Film review. An analysis of the cinematography of Only God Forgives, by Nicolas Winding Refn

Only God Forgives is the last film by the Danish director Nicolas Winding Refn (Drive, Bronson, Valahalla Rising) which was selected in last year Cannes Film Festival official Competition.

The plot. A drug smuggler owns a Thai box gym in Bangkok as a front for his drug operations. When his brother is killed, his mother, and chief of the organization, arrives urging him to find his brother's killer and revenge him.

Cinematography: Larry Smith

Camera: Arri Alexa Plus, Red Epic

Lenses:  Cooke S4

Aspect ratio: 1.85:1

Format: ARRIRAW, Redcode RAW

Film Stock: -

Only God Forgives is the second collaboration between director  Nicolas Winding Refn and cinematographer Larry Smith (The Guard, Bronson) who worked as gaffer and lighting cameraman in Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut, Barry Lyndon and The Shining. His election for digital and cameras such as the Arri Alexa and the Red Epic is justified not only for budget reasons but also because they were working with a 7 weeks schedule with numerous locations, so they had to be quick and fast at shooting.

The image is softened with  the lenses used, the Cooke S4, as we can notice by its signature: the octagonal iris. Borders are soft, contrast isn't high and the transition to out-of-focus areas is soft too, while skin tones are slightly warmer. Definitely one of the best solutions to give the digital format a cine-like look.

Most of the times Smith chooses a one-light-set-up to light the scene. It is often a strong light which falls onto the characters after passing trough some kind of grid, painting patterns of strong shadows on character's face and body, which is visually interesting. This kind of lighting is obviously theatrical and it is reinforced with the beautiful use of on set lights, like Chinese lanterns in the karaoke club  or the lights on the wall at the restaurant, creating a more natural and diffused light.

But the characteristic of Smith's cinematography which is predominant throughout the film is the use of colored filters on light. In order to recreate the ambient of Bangkok and of the places where most of the scenes where shots, lights are filtered with red gels. Sometimes different colours filters, mainly blue, are used so colour contrast is strongly increased. There are scenes, like the fight one,  lit with a red tone ambient light  while the key light lighting the characters is white: bright neons and strong reds coexist to transmit the feeling of a city and a story filled up with blood, eroticism, violence and darkness.

Anyway, Only God Forgives' cinematography is meant to visually impress only. There are some beautiful images in the film but they are just that: they don't enhance character's feelings or the story which itself is also meant to impress and is missing something that has to be basic for a film: content.

Film review. An analysis of the cinematography of Prisoners, by Denis Villeneuve

Prisoners is the last work by Quebecois director Denis Villeneuve (Incendies, Polytechinque, Maelström), a suspenseful as well as disturbing thriller with a great script.

The Plot. On thanksgiving day, two six year old girls disappear. Despite the police investigation, which seems to lead nowhere, the father of one of the girls decides to take matters into his own hands, using desperate and unorthodox methods.

Cinematography: Roger Deakins

Camera: Arri Alexa Plus and Studio

Lenses:  Zeiss Master Prime

Aspect ratio: 1.85:1

Format: ARRIRAW

Film Stock: -

Prisoners is the first collaboration between director D. Villeneuve and one of the finest living cinematographers, Roger Deakins (Skyfall, No Country for Old Men, A Beautiful Mind, The Hurricane...) and the result is outstanding.

Once again, the British cinematographer chooses the Arri Alexa and Master Prime Zeiss lenses to shoot Prisoners: this choice is not only dictated by Deakin's preferences and own style, but also for the way of shooting the film and the results he was expecting. The resolution, the latitude and the details offered by camera and lenses were necessary to shