The Cinematography Guild's Nominees
Wednesday, January 7, 2015 at 3:00PM The American Society of Cinematographers chose the following five films as the best shot of the year. According to Twitter The Imitation Game is the odd man out. It was shot by Oscar Faura who is definitely talented (see The Orphanage and The Impossible) but discussions around this film rarely concern themselves with the quality of its cinematography (which can't really be said for the other nominees here).
1 of roughly 1,890 amazing shots in Mr Turner
- Birdman Emmanuel "Chivo" Lubezki (4 previous ASC nominations, 3 of them won)
- The Grand Budapest Hotel Robert Yeoman
- The Imitation Game Oscar Faura
- Mr. Turner Dick Pope (1 previous ASC nomination for The Illusionist)
- Unbroken Roger Deakins (12 previous ASC nominations, 3 wins, and 1 lifetime achievement)
It does remind slightly of when The King's Speech got that perplexing actual Oscar nomination for Cinematography over at least a dozen (at least it bears repeating) well shot and more inspiring choices from 2010. Of the ASC nominees only Lubezki has previously won an Oscar (for Gravity) and Roger Deakins is of course ever the Bridesmaid, never the Bride (which we used to be able to say about Lubezki). Dick Pope has one previous nomination to his credit (The Illusionsit)
Assuming the Oscar race is between Lubezki and Deakins, who do you think will win? Do you think this will be the Oscar list and if you don't which film with acclaimed cinematography (no matter what one thinks of each film) sneak in? Selma? Interstellar? A Most Violent Year? Wild (interview)? Gone Girl? The Homesman? or something else entirely? My write-in vote is Yorick LeSaux's work on Only Lovers Left Alive.
P.S. My final Oscar predictions are coming next week. Obviously I need to rethink my chart - way off there! We're just waiting for Oscar nomination balloting to close up shop (which happens tomorrow evening).
Reader Comments (22)
Darius Khondji's work in The Immigrant is like a zillion times better than four of the nominees, except for Pope. Shame on you, ASC
Considering recent inclusions at Oscar that missed at the ASC's are Academy favorites helming Best Picture contenders (Robert Richardson for Django, Janusz Kaminski for War Horse), could the odd-man-in be Cronenweth with Gone Girl or Elswit with Nightcrawler?
While I'm much more enthusiastic about Fury than most, I think the camera work is its greatest technical achievement. So put in me in the fingers-crossed for Roman Vasyanov camp.
Notable that there's no big CGI behemoth in the thick of things this year, no? After however many consecutive wins for very VFX heavy films, this is pretty refreshing.
The Imitation Game does stick out like a sore thumb - not because the work is bad, per se, but just because it's so... functional and drab.
I'd happily nominate Greig Frasier for his gorgeously refined work on Foxcatcher.
Holy crap, that shot from Mr. Turner is awesome. It doesn't open here until Friday (same with Selma) but I'm putting it on my must-see list for Saturday instead of the Patriots game. No one will notice I'm gone.
Haven't seen Unbroken yet, but the Birdman gimmick worked for me, so "Chivo" gets my vote.
Sawyer-I liked Fury too, but how much was real and how much as CGI?
If "The Double" was eligible I would have liked to see that here. Stunning, stunning, stunning.
Also "Foxcatcher."
Also "The King's Speech" comparison doesn't really work. You can say all you want about that film but the lensing was certainly singular and distinct in its identity, more than you can say about "The Imitation Game."
I don't feel like Unbroken is going to be the one to get people all up in arms about how they MUST give an Oscar to Roger Deakins (especially considering the quality of the films for which he's lost the Oscar), but I have difficulty reading how the Academy will respond to this particular film anyway.
IF they actually watch the film, I think Mr. Turner could probably win, seeing as how not only did Lubezki just win but that Birdman could very easily be seen as showing off (despite it actually feeling quite organic moment-to-moment, imho).
Given the way this category has gone recently, I would say that Hoytema would be the spoiler for Interstellar, but who knows? Maybe the Academy will decide en masse that they really couldn't get enough of gold filters this year and nominate Theory of Everything (I really liked that movie, but really, that filter was ridiculous)!
