Justan Zimmerman

I don't recall the exact issue, though it was definitely in the latter half of '95. I was actually looking for the article on "Casino" but that issue had been stolen from the library. While perusing other issues from that year I came across the "Clockers" article. Since the cinematography was obviously inspired by Robert Richardson, I figured it was worth a read. Philip Kaufman has made two of my favorite films - "The Right Stuff" and "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" - yet I can't bring myself to watch "The Wanderers" for fear that it will ruin Price's novel for me. Despite being set decades earlier in another city, the book was like the bible to me and my friends in West Philly while growing up.

I was going through back issues of American Cinematographer a few weeks ago and read the article on "Clockers." In it, Spike Lee recounts with great pride how he was able to quote another film - "The Boston Strangler" - without producer Martin Scorsese realizing until he told him. I don't think this makes Lee any less of a talent. He even adapted this stylistic devise to one he was already known for - having the actors move on a dolly along with the camera. (I always thought that was a nod to Scorsese's "Mean Streets" when the camera is mounted to Harvey Keitel. Scorsese probably got the idea from a half-forgotten 40s noir or obscure Italian film, which is how I always thought the art of filmmaking and cinematic language progressed.) Anyway, "Clockers" is a decent movie adapted from a phenomenal novel. I still need to see "The Boston Strangler."

I'd love to have the Alien set, but I refuse to buy anything that insults my intelligence. The word is tetralogy, and it will get my $69.99.

Anachronistic music in film never bothered me. If it works, it works. If not, oh well. Personally I thought ?Age of Consent? fit the mood of the trailer perfectly. Funny, but you never hear gripes about a conventional orchestral score being used in a movie set pre-17th century. I constantly show friends The Adventure of Robin Hood, and while they complain about the wardrobe, sets, and day-for-night, the score is almost always praised. Never mind that none of the instruments had been invented yet, let alone collected into an orchestra playing homophonic music. I'm looking forward to seeing what Acord does with a period piece, especially after Lost in Translation in which he relied so much on practicals. Still I wouldn't mind if Coppola worked with Ed Lachman again. I loved the look of The Virgin Suicides. Justan Zimmerman

I can't believe no one has mentioned the Talking Heads' concert film "Stop making Sense." Jonathan Demme directed with Jordan Cronenweth as DP. Fantastic music, great directing, and inspired cinematography.

I'll be unoriginal and put "Sunrise" at the top of my list. I was lucky enough to see it at the Egyptian Theater a few years back. "Sunrise" is also saddled with the dubious honor of having the stupidest DVD distribution ever. "The Fall of the House of Usher" (Jean Epstein's version - although the silent short is also pretty good.) "The Crowd" "Strike" "The Last Laugh" "Regeneration" The 1920s version of "Ben-Hur" gets a special mention for best action sequence in a silent film. The chariot race is as intense as anything made today and looks like it was shot by a French new-wave camera op.

The Age of Innocence happens to be my favorite Scorsese film, or at least the one I watch most often. Scorsese has always had an expressionistic streak and with the exception of the boxing sequences from Raging Bull, it is unleashed to the fullest extent in The Age of Innocence. Likewise he is also fixated on examining the lifestyles and cultural minutiae of his characters, in this case performing an anthropological autopsy as much as telling a story. The editing reduces the important but lengthy rituals of the characters' lives into short, comprehensive sequences - opera and theater going, obsessive letter writing (pre-telephone), dining, marriage and the expected European honeymoon. The dissolves to flashes of color and the close-ups of trinkets, jewelry, clothing, cigars, and other conspicuous adornments serve as exclamation points. I'll agree with David that there are sometimes two (or three) dissolves when one will suffice, but usually I think they're well utilized. I've known other people who were thrown by the editing style but once they reconciled it with men in top hats and women with parasols they usually thought it was a good fit. The omniscient narrator is what tends turn off friends I get to watch it. As far as the cinematography goes, I think Michael Ballhaus did very nice work. It may not be flashy but by playing it straight the cinematography gives the editing and directing a freer reign. Still there are some expressionistic moments of lighting - most evident in the final letter reading scene. It certainly makes watching a Daniel Day-Lewis reading more interesting than it would be normally. The stylistic flourishes offer a greater insight into the characters' psyche and culture. Without them it would be like watching the version of The House of Mirth from a few years ago. Pretty locations and fantastic costumes, but everything behind the restrained manner of expression employed by the characters that Edith Wharton delves into in her books is lost on screen. But then The Age of Innocence is a much richer book than The House of Mirth.

