Tom Lowe

Evanescence - My Immortal

BTW, Matt, when does this come out?

Lol... Rick Ross. :lol: How did the 7D perform out on the end of that jib on the truck? Any jello problems?

Lol, yep.

Great list Bill. Many of these are in my top 20 for sure.

He's clearly romanticizing it, extrapolating it. And I agree, it's a valid point for criticism, if perhaps the only one! The idea, obviously, is to drive the point home about nature.

Here's my list for top ten films of the decade, in ascending order. #10 - Der Untergang (2004) - Oliver Hirschbiegel An intimate, unvarnished observation of what happens when a nightmarish dream collapses around a man. Bruno Ganz's performance as Hitler is among the best of the decade. #9 - Spirited Away (2001) - Hayao Miyazaki I stumbled into this film in 2001 after reading a very positive review by Roger Ebert. It was my introduction not only to famed director Hayao Miyazaki, but also to anime as a serious artform. The film won an Oscar for Best Animated Feature, but it should have won Best Picture. Spirited Away is pure magic. #8 - Cidade de Deus (2002) - Fernando Meirelles & Kátia Lund I don't think filmmaking gets more pure than "City of God." Wow. The cameras are on the ground, in the mix, with essentially all amateur actors, in the slums of Rio. This is one of those films, like Goodfellas, that sucks you in immediately and spits you out at the end, sort of exhausted, but feeling like you have glimpsed a time and a place you would never have been aware of otherwise. #7 - Ghost in the Shell 2: Innocence (2004) - Mamoru Oshii Visually glorious, philosophically meditative, Ghost in the Shell 2: Innocence is the type of "action" movie Hollywood neither has the balls nor imagination to make. If you've never seen the film, watch this short HD clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Qdc_Cfi1-k (and have a spatula ready to scrape your jaw off the floor). #6 - Avatar (2009) - James Cameron Looking back decades from now, I believe that Avatar will be considered among the great event films that changed motion-picture history - King Kong, Wizard of Oz, and Star Wars. Visually, Avatar makes The Lord of the Rings look like a badly staged high school play. Philosophically, spiritually, and politically, under what appears to be a glossy surface, deep waters run. Can a film like this change the way humans think about war and our relationships with technology and nature? Amazingly, I think the answer is Yes. Yi Yi (2000) - Edward Yang I almost feel this film should be higher on my list, because in many ways, Yi Yi is a perfect film. It is a masterpiece in every way that it is possible to be a masterpiece. I have never seen any film that more perfectly, beautifully, poignantly and humorously portrays the human condition. The word I keep coming back to is "master," because every stroke, every beat, every pause, every cue, every cut is clearly the work of a great cinematic master. The film packs a massive emotional wallop, but none of it is earned through plot devices or trickery. It begins to build from the first frame of the picture, steadily throughout, and by the end, you feel almost floored. Every ounce of the film's impact is earned, not fabricated. #4 - Mulholland Drive (2001) - David Lynch Muholland Drive is about as close as you can get to making a film that is a dream. It boasts easily the finest female performance of the decade by Naomi Watts, and showcases the best visual metaphor I've ever seen on film - Rebekah Del Rio's Llorando. #3 - The Fountain (2006) - Darren Aronofsky There are several things at work simultaneously in Darren Aronovsky's masterpiece The Fountain that will make it last forever among my favorite all-time films. Visually, the movie is stunning, thanks to DP Matthew Libatique, the art department, and a vfx team that used organic and microscopic photography to break the stale grip CGI had on science-fiction at the time. Clint Mansell contributed an original score for the film on an artistic level not seen since Hans Zimmer's work on The Thin Red Line, culminating with a tour-de-force piece called Death is the Road to Awe, which fueled a jaw-dropping, eye-melting, goosebump-inducing, breathless finale for Aronofsky's film. But the unsung hero in The Fountain is Hugh Jackman, who turned in one of the ballsiest performances this side of Brando. Devastating stuff. The level of trust between Aronofsky and Jackman is sort of unprecedented, from what I can see. Obviously, Aronofsky has the golden touch with actors, as his next film, The Wrestler, confirmed. The Fountain is visual and spiritual poetry. I hope I meet Aronofsky some day, so I can thank him for having the guts to make this film, and to tell him how **(obscenity removed)**in' awesome it is. #2 - In the Mood for Love (2000) - Wong Kar-Wai In the Mood For Love is about as flawless a film as you will ever find. Visually, it is nearly unmatched. The cinematography is on a level with Days of Heaven and Barry Lyndon, while the subtlety of the storytelling puts it in a league entirely its own. With this film, we find director Wong Kar-Wai at the height of his powers, at the same time Chris Doyle, Tony Leung, and Maggie Cheung are at the height of their own. The soundtrack and use of overcranking are mesmerizing. The film is ultimately about love, and dignity. The restraint of the characters is matched only by the restraint of the filmmaker. The result, pure perfection. #1 - The New World (2005) - Terrence Malick It is often discussed and pondered when "The Great American Novel" will finally be written. Decades and centuries have passed. And yet, in early 2006, very quietly, I believe that "The Great American Film" graced the screens of select multiplexes around the world, almost unnoticed. The New World is the story of America, of our founding. It is also the oldest story ever told, about man's relationship with nature. It is about the consequences of living a "false life" versus a real life. In the late Sixties, Malick quit his job as a philosophy professor at MIT in order to join the first AFI Masters program for film. Why? It seemed an awful gamble, especially for someone as famously quiet, private and introverted as Malick (he has not granted an interview in decades and has been photographed less often than Bigfoot or the Loch Ness Monster). I think Malick recognized and was motivated by the fact that the next advances in philosophy and art would not be written nor painted, they would be filmed. Imagine a once-in-a-century philosophical mind, attempting to reconcile Tao Buddhism with Heideggerian ontology (as Heidegger himself was essentially attempting). Combine that with an ability to write poetry like Walt Whitman, create images like Monet, and edit them all together using a new cinematic language set to music at the level of Beethoven, Mozart and Wagner. This is what Malick represents, and it is extremely powerful. Not only do I find The New World to be the best movie of this decade, I think it is the best movie ever made. Here we have Malick, working at the height of his powers, surrounded by collaborators like Lubezki, Horner, and Fisk, with a leading female who seems to have been fallen from the heavens just to play this role... I could go on about this film for 10 pages. Suffice it to say, for those who've not paid close attention to The New World, or not seen the Extended Edition on Bluray.... what are you waiting for? Cinematic bliss and enlightenment await. :)

Yeah but it probably only won because it was such an inexorable force that year, sweeping essentially all categories. I was going to say, "with the exception of The Abyss"... so yes, that one was nice. Anyway, I haven't been paying much attention to the cinematography race this year. Who are some of the top contenders? How many films will be allowed in that category? I liked Prieto's work on "State of Play" early this year.

IMO, no, Avatar should not win Best Cinematography, simply because I don't think the angles, frames and light were super special -- even though the filmmakers had total control over them! Cameron has never been known for great cinematography. If you want to see an animated film that should win cinematography awards, check out something like "Five Centimeters Per Second": (you will appreciate the high school hallways, David! ;) ) It features beautiful, haunting camera angles and frames, stunning light..everything you would want in a cinematography masterpiece. So my answer is, yes, in theory, these films are eligible, but Avatar is not a good example of it.

:lol: :lol: :lol: ;) Regarding the actors. I mean, take a look at the career of Andy Serkis. Most people had never heard of him before Gollum. Now he's staring in Steven Spielberg digital 3D movies, once again, basically using an "avatar" on screen.

LMAO. That reminds of when Stephen Williams tried to talk like a "high roller" on the Reduser forum regarding our digital cinema bet. He was goading me to bet more, until Jim Jannard showed up and offered to back my side of the bet with "six figures," at which time Stephen ran for the hills faster than a Scotsman with a pack of Edward the Longshanks' hunting dogs in pursuit.... :lol: If you want to bet about 3D for home, make a separate thread about it and lay out the terms.

Yes, I will take that bet.

All manual, no brackets. Pans are stepper driven, but I am planning to move to continuous motion. Stepper is too jerky, I think.

Congrats on the ASC nomination, Glen! ;)

The bet is not whether Bluray sales will match DVD. The bet is whether 3D Bluray and 3D at home will become more popular than DVD audio. Still want to take that bet? My guess is that people will be lining up for 3D televisions and Blurays to see films like AVATAR at home. You can take that to the bank.

Care to place a bet on that?

Perhaps you haven't heard yet about 3D Blurays?

I bet my last dollar that phonelines around the globe are on fire with conversations between directors, DPs and producers about how to convert their current pre-production projects into 3D -- maybe even some in-production films. Also, consider the impact of 3D on piracy. Does anyone really want to watch a non-3D, VHS-quality "cam" copy off bit torrent of AVATAR?? No way

This will be the first in a long line of people here changing their tune after seeing the movie. ;)

Don't get me started on the clear similarities between what Cameron is doing with AVATAR and what Malick did with THE NEW WORLD. What's very interesting is that Malick and Cameron are in many ways telling the same story, but with totally polar-opposite approaches in terms of the technology used to tell it. Malick purposefully used very, very simple cinema tools to shoot TNW, essentially banning cranes, dollies, etc. About the most advanced technology you will see in TNW is a Steadicam shot. The film could almost have been shot on cinema cameras and technology developed 50 years ago. Meanwhile, Cameron has gone 180 degrees in the other direction with AVATAR, obviously! :lol:

Yeah, well, nearly every other critic is head over heels. Ebert just gave the film a positively glowing review: http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.d...VIEWS/912119998 It's 90% at RT right now.

Sure... sure... ;) :lol:

Me personally, I am hoping that AVATAR revives the grand-scale Sci-Fi/Adventure/Fantasy/Myth genre, that really has been dormant since Return of the Jedi in the mid 80s. What has changed with this technology, perhaps, is motion-capture that actually WORKS. Cameron was looking through his 3D camera not at actors against a greenscreen with dots on their faces, but at 3D renders of alien creatures moving inside a jungle! As he panned his 3D camera, the jungle panned behind the characters... marvelous technology. And what will this allow? I see this type of technology, in the correct hands, making films that have always been impossible to realize. Sci-Fi being very high and important on that list. Avatar itself is the perfect example of what is possible, obviously. Man's destiny, if we survive the next 40 years or so, is not here on Earth, but out in space. I think it is very important for us to be inspired to something beyond sitting around on this rock bickering with one another. I believe that was Cameron's actual goal with this film -- to inspire us to explore. When Cameron was presented with an award from the Planetary Society, he stated: "Exploration is not a luxury we can't afford; it's a necessity we can't afford to lose. Pushing farther into the unknown is our greatest endeavor as a civilization and our deepest responsibility to future generations." Sci-Fi is a way for artists to inspire and warn us about the future. This is very important stuff.. at least as important as any nonsense that governments and "leaders" do. In this sense, artists and filmmakers are of huge importance to the future of humanity, and any technology that helps us explore these issues in an exciting manner is a positive step. Does anyone think that Cameron devoted 10 years of his life to "Avatar" just to make a popcorn movie? Think about it. He is doing something much more important here.

;)

All this "Bourne" shaky-cam filming is a plague on cinema, IMO. The last James Bond picture had action that was incomprehensible, and D9 almost made me vomit from sea-sickness. /rant