88th Academy Awards: Best Cinematography

Brandon Thompson
Feb 22, 2016
5 min read

One week to go. One week until we find out who will go down in Oscar history (for the right and wrong reasons). Today’s category is Best Cinematography. This year comes with another nomination for Roger Deakins (13th nom) and Edward Lachman (2nd nom). While the other three nominees have all won the award at least once. This is probably one the best categories in terms of quality of work with each piece of work deserving to win for it’s own reasons.

This year’s nominees are

Carol (DoP - Edward Lachman)

The Hateful Eight (DoP - Robert Richardson)

Mad Max: Fury Road (DoP - John Seale)

The Revenant (DoP - Emmanuel Lubezki)

Sicario (DoP - Roger Deakins)

Apart from Carol these movies all have big scopes being shot outside to show off skill and technical advancement. This however doesn’t mean it’s bad cinematography. All five of these nominees are special in their own ways and do something different that no one else did this year for cinematography.

CAROL

Probably the least likely to win the award but the most deserving. Set in the 1950s Lachman shoots the film on 16mm and blew the film up to 35mm giving the film a feel like that we are watching the movie through one of Rooney Mara’s character cameras. While watching the movie I did notice how the placing of characters within the frame was used and man was it used well. Another factor that was used well was negative space. The space gives us feeling that we are watching from a distance and we are zooming in on the characters.

In a interview I saw online Lachman talked about his history as a photographer and that he tries to get every shot to tell a story. When I saw the movie I thought he did a great job doing just that. Most shots convey something more than just the story being told. Some shots give the movie a voyeuristic feel as if the characters are being spied on. With so many winners of the cinematography award going to big films in scope and scale, it’s great to see a more personal film get nominated.

THE HATEFUL EIGHT

The Hateful Eight is the complete opposite of Carol and is shot in 70mm film. I believe that is one of the main reasons it was nominated for the award. In terms of story telling through the work of Richardson in this movie; it lacks dismally. This nomination should’ve gone to Tarantino as he was the one who decided to shot on 70mm and he tells the story with Richardson adding little to the movie.

I would like to be clear and that I think The Hateful Eight is one of the best movies of the year but this is my only perk with it. Also I know that the roadshow presentation is over but if the time ever pops up again please try and see this on 70mm.

MAD MAX: FURY ROAD

Like The Hateful Eight the director had a lot to do with how the movie was framed and shot but it’s also after the cameras stopped rolling did Seale’s work truly become a great piece of work. While shooting the movie Seale got George Miller to have multiple camera setups while shooting and it ended up being a great advantage to the movie. Seale’s frames are controlled and the editing adds to his work which doesn’t happen often. Seale’s cameras always move forwards keeping us in the action. In terms of lighting i’m sure that he had no shortage of it.

In post production Seale’s work with colour correction somehow makes the blues and oranges work in a blockbuster for the first time in many years. It makes the landscape deadlier and makes it more appealing to look at.

THE REVENANT

The favorite to take away this prize has by far the best lighting setup with it all being shot with natural light which makes shots feel colder. With amazing depth of field and clarity Lubezki at point may seem like he is trying harder to show off the landscape more than DiCaprio or Hardy. The moments when we are given action, greatly choreographed by the way, also seem to highlight scale more than the emotion that comes with those scenes.

However this doesn’t mean Lubezki doesn’t show emotion, there is plenty of it when characters are talking to one another and when we get close to the characters. I just wish it was more present in more scenes. Lubezki also pulls off many long shots which he is now known for from movies like Children of Men, Gravity and Birdman. Overall I enjoyed watching Lubezki’s work in this movie but he’s done better work in about 4-5 other works of his.

SICARIO

Along with Carol, Sicario has some of the best framing of the year but for different reasons. Sicario’s framing is tight and when it goes handheld it’s still great. Sicario is the only film of the five to change types of cameras when it goes night vision later on in the movie. Deakins only shows what the audience needs to see by keeping it in focus and when it’s not important the field of depth changes and we are shown what is important.

Like some of the other nominees the cinematography calls it self out but it only does this in the wide shots that setup location. While Roger Deakins deserves to win an Oscar this isn’t the film he should win for and he should’ve won one a while ago.

WHO SHOULD’VE BEEN NOMINATED

While being a 2014 film for best foreign film I think MOMMY (which came out in 2015) should’ve been here. STEVE JOBS for its use of 16mm, 35mm and digital to show different time periods. MACBETH for it’s imagery that used colour like no one else did this year. THE ASSASSIN for it’s beauty in framing and imagery and ANOMALISA for it’s life like stop motion that will make your jaw drop.

KNIGHT OF CUPS and THE LOBSTER are two films that are 2015 films in Australia but 2016 in the USA and are both great pieces that were ineligible for this year (but if Lubezki wins this year he might get a nom for Knight of Cups next year because his name is Lubezki).

OVERALL

I think each of these five movies are great to watch on the big screen but when it comes to who tells a story better through framing and lighting, that’s where you find who deserves to win.