It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I agree with this, naturally.
As you can see from my list above, that is a bit questionable. I do not believe Claudio is the overwhelming favourite yet as Huffington Post likes to predict. Both Roger Deakins for 'Skyfall' and Claudio Miranda for 'Life Of Pi' won quite a bunch of 'Best Cinematography' awards so far.
If you ask my personal opinion, and if you look to the pure art of filming, then I think Roger Deakins deserves the Oscar. He used very new digital filming equipment, but the effect is wunderful and it had a classic, crisp and elegant feel to it. IMO groundbreaking in 2D filming....and it could set a standard even for smaller movies (Yes, I know Quentin Tarantino hates it, but I do not care). All the wide shots from beautiful views of Turkish nature, the Scottish highlands, the skyline of Sjanghai and dreary London itself.....are simply marvellous. Not only that, close-ups were captivating too.
Claudio Miranda had a big visual and special effects department backing him up. I think it were the 3D effects and visual (CGI) effects that truly enhanced the plot/storyline of the movie, not necessarily Miranda's camerawork. Moreover, I found his work for 'The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button' better. So, the Oscar for 'Best Visual Effects' to 'Life Of Pi'? Yes. To 'Best Cinematography? No.
Indeed, 'Skyfall' should win the 'Best Cinematography' Oscar. Period. But predicting this category.....aaaaarghhh :O :O :O
Anyway, I agree with Gustav that Deakins deserves the Oscar (and all other awards) for his work in Skyfall. Whether Miranda would also deserve an Oscar I can't really comment on. I do however know that personally I've never wanted anyone, for any movie, to get the cinematography awards as much as Deakins for Skyfall. I was in awe of his work in it the first time I saw it, and even more on subsequent viewings.
I'm generally suspicious of the Academy, but I'll hope, anyway, of course, and will cross everything on the night. :)
How is that unfortunate?!
Oh come on, you KNOW, what I mean. Its easy really. I wish for Deakins to win, but I think, Pi was just that amazing, that it will win.
I know, I just wanted to hear you say it, or watch you type it to be more exact. I think the most important thing at the end of the day is that a person who is deserving of the award gets it, no matter if they are Bond attached or not. Though, I think Deakins may have it, or is close.
Exactly. I've been saying this for ages, it's the reason I don't want Newman to win.
Who would you like to see win in that category? Or just anyone as long as it's not him?
Well I thought Looper had the best score of the year but out of the nominees I'm not sure as I haven't seen any of them apart from Skyfall.
John Williams is generally fantastic though so I suppose him? Although it's not really fair for me to say which other nominee should win.
I just don't think Newman deserved to be nominated and I don't think he deserves to win an award for his score.
Yes, I agree with you that 'Life Of Pi' was amazing. I loved the movie. But I just find the Cinematography Oscar a bit too much honour. 'Life Of Pi' worked tremendously well because of the combination of a very good, original plot idea (allthough it's adapted from a novel) combined with enthralling visual 3D effects. Actually, IMO it is the best 3D movie in years. It's good to see that visual effects sometimes can truly enhance a good dramatic story with several (religious) themes in it. Ang Lee is basically following James Cameron: Not using 3D solely for creating blockbuster stuff, but for helping enhance wunderful stories and themes.
Having said that, I think cinematography is important for the overall effect of 'Life Of Pi', but it's not groundbreaking. Claudio Miranda obviously did a lot of blue/greenscreen camerawork. That's not captivating, that's plain necessary for the visual effects later on.
That's why I think Roger Deakins deserves the Oscar for 'Best Cinematography'. It's more groundbreaking. Deakins' cinematography enhances the plot and story of 'Skyfall'. It is not Miranda's cinematography that enhances the plot and story of 'Life Of Pi'.
Ok, so it was basically like Avatar where the effects and cinematography were the only thing really going for it?
I didn't get to see Life of Pi but I know the story. The book was considered unfilmable, because the story is in itself a fantasy. I'm not sure how much of it was real and how much was CGI/visual effects. Perhaps people who saw it can give their opinion (@Germanlady?).
I found Avatar with its innovative use of new technology in 3D well deserving of its prizes, and a large audience was found for Avatar that found the movie well worth their time.
Kudos for James Cameron who has shown a talent for making cutting edge technological made movies that seem to be enjoyed by men and women alike. Of which his BO is the prove with his two recent cinema movies. ;)
Life of Pi was really beautifully shot, SF was shot beautifull as well but just not as good imho. I think with the Oscar for Adele SF should be very happy, as well as the celebration of 50 years of 007 movies.
Lets hope they do something nice for Star Trek too in 3 years time.
The action wasn't amazing and the story was your fairly generic Dancing With Wolves esque plot. And like The Last Samurai, it failed to improve on Dancing With Wolves in any way. But, The Last Samurai had ninjas and samurai and some cool sword fights, and is therefore better than Avatar :)
Cameron has done the Alien and Terminator movie and they were awesome, so why return to that if you honestly do not know how to improve on them (his own words). What he delivered was a beautifull shot movie that made 3D relevant. It is one of the few movies I have seen that is worth seeing preferable in 3D.
Dancing with wolves puts me to sleep every time, the last Samurai is Shogun for a new generation only not as good. ;)
Your second paragraph mirrors my thoughts exactly.
I went to see it in theaters at the time when it was released and it was worth it for the visual effects alone. One day it was on TV and I tried to watch it again and I was so bored by it that I changed channel after 15 min or so. Without the immersion provided by the 3d it falls flatter than an ironing board.
Skyfall
Roger Deakins
The Scene: James Bond (Daniel Craig) engages his target, a professional hit man (Ola Rapace), in a fight to the death in an under-construction skyscraper illuminated by a massive LED screen at night in Shanghai.
Behind the Scene: “It’s one we shot early on, and I felt I was taking a chance by suggesting or pushing for that kind of look, the big LED screens and light and the whole set just with those source lights that you see in the shot. Also the fact that we did it on stage as opposed to a location, which was the original intention. And I was quite pleased the way it turned out. When it’s one of the earlier scenes in a shoot, you feel a sense of relief that you’ve achieved something close to what you had in your mind’s eye when you started. We spent a lot of time prepping. Obviously it was a big stage set, and there was a lot of very particular lighting that was built into the set. We spent actually weeks and weeks testing a few different big LED screens for the playbacks. And then we had to order a particular one we liked, which was a combination of being a fine pixel count and also being practical to do in the size we wanted, because it was about 60 by about 40 or 50 feet, I think. And we had to find one we could rent for the period we needed it and, in fact, it was available for only a small window of time, so we had to shoot the scene and then it had to be broken down and sent back before we had really cut the scene. It was a bit of a risk in it, really. But it was good being on stage at Pinewood because we were shooting there quite a bit, and I could go in at the end of the shoot day and look at the lighting and just gradually build it.”.
http://www.deadline.com/2013/02/oscars-cinematographers-on-creating-the-right-imagery/#more-425879
DC himself most likely not there, but the film still hold those 8 nods.
It will be shown on BBC1 tonight.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-21401540
EDIT: sorry about the double post.
Classy as always replying to the question about the fact the Skyfall is not nominated as best film. "There are so many good films out, it's tough"