This was the first time I saw a film projected digitally - make that a movie projected digitally. The wide shots of snow covered landscapes made me cringe. Digital technology met its match with all that white. Not that any of the people I was with noticed or had any complaints.

Coal soot. Lay a piece of glass flat outside in the morning in any major city in China and by afternoon you'll have a black mist filter.

Mary Shelley ought to be mighty pissed off in the hereafter about "Mary Shelley's Frankenstein."

I noticed that TCM is showing this as part of a bevy of Orson Welles films tonight, so it appears I?ll be staying up late. I?ve worn out two VHS copies of this film and was finally able to see it in a theater a year or two ago. Simply amazing. Yes, it was chopped apart and had a happy ending tacked on, but I still love this film. I?ve never understood why the film as a whole, as well as the cinematography by Stanley Cortez, doesn?t receive the same amount of praise and attention as other non-Citizen Kane films by Welles, like Touch of Evil or The Lady from Shanghai (not that I?m knocking them). So am I the only one who loves this film? I know people who rave about Stanley Cortez?s cinematography for The Night of the Hunter but still haven?t seen The Magnificent Ambersons. Madness, utter madness. By the way, I?m willing to break legs to get this on DVD if only someone could please tell me who gets the receiving end of my bat.

Of course Jack Cardiff is still alive and shooting. He was the one who showed us that Heaven is black and white but the living Earth is Technicolor. Now I?ll go watch ?Black Narcissus? for the hundredth time.

I always thought ?Citizen Kane? was great because it?s so much fun. Yes, the cinematography helps. And the directing. And the acting. And the music. And the editing and sound and sets and? well, you know the rest. But it?s just about the most fun two hours I?ve ever spent in a movie theater.

Has anyone else seen this yet? I thought it was a great film with fabulous work by Dick Pope. All of the interiors had an interesting look with the key side of the actors? faces going a bit hot while falling quickly into dark shadow. It really brought them out of their environment, which was always a bit dark, and added some intensity to the seemingly unassuming characters. Altogether it was a really nice conjunction of cinematography, set design, and wardrobe. The minimal coverage was also refreshing. Just find the best angles and stick with them. Can anyone think of any of Pope?s work in particular that I should check out? All I can remember seeing are ?Nicholas Nickleby?, which, cinematography wise, I can only recall having no complaints ? anyway you can?t go wrong with Dickens; and ?The Way of the Gun? which I really didn?t care for but remember being struck by two things: the sound design (those gun shots were like howitzers!) and the moonlight ? it wasn?t blue.

My problem with the Lord of the Ring films was that they all suffered from Sergio Leone disease ? that is, there were no small moments, just huge ones. Even the quiet, tender moments are imbued with the epic. In the case of the Lord of the Rings, I have a feeling this was a result of the way they were shot ? lots of different units shooting a whole lot of footage without being sure how it was all going to be put together in the end. Still, I love ?Once Upon a Time in the West?. Does that count as an action film? I just can?t watch it all in one sitting. ?Excalibur? is probably my favorite action film. True, it?s a mish-mash of Arthurian legends (mainly from Malory) and some people I know consider it an incoherent mess (my wife especially), but I think it?s brilliant. John Boorman is one of my faves. DP Alex Thomson did some might fine work on it, too.