Nice! Wouldn’t have necessarily been my choice, but it’s in my top five, and it’s a great break from the “pretty” cinematography that usually dominates the awards season.
Pablo (Col)
Im incredibly happy for The White Ribbon. To put it simply: the best cinematography won the award, that it. Avatar is spectacular as well as The Hurt Locker but The White Ribbon did not have to rely on sound, editing or effects to enhance its cinematography. It was Berger with only lights and camera that did all that fantastic work.
Very cool that this won. It’s been a long time since a black and white film won for photography (Schindler’s List, I think, and The Man Who Wasn’t There was the last BW nomination). Needs to happen again.
Edward L.
Pablo (Col): Just to say, The White Ribbon does utliise a lot of post-production effects. The film was shot in colour and then processed in black and white. Also, the filmmakers used CGI to remove a lot of the modern details (telephone wires etc.) in the shots. I think the film has a fascinating look and I have no problem with it winning, but it would be an error to think that it hasn’t benefited from computer work.
The Dude
Amazing result!
aspect ratio
A fairly poor choice, but at least Avatar didn’t win and it’s not like the other films were so staggeringly deserving either. Shutter Island has already beaten everything I saw from 2009 in terms of cinematography.
Interesting to note, Roger Deakins won the ASC for The Man Who Wasn’t There, but lost the Oscar. I predict the same fate for The White Ribbon (those fucking yahoos will probably pick Avatar, making it the first film in history to win more than one category for its visual effects).
I love black-and-white cinematography, and I dearly wish more contemporary directors would have their cinematographers utilize it. That said, I’m not passionate about the cinematography in “The White Ribbon.” I wish I hadn’t known going into the film that it had been shot in color and then desaturated. It seemed evident in a distracting way.
Berger still had to light the shots in advance for them to be desaturated, and not to mention the skilled framing, so I would be comfortable with it winning the Oscar, although it’d be my third choice. Count me among the skeptics for the nomination of “Avatar” here.
red_wine
I’m disappointed. I like the movie, directing, screenplay, acting and it’ll probably be in the Top 10 for me for 2009 but cinematography is something I don’t like.
It looks extremely unnatural. Even before I knew that it was shot in color and digitally converted to black and white, something seemed off with the color scheme. The contrast is too overblown, sometimes the sky almost seems white, and the lighting is distinctly disorienting in the interior shots where you can tell they were probably lit for color cinematography.
But I’m happy for the nomination as I will always support any foreign language film getting nominated in any other category other than foreign language film.
But still this its better than avatar winning, whose win would have been defenseless. I think its sad that it even got nominated, but those “yahoos” (I like the word aspect) will probably think “so beautiful” and blindly vote for Avatar.
Basterds had the usual period cinematography, nothing that really stood out, far inferior to Kill Bill Vol 1, cinematography wise, even the token auteurish camera moves were tired and nothing special.
Harry Potter, omg what a meh movie, jeez I wonder how it even got nominated, what a compulsively forgettable movie, who remembered it enough to vote for it?
Even otherwise, it was just too slick and had that distinct computer enhanced sheen that I abhor in movies (eg Benjamin Button).
Finally that leaves Hurt locker, wonderfully shot and rather beautiful inspite of being gritty. On my first viewing what struck me most was how great the film looked. So its not like it should win by elimination but will be a thoroughly great choice.
voland
Of course it wont win the oscar. And @ aspect ratio, its not a poor choice at all, that’s what actually happens when a guild awards a film regarding its quality and not popularity.
Bill M.
YES! For one of my favorite films of the year.
Of course this doesn’t guarantee a repeat next week with the entire Academy body voting but it’s clear the visual effects of Avatar didn’t mix well for cinematography on a whole.
Room 237
Um…pretty much all major B&W films that you’ll see today were shot on color stock. The Man Who Wasn’t There was shot on color stock.
This is for 2 reasons:
1) Quality. Color stocks have evolved over the years, while B&W stocks are the same from decades ago.
2) Distributors want to reserve the right to release the film in color in certain territories because they don’t think people will watch B&W. Again, this was the case with The Man Who Wasn’t there.
So was the black and white opening of Casino Royale and the black and white wedding sequences in Kill Bill
red_wine
Casino Royale’s opening scene looked great.
Tetro was also shot in black and white but it was shot on video.
