Christopher Doyle calls out The Academy over Oscar for Cinematography

[markm]

Leang and Mark sorry to be blunt but your ignorance astounds me on so many levels.

 

The logic of the argument is what matters, and the judgement & talent of the person making the argument.

 

There's no other creative industry where talent is trumped by some weird class order, as if having ASC after your name makes a mediocre talent great and 'ignore the rest'. There are people with experience who I don't respect, because I don't rate their work, their art, their taste, their world view and what they have to say. Doesn't matter if they are an ASC or not.

 

Doyle is not a career filmmaker, he only cares about the cinematography. If only more people were focussed on that, on understanding, refining and generally getting on with it - rather than climbing a career ladder. It wouldn't happen in the music industry. With music nobody sneers at a talented guitarist because he isn't part of the RIAA. It's the creativity, stupid. In the movie industry talent somehow takes a back seat to bullshit. It's weird.

 

And it isn't just about the attitude, if Doyle wasn't a genius behind the camera, his attitude would carry no sway with me.

 

Sean's work here could have any level of standing at all and I'd still admire it as the artistic achievement it is.

 

I respect people based on what they do, not 'who they are'. Maybe because I am a doer, and more interested in doing stuff than bullshitting around it.

 

Why address this to me?

 

An ASC though does command a certain professionalism because of the work they have done that has proven themselves Experience and knowledge often equate to talent if an ASC or  BSC offered to be my DP I would be very happy indeed. They are extremely knowledgeable talented people who know far more than I will probably ever know about being a DP.

 

Look I may not have liked Roger Deakins ASC BSC Cinematography in skfall with the Alexa and I'm entitled to an opinion. We criticise the pro's precisely because they are the best of the best. I might say I hated the last indiana jones film but there is more talent in that film than I may ever have in one of my miserable little efforts but I judge them by the very best of the best standards. I may be harsh but it doesn't mean I dont respect them for what they do because I damn well know how near impossible it is what they do do.

 

If Leang wants to tell me I know jack then fine He's right Until I earn my stripes that is. I have been learning all I can and making films but spent very little time actually directing But I feel I am ready that is why I want to make a breakout film.

 

I respect my peers. I may not always like them but in a professional capacity I would always be a professional because I do respect the work they do.

[zaz]

miranda interviewed on the ASC Podcast: http://podbay.fm/show/259748235/e/1354772437

[solo]

Christopher Doyle is the man.

some guys make art
some guys are gaffers
and others are just ... trolls

That's all.
Eat this
All this:


-Chungking Express
-Days of Being Wild
-Ashes of Time
-Fallen Angels
-Dumplings
-In the Mood for Love
-HERO
-Last Life in the Universe
-Invisible Waves
-2046
-LADY IN THE WATER
-The Limits of Control
-PARANOID PARK

the wild man:

http://www.filmmakermagazine.com/archives/issues/fall2005/features/wild_man.php

 

:)

[Leang]

He was not there and not involved in the real crafting of PI.  How daft are you to not get that?  How presumptuous are you to lecture anyone?  

 

in filmmaking there's a process of pre-production, production, and then post.  I assume PI was just completely post and no camera involvement or lighting.  I see.  He wasn't ''there.'' I'm not the one being comedic.  

 

http://www.arri.de/news.html?article=1104&cHash=a4f19e808f381b666b571571fda7a6f4

[andy lee]

once the 3D CGI boys get their hands on the elements the original cinematography

gets massively watered down and the cg element takes over the final control of the look and feel of the frame in question.

I have been directing Green/Blue Screen for 17 years now for MTV shot on film and now digital

and I have to say from my experiance the months spent in post completely re defines the cinematography , resizing , relighting , reframing adding cg background compositing etc etc grading etc

By the time I've finished with it don't recognise my own original work

it's been altered so much to create the final composite image of original film elements and added cgi elements.

 

I view 'Life Of Pi' in exactly the same way

that's why I was shocked that it won the Oscar for best cinematography over some of the other candidates I thought where more deserving of the award.

[Bruno]

in filmmaking there's a process of pre-production, production, and then post. I assume PI was just completely post and no camera involvement or lighting. I see. He wasn't ''there.'' I'm not the one being comedic.

Saying that VFX companies do the post work these days is very inaccurate. They're involved since day one, bidding based on the screenplay (and possibly affecting it) and doing previs and designing VFX and action sequences before they're even shot. I know this because like Sean I've also worked on VFX. I've been involved in projects where we started designing sequences even before there was a cast or even a DP attached. There's a huge lack of understanding regarding VFX from everyone else in and out of the film industry, and that's why the VFX artists had enough and are now trying to gain momentum in order to impove things.

[Leang]

miranda interviewed on the ASC Podcast: http://podbay.fm/show/259748235/e/1354772437

 

thanks for the link.  was an interesting interview.

[Sean Cunningham]

in filmmaking there's a process of pre-production, production, and then post.  I assume PI was just completely post and no camera involvement or lighting.  I see.  He wasn't ''there.'' I'm not the one being comedic.  

