Beauty in Cinematography
Posted 19 January 2006 - 09:20 AM
Posted 19 January 2006 - 09:59 AM
but you wanted an example where cinematography distracts the audience... so i guess that aint it...
Edited by lav, 19 January 2006 - 10:00 AM.
Posted 19 January 2006 - 05:45 PM
You've definetly jumped into the great ocean of artistic subjectivity on this one. Recently, my wife and I saw Narnia. We felt it over used scenic great-scapes along with motion way, way, way too much. Give it a look. While it is not in DVD yet, it may give your paper a very recent example.
Due to the artistic sensibilities of Japan, you may use their tendencies to frame unbeliebably beautiful images. While they are absolutely eye gougingly lovely, they do not appeal to the average American notions of what cinema is.
Posted 19 January 2006 - 05:57 PM
Posted 19 January 2006 - 07:57 PM
While I don't completely agree, Michael Chapman used to complain that Storaro's photography of "Agatha" completely overwhelms a simple little story, like pouring heavy gravy over everything. Some critics made the same complaint about the photography of John Ford's "The Fugitive", which is a bit over the top. Again, I'm not sure I agree because I don't believe these movies would have been improved by a change in cinematography, only in the scripts. But the complaints have some validity.
I tend to feel that a much greater problem is mediocrity in cinematography rather than overt expressiveness. The question is when does cinematography crossover from gentle, low-key subtlety (which I love) to mediocrity.
Posted 20 January 2006 - 01:01 AM
You bring up an interesting point. I recently saw Snow Falling On Cedars on my digital projector. The images were stunning. So much so that the story seemed belabored by them. I would go so far as to say that the story kept interrupting the sequences of beautiful images!
I'm speculating that it may have something to do with what part of our brains we use for what. As I review my memories of that movie, I recall it as two different presentations. I have stored the amazing imagery as a seperate information base than the story line. Possibly, the cinematography can work as a seperate strength from the story. However, my notions of movie making incline me to assume that the cinematography and story should work in union.
Posted 20 January 2006 - 07:08 AM
David have you ever turned down a job because you thought i fell short of your ability? Hope you don't mind me asking.
Posted 20 January 2006 - 08:30 AM
beauty. The low light photography was extraordinary to me. I was impressed and em-
otionally moved by the older japanese era as it progressed towards world war II. The
change of people and places as the film progressed chronologically along. I was partic-
ularly moved by the beauty of Michelle Yeoh as she progressed chronologically in time
throughout the film.
Posted 20 January 2006 - 09:47 AM
I've done plenty of bad films, but I sometimes turn down something either because I don't feel they have the budget or schedule to do justice to the script, or because the script, though fine, has no compelling visual aspects to it.