I don't agree since quite some years with the results for the Oscar cinematography. Because the Oscar for cinematography is not really given lately for cinematography, but for collateral stuff that falsely makes camera work to look deserving. It's either VFX, editing, or as most probably this year, production design. Still, it's not so wrong as in the previous... But, let's cut this short.
Bradford Young for "Arrival". I don't know how hard is to stay limited to an area with grey shades and filters that keep the gloomy feeling of the movie from the beginning to the end, but probably that's the main merit here. Nothing more.
Linus Sandgren for "La La Land". Full contrast with the above. But besides that we also have a contrast between the first and second half of the movie, which is supported well by the cinematography, even though it always keeps a very lively chromatic. Another difference comes from the framing and movement part, which is obviously at a different level here, at least through the need of dancing shots. All in all... how much of what we see comes from production design, and how much from camera work... I wonder.
Greig Fraser for "Lion". Well... maybe I'm too conservative, but finally what we have here is indeed pure camera work. It spans on almost everything, from panoramas to close shots, from good use of kinetic to fixed tracking shots, filters a bit less but we have these too. And maybe one of the most impressive is the composition of some fixed frames. The clip below doesn't do justice for all we have here, but unfortunately I don't have time to look for more now... Just watch the movie ;)
James Laxton for "Moonlight". The movie is shot ok-ish, but I don't find it much better overall than "Arrival". Probably the most impressive part is the sequence below... There are few frames "to remember" in the rest.
Rodrigo Prieto for "Silence". Scorsese's movie, adaptation of a book on the torment of several missionaries in the Middle Age Japan has an implicit factor of "cinematography boost" = the historical/epic character coupled with the open air action. In brief, it gains a bit from the open shots, the rest is ok overall, but not impressive.
Verdict: "La La Land" will probably get it, but I will keep my fingers crossed for "Lion".
I decided to boycott the cinematography at this year Oscars. But this time I'm gonna do it loud = short text & bashing. Reason: who should win (well .. if they would have had the mercy to nominate him) - Hoyte van Hoytema for "Interstellar" + who will most probably win ...
Emmanuel Lubezki for "Birdman" ... I have nothing against this guy (one of the best directors of photography at the moment actually), and the visuals in "Birdman" are indeed impressive = one continuous shot from beginning to the end. The problem is the same as in the previous years. The confusion of the "grand jury". I thought we managed somehow to get rid of cinematography Oscar awarded for VFX at least once. But well .. I'm afraid we'll have one for something that looks more like editing (where by the way, surprise ... no nomination).
Robert D. Yeoman for "The Grand Budapest Hotel" should snatch the Oscar from what we have here (in the absence of "Interstellar") if the Academy awakens by some miracle and awards it objectively ... Which I doubt ...
Lukasz Zal & Ryszard Lenczewski also use in "Ida" a static camera. As in the one above. Unfortunately only in black & white. And since "Schindler's List" (> 20 years) the Academy decided that the cinematography Oscar should embrace the color era. So ...
Dick Pope for "Mr. Turner" : Superb light. Good cinematography. Small chances to win (we're at the Oscars, remember ? ... if it's not blue as "Avatar" then not ok).
Roger Deakins for "Unbroken" ... or how to reach 12 nominations without being given one single Oscar ... or how the Academy thinks it can compensate the lost opportunity to give it for "True Grit". Dream on ...
I'm writing ... in a pause on writing an article on IT security for a conference where I don't think I'll meet the deadline. To add some extra to the time crisis, I'm also struck by a horrible migraine since this morning. Ergo, don't expect much coherence in what follows. And consequence 2: I've decided, as never before, with apologies for my laziness, that instead of searching for clips from every movie, to choose a very well done mix on the topic, with some comments on which I agree 90% or more. Credits go to fandor.com :
Now .. if the clip was not enough, and you have patience to get extra bored by me, let me throw a couple lines on the subject ...
"The Grandmaster" is yet another movie about Ip Man (or Yip Man depending on the orthography). Yet another = there are no less than 5 (five) movies made in China in the last 6 years which have this main character. Sorry .. who's Ip Man ? Apparently somebody quite important in the world of kung-fu schools, who people say that had also Bruce Lee as student at some point. This movie is directed by Wong Kar Wai, one of the most appreciated Chinese filmmakers, nominated quite often at Cannes. For who knows what we're talking about, there's probably no surprise that "The Grandmaster" is not a "kung fu movie" by definition. Is a melancholic chaos typical for WKW, hard to follow, and even more hard to understand if you see it one small part at a time as I finally managed to do. Even so, it's hard for me to give any circumstance for how "dis-articulated" the production proved to be. It's quite far from better titles by WKW as "Ashes of Time" or "2046". About the cinematography, it's indeed the best part of the movie, but even here, despite the fact that pleases the eye, it's a bit too much excess of gros-plan and slow motion. Overall it looks good, but still Phillipe Le Sourd (the director of photography) is not Christopher Doyle (again, check out "2046" or "Chungking Express"). And that rain is a bit too artificial ...
"Gravity" gets again in the top Oscar contender position, especially given the fact that since "Avatar", this award was unfortunately given too the most visual spectacular movie, and not really for the best cinematography. The comment in the clip is very objective on the question of where does cinematography start and where does it end ? Well ... we still have something called VFX, and we still have something called film editing, and for me there are three different things. Anyway, unlike "Avatar" where the Oscar was given as well as you could give a cinematography Oscar to an animation (by the way, the winner - Mauro Fiore in his whole career by now had only one nomination except "the blue movie" and that on something called DVD Exclusive Awards), in "Gravity" at least we have cinematography. There are close-ups, the camera is playing with the shadows, you get to see super-angular framing, we have out of the ordinary tracking shots. I have to admit, that besides all the VFX it has, "Gravity" has also an excellent cinematography, although in my opinion not the best one this year. Still, Emmanuel Lubezki should've got the Oscar anyway for "Tree of Life", and lost against "Hugo", so ...
"Inside Llewyn Davis" is the main reason (besides the lack of time) for which I preferred the clip above. The second scene presented there perfectly completes what I was saying last time when I wrote about sound mixing. You can feel the winter ... If there is to be any surprise this year, it will come from here (and I'd really like to happen). Bruno Delbonnel has his own well defined style as director of photography, which you can also recognize in "Amelie", in "Un long dimanche de fiançailles" (probably the most close to what we have here), and even in "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince". Maybe I'm a bit subjective, because from all that gets into cinematography I'm most fond of chromatic filtering, but this movie has more than that. I'll repeat myself, but the second scene presented in the clip, especially in the context where is set in the movie is supported in a very powerful manner by the light & shadows work for obtaining a sensation of "getting lost in life" ...
"Nebraska" is a movie shot in black and white. The first using this technique directed by Alexander Payne. I'll talk more about the movie another time (there are plenty of occasions left) since I'm quite on the rush now. What can I say about the cinematography ... Phedon Papamichael is the usual director of photography working with Payne, and the cinematography wasn't exactly the best part of the movies, by now. In this case we have an exception, especially due to some wide shots. Unfortunately the clip above doesn't present a panorama with a moving car on a U.S. interstate highway, which is probably the most significant scene visually. In any case, since "Schindler's List" I don't think I've seen any black & white movie to emit serious claims for an Oscar. This year neither ...
"Prisoners" is a movie I've written already before, so I'll end quickly, especially since I completely agree with the clip's comment that is a bit on a different league than the others. It's quite far actually from the best of Roger Deakins = "Shawshank Redemption", "The Reader" or "True Grit". I start to believe that the Academy has a sadistic pleasure to just nominate this guy (also last year without much chance for "Skyfall") considering he is for the 11th time on the list, and again quite unlikely to win. There's still time though, maybe next year ;) ...
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.
Unlike last time, I really like writing about cinematography. It's obviously the aspect that gives the most to the visual feeling of a movie (well, sometimes helped ot buried by the editing, but about that next time). So, let me go quickly into the subject :) until I'm not getting again too long ( and out of the subject :) ) in the intro..
Matthew Libatique for "Black Swan" - is the cinematographer who worked at most of the movies directed by Aronofsky (except "The Wrestler"). I think his best remains "The Fountain", but "Black Swan" is not too far. It's the story of a ballerina driven by her obsession for a role up to a thin edge somewhere between psychosis and schizophrenia. The image composition in the movie helps a lot in creating an atmosphere that is a mix between tension and pure madness increasing in intensity as the film gets near its end. Remember "Shining" by Kubrick ? Maybe, it's better to give it as example for the effect of the cinematography in there as a comparison instead rambling general nonsense from my head :) Getting a bit more technical, the image in "Black Swan" is cold, in dark tones, narrow framing (I don't think you have more than 10 minutes in the entire movie in which the visual field covers more than 4-5 square meteres maximum), the camera is usually close to the character, sometimes even pretty "bound" enough scenes being filmed in one shot (one sample below). However, with all these helping a lot to getting the feeling I was telling about, I see "Black Swan" somewhere in the middle of this years nominees. I've said it before :) it was quite a good year for movies ...
The second nominee and one of the main two favorites is Wally Pfister for "Inception". Here also, as in many cases, we have a pair, the mentioned one being the cinematographer preferred by Nolan. Actually, since "Batman Begins", meaning also "The Prestige" and "The Dark Knight" Pfister got every time a nominee for cinematography. No Oscar yet. I personally like his work, but in every movie I have the feeling that something is missing somewhere ... There are some scenes that should be more "warm" instead of looking to cold and dry as they do, generally speaking, not only in "Inception". Actually "Inception" and "The Prestige" suffer less of this problem. I'd say even more, that "The Prestige" has some advantage in the visual aspect of the final result being quite close to perfect, but this taking into consideration that the movie has much lower visual requirements than "Inception" (less location settings, very consistent support from art direction - I can't forget the hats scene :), etc). To cut it shorter, Pfister has pretty big chances this year to get the Oscar for "Inception", but I think he'll wait one more time :) unfortunately .. because something tells me that we won't see anything better as long as he keeps his current style. In "Inception" I think he gave the maximum he can for this type of production (like I said "The Prestige" falls in a different category). At least he is much better here than he was in "The Dark Knight". And that actually counts even for scenes that apparently don't require much like the next one - love the slow motion in the end :) - that's cinematography, not VFX like the water flood by the way (with appologies for one additional click, but unfortunately 99% of what's on YouTube from "Inception" has "embedding disabled by request"):
Danny Cohen for "The King's Speech" - I don't have any clue who this guy is. I think even the BAFTA doesn't :), where this movie was in its own "kingdom" to say so = grabbing any deserved and not really deserved award, but I prefer not to talk more about it ( was expected to be so in UK :) ). Even so, like I said it didn't get the award for best cinematography. I actually find a bit strange the nominee at this category, considering that last year were movies much more deserving like "Shutter Island" or "Ghost Writer". Anyway, this is not the only case here ... We have one more a bit below, which I think it's even worse. Going back to the topic, and trying to be fair, there are some scenes in "King's Speech" well done visually - the walk in the park, or the traveling in the final scene where the camera follows the main character, and even some frames from the therapy sessions. Anyway, in all of these, I think the editing helps a lot. Unfortunately I couldn't find anything from the mentioned ones so I don't have something better to give as sample besides the wine cellar scene. This one is .. well .. pretty normal :), ok with respect to the shadow composition = the image is well balanced regarding the lighting, but that's pretty much of it I think ..
Jeff Cronenweth for "The Social Network" - from my point of view it definitely shouldn't be here. He is the cinematographer who did "Fight Club", and didn't work with Fincher afterward until now. I really believe that the cinematography in "Fight Club" is better than here although I don't remember being impressed by this part there also. What worth mentioning about "The Social Network" with respect to the final look is the editing, but like I said I'll discuss this next time. I don't even know what else to say. If on the above one I did have some examples to give .. here I don't. If this movie gets the Oscar for cinematography, I really think that next year I'll seriously consider not writing anymore about this category, because in that case it would mean that I'm probably waaaaay off the line with my appreciations ( not just way :) ). The only scene that I can mention (although again .. the editing ...) is the one with the boat race:
Roger Deakins for "True Grit" - reached to the ninth Oscar nomination without getting any until now. I didn't see two of his previous works in this list ("Kundun" and "The Man Who Wasn't There") but from the rest, I definitely believe without any discussion that this one is his best movie. Many people consider this guy one of the best cinematographers of the moment, and after seeing "True Grit" I'm also starting to believe it finally :). Also many people consider that he should have won the Oscar for "No Country for Old Men". I totally disagree on this, the cinematography from "There Will Be Blood" was way superior and deserved its award. Here, however it's something totally different, even if it's the same collaboration with the Coen brothers as directors, and even if we have pretty much the same kind of open settings as in "No Country for Old Men". The result it's clearly above. It is the best movie of the last year for cinematography and I don't think it will miss the Oscar. Probably I shouldn't say more, and just let the next clip roll.
Posts
