Search the Community

At a charity shop recently I picked up a copy of Macbeth with utter surprise as I wasn't aware that such a version of Macbeth existed, and I was easily parted with my £1 to check it out. It turned out to be £1 very well spent as not only is the soundtrack by the third ear band but the cinematography is some of the most amazing ever seen. I was recently watching "The ninth Gate" which almost seems to be influenced by this version of Macbeth and while Darius Khondji's work is great in "The Ninth Gate" it is as if it is nothing compared to the work of Gil Taylor in Macbeth. Now Gil Taylor also shot Dr Strangelove, Repulsion, Frenzy, The Omen and Star Wars! Not to even mention a lot of very well known British films that are fast becoming lost in time (along with most British movies). The thing that really puzzles me is that after shooting Star Wars the mans career seems to take a complete nose dive. It's possibly his last note worthy film. How could such a thing happen? I've often noted when people say bad things about Star Wars that the one thing the film definitely had was atmosphere, and that mostly comes down to the cinematography and set design. So the question is "what happened to Gilbert Taylor?!" Did he just make poor choices of films to work on after that? I mean you can't imagine that nobody wanted to employ him after Star Wars, but maybe they assumed he would be too expensive or something? I see this happen with other cinematographers too to be honest and I don't understand it. It's quite often that you see really talented cinematographers without work or even people who have had success on a huge film then go on to struggle. Is the success of a cinematographer not really connected to having successful films or even to how good their cinematography is? I'm not that surprised about the latter but I am surprised about the former. Freya