89th Academy Award for Best Cinematography

AJ Young · February 6, 2017

Is that a sort of an announcement about the Oscars?

I still think La La Land will win it.

Not typically, the Oscars have a much larger and different demographic voting for best cinematography. Only cinematographer's in the academy can nominate cinematographers, but everyone gets to vote.

For example, Deakins won an ASC award for Skyfall, but Miranda won the Oscar for Life of Pi.

Alexandros Angelopoulos Apostolos · February 6, 2017

After I posted that, I saw that the article says this:

In six of the last 10 years, the winner of the ASC Award in the feature category went on to win the Academy Award for cinematography.

so it’s 60 % accurate. And that only in the last 10 years.

Edited February 6, 2017 by Alexandros Angelopoulos Apostolos

fatih yıkar · February 26, 2017

I'm sorry folks im not a expert but Who's voting in acedemy best cinematography?

This year La la land- Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them- Nocturnal Animals- Batman v Superman- The Neon Demon- Café Society- Rogue One- American Honey- Especially The Witch got really good cinematography.

I'm okey with arrival,silence but Moonlight and Lion really is this a joke or something?

What kind of cinematography moonlight have? ıts so poor looking movie when i say poor im not meant budget or design you know what i mean so simple ıts just looking shot in digitally and make a little color correction,grading thats it.These movies i say up there has got much more good cinematography im absolutely sure...

Edited February 26, 2017 by fatih yıkar

Alexandros Angelopoulos Apostolos · February 27, 2017

Congratulations, La La Land! :) I think we all predicted that Linus would win. :)

Yeah, Fatih, I, too, wanted to ask what is the deal with Moonlight’s photography: I had a problem with the skin of African American actors appearing somewhat greenish, shaky cam, and generally distracting bokeh. I haven’t seen the film, though; it just appeared that way from the previews.

I feel sorry for them for having received the award, for best picture, that way. Oh, well.

John E Clark · February 28, 2017

I was totally underwhelmed with "La La Land" in regard to cinema... ok, everything... especially cinematography... I'm pretty sure the 'look' was what the direct and cinematographer wanted... but for me it was a big failure.

I felt the lighting was given a heavy 'noir' slant, for a story which had no noir element in the least. If there was supposed to be an homage to Cinemascope and "Rebel without a Cause"(1955)... the results were ugly.

On quick search I could only find this gif for the opening scene... where lighting is sort of the broad daylight...

There were many other occasions were for me, the lighting failed relative to 'content' vs 'style'. Perhaps it should have been a Murder Musical... I could have probably 'worked into' that sort of thing...

The Wife liked it, and we saw it a second time... and afterwards, she said... 'Perhaps we should have left it at one viewing'...

Edited February 28, 2017 by John E Clark

Adam Frisch FSF · February 28, 2017

This is the age old dilemma for all DP's. I know for a fact the shoot of La La Land was very tight, very fast and not much room for quality control. I'm sure Linus would have wanted to finesse, improve and redo a lot of his stuff, but the reality is, there are no second chances or opportunities to make it right in todays tight budget world. And ultimately, the audience doesn't know that nor do they care if you had a tight schedule or a low budget. It either looks good or looks bad (I'm not saying this does - I have not seen it - but I think Linus is a very good DP).

I myself was the victim of that on my last feature, Don't Knock Twice. Extremely tight and painful shoot, a horrible post production and grading process I was not a part of at all and the results suffer visually. Doesn't matter how many excuses I make, ultimately nobody cares. So, what I'm trying to say is perhaps two-fold: as a DP it is important to fight for the right tools and time to be able to do the job correctly. As long as my name is on that thing, I have to protect it until the very end. It's like a child that needs rearing, you're the parent and you don't want to send it off to the orphanage to be raised by others. I didn't get to do that on DKT, and it's something I regret and a lesson learned. But also, we need to as professionals see perhaps the "intent" of the cinematography, and understand that film is 95% compromise and you're gonna get shafted on a feature film no matter what. It's a mystery any films get made at all, really. And it's even more mysterious if they also happen to look good. :mellow:

Mark Kenfield · February 28, 2017

I thought LaLa Land was terrific on all counts, and I loved Linus' work on it. The movement and the colours were just exquisite. And I didn't find the low-key stuff distracting at all - it seemed quite naturally linked to each scene's setting to me.

Max Field · March 1, 2017

From a visual aspect I thought La La Land stood out great above the others.

The one thing I didn't like about the awards show in general how 85% percent of the speeches/inter-monologues were involving Donald Trump. Regardless as to whether you like or hate him (I'm fairly neutral myself), it comes off as basic and unoriginal.

Manu Delpech · March 4, 2017

La La Land is gorgeous, what the hell?

Satsuki Murashige · March 4, 2017

I thought 'La La Land' looked great, for the most part. The colorful art direction and skillful camera operating stood out the most to me. No idea how they pulled off some of those shots. Great bold choices in color, lighting, and compositions. The dusk 'oner' sequence was especially lovely. They told an old story in a fun way and let the actors shine.

Some things did look a bit rushed to me, which I guess lead to a significant amount of soft close-ups. I wish they had been able to shoot at a deeper stop, or shoot more takes. Felt bad for the 1st AC.

My main issue with the film - there were a few close-ups of Emma Stone that made my cringe. Especially one early in the film at her first audition. The distortion from the lens did not treat her kindly in this instance, to put it mildly. She looked gorgeous in the rest of the film. Maybe this was done intentionally for the scene, I don't know. If so, I hope they all agreed on the plan ahead of time. It took me out of the film and upset me.

Also, I think someone already mentioned up above but I wish the opening freeway scene had been staged in front light. It really needed more frontal fill light to make the colors pop and the faces readable, which I guess would have been nearly impossible with the complex camera movement and all the reflective surfaces. But maybe there was no other choice of location or time of day. Anyway, it seemed like an odd choice to me.