Oscar 2012 - Cinematography

Although I'm generally disappointed by the last year's movies, I still have to admit that there are a few sections which individually taken (and exclusively) for what they are offering, do not leave room for negative opinion. And the cinematography it's actually pretty much yearly sufficiently high to put you in doubt about any prediction.

"The Artist" - Guillaume Schiffman - is again the "different" entry due to it's black & white cinematography. The final result, starting with the dimensions up to the nuances wants to be something close to what you could have seen in cinemas in the '20s (well .. with the quality of the film of the present days and both the much lesser degradation factor). The movie was shot in color in the original, and the changes were applied after, but the result looks excellent. And it's not just about the color, but also the framing, etc. I find to be hard to predict something here, also because Schiffman (of whom I didn't hear up to this moment, working apparently only in the French cinema) just got the BAFTA. However ... the last movie in black & white that I remember to get the Oscar was "Schindler's List" (filmed directly in black & white). "The White Ribbon", recently nominated and "The Man Who Wasn't There" a bit older (which visually is a masterpiece although I've seen it in color, both being shot using the same subsequent "decoloring" procedure) passed unnoticed. So, the next one ...



"The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" - Jeff Cronenweth - is probably the least likely to win here, but I can say that I loved what I've seen in it. The cinematography it's probably the biggest difference (positive one) from the original Swedish version. I have to admit that I am slightly subjective, because I have a weakness for filters and here we have cold ones alternating on the present action (and maintaining part of the eerie atmosphere) with warm tones, even close to sepia, covering basically all the flashbacks. Besides these the movie really has some exceptional shots, the type that you'll remember (at least in theory :) ) probably even after one year from seeing the movie = one example - the first trip in the car to the Vanger house. The last year I was totally unimpressed by the nomination Cronenweth got for "The Social Network". This year I would place him the second in my valor scale. However, as I was saying .. I doubt that he has any chances from the American Academy ...



"Hugo" - Robert Richardson - is the only 3D from the nominees, and probably that's its advantage (if it has any advantage). I don't know anyway how much from the 3D is actually part of the cinematography. If I would make a personal top, Richardson for me is at the first place in the list of who works at Hollywood in this area (overall I remain a devoted fan of Christopher Doyle, but I can't remember when that guy appeared on the credits of a mainstream movie outside Asia). What I like is especially the way Richardson handles the chromatic - "Shutter Island" and "Inglorious Basterds" being just two recent examples. Although "Hugo" looks very good, I think a big contribution to this is brought by the production design, and in lesser extent by the cinematography. On top of that, I'm not the biggest 3D fan and to cut it short, we have other titles that are I think at least more original on the visuals this year.



"The Tree of Life" - Emmanuel Lubezki - is I guess, although completely ignored at BAFTA, the most entitled to take a cinematography award this year, and I really think it will be like that (although I wouldn't bet ...). About the movie, I can say for now that it was a pleasant surprise. More, generally speaking I'll tell some other time. Because it's not the case to mix to much stuff now when I should be talking about the visuals. The problem is that I don't really know what to tell. It's probably the most different image from the five nominees talking about framing and focus. Stuff that really gives a note of originality. But the really nice part is that this doesn't come gratuitously, it's somehow in a similar tone with what we can call the action of the move and it helps a lot for the "watchability". Overall (= including also the VFX) I can say that visually the movie offers you something close to the feeling, if not over what "The Fountain" did (if the title doesn't sound familiar, you should watch it - if it sounds, I didn't pick it randomly having some common elements somewhere more or less in depth). The cinematography is clearly the part that gives weight to this production, and for me also the main reason to be seen.



"War Horse" - Janusz Kaminski - is the outdoor movie, in what we have here. Large spaces, panoramas, war scenes, stuff like that. Filmul has anyway also some very nice close-ups (= I got stuck in my head with a gros-plan with a reflection in horse's eye). I can't figure anyway how it could impress enough to grab an Oscar, mostly after the surprise (sort of) from last year when "True Grit" missed the award, being also outdoors, being also above what's here, and with Roger Deakins at his eighth nominee I guess without an Oscar. And talking about awards, Kaminski, the main cinematographer who works with Spielberg, did clearly better movies before (I mentioned "Schindler's List" a bit earlier).



Since my free time is shrinking down, with one week left until the Oscars, and since anyway I'm writing in quite a rush, I guess next time I'll jump to the final categories directly.