Categories One-by-One: Cinematography

For the films of 2013
Post Reply
User avatar
rolotomasi99
Professor
Posts: 2108
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:13 pm
Location: n/a
Contact:

Re: Categories One-by-One: Cinematography

Post by rolotomasi99 »

Those particularly fascinated by the art of cinematography might want to take a look at Kris Tapley's Top 10 Shots of 2013.

http://www.hitfix.com/in-contention/the ... 3-part-one
http://www.hitfix.com/in-contention/the ... 3-part-two

His whole list is good, but his top three in particular truly were the most striking shots of the year.
"When it comes to the subject of torture, I trust a woman who was married to James Cameron for three years."
-- Amy Poehler in praise of Zero Dark Thirty director Kathryn Bigelow
User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 13668
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Re: Categories One-by-One: Cinematography

Post by OscarGuy »

I don't think it's the 3D cinematography that people are complaining about, but a shift from celluloid to digital. Warner Bros. has declared celluloid dead and will release all of its films (except Interstellar) on a digital format. The issue with digital is that you can capture natural lighting and then correct it after the fact. With regular film stock cinematography, you get it right the first time or you don't get it at all. You can go through some visual effects to fix it, but it's not as easy. Plus, there's an art form to working on film.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
Greg
Tenured
Posts: 3285
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 1:12 pm
Location: Greg
Contact:

Re: Categories One-by-One: Cinematography

Post by Greg »

I beleive that the big upcoming advance in cinematography will not be improved 3D, but will be the development of ultra-high definition cinematography.
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Categories One-by-One: Cinematography

Post by Mister Tee »

I just got to The Grandmaster last night, and might have initiated this thread myself, but thanks to dws for saving me the effort.

The video essay rolo links to actually pinpoints favorite visual moments of mine -- the fight in the rain in The Grandmaster; the hitchhiking in he fog in Inside Llewyn Davis; even the capture of Paul Dano in Prisoners (though they highlight that as a bad moment, with which I disagree).

Prisoners, though, would be very unlikely to have made the list were it not shot by Deakins, who's in the John Williams class of always getting nominations (though never wins). He does capture the bleakness of such a town during the cold season, which is notable, but, again, not apt to be singled out for such a non-contending movie.

I grant that Nebraska isn't a true black-and-white wow like The White Ribbon, but I think Papamichael does a good job of making the bleak, flat landscape an important part of the story's subtext. But Academy voters have proven, especially in this millenium, that they don't hold black-and-white in the same high esteem cineastes do -- picking Memoirs of a Geisha over Good Night and Good Luck was about the final word on that.

I'm right with dws on The Grandmaster: the cinematographers' branch has always like highlighting a foreign film (Asian, in particular), and the voters never bite.

Inside Llewyn Davis is definitely the finest example of non-visual-effects-enhanced photography on the slate this year. But the general snub of the film makes it feel, as dws has said, that it wouldn't win even if Gravity weren't the alternative.

Anyway, Gravity IS the alternative, so the discussion pretty much ends there (especially given the concurrence of ASC, historically resistant to computer-generated films). I imagine the debate over what constitutes cinematography in this brave new world will continue over the next decade. But, please: let's not get on our high horse about CGI now when it's finally accruing to the benefit of a man who's been cruelly deprived in this category time after time. Lubezki for the win.
User avatar
rolotomasi99
Professor
Posts: 2108
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:13 pm
Location: n/a
Contact:

Re: Categories One-by-One: Cinematography

Post by rolotomasi99 »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJicFnwQbv4

Here is a video analyzing the five nominees that folks might find interesting.
"When it comes to the subject of torture, I trust a woman who was married to James Cameron for three years."
-- Amy Poehler in praise of Zero Dark Thirty director Kathryn Bigelow
dws1982
Emeritus
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 9:28 pm
Location: AL
Contact:

Categories One-by-One: Cinematography

Post by dws1982 »

Not sure there's a great deal to discuss here, at least in terms of competition.

In most categories with a strong frontrunner, we usually can say "well in another year, [nominee X] would win". I don't see that in this category. Maybe it's because this category has gone towards the big 3D productions so often in the past few years, but even looking at the years before that, when voting was more a bit more traditional, I don't see any of the four non-Gravity nominees as films that would be a frontrunner.

Of the non-nominees, two that might make sense as winners under more traditional voting would be Captain Phillips and 12 Years a Slave--but even then, they likely wouldn't have sure bets unless their movies were expected to sweep. I wasn't shocked that they didn't get nominated, but I would've put them both on the list ahead of Nebraska and probably Prisoners.

I think we can all agree that Nebraska wouldn't have been nominated here if it were in color; The black and white photography is fine, and it does evoke a certain mood, but Nebraska is still not the type of film that typically wins this category. The Grandmaster, is the type of foreign movie that can get nominated but almost never wins. Prisoners: no movie since She Wore a Yellow Ribbon has won this award with no other nominations. Inside Llewyn Davis was a big critical favorite in the cinematography awards, but given its near-collapse with the guilds and the Oscar voters, I doubt it would have a very good shot.

This has to be Gravity's award to lose. The 3D movies have been dominating this category of late, even at the expense of Lubezki's widely-acclaimed work on The Tree of Life. There is a bit of growing controversy--and I suspect it'll continue to grow after this year--about how much of the impressive stuff these 3D effects-driven movies is actual photography vs. visual effects. This isn't a coincidence given that the Cinematography award and the Visual Effects award have gone to the same movie for each of the past four years--something that has only occurred twice since the Cinematography categories were merged in the late 60's. But I don't think that "cinematography or visual effects" controversy is going to hurt to Lubezki this year. Maybe down the line, especially if there's a 3D movie up for this award that isn't really very widely loved, we'll see a 3D movie go down. Until then, I don't see any reason to bet against 3D. And since Lubezki is primed to benefit, after losses for The New World, Children of Men and The Tree of Life, I'm okay with it. Now, I guess the real question is: When will Roger Deakins do 3D?
Last edited by dws1982 on Sat Feb 15, 2014 8:54 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Post Reply

Return to “86th Nominations and Winners”