Congrats Wally.

I actually was hoping that Danny Cohen or Matthew Libatique would get it, but I was glad that Pfister finally took the award. He really should have won in 2009 over Mantle (Slumdog Millionaire).
 
Michael Traven said:
I actually was hoping that Danny Cohen or Matthew Libatique would get it, but I was glad that Pfister finally took the award. He really should have won in 2009 over Mantle (Slumdog Millionaire).
Click to expand...

I liked all nominees this year but Libatique was the anti-thesis of Pfister. One went 16mm, grainy, conflicted and rough... Pfister went 65mm, surreal and polished... for lack of better terms. I'd rather it went to Pfister. I think both looks were appropriate for the films, but Pfister I think had the greater achievement, if you know what I mean. (Think of the rotating sets, lighting cues, etc.)
 
Yes, I wasn't overly impressed with a lot of Libatique and Aronofsky's choices with Black Swan, but watching it I can't help but just enjoy the shots. The cinematography wasn't quite as... stand-outish with Inception. Some would say that's a good thing, and it certainly can be. My top pick was easily Cohen. I know people have said elsewhere that they found the wide and off-centered shots in The King's Speech to be distracting (or something similar), but that's actually 90% of the reason I paid $40 to go see it (it wasn't playing near me). It was simply beautiful and interesting and I could just sit there in the theater and soak up the framing.

Also, the super tight shots of Firth's mouth at the microphone were great. Everything seemed very specific, very intentional. I loved it. <grin>
 
Ryan Patrick O'Hara said:
I liked all nominees this year but Libatique was the anti-thesis of Pfister. One went 16mm, grainy, conflicted and rough... Pfister went 65mm, surreal and polished... for lack of better terms. I'd rather it went to Pfister. I think both looks were appropriate for the films, but Pfister I think had the greater achievement, if you know what I mean. (Think of the rotating sets, lighting cues, etc.)
Click to expand...

I think this is a very interesting point, Ryan. I know what you mean, but I disagree.

In another thread you mentioned Mauro Fiore's Oscar win last year and how you still didn't know how you feel about it. I was quite stunned and still am. The look of the film was achieved more in post than in the shooting. I think this is true too of INCEPTION - but not to the same degree.

I actually found the cinematography in INCEPTION to be a little bland - the opening sequence at Saito's was elegant but somewhat dull; while the sequnce in the snow in the second half looked like something out of James Bond.

To me, cinematography is primarily about using composition and lighting to evoke the mood of the story, and Deakins' work in TRUE GRIT I found far superior. There are some stunning shots in that film, whereas the stunning shots in INCEPTION were more to do with the VFX, art direction and production design. INCEPTION was significantly relit digitally in post, far more than TRUE GRIT.

Most importantly, the cinematography in TRUE GRIT really added to the emotion of the story. On the other hand, like the Tin Man in OZ, INCEPTION had no heart. This is Nolan's fault rather than Wally's, but to me great cinematography is about heightening emotions. I felt none during INCEPTION other than cool detachment.

Don't get me wrong, Wally is a great DP, but a Deakins he is not (yet). I also find it unfair that the budget of INCEPTION was so massively above that of all the other films, so of course they were able to translate that into a good-looking movie. INCEPTION also won sound editing and sound design - of course they did, their budget was so big they had a clearly unfair advantage, just like AVATAR did last year.

Fiore winning last year, Deakins no wins despite shooting SHAWSHANK, KUNDUN, JESSE JAMES and NO COUNTRY to name but a few? I care not for the AAs anymore.
 
Last edited:
Futchibon said:
INCEPTION was significantly relit digitally in post, far more than TRUE GRIT.
Click to expand...

I find that hard to believe considering Wally color timed this film photo-chemically.

From AC July 2010:
Pfister did all of the color timing photochemically at Technicolor, working with long-time collaborator Dacid Orr. In addition to 35mm and digital-cinema presentations, Inception will be released on 70mm Imax in select markets, and DKP 70mm Inc. scanned the 35mm color-timed inter-positives to create those prints. "The photo-chemical process is quite simple and works well for us," notes Pfister. "I put a lot of care into the color balance and exposure during filming, and that limits the manipulation required in post. If we want a scene to have more contrast, we accomplish that with lighting, wardrobe and set design. We were able to time this entire film in just three check prints. That's about half the time of the average digital intermediate." - Wally Pfister
Click to expand...
From Paramount Pictures, Post interview with Christopher Nolan:
Post: I know you’re a fan of film rather than digital. Did you even do a DI?
NOLAN: “No. We cut the negative and timed it photo-chemically. That gives you the best result by far, in the least amount of time, at the best price. It’s truly a great process. Most films seem to do a DI now, but I think it’s just a waste of time for most. If you don’t want to avail yourself of any particular stylization in the timing, then photo-chemical timing will give you the best possible quality, in hours rather than weeks.”
Click to expand...
The special effects shots were the only ones that needed digital touching in post, and as far as I know were not touched in regards for altering lighting or color grade of the 'real' elements on film.

You are correct about Deakins, he should have won by now. In my opinion, he should have taken Assassination of Jesse James, when he was nominated twice in one year! But this year, I don't think True Grit, as excellent as it was, was a) his best film, b) able to take down Inception. That of course is totally my opinion.
As far as budget, just as I don't want all the big flashy films to win every year, I'd hate to see people start to win the award for the opposite. Reverse discrimination, ya know? I don't want to see it go to a film because they were more poor than the other... or etc. The Oscars are never an easy decision, nor are they hardly agreeable by everyone. Next time Deakin's makes a Shawshank, Man Who Wasn't There, Kundun, Assassination, or etc. I'll be in his corner. For sure.
 
Last edited:
Futchibon said:
I actually found the cinematography in INCEPTION to be a little bland - the opening sequence at Saito's was elegant but somewhat dull; while the sequnce in the snow in the second half looked like something out of James Bond.

Most importantly, the cinematography in TRUE GRIT really added to the emotion of the story. On the other hand, like the Tin Man in OZ, INCEPTION had no heart. This is Nolan's fault rather than Wally's, but to me great cinematography is about heightening emotions. I felt none during INCEPTION other than cool detachment.

Don't get me wrong, Wally is a great DP, but a Deakins he is not (yet). I also find it unfair that the budget of INCEPTION was so massively above that of all the other films, so of course they were able to translate that into a good-looking movie. INCEPTION also won sound editing and sound design - of course they did, their budget was so big they had a clearly unfair advantage, just like AVATAR did last year.
Click to expand...

Of course, art is subjective, but I'm amazed that you felt Inception's cinematography had no emotional impact. I thought the pools of light in Cobb's own dreams reflected the words he was saying at the time about his kids. I thought the transitions with the lighting gags were perfect, like when Cobb says "I'm ready," looks up, the light off-camera shines in his face and grows brighter, his pupils go narrow, and then we match cut to him holding a sniper rifle in the mountains. I thought the use of super-wide angle lenses in the Parisian street shots were fantastic and added to the complexity of the scene.

I could list more, and I have not yet seen True Grit, but I am shocked that you thought Inception "had no heart." I thought it was an incredibly thoughtful and though-provoking film in general, mainly because of Nolan and Pfister's collaboration.
 
Although I really think the cinematography in INCEPTION was outstanding and Wally Pfister, ASC definitely deserves the award, I would've liked to see Deakins winning. Because this was now his 9th nomination and he's done such an amazing job in all of his films. I really think it's about time that he's gonna get the oscar. In my opinion he should've won it for THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES in 2008.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top