Best Picture

Jim20
Temp
Posts: 337
Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2003 7:54 pm
Location: Pasadena, CA
Contact:

Postby Jim20 » Wed Mar 02, 2011 6:54 pm

One of the reasons Pfister probably won his Oscar was not for merely servicing the FX and bringing them to their most realistic effect, it was his use of the many locations like Paris and Mombasa and others that one could say was the "pretty" nominee.

I was especially impressed with the extras on the Blu-Ray that showed in detail the extensive use of shooting in the Zero-G hallways and how complicated the logistics that must have been for Pfister and his crew.

I liked Deakins' work on True Grit a lot, but I didn't think it (1) matched the best of his past work and (2) thought the look and the feel of Inception was simply better.

User avatar
rolotomasi99
Associate
Posts: 1913
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:13 pm
Location: n/a
Contact:

Postby rolotomasi99 » Wed Mar 02, 2011 3:22 pm

ITALIANO wrote:It's not exactly my opinion (though I wouldn't say that I was impressed with the cinematography in Inception - it looked serviceable, not much more than that) but what I've read on most comments I've seen. Most say that with such greatly-shot movies as Black Swan, True Grit and The Social Network - and some add The King's Speech, though I don't agree with this - picking Inception was just completely wrong.

Well it makes up for INCEPTION being snubbed for its editing. Of its 7 non-BP nominations, I thought it deserved to win every category except cinematography and screenplay. I was rooting for Deakins all the way. However, the cinematography was very well done. I love Pfister's use of light and shadows. This might be the film where he uses the most color, though they seemed to be primarily hot colors like red, yellow, and orange. His best work was definitely THE PRESTIGE. The image of Hugh Jackman in a foggy field of lightbulbs coming out of the ground is a truly amazing visual.

While TRUE GRIT had the best cinematography of the year, INCEPTION was definitely in the running for second best. It is certainly a better choice than AVATAR's non-cinematography and SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE's ugly cinematography.


P.S. I would add, the past two winners for cinematography have been sci-fi films. Roger Deakins next film is NOW, a LOGAN'S RUN knock-off. It is being directed by Andrew Niccol, who utilized strong cinematography in GATTACA and LORD OF WAR (I have not seen SIMONE). Perhaps Deakins will be winning an Oscar sooner than we think.




Edited By rolotomasi99 on 1299100409
"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

Uri
Assistant
Posts: 986
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 11:37 pm
Location: Israel

Postby Uri » Wed Mar 02, 2011 2:23 pm

Damien wrote:
Uri wrote:
Damien wrote:One of the best movies ever to win this award.

This honestly comes from a totally sarcasm free, really bewildered place. I'm always intrigued by your stands, whether I wholeheartedly agree with them or passionately don't, and over the years I believe I learned to trace where you come from. This time I'm totally lost, for The King's Speech is such a reactionary film. Not only in the way it's made – unlike True grit, it's not about traditionalism as a conscious artistic decision – but also about the way it turn historical events and conflicts into a reassuring, soothing celebration of the way everything falls into it's right and proper place. Such a celebration of the concept of the monarchy and its ability to find the right path even when the times are changing (ok, with the help of some eccentric commoners, after all this is not 1600) is really hard to find. As far as I remember you were not a fan of The Queen, but at least it presented a more balanced, complex angel. Since I think that politically our views are not that far away, I'm amazed in your seemingly unrestrained endorsing of TKS. I'm really baffled.

Uri, one of the qualities I most cherish is kindness. Although it is probably not apparent here because the Internet is such a bully board, being kind is the guiding force in my life. (It's why, despite our 180 degree political differences, Leo McCarey is one of my top 3 favorite directors.)

And The King's Speech is, above all, a movie about kindness. About people reaching out and connecting. Interesting people from wildly different backgrounds. And the connections are sweet and moving. But the film is never maudlin. It's very clear eyed and unsentimental, And for those much maligned off-kilter visual set-ups, where characters are not centrally framed, I think they're a perfect visual correlation to the real life relations of the characters.

In addition, the script is literate, witty and wise. It all ads up to sn extremely fine picture.