I haven't had the opportunity to see Mr. Turner yet, but I have seen the preview several times, and the cinematography in that alone was pretty breathtaking. I'm glad to see Robert Yeoman finally get some credit for his long collaboration with Wes Anderson, but I'm sorry that Greig Fraser hasn't gotten more attention for the cinematography in Foxcatcher.
The dominance of The Imitation Game in these Guild nominations is starting to make me wonder if it could win Best Picture.
Mr. Turner is hands down the best cinematography of the year and perhaps most years. No CGI in those shots and many in natural light. It is astounding.
Not exactly true, Henry. The shot that recreates "The Fighting Temeraire" has noticeable (and for me actually somewhat distracting) CG enhancements.
And I continue to be surprised by how many people so emphatically embrace the fact it was shot digitally when film would have been so much more appropriate and so much more striking. It pains me to even admit I have misgivings about its cinematography because I adore the movie but I can't deny my feelings.
Am I the only one who remembers The Illusionist as being way too dark and way too reliant on fog?
That still from Mr. Turner is gorgeous, though.
Pope is the reason I want to watch "Mr. Turner," which is an odd thing to say, I suppose. But it's true! I liked the seedy neon and the newstudio glare of Elswit in "Nightcrawler."
Sometimes, a movie is so overwhelmingly beautiful that it wins even if it's smaller than its competition. Mr. Turner is probably one of those movies.
Unfortunately for it, Birdman has a killer premise cinematographically that I just don't think it can be beaten. Maaaaybe if lots of folks see Mr. Turner or if some campaigner makes the race into film vs. digital methods (assuming that Birdman wasn't shot on film-- I'm not actually sure), then perhaps Mr. Turner could win. But I doubt it.
I severely doubt that Deakins could win this year. Unbroken is fading, the work isn't that showy (and certainly not up to Deakins' other work), and Birdman's "one shot" gimmick/brilliance gains it extra traction.
I had to stop watching my screener of Mr. Turner on my TV about 15 minutes into it, go to the closet, drag out my projection screen, set everything up, and watch it projected in my living-room instead - even though I am HELLA lazy - because it was SO BEAUTIFUL that it seemed like a crime to watch it on just my little TV screen.
For all of MY efforts, I demand it win a statue.
Evan-it's actually not very often that a film makes it when Cinematography is its only real shot at an Oscar. The last time a film only won one Oscar was in 2002 with Road to Perdition (and it was nominated five other times that year, a feat unlikely to be duplicated by Mr. Turner and had the added sentimental pull of Conrad Hall being the victor). A River Runs Through It and Legends of the Fall both seem to be the most recent films to win when Cinematography was the only nomination it had a shot of taking, and that was over twenty years ago. More often it's just a high profile nomination (Kundun, Snow Falling on Cedars, The New World) but no actual trophy, which seems likely to be Mr. Turner's fate.
I do agree that Deakins isn't happening here and that Pope is likely the second place, but Birdman is so far in front I don't know that anything can realistically stop it.
Well, I'm not sure that 3 times in 20 years is too infrequent and those statistics are hampered by the recent trend to award cinematography and visual effects to the same film, but we reach the same conclusion: Mr. Turner would be a wide longshot at best.
(I learned after my last post that Mr. Turner was shot digitally, so there goes that argument in its favor. That argument sure gets some riled up but I can barely tell the difference... as is clear with my original post.)
It feels like Lubezki is the favorite for the Oscar. And since he won last year, I was wondering: Has any other DP won back to back AA's?
John Toll did-94 and 95.
So no one is rooting for Yeoman?
It was The Grand Hotel Budapest, and not just because I lived in Budapest, but because of its special feeling and imagery. I felt like passing through an antique store. It felt like it was done in an old manner with a precision and enough time to think about every detail included in the movie. This was absolutely amazing and has this feeling of old and new put together and animated like a cartoon that makes it truly amazing. And yes, I love Wes Anderson.
I would like to see Elswit slip in there for either INHERENT VICE or NIGHTCRAWLER. The pair might cancel each other out, which is a shame - nobody had a better year as a DP than Elswit.