Anybody knows what format and camera were used to shoot the new Borat feature film? I'll bet it's not 35mm, it must be some form of DV or HDV, anyone got any idea?

Cheers.

Found this on IMDB

Technical Specifications for
Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan (2006)

Film negative format (mm/video inches)
Video (HDTV)
Cinematographic process
DV (partly)
HDV
Printed film format
35 mm
Aspect ratio
1.85 : 1

Russ

It's definitely mostly HD - in a certain chase scene near the very end of the film, I remember actually seeing a pro video lens from a second camera creep into the shot for a split second. I think total budget on the film was $17M.

There is a post on Cinematography.com which indicates that much of "Boret" was shot on Panasonic VariCam rentals from Abel Cinetech. The person who wrote the post works there, so it must be true...

Monitary facts for your enjoyment.

COST = $27M (US$)

Opened in 1/3 of movie studios. Due to the flop of the Ali G film "Ali G in Da House" FOX was very worried of this film. Especially the controversy surrounding.

On the first opening week, the Movie shot to No.1

Because FOX did not release the film in all the cinemas, FOX lost over $500M US$. The following week, Fox opened the film everywhere it could.

I love anything that pokes fun at fox... Especially Fox news.

"No You're wrong. Who listens to the UN?"
"I'm sorry, but I think there are people other than FOX who know more about the facts."
"Just shut up - you dont know nothing"
"Let me finnish"
"Shut up, just shut.... up ok.."
"No, you wont let me finnish"
"Shut up.... Cut his mic."

How could this thing have cost $27M to make? No sets, two actors, no CGI, nothing.

Crew hast to get paid, transportation costs money, gear has to be rented, insurances has to be bought, actors get paid, inverstors get paid, editing and finishing costs money, film transfers cost money.

27 million seems high though, I'd have put it closer to 15.

Don't forget rights and clearances and craft services.

I know a guy in Jackson Miss. who helped shot a few segments of the movie. They shot the segments he worked on with Varicams.
Fun little side note:
The shooters were given a supply of dummy tapes to give to the cops if they were taken into custody.
Thats about all I know and about all he'll divulge.

I agree with the above skepticism about the budget. You simply don't see $27 million on screen in this film, and it seems unlikely anyone would ever finance such a risky investment to that kind of money.

$27 million total including P&A--that I'd believe.

Does that $27 Million figure include distribution and advertising? Thats about the only other expense I can think of.

Yeah, P&A, distribution and such can double a films 'production' budget. It's important to keep that in mind when looking at figures like this. It's not uncommon in Hollywood to DOUBLE the overall costs in this manner.

It's also important to remember, as we look at how 'inexpensive' it is to 'make a movie' these days... that PROMOTING the movie can cost far more than the production costs.

Because filmmaking is such a collaborative effort, and involves SO many aspects of different crafts... from office work, to catering, to advertising, to insurance, to duplication, to MORE insurance, to transportation, music rights etc... it's easy to 'forget' about those hidden costs when shopping for our next toy. Often, people get fixated on how much 'cheaper' it is to shoot video over film. WHich is true. And there is a certain economy of scale involved with small projects. IF purchasing and processing film is going to triple the budget for your project, then yeah, shooting video saves tons of money.

But on a big budget, the cost of film is WAY down on the list expenses to worry about. Sure, there are still savings to be had, but it has to be balanced against other 'departments' craving money... and the long term 'pay off' can be the deciding factor.

I think "Kiss Kiss Bang Bang" with Robert Downey and Val Kilmer and an
A list screen writer, cost 22 million.

So I don't see how "Borat" could have been that expensive.

Lawyers cost a lot of money!

It's budget has been listed as $16 Million U.S.

Advertising budgets are never included in budgets.

john
evilgeniusentertainment.com

Admin: Rec'd from Panasonic on 12/20/2006. Apologies for the formatting errors; that's how it came in.

