Support NeoGAF

[GhaleonEB]

I think you missed my post where I explained that lighting has been my job for twelve years. I'm pretty sure I have a handle on how it all works.

Thanks! I stole that post from a Cinematographer.

That actually makes the post even dumber, unless it was meant to be entirely in jest.

 

[Skiptastic]

That's a great idea, actually.

It could work out perhaps...but I kinda get the feeling it would end up being something stupid like one of those AFI lists. :/

 

[Tobor]

I'm not sure you guys are getting the argument. Traditional cinematographers are designing the total shot. Foreground, background, movement, lighting. With CGI, Most of the major elements are missing, and movement and foreground have to be tightly controlled to allow for the work of others. At that point, is he really a cinematrographer anymore, or just a high level camera operator working for animators?

I guess what I'm getting at is this: Does the increased use of technology start to blur the lines between positions in film?

 

[2 Minutes Turkish]

Sorry, I misunderstood that. However, keep in mind that many thought it was a showdown was only between THL & Avatar. So no matter how you slice it, the Academy took Avatar very seriously as they should have.

I expceted them to.

I'm just glad they didn't pander to the masses by handing out the award simply 'cos people loved it, and it made heaps of money'.

Having said that, an undeserving movie still won it.

I actually prefer the Golden Globes in terms of deserving winners of each category.

 

[Sobriquet]

Has the cinematographer worked with CG before? Worked on anything of the scale of Avatar?

Sounds quite logical that someone with a traditional on-location photography background, for example, would dismiss the skill and artistry of someone incorporating modern tech and stage shooting.

The scale of Avatar? Not many have. On location, stage work, green screen. It's all routine. Every show uses a combination of those. Green screen work is by far the easiest, to light and to shoot.

That actually makes the post even dumber, unless it was meant to be entirely in jest.

Of course it was in jest! I'm surprised so many people are taking it seriously.

 

[SCULLIBUNDO]

Ah, finally explained!

Perhaps the only interesting moment in the entire turgid Oscarcast last night came when the director of Oscar-winning short doc Music By Prudence was suddenly interrupted by some white lady who appeared to be a crazy person. Across the country people thought a random drunk had rushed the stage - maybe even someone whose doc had lost but who was confused or angry.

It turns out that woman, Elinor Burkett, was the producer of Music By Prudence, and she wrestled the mic away from director Roger Ross Williams as the latest in a long feud between the two. Salon got the story, and here's Burkett's side:

What happened was the director and I had a bad difference over the direction of the film that resulted in a lawsuit that has settled amicably out of court. But there have been all these events around the Oscars, and I wasn't invited to any of them. And he's not speaking to me. So we weren't even able to discuss ahead of the time who would be the one person allowed to speak if we won. And then, as I'm sure you saw, when we won, he raced up there to accept the award. And his mother took her cane and blocked me. So I couldn't get up there very fast.

The cane block technique! It's not quite Marlon Brando sending an Indian to the awards in his place, but it'll do. And now you know the story of the Great 2010 Oscar Moment of Interest

 

[Zachack]

Can we have more discussion about Logorama winning Animated Short? Because really now.

Also, The New Tenants should not have won Live-Action Short over Instead of Abracadabra, although the former did amuse me with overweight Vincent Di'Nofrio.

 

[BowieZ]

Ah, finally explained!

http://chud.com/articles/content_images/5/burkett.jpg

The story's been posted several times already, but yeah, the funniest part of the show for me.

 

[Son of Godzilla]

Eh, who cares about the Oscars anyway.

 

[SCULLIBUNDO]

The scale of Avatar? Not many have. On location, stage work, green screen. It's all routine. Every show uses a combination of those. Green screen work is by far the easiest, to light and to shoot.

Of course it was in jest! I'm surprised so many people are taking it seriously.

The hell? Since when is lighting green screen work easier? It is much harder to make lighting look natural when shooting green screen setups.

 

[Skiptastic]

Why does the director of Best Animated Film get to receive the Oscar, but Best Picture is received by the producer?

 

[GhaleonEB]

Of course it was in jest! I'm surprised so many people are taking it seriously.

Well, it fit right in with many non-sarcastic comments, so it was hard to tell. Heck, Ebert agrees with the non-sarcastic version of the post.

WTF? Cinematography for "Avatar" and all that CGI and green screen? Not for Basterds or White Ribbon?

Sarcasm and serious posting blur a lot. :lol

 

[Sobriquet]

The hell? Since when is lighting green screen work easier? It is much harder to make lighting look natural when shooting green screen setups.