Tetro looks far more beautiful than The White Ribbon.
And it was a similar case with the white Ribbon, certain European territories don’t buy black and white movie for TV showings, so the revenue would have been compromised so The White Ribbon was shot in color and then converted to black and white. I’ve heard even Good night And Good Luck was shot in color first and then converted to black and white.
But I have to say, not a fan of the technique at all. Lighting for color and lighting for black and white is a completely different ball game.
ninja
It`s a welcome break from rather routine Hurt Locker sweep of late but it won`t translate to the Oscars. Hurt Locker will win this one and I predict 7 out of 9 total of wins. It`ll miss only Score (goes to Up) and Actor (goes to Bridges).
Avatar will win only SFX and Bastereds only Best Supporting Actor. However, Precious could end up winning two (shoo-in Mo`nique and Adapted Script) and Up In the Air could win zero (if Precious wins Adapted). Not too happy with this prospect, but realistically speaking, this is what Oscars are shaping up to be.
Al
Cinematography has been the toughest award to track in my opinion (its also my favorite outside the top 5) Obviously its not going to be Harry Potter. But it could easily be any of the others.
Me.
YESS!!! This made my day!!! What a deserved victory!!! Although I think The Hurt Locker will still take this one on Oscar night. If The White Ribbon wins though, I’ll scream of joy. :D
tim
Unless Hurt Locker sweeps, The White Ribbon could easily take best cinematography. I remember when Pan’s Labyrinth won in 2007. Though it was a weaker field than this year.
Rick
Yes, Cinematographers who know Cinematography nominated Avatar because it had bad Cinematography. I mean some of you don’t even know what Cinematography is.
Room 237
Robert Richardson, though he’s won 2 Oscars, has never won an ASC…
Roger Deakins, though he’s won 2 ASC awards, has never won an Oscar…
Obviously, this is not an accurate barometer…
Dave
I am happy to see this movie win any award because it was the best movie of the last decade.
JJ
Well, let’s hope Richardson wins ASC for Shutter Island in 2010, and let’s hope that Deakins win the Oscar for True Grit.
Comments
27 responses to “‘The White Ribbon’ wins the ASC award”
Wow. I wasn’t expecting that!
Kris, do you think this could possibly happen again next Sunday?
Absolutely deserving!
Cool. I really need to see this one, but it hasn’t come near me yet.
I just don’t get it.
Nice! Wouldn’t have necessarily been my choice, but it’s in my top five, and it’s a great break from the “pretty” cinematography that usually dominates the awards season.
Im incredibly happy for The White Ribbon. To put it simply: the best cinematography won the award, that it. Avatar is spectacular as well as The Hurt Locker but The White Ribbon did not have to rely on sound, editing or effects to enhance its cinematography. It was Berger with only lights and camera that did all that fantastic work.
I really hopes this happens again on Oscar Night.
Very cool that this won. Hope it happens again.
Very cool that this won. It’s been a long time since a black and white film won for photography (Schindler’s List, I think, and The Man Who Wasn’t There was the last BW nomination). Needs to happen again.
Pablo (Col): Just to say, The White Ribbon does utliise a lot of post-production effects. The film was shot in colour and then processed in black and white. Also, the filmmakers used CGI to remove a lot of the modern details (telephone wires etc.) in the shots. I think the film has a fascinating look and I have no problem with it winning, but it would be an error to think that it hasn’t benefited from computer work.
Amazing result!
A fairly poor choice, but at least Avatar didn’t win and it’s not like the other films were so staggeringly deserving either. Shutter Island has already beaten everything I saw from 2009 in terms of cinematography.
Interesting to note, Roger Deakins won the ASC for The Man Who Wasn’t There, but lost the Oscar. I predict the same fate for The White Ribbon (those fucking yahoos will probably pick Avatar, making it the first film in history to win more than one category for its visual effects).
I love black-and-white cinematography, and I dearly wish more contemporary directors would have their cinematographers utilize it. That said, I’m not passionate about the cinematography in “The White Ribbon.” I wish I hadn’t known going into the film that it had been shot in color and then desaturated. It seemed evident in a distracting way.
Berger still had to light the shots in advance for them to be desaturated, and not to mention the skilled framing, so I would be comfortable with it winning the Oscar, although it’d be my third choice. Count me among the skeptics for the nomination of “Avatar” here.
I’m disappointed. I like the movie, directing, screenplay, acting and it’ll probably be in the Top 10 for me for 2009 but cinematography is something I don’t like.
It looks extremely unnatural. Even before I knew that it was shot in color and digitally converted to black and white, something seemed off with the color scheme. The contrast is too overblown, sometimes the sky almost seems white, and the lighting is distinctly disorienting in the interior shots where you can tell they were probably lit for color cinematography.
But I’m happy for the nomination as I will always support any foreign language film getting nominated in any other category other than foreign language film.
But still this its better than avatar winning, whose win would have been defenseless. I think its sad that it even got nominated, but those “yahoos” (I like the word aspect) will probably think “so beautiful” and blindly vote for Avatar.
Basterds had the usual period cinematography, nothing that really stood out, far inferior to Kill Bill Vol 1, cinematography wise, even the token auteurish camera moves were tired and nothing special.
Harry Potter, omg what a meh movie, jeez I wonder how it even got nominated, what a compulsively forgettable movie, who remembered it enough to vote for it?
Even otherwise, it was just too slick and had that distinct computer enhanced sheen that I abhor in movies (eg Benjamin Button).
Finally that leaves Hurt locker, wonderfully shot and rather beautiful inspite of being gritty. On my first viewing what struck me most was how great the film looked. So its not like it should win by elimination but will be a thoroughly great choice.
Of course it wont win the oscar. And @ aspect ratio, its not a poor choice at all, that’s what actually happens when a guild awards a film regarding its quality and not popularity.
YES! For one of my favorite films of the year.
Of course this doesn’t guarantee a repeat next week with the entire Academy body voting but it’s clear the visual effects of Avatar didn’t mix well for cinematography on a whole.
Um…pretty much all major B&W films that you’ll see today were shot on color stock. The Man Who Wasn’t There was shot on color stock.
This is for 2 reasons:
1) Quality. Color stocks have evolved over the years, while B&W stocks are the same from decades ago.
2) Distributors want to reserve the right to release the film in color in certain territories because they don’t think people will watch B&W. Again, this was the case with The Man Who Wasn’t there.
Actually the B&W sequences in NINE were shot on B&W film…
So was the black and white opening of Casino Royale and the black and white wedding sequences in Kill Bill
Casino Royale’s opening scene looked great.
Tetro was also shot in black and white but it was shot on video.
Tetro looks far more beautiful than The White Ribbon.
And it was a similar case with the white Ribbon, certain European territories don’t buy black and white movie for TV showings, so the revenue would have been compromised so The White Ribbon was shot in color and then converted to black and white. I’ve heard even Good night And Good Luck was shot in color first and then converted to black and white.
But I have to say, not a fan of the technique at all. Lighting for color and lighting for black and white is a completely different ball game.
It`s a welcome break from rather routine Hurt Locker sweep of late but it won`t translate to the Oscars. Hurt Locker will win this one and I predict 7 out of 9 total of wins. It`ll miss only Score (goes to Up) and Actor (goes to Bridges).
Avatar will win only SFX and Bastereds only Best Supporting Actor. However, Precious could end up winning two (shoo-in Mo`nique and Adapted Script) and Up In the Air could win zero (if Precious wins Adapted). Not too happy with this prospect, but realistically speaking, this is what Oscars are shaping up to be.
Cinematography has been the toughest award to track in my opinion (its also my favorite outside the top 5) Obviously its not going to be Harry Potter. But it could easily be any of the others.
YESS!!! This made my day!!! What a deserved victory!!! Although I think The Hurt Locker will still take this one on Oscar night. If The White Ribbon wins though, I’ll scream of joy. :D
Unless Hurt Locker sweeps, The White Ribbon could easily take best cinematography. I remember when Pan’s Labyrinth won in 2007. Though it was a weaker field than this year.
Yes, Cinematographers who know Cinematography nominated Avatar because it had bad Cinematography. I mean some of you don’t even know what Cinematography is.
Robert Richardson, though he’s won 2 Oscars, has never won an ASC…
Roger Deakins, though he’s won 2 ASC awards, has never won an Oscar…
Obviously, this is not an accurate barometer…
I am happy to see this movie win any award because it was the best movie of the last decade.
Well, let’s hope Richardson wins ASC for Shutter Island in 2010, and let’s hope that Deakins win the Oscar for True Grit.
Yay.