasn't a fair thing to try for American filmmakers at all, but the overall tone of this article leaves a bitter taste in my mouth because, in a way, it's beating around the bush. What I'm trying to say is this: You guys will sure get more out of this than the German filming community will ever get.

Federal German film commissions have continuously been under fire from various serious media outlets (most notably "Die Welt") and even the German Taxpayers Federation for investing a huge amount of their altogether 310.000.000 € budget into either German productions that do not need funding at all because of the big names attached to them, or into what were basically American big budget studio productions that were simply shot in Germany (8 Million € went to "Monument's Men", see http://www.mz-web.de/mitteldeutschland/george-clooneys--monuments-men--s...). I'm getting a vibe of disregard for the local film communities from this article that I'd love to exclude from the discussion but simply can't.

You guys, who've already seen the film? These shots look eerily amazing, but judging from these and the trailer, this rather unorthodox sense of composition runs through the whole film. Does this work out fine during the whole running time? Or does one get increasingly indifferent with, or worse, distracted by it? I can't help but see this danger looming over the visual concept of the film.