How so? It's pretty basic stuff. And you don't have to worry about lighting a background. Riggers light the green screen beforehand. That never changes, except for occasionally turning tubes on and off. We come in and light as normal, with the grips flagging out the screen.

 

[BowieZ]

How so? It's pretty basic stuff. And you don't have to worry about lighting a background. Riggers light the green screen beforehand. That never changes, except for occasionally turning tubes on and off. We come in and light as normal, with the grips flagging out the screen.

So who directs the actual CGI work? Cameron?

 

[Timbuktu]

Can we have more discussion about Logorama winning Animated Short? Because really now.

I can't believe that short took six years to make. I enjoyed it, but six years?

 

[SCULLIBUNDO]

How so? It's pretty basic stuff. And you don't have to worry about lighting a background. Riggers light the green screen beforehand. That never changes, except for occasionally turning tubes on and off. We come in and light as normal, with the grips flagging out the screen.

Synching the lighting setups is much harder imo. Too often with green screen setups, once you start synching up in post you realise just how jarring the on-set lighting setup is with the background applied.

 

[dofry]

Okay, basic rule: you don't get to criticize nominations for movies you have not watched. :lol :lol :lol

No, no, no. Misunderstanding the short answer I gave. I have seen all the movies I critized and some others from the best picture category, but some are not even out in my country yet. Would not critizise otherwise.

 

[Skiptastic]

Probably been discussed but:

At the 1st Academy Awards ceremony (for 1927 and 1928), there was no Best Picture award. Instead, there were two separate awards, one called Most Outstanding Production, won by the epic Wings, and one called Most Artistic Quality of Production, won by the art film Sunrise. The awards were intended to honor different and equally important aspects of superior filmmaking, and in fact the judges and the studio bosses who sought to influence their decisions paid more attention to the latter - MGM head Louis B. Mayer, who had disliked the realism of King Vidor's The Crowd, pressured the judges not to honor his own studio's film, and to select Sunrise instead.

If we're living in alternate universe land, I think Avatar wins Most Outstanding Production easily and THL wins Most Artistic Quality of Production.

 

[Sobriquet]

So who directs the actual CGI work? Cameron?

Cameron, in conjunction with the Visual Effects Supervisor and/or the CG Supervisor. I know Cameron had input on pretty much every facet of the production.

Synching the lighting setups is much harder imo. Too often with green screen setups, once you start synching up in post you realise just how jarring the on-set lighting setup is with the background applied.

Oh, I don't know much about that as I've never worked in Post. All of my experience is on set, but I can imagine syncing in post is a problem. I am aware that a ton of lighting and camera errors are fixed in Post. "Fix it in Post" is an ongoing joke.

 

[Solo]

Corliss' lists are awful.

 

[BowieZ]

Cameron, in conjunction with the Visual Effects Supervisor and/or the CG Supervisor. I know Cameron had input on pretty much every facet of the production.

Don't get me wrong but it seems like the DP would work well supervising the later stages of the implementation of Visual Effects... and I had presumed this was the case with Avatar's Cinematographer, but I must be poorly remembering some article or something.

Either way, quite frankly, I thought whoever framed the shots in Avatar deserved the award.

 

[Sobriquet]

Don't get me wrong but it seems like the DP would work well supervising the later stages of the implementation of Visual Effects... and I had presumed this was the case with Avatar's Cinematographer, but I must be poorly remembering some article or something.

Either way, quite frankly, I thought whoever framed the shots in Avatar deserved the award.

Oh, the DP would be around, certainly.

A lot of people (including the Academy) agree with you.

 

[naijaboy]

They're called technical awards (Best Visual Effects, Best Sound Mixing, Best Make-Up, etc.)

Yes but a lot of films in these genres are more than just tech demos

God forbid that one of such films from the non-drama genre wins best picture or director...

 

[Dr.Acula]

One reason I'd imagine lighting on a green screen would be easier is that you could set up the lights anywhere, or move them quickly and easily. You're never worried about things like walls and ceilings, and proximity to flammable objects, or running yards and yards of cables up stairs or hiding them behind furniture etc.

 

[aparisi2274]

The funniest part of the oscars anyway, was this commerical for Modern Family...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvjgqhvSKmY&feature=player_embedded

 

[benita]

I think we can all agree that box office =/= quality but I thought it was interesting that The Hurt Locker sold fewer tickets than any BP winner in history.

 

[WrikaWrek]

I don't think Avatar should even be in the discussion of best film. But neither does hurt locker. Everyone who is happy that hurt locker won seems to really only be happy that Avatar didn't.

Truth is IB, UP, and a serious man were all far better than hurt locker. There are other movies that I haven't seen yet but are also brought up in this thread as being much better than hurt locker. Heck I thought District 9 deserved to be in the running, but there were definitely better movies than D9 that should have won. The Hurt Locker isnt one of those movies.

And I will say it again. Worlds Greatest Dad was better than The Hurt Locker. And Daryl Sabara really brought his obnoxious character to life better than anybody in Hurt Locker did.

No, that's just bullshit people like you say to cope with the fact that The Hurt Locker is the best movie.

There, i said as much as you in one sentence.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Don't get me wrong but it seems like the DP would work well supervising the later stages of the implementation of Visual Effects... and I had presumed this was the case with Avatar's Cinematographer, but I must be poorly remembering some article or something.

Either way, quite frankly, I thought whoever framed the shots in Avatar deserved the award.

I think this is where the lack of understanding of the methods Cameron used to make Avatar helped bite it some. While there were many adjustments made in post due to the virtual nature of the filming, nearly every shot - even the battles - were initially framed, compositioned and filmed with the virtual camera. The cinematographer worked closely with the post production team on final lighting and composition, as did Cameron.

It was a mix of old and new techniques, and is absolutely worthy of the award. Personally I thought it deserved Cinematography at least as much as visual effects.

 

[Tobor]

I think this is where the lack of understanding of the methods Cameron used to make Avatar helped bite it some. While there were many adjustments made in post due to the virtual nature of the filming, nearly every shot - even the battles - were initially framed, compositioned and filmed with the virtual camera. The cinematographer worked closely with the post production team on final lighting and composition, as did Cameron.

It was a mix of old and new techniques, and is absolutely worthy of the award. Personally I thought it deserved Cinematography at least as much as visual effects.

Interesting. Counters my devils advocate argument from earlier perfectly. Not that I didn't think it deserved the award, I assume it did.

 

[ZeoVGM]

I could'nt imagine one day.....Sandra Bullshit

How witty.

 

[v0yce]

One reason I'd imagine lighting on a green screen would be easier is that you could set up the lights anywhere, or move them quickly and easily. You're never worried about things like walls and ceilings, and proximity to flammable objects, or running yards and yards of cables up stairs or hiding them behind furniture etc.

Or trying to move the sun.

 

[benita]

Glad I was proven right on Avatar.

I told everyone the film was 100% visuals with no substance. And the Academy just proved me right.

Enjoyable as a popcorn action flick, but I expected more from Cameron. Titanic aside, I felt connected to the characters in ALL his other movies.

Not sure about Hurt Locker winning it though. Was hoping the Blind Side would take it. Or Up.

:lol

So there's only ever one movie of any substance released every year right?

How thick are you? On one hand the academy proved you right because Avatar didn't win. On the other, your favorite - The Blind Side - didn't win either.

Get a clue dude.

 

[FirewalkR]

C'mon guys, time to let it go. Everyone knows this'll be a LotR-like affair. JC will sweep the oscars with the last movie of the trilogy.

 

[JGS]

This is not intended to disprove your previous statements, just to point out the fanatics opinion on the other films.

QQ

:lol I stand corrected!

Technically, I was talking about this thread, but I retract a bit of my statement.

But surely The Hurt Locker Fanboys Forums are gloating mightily...Oh wait.

 

[Discotheque]

Anyways moving past all this whining on both sides. I thought the camera man caught some brilliant moments:

Also I find it sad that the Academy still hasn't recognized mocap performances. Andy Serkis pulled a dynamite performance in The Two Towers and surely should have been at the least nominated for best supporting actor (and shoulda won too)

Zoe Saldana's performance wasn't as good, but still it was at least better than Sandra Bullock in the Blind Side. FFS.

 

[BowieZ]

Zoe Saldana's performance wasn't as good, but still it was at least better than Sandra Bullock in the Blind Side. FFS.

YOU THREA'EN SANDRA, YOU THREA'EN ME

 

[Veidt]

YOU THREA'EN SANDRA, YOU THREA'EN ME

I WANT MY AMERIKUH BACK!

 

[Discotheque]

I'd like to see Sandra Bullock play Nancy Grace next.

 

[Amir0x]

Whoa whoa whoa. She was in a movie about a poor black kid. Who else would you give it to

:lol So true!

Glad I was proven right on Avatar.

I told everyone the film was 100% visuals with no substance. And the Academy just proved me right.

Enjoyable as a popcorn action flick, but I expected more from Cameron. Titanic aside, I felt connected to the characters in ALL his other movies.

Not sure about Hurt Locker winning it though. Was hoping the Blind Side would take it. Or Up.