Ok, I get your point – and as I said before, watching TKS was a pleasant experience, and it probably was the result of, indeed, an apparent sincerity in its making. Maybe I'm a bit too harsh in my criticism as a response to what I feel is an unjustifiable canonization of it, but I'm afraid what particularly upset me is that I think that this need to be gracious comes at the expense of courageous evaluation of historical events, and while I accept the right of its creators to be flexible with the facts in order to enhance their artistic agenda, I'm disappointed that all their choices seemed to be aimed at softening the impact of the actual "truth", of making it more comfortable and less disturbing for the viewer, and I have a problem with Art which is there to please.

ITALIANO
Emeritus
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 1:58 pm
Location: MILAN
Contact:

Postby ITALIANO » Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:21 pm

It's not exactly my opinion (though I wouldn't say that I was impressed with the cinematography in Inception - it looked serviceable, not much more than that) but what I've read on most comments I've seen. Most say that with such greatly-shot movies as Black Swan, True Grit and The Social Network - and some add The King's Speech, though I don't agree with this - picking Inception was just completely wrong.

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 6849
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Postby Sabin » Wed Mar 02, 2011 11:59 am

(ITALIANO @ Mar. 02 2011,5:28)
In Italy The Social Network hasn't been a big hit (even less so compared to The King's Speech's huge box office), so not many have cried over the results - and Natalie Portman's win has been praised by everyone. Interestingly, most negative comments here have focused on Best Cinematography to Inception - which many reviewers felt was the worst among the five nominees.

Really? That's quite interesting to me. Although I think Roger Deakins' work on True Grit was only intermittently stunning the rest being quite average, I wonder why Inception's cinematography struck so many as the worst? It's a rather beautifully lit film and within the constrains of Christopher Nolan's shot-reverse shot tempo, I think Wally Pfister does the most that he can, and occasionally the result is quite beautiful. Ultimately though, it's still shot-reverse shot. I think the voters were going for the visual effects as much as the lensing.

My favorite this race was Matthew Libatique's handheld camera work on Black Swan.
Philomena is one of the year's best Philomenas!

ITALIANO
Emeritus
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 1:58 pm
Location: MILAN
Contact:

Postby ITALIANO » Wed Mar 02, 2011 6:28 am

:)

Well, I'm not sure that kindness can be considered an artistic quality, but I'll admit that the movie isn't "polite" (which is what some movies actually are, rather than "kind") - like it or not, the human interest in this case is sincere, and it shows.

It's not one of the best Best Picture winners ever, but not one of the worst either, and the fact that it won over critics' favorite The Social Network unfortunately will make some say so, even in the future (I should point out that Fincher's movie also won the NBR award and the Golden Globe - of Pia Zadora fame - definitely not two of the most revolutionary and daring prizes in sight).

In Italy The Social Network hasn't been a big hit (even less so compared to The King's Speech's huge box office), so not many have cried over the results - and Natalie Portman's win has been praised by everyone. Interestingly, most negative comments here have focused on Best Cinematography to Inception - which many reviewers felt was the worst among the five nominees.

User avatar
Damien
Laureate
Posts: 6331
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:43 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Postby Damien » Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:28 am

Uri wrote:
Damien wrote:One of the best movies ever to win this award.

This honestly comes from a totally sarcasm free, really bewildered place. I'm always intrigued by your stands, whether I wholeheartedly agree with them or passionately don't, and over the years I believe I learned to trace where you come from. This time I'm totally lost, for The King's Speech is such a reactionary film. Not only in the way it's made – unlike True grit, it's not about traditionalism as a conscious artistic decision – but also about the way it turn historical events and conflicts into a reassuring, soothing celebration of the way everything falls into it's right and proper place. Such a celebration of the concept of the monarchy and its ability to find the right path even when the times are changing (ok, with the help of some eccentric commoners, after all this is not 1600) is really hard to find. As far as I remember you were not a fan of The Queen, but at least it presented a more balanced, complex angel. Since I think that politically our views are not that far away, I'm amazed in your seemingly unrestrained endorsing of TKS. I'm really baffled.

Uri, one of the qualities I most cherish is kindness. Although it is probably not apparent here because the Internet is such a bully board, being kind is the guiding force in my life. (It's why, despite our 180 degree political differences, Leo McCarey is one of my top 3 favorite directors.)