COMEDY MEGA-HIT BORAT LENSED WITH PANASONIC AJ-HDC27 VARICAMS

* HD Cameras Provide Documentary-Style Coverage of Comic's Cultural Hijinks *

SECAUCUS, NJ (December 20, 2006) – Opening number one at the box office and still playing strong in theaters, Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan, the breakout comedy hit of 2006, was shot in classic documentary style with Panasonic's AJ-HDC27 VariCam HD Cinema cameras.

In the run-up to the Hollywood awards season, Borat has been named a Golden Globes nominee for Best Picture (Musical or Comedy) and the film's star and creator Sacha Baron Cohen (HBO's Ali G) is a Globes nominee for Best Actor. Baron Cohen was recently named Best Actor by the Los Angeles Film Critics Association.

Distributed by the Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation, Borat was directed by Larry Charles (Seinfeld, Curb Your Enthusiam) and shot by co-Directors of Photography Anthony Hardwick and Luke Geissbühler. The plot may be loosely summarized as "Kazakhstani TV personality Borat is dispatched to the United States to report on the greatest country in the world" for the alleged good of his Central Asian nation. With a documentary crew in tow, the wacky Kazakh journalist Borat becomes more interested in locating and marrying Pamela Anderson than in his assignment.� Intrinsic to the success of the film is the credulity of Borat's interview subjects, who are unaware that Baron Cohen/Borat is a fictional visitor to their real world.

"In early conversations about which format to shoot the project on, everyone was very concerned about using larger cameras, as they might be too obtrusive and off-putting to the non-actors we'd be shooting,"� said DP Hardwick. "There was speculation that the quality of a smaller camera like the DVX100 might hold up well enough for our 35mm blow-up, but after the production team saw the tests that I shot, it was apparent that we needed at least 720 lines of resolution, leaving the only real contenders the VariCam and Sony F900."�

"We opted for the VariCam based on the natural look of our test tape-to-film transfer, which looked like really clean Super16mm blown-up—it didn't scream video,"� Hardwick continued. "The VariCam also afforded us the potential for high-speed sequences, and it was the superior choice in terms of size, weight and power management, all critical considerations as we shot the project predominantly hand-held."�

Borat entailed roughly five months of shooting, in the U.S. and Romania (standing in for Kazakhstan), from 2004 -2006. "We worked with a minimum of people, traveling as light as possible,"� Hardwick noted. "Because of the low-light performance of the VariCam, we were able to use only a handful of professional lights combined with beefing up the practical light sources. Because we did a very high-quality transfer test at Modern VideoFilm (Burbank, CA), I learned that I should underexpose, and I shot at approximately 60% luminance, which ultimately gave our colorist Kathy Thomson the latitude she needed to match contrasting shots."�

DP Geissbühler was hired on for Borat on the strength of his having been director of photography for Mail Order Wife, a feature shot in documentary format with the VariCam. "Mail Order Wife illustrated what the VariCam can accomplish in terms of verite and documentary coverage. While it's a 'mockumentary,' it feels very genuine, as Borat does."

On Borat, shooting straight-ahead was key. The camerawork couldn't upstage Sacha or his subjects,� Geissbühler explained. "We would try to predict how a scene would unfold, shoot it documentary-style, and with the two cameras we'd get the coverage we needed. Anthony and I shared one camera assistant, Mark Schwartzbard, and we had a little plant of batteries and tape. We had wireless transmission to the director, wireless audio, and we shot with the longest loads we could get. We'd take turns re-loading quietly, all this ensuring that the cameras were as unobtrusive as possible."�

"Our shooting style gave Sacha absolute freedom during lengthy encounters with his subjects,"� the DP said. "He never broke out of character, and the subjects would begin to ignore the cameras."�

"The VariCam creates a natural but aesthetic image,"� Geissbühler continued, "I love the way the camera renders a natural, un-lit area and manages the eccentricities of location lighting. The image blooms in a beautiful, smooth and subtle fashion—and the camera gets all the production value out of a shhot. The color space is superb, with a great gradation of color."�

"The VariCams performed wonderfully throughout,"� Geissbühler said. "The cameras are rugged, and we worked them to the bone. The paint settings track really well and don't inadvertently alter other aspects of the images as other cameras seem to. So when I find myself engineering the camera in the field, it works out beautifully."�

The production rented the two VariCams from Abel Cine Tech, and made occasional use of a Panasonic AG-DVX100 and a few "ice cube"� cameras. Altogether, the two DPs shot more than 400 hours of footage. The on-line edit (Quantel IQ), color correction (DaVinci 2K Plus) and film-out (Arri Scan Laser) were all done at Modern VideoFilm.

Anthony Hardwick's credits include the documentary Frathouse (Sundance Grand Jury Festival Prize); Todd Phillips' debut feature Road Trip (2nd Unit DP); his recently released School For Scoundrels (2nd Unit DP - NYC); an upcoming feature, The Grand, about the world of high stakes poker starring Woody Harrelson; and he is currently using Panasonic's AJ-HDX900 DVCPRO HD camera to shoot a documentary about world religions with Bill Maher and director Larry Charles.

Luke Geissbühler's feature films include the award-winning Acts of Worship and Mail Order Wife, and his long-form documentary work includes Barry Levinson's Hard Ball, Barbara Kopple's Bearing Witness, Jane's Addiction's Three Days, and the upcoming graphic design doc, Helvetica, shot with Panasonic's AG-HVX200 DVCPRO HD P2 camcorder.

Panasonic's AJ-HDC27 VariCam replicates many of the key features of film-based image acquisition, including 24-frame progressive scan images, time lapse recording, and a wide range of variable frame rates (4-fps to 60-fps in single-frame increments) for overcranked� and undercranked� off-speed in-camera effects. The AJ-HDC27 VariCam also features CineGamma™ software that permits Panasonic's HD Cinema camera systems to more closely match the latitude of film stocks.

About Panasonic Broadcast

Panasonic Broadcast & Television Systems Co. is a leading supplier of broadcast and professional video products and systems. Panasonic Broadcast is a unit company of Panasonic Corporation of North

America. The company is the North American headquarters of Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. (NYSE: MC) of Japan, and the hub of its U.S. marketing, sales, service and R&D operations. For more information on Panasonic Broadcast products, access the company's web site at www.panasonic.com/broadcast.

- 30 -

Because FOX did not release the film in all the cinemas, FOX lost over $500M US$. The following week, Fox opened the film everywhere it could.

I simply don't understand that statement. Is it saying that "cam" rip distribution cost the studio $500M? I don't think so. Is it just referring to US theaters? Not even possible. I don't think the movie will even make $500M before it hits DVD. Thats huge money. And simply NO movie ever has earned in a opening weekend. Ever! The other angle to that logic is to say that movie viewers simply don't go to a movie they haven't seen because it is one week old? Ha! Everyone who didn't see it the first week, and wanted to, simply saw it when it was released the second week. Why not? Do they only see one movie a year?
Regardless, I am sick of the monetary amounts the big studios throw around as a form of propaganda to rial movie goers into a sense of quality. "did you hear its the most expensive movie ever!" Uhhrrrgg, Pointless. I especially despise the highest grossing movie rankings. Is a buck worth the same as it was in 1960? Or even 1990? If anything movies should be ranked by number of tickets sold. But even then, populations have grown dramatically as well entertainment spending do to the heaps of over promotion that all to easily makes its largest target audiences drool at the most average of flicks.
If anything $ figures should be thrown out of the window except for accountants books. Take an average number from the webs top movie sites user ratings as a good idea of what a movie is really worth.
Just one guys opinion.

it was probably 50 million....

Why films cost a bunch of money
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0227061hollywood1.html

This was the highest grossing flick of 2006 -- Borat will not even come close.

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest (2006) $423,032,628