 

http://www.arri.de/news.html?article=1104&cHash=a4f19e808f381b666b571571fda7a6f4

 

Yes, he was not there.  He may have never even stepped foot in the doors of R+H, the place where the imagery was actually crafted.  It's absurd that they use imagery with the R+H tiger and ocean and sky in that article because he was not present when those aspects of the film were being created. 

 

You're very comedic.  

[Sean Cunningham]

Saying that VFX companies do the post work these days is very inaccurate....

 

He just doesn't get it.  His exposure to filmmaking is academic, the press and Turkey.  We really shouldn't expect so much from the boy.

[Leang]

He just doesn't get it.  His exposure to filmmaking is academic, the press and Turkey.  We really shouldn't expect so much from the boy.

 

Oh really?  Why don't we shoot a short film competition?  I'll go against your vast years of knowledge as you insult and patronize my work.  please let's have a go at it!  No VFX.  

[Sean Cunningham]

Oh really?  Why don't we shoot a short film competition?  I'll go against your vast years of knowledge as you insult and patronize my work.  please let's have a go at it!  No VFX.  

 

Awww, but the real problem here is your reading comprehension and ability to process information.  How is a "film off" going to help you grow and learn?  

 

I'll remind you, the patronization started on your end.  It's not my fault I'm better at that than you as well.

 

Beyond that, I'm not skerr'd but I don't want to be really mean so I'll just leave it at that.

[Sean Cunningham]

Saying that VFX companies do the post work these days is very inaccurate. They're involved since day one, bidding based on the screenplay (and possibly affecting it) and doing previs and designing VFX and action sequences before they're even shot. I know this because like Sean I've also worked on VFX. I've been involved in projects where we started designing sequences even before there was a cast or even a DP attached. There's a huge lack of understanding regarding VFX from everyone else in and out of the film industry, and that's why the VFX artists had enough and are now trying to gain momentum in order to impove things.

 

And here's where I can also say there's a big difference between someone like Deakins and Miranda, at least in the case of PI.

 

I worked on the first ever, end-to-end feature film to get a DI.  That was cool, but you know who took it deadly serious?  Roger Deakins.  He wasn't satisfied to just shoot Oh Brother, Where Art Thou? and say, "well, I shot it, now it's up to them."  The end result would be, even if he wasn't the one tweaking the dials personally, a reflection on his work.  End-to-end.  He lived and breathed that film all the way to the end.  

 

Oh Brother had a sequence which, just like in PI, a majority of the frame would end up being totally digital.   This was the sequence I was lead over.  You know who took this sequence deadly serious, because it had to not only match the tone of surrounding photography but would ultimately be a reflection on his work?  Roger Deakins.  And so he was there, defining, tweaking and crafting the look with us.

 

Miranda just isn't that guy, if we're to use PI as an example.  He was not there, at R+H, when the look and impact of the film was actually being crafted.  He was absent from the process.  There is no plainer way to say it so that someone like Leang can understand.  I'm sure he'll still try to find some BS, third party source to try to maintain his fantasy to the contrary.

 

This will be my parting statement on the subject.

[Leang]

I'll remind you, the patronization started on your end.  It's not my fault I'm better at that than you as well.

 

Beyond that, I'm not skerr'd but I don't want to be really mean so I'll just leave it at that.

 

Well for the record I've been itching to comment on your lighting and shots as a ''DP'' for ''Sick Boy'' and rewind all the irony about ''cinematography.''  Or is it not your fault?  It's your lighting crew and direction huh?  Oh no wait it can't be that it's the post right!?  You're the VFX warrior with no flaw to making a first feature film?  So I'll just leave it at that and not say anything.

[Sean Cunningham]

Well for the record I've been itching to comment on your lighting and shots as a ''DP'' for ''Sick Boy'' and rewind all the irony about ''cinematography.''  Or is it not your fault?  It's your lighting crew and direction huh?  Oh no wait it can't be that it's the post right!?  You're the VFX warrior with no flaw to making a first feature film?  So I'll just leave it at that and not say anything.

 

You really want to go there?  Because I'd be happy to point out what I think of Bendeyar, which, not your fault, you didn't shoot it.  Is it your fault it was graded like it was?  Your fault the editing is like it is?  Is it your fault the VFX are the way they are?  Is it your fault the trailer is cut the way it is?  Your fault the poster looks like it does?  What exactly was your total involvement in your movie, Leang?  

 

Some of these issues seem to be improved in your "vampire" short but others leave me scratching my head why they'd persist after graduating from such a prestigeous film school.  I don't know anything about Columbia.  I know some film programs you might not actually get to make more than one film between enrollment and degree and so students have to actually learn how to make a movie after graduation.  I'm just giving you the benefit of the doubt here.

 

The only irony here is that I've actually shot a feature, that looks like you're watching a movie, and not something from a video camera, and you have not.  Still, you continue to provoke me even when I've been generous to you more than once since we've locked horns.  Is it perfect?  No, and I'm the first one to say so.  It's my first time shooting anything of this length with this kind of pressure, first time picking up that camera.  Could you do the same?  That's yet to be seen.  

 

You can talk shit all you want, JAFO.  Be prepared though, if you want to go there.  Your kung fu does not scare me.

 

 

edit: for the record, I shared main title credit with my lead gaffer, Homer, because I was that proud of what we did and his assistance in creating naturalistic interior lighting.  We didn't have enough lights to over-light but we both prefer the work of classic Cundey, Savides, Cronenweth Jr. and Escoffier to the slick, contrived conventional lighting techniques that, when attempted, put the stink of fail on low budget projects.

[Leang]

Your kung fu does not scare me.

 

nor does your camera work.

[Bruno]

Come on guys, does it really need to get this low?

That's why I avoid talking about my personal work here, even if that makes many in here think I never did anything and all I do is speak out of my ass.

This is mostly a camera and technical forum, and still things heat up enough when talking about $1000 dollar cameras, so let's not expand the discussions to our own personal work, since that tends to get more personal and emotional, unless it's constructive criticism (which is often already quite hard to digest).

[Zach]

Hang on, let me grab some popcorn.

 

Really though, just agree to disagree and lets all be friends 

[hmcindie]

Yes, he was not there.  He may have never even stepped foot in the doors of R+H, the place where the imagery was actually crafted.  It's absurd that they use imagery with the R+H tiger and ocean and sky in that article because he was not present when those aspects of the film were being created. 

 

You're very comedic.  

 

Ok but what the f? You are not the only guy who has worked (I actually still do so there) at a posthouse and every project is different. In some projects, the DoP does indeed sit quite awhile with the 3d guys, working out issues and going through the look. In smaller projects that almost never happens but when the budget is there, and the DoP is recognized properly, he does have a say. He doesn't have the FINAL say, but who really has anyway. Maybe Cameron but a lot of directors are stepped over by producers anyway. Cameron is one the few directors who doesn't really care about his DoP guy anyway, but don't start claiming every director works like that. Some actually do appreciate the input of the DoP creatively.

 

And yes, in the majority of projects (especially commercials and small gigs) the DoP is nowhere to be found in post. But you can't just categorically claim to know what was done in another project, in another post house, with a completely different crew. Unless you were there.

[Axel]

Ah, fuck. I don’t care, I’m sure he’s a wonderful guy and I’m sure he cares so much, but since 97 per cent of the film is not under his control, what the fuck are you talking about cinematography, sorry. I’m sorry. I have to be blunt and I don’t care, you can write it. I think it’s a fucking insult to cinematography.

 

In 2046, if cinema is to survive, 'cinematography' will define something completely different. The word, as it is used by the americans, isn't too correct anyway. Literally it means 'drawing or recording movements'. Yes, the french pioneers who made the first 'film' (material: paper), just advanced an older technique called chronophotography, in which the word photo dominates, meaning light. But early on, it was clear that film as a new technical and cultural phenomenon was successful not because it was lit in any defining way, but because it allowed to manipulate time. Take this one from 1898:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8oFnOAnL8Ss

 

'Cinematography' is synonymous with 'filmmaking'. Including the cheapest tricks and the costliest.

 

In In The Mood For Love, there are other major contributors to the look and feel than just Doyle: the director, the composer, the actors, and, quite humble in the background, the production designer and costume designer and editor and associate producer, all 4 in one person.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypY9OaKCfRU

 

Wouldn't you agree, that however masterfully and tastefully Doyle lit and photographed this film (in a way the bible for the DSLR-aesthetic-connoisseurs), he doesn't deserve to be called it's cinematographer, in the original meaning of this word. He is a cinema-photographer, skilled and with a cognizant style. But that's it.

 

Would William Chang, who painted the drafts, collected the props, searched the locations, defined the colors of the backgrounds and costumes (a.s.f.) feel cheated, if anyone said it was Doyle who created the look of the film?

 

No, because they worked together. It must have been a creative decision of this small team. 

 

If in Pi Ang Lee thought that he only needed an experienced blue screen camera operator (in german, DOP is simply credited as 'Kamera'), he could have hired a mere technician. But he didn't. Nor did he hire the 'artist' Doyle. He hired a talented team player, who had already proven that he cared for perfect 'plates' to make the VFX artist's job easier and prevent the CGI from looking like CGI (as he says in the Arri-interview).

 

Who was entitled to take the award for 'cinematography' for Pi ?

No one?

Was there no cinematography (in the modern sense of 'cinema-photographer' as well as in the old sense 'making images come alive')?

 

I'm sure, in 2046 we don't wonder any more. 

[Leang]

I don't know anything about Columbia.  I know some film programs you might not actually get to make more than one film between enrollment and degree and so students have to actually learn how to make a movie after graduation.  I'm just giving you the benefit of the doubt here.

 

Mauro Fiore ASC - B.A. from Columbia College Chicago (Avatar) Oscar

Janusz Kaminski ASC - B.A. from Columbia College Chicago - 2 Oscars