And The King's Speech is, above all, a movie about kindness. About people reaching out and connecting. Interesting people from wildly different backgrounds. And the connections are sweet and moving. But the film is never maudlin. It's very clear eyed and unsentimental, And for those much maligned off-kilter visual set-ups, where characters are not centrally framed, I think they're a perfect visual correlation to the real life relations of the characters.

In addition, the script is literate, witty and wise. It all ads up to sn extremely fine picture.
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell

User avatar
kaytodd
Assistant
Posts: 846
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2003 10:16 pm
Location: New Orleans

Postby kaytodd » Tue Mar 01, 2011 8:11 pm

Would it would be catty for me to point out that a video interview with Kevin Spacey is right below that particular story?
The great thing in the world is not so much where we stand, as in what direction we are moving. It's faith in something and enthusiasm for something that makes a life worth living. Oliver Wendell Holmes

danfrank
Temp
Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:19 pm
Location: Oakland, CA

Postby danfrank » Tue Mar 01, 2011 4:45 pm

Somehow this story makes me like The King's Speech a little bit more, though I think the set probably suited the other film better.



Edited By danfrank on 1299016169

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15018
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Postby Big Magilla » Tue Mar 01, 2011 3:37 am

Mister Tee wrote:So, let's acknowledge what was the truly biggest surprise of this Oscar season: that Damien rated The King's Speech more highly than Magilla did.

Depends how you look at it. It's currently sitting at no. seven on my ten best list, one up from Damien, but that could change.

However, the only aspect of he film I really liked was the acting, especially of the three nominees and Jennifer Ehle. The costumes weren't bad, either, but the rote screenplay, the direction of everything and anything outside the principal actors, the choice of music queues and those tacky sets were all dreadful.

As I've said all along, it belongs on the lower half of a top ten list if it belongs on one at all.

And yet I don't find the win reprehensible. It's not a bad movie like Braveheart or an indifferent one like Gladiator or a what-were-they-thinking choice like Crash.

What I'm wondering now that it's all come to pass, is if selling yourself really counts. David Fincher and Christopher Nolan did no campaigning - zilch. Harvey pushed his actors, screenwriter and director to be everywhere and they were. I think AMPAS voters still like the personal touch.

Uri
Assistant
Posts: 986
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 11:37 pm
Location: Israel

Postby Uri » Tue Mar 01, 2011 3:07 am

Damien wrote:One of the best movies ever to win this award.

This honestly comes from a totally sarcasm free, really bewildered place. I'm always intrigued by your stands, whether I wholeheartedly agree with them or passionately don't, and over the years I believe I learned to trace where you come from. This time I'm totally lost, for The King's Speech is such a reactionary film. Not only in the way it's made – unlike True grit, it's not about traditionalism as a conscious artistic decision – but also about the way it turn historical events and conflicts into a reassuring, soothing celebration of the way everything falls into it's right and proper place. Such a celebration of the concept of the monarchy and its ability to find the right path even when the times are changing (ok, with the help of some eccentric commoners, after all this is not 1600) is really hard to find. As far as I remember you were not a fan of The Queen, but at least it presented a more balanced, complex angel. Since I think that politically our views are not that far away, I'm amazed in your seemingly unrestrained endorsing of TKS. I'm really baffled.

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 5926
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Postby Mister Tee » Mon Feb 28, 2011 9:57 pm

So, let's acknowledge what was the truly biggest surprise of this Oscar season: that Damien rated The King's Speech more highly than Magilla did.

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15018
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Postby Big Magilla » Mon Feb 28, 2011 9:26 pm

In retrospect, it's about the British monarchy, World War II and an affliction, how could it not have won?

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 6849
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Postby Sabin » Mon Feb 28, 2011 8:12 pm

All of my grandparents agree with you.
Philomena is one of the year's best Philomenas!

User avatar
Damien
Laureate
Posts: 6331
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:43 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Postby Damien » Mon Feb 28, 2011 3:54 pm

One of the best movies ever to win this award. liked The Fighter more. but I'm delighted at this outcome.
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell


Return to “83rd Nominations and Winners”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests