carbonadam Posted January 18, 2010 Share #1 Posted January 18, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Never Cry Wolf is one of my all time favorite films. I am pretty sure Charles Martin Smith is using a Leica at one point in the film. I figured I'd post some shots and let everyone have a go at it. It's a great film for any of you that have not already seen it. Very slow, deliberate. and beautiful. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 18, 2010 Posted January 18, 2010 Hi carbonadam, Take a look here Leica in Never Cry Wolf?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
epand56 Posted January 18, 2010 Share #2 Posted January 18, 2010 Loved this film very, very much. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carbonadam Posted January 18, 2010 Author Share #3 Posted January 18, 2010 Ooops. Sorry i posted on the M9 Forum. I am always there. Sometimes I forget there are other forums too. My bad. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elgenper Posted January 18, 2010 Share #4 Posted January 18, 2010 Visoflex I with bellows on unidentified LTM body; straight viewfinder looking somewhat fishy... VERY old short mount Leitz lens, possibly an enlarger lens. FIKUS adjustable sunshade. Would be quite a decent setup for extreme closeups, even today. Can´t see it he´s using a tripod; that would be mandatory to get anything better than massive blur.... Haven´t seen the film; what´s he supposed to shoot here? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted January 18, 2010 Share #5 Posted January 18, 2010 In the 4th picture the lens is clearly marked with "Ernst L". The white tubular object behind the lens may or may not be labelled "canon". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carbonadam Posted January 18, 2010 Author Share #6 Posted January 18, 2010 He has the camera right down on the ground shooting flowers and plat life. Oh, and the film came out in 1983. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted January 18, 2010 Share #7 Posted January 18, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) The movie is roughly based on the early research life of Farley Mowat, and the book he published by the same title in 1963. Mowat was born in 1921 and studied biology just after his WWII service, so a screw-mount Leica/Visoflex would be timely for that period, c. 1950. The main character is studying Arctic wolves and their place in the ecosystem, including their food supply (hypothsized to be mice, rather than the caribou assumed to be the prey up until that time) - so a complete study of the food chain and ecosystem might well include the plants the mice feed on, or scats as a guide to the wolves' diet. (Always MY favorite subject for close-up photography!! Mmmm!) Farley Mowat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The movie is more vague about its time setting - when he encounters his bush pilot (Brian Dennehy) for the second time near the end of the film, the pilot has a new turbo-prop Helio Stallion float plane, not introduced until 1964, although the piston-powered Helio Courier (protoype 1949, production 1954) might just have been realistic if one assumes Mowat spent several years in the bush. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elgenper Posted January 18, 2010 Share #8 Posted January 18, 2010 In the 4th picture the lens is clearly marked with "Ernst L". The white tubular object behind the lens may or may not be labelled "canon". Canon is unlikely on this very vintage setup. More likely OTSRO or another of a dozen or so adapters that existed for mounting lens heads on the bellows. Being chrome, it is quite a bit later than the rest of that setup. BTW, that straight viewfinder seems to be the one on the 1938 PLOOT reflex housing; even older than the Visoflex I that I mentioned. What time period is the story supposed to be from? Or is there an explanation for him using such an antique outfit (inherited from grandpa or something)? Mind you, for slow and considered flower photography, it would work well even today. Edit: hadn´t seen Andy´s post when writing the above. Surely someone shopping for second-hand closeup gear in the ´50s might very well have ended up with something like this. Maybe it´s even a genuine Farley Mowat-owned outfit that they borrowed for the film.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carbonadam Posted January 19, 2010 Author Share #9 Posted January 19, 2010 The movie is roughly based on the early research life of Farley Mowat, and the book he published by the same title in 1963. . Yes, the film is very different from the book. I love the film so much I tracked down the book and read it. While the book is great, the film has a quality that is pretty rare amongst films in general. It's slow, beautiful, and has little conflict besides that of man against nature. There is a lot of contemplation going on in the film and I never seem to tire of watching it. I never thought about the dates as you have. Since the film came out in the 80s I always just placed the film as taking place in the 80s. I'm sure the director left it ambiguous so the film would not seem dated. The equipment and clothing is all that dates it now but the topics being confronted in the film about man and nature seem even more relevant now than ever. The old equipment he is using would have been government issue since that was who he was doing the study for. Also, it was the Canadian government, not the USA. The film has that ambiguous too as it was a Disney film. back when Disney was taking risks and making some of the greatest films ever. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted January 19, 2010 Share #10 Posted January 19, 2010 The film's still photography consultant was David Cavagnaro (David Cavagnaro Photography) who has some very amusing stories to tell about the making of the movie. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.