Best Cinematography

Started by Jeremy Blackman, April 18, 2006, 02:13:10 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


what is cinematography really?


not to increase the animosity on this here thread or anything, but killafilm's interpretation of the luzbeski quote and his subsequent definition of cinematography are both very superficial.  to think that an entire film can be filmmed in high noon light which meant ugly light which meant ugly actors, or
Quote"The fact that it wasn't nominated by the ASC does matter.  Cinematography is a technical craft.  When the ASC nominates someone it's a remark on their abilities to use photographic techniques to reach an artistic expression (but note that Munich wasn't nominated either, so umm...).  To that extent I'll once again say that it's in MY OPINION that Munich is the better picture.  And not just through 'lighting' but through composition, the use of the zoom, mixed color temps, silver retention, different color schemes all to service the STORY."

which is like a lot of words for a very inarticulate stab at cinematography--by first inserting some kinda awards-ceremony-esque speech and then secondly telling us the most basic and superficial elements of what he thinks cinematography is comprised of.  these are like film buff words.
"Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot."
- Buster Keaton


Quote from: pete on April 20, 2006, 12:05:39 AM
these are like film buff words.

A lot of insults have been thrown around, but you just dropped the big one.
"As a matter of fact I only work with the feeling of something magical, something seemingly significant. And to keep it magical I don't want to know the story involved, I just want the hypnotic effect of it somehow seeming significant without knowing why." - Len Lye


i havent' seen The New World, but when I read the american cinematographer article about it I was waaay more excited about Lubeszki's work than, for example, Rodrigo Prieto's in Brokeback Mountain...

Judging cinematography can be very subjective, techical stuff is not always the primary concern. I agree that Munich has a superb cinematography, but if I had to choose a film in which I personally enjoyed the screen experience due to cinematography last year, I guess that would be Pride & Prejudice, and no one has said anything aobut it on this thread or the movie received any kind of recognition for it...but for me it was trully wonderful to look at...

The ASC  is a respectable group, but they are also kind of political too, they have their own sacred cows and all. They have honored Lubesxki before, and maybe this time they wanted to honor someone else....

I'm happy with xixax honoring the new world...


I had to step back and think this over for awhile.

I think (hopefully) that this will explain where I'm coming from.  I worked on a project with Jack N. Green's son (so there is some bias here), and we were just talking about his dads career and some of the high points.  Obviously Unforgiven is a great great film, but I don't think I'd ever really thought about the cinematography.  And when we got to this film he mad a quip about it not getting the oscar.  His personal complaint (not his dads) was that the winning film was shot mainly in natural light in gorgeous exteriors.  While most of Unforgiven was filmed at night in period, thus having to replicate oil lanterns of the times.  Which is not an easy task, and it's in my opinion Green took the high road and made it quite natural.  So maybe that's coming more from a filmmakers perspective rather a critics.

And I find it kinda funny that I was getting attacked, when I did indeed list The New World as my favorite movie of the year.

Pete, just wondering, have you ever worked on a film? One that was shot on film?


Sorry, I don't mean to continue the attack here, but do you have your own opinion of this at all?  You keep quoting others and their opinions to back your point.

Also, your friend's reason was dumb.  "It should win an Oscar because it wasn't natural light and that's like, way harder to do".



yes I've shot things on film, not with jack green's son though.  I read the American Cinematographer just like you do, but I don't really care about what the cinematographers say about the quality of their lights I just watch whatever is onscreen.  I do not have a "good light bad light dichotomy" not even when I shot those projects back in my school days.  as you grow old, if you don't become an idiot or a snob, you'll realize that cinematography is way than the sum of lighting and composition and lens.  the way you gladly list what you consider cinematography should be, a list that most cinematographers with soul will tell you should not dictate what is good or bad cinematography, shows that you've still got a lot to soak up in your pursuit for good filmmaking. 
"Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot."
- Buster Keaton


This is the dullest throwdown ever.
My house, my rules, my coffee