I thought Avatar was terrible but it annoys me more when someone thinks a board of voters suddenly proves an opinion right or wrong.

You were not proven "right" that the movie was all visuals and no substance by AVATAR not winning BP. You merely had confirmation that the Academy agrees with your opinion.

It's like people using metacritic or rottentomatoes to try to argue that a movie is good or bad. No, I don't give a fuck what a sampling of 200 critics thinks of your film. Argue the merits on your own terms!

*ahem*

But still, thank God AVATAR didn't win. Totally soulless film.

Really, the bigger problem I have with the ACADEMY is that they so frequently ignore good comedies for the best awards. Bitches ignored some amazing comedies over the years that deserved wins.

I'd rather they get over that phobia first than their phobia of CG actors. I'd hope they get over their phobia of CG actors when a movie comes out that deserves the distinction.

 

[WillyFive]

I would really like to see something like the 1st Academy Awards again.

15 minute run time!

 

[Mgoblue201]

Really, the bigger problem I have with the ACADEMY is that they so frequently ignore good comedies for the best awards. Bitches ignored some amazing comedies over the years that deserved wins.

I'd rather they get over that phobia first than their phobia of CG actors. I'd hope they get over their phobia of CG actors when a movie comes out that deserves the distinction.

Comedies are under-represented, but many of my favorite comedies have won major awards. Annie Hall actually won best picture, for instance, and MASH was nominated. The Producers also won a writing award. However, the academy is probably less likely to recognize pure comedies. Both MASH and Annie Hall had major dramatic or social elements. Otherwise the best they can usually aspire to is a writing award.

 

[beelzebozo]

there really should be a "best comedy" category. then again, i guess that would open up a veritable pandora's box of people demanding "best of" categories for nearly every genre.

 

[Ceres]

there really should be a "best comedy" category. then again, i guess that would open up a veritable pandora's box of people demanding "best of" categories for nearly every genre.

Well, there is what the Golden Globes does although I've never understood exactly how comedy and musical are in the same category as there are musicals that are comedies and musicals that are dramas (and it's not like there are a ton of musicals these days).

 

[goldenticket]

I've never understood exactly how comedy and musical are in the same category

Just because they are so different then dramas and there isnt enough quality comedy AND musicals every year so makes sense to combine them

 

[seat]

Can we have more discussion about Logorama winning Animated Short? Because really now.

I thought it was brilliant and that the award was well-deserved, even when compared to the other contenders.

 

[AniHawk]

I can't believe that short took six years to make. I enjoyed it, but six years?

That must be some lie from somewhere.

 

[Count Dookkake]

The tribute to horror was a disgrace.

1) The presenters are not stars of a horror film.

2) Many of the clips were not from horror films.

3) Too much repetition from the same movies.

 

[wizword]

Oh, can I also just give a big :lol :lol :lol to the Academy's attempt apology to The Dark Knight by giving the film an exclusive five minute feature to explain how sound mixing works. I like how they didn't visit past movies for the other awards. :lol

The dark knight had no substance in the same way as avatar. It is just a comic book movie. Glad a superior movie that had so much substance won over it and glad it wasn't nominated for best adapted screenplay. Because we know that comic book scripts are average.

 

[Dr.Acula]

The tribute to horror was a disgrace.

1) The presenters are not stars of a horror film.

2) Many of the clips were not from horror films.

3) Too much repetition from the same movies.

Yeah, horror is totally under-appreciated by critics. Peter Jackson and Sam Raimi got their starts in horror, and they're two of the biggest directors working today. And no one gives any love to John Carpenter, even though if he had dedicated his life to making dramas he would have been nominated several times over.

 

[Puddles]

I clearly made comments about most GAFers commenting on this very particular thread being gamers more than people who understand what makes a great film.

You're referring to me, so I'll respond. I think I have a pretty good idea about what makes a great film. I don't want to get into a dick-measuring contest about this, but some of my all-time favorites include works by Bergman, Kubrick, Hitchcock, Kurosawa and Leone. Maybe I haven't seen quite as many films as some of the people in this thread, but I've certainly seen more than the average cinema-goer, especially in regards to the classics.

With that said, there any many reasons why a film can be good. Avatar had its flaws, yes, but in my opinion it did so well in the areas where it did succeed that those strengths elevate it to the level of a Best Picture-caliber film. Avatar is good for different reasons than The Hurt Locker. I happen to think that Avatar's strengths outweigh The Hurt Locker's strengths, but for whatever reason, The Academy didn't see it that way. Oh well. At least it was nominated.

I'd appreciate it if you didn't try to paint all of us "Avatards" with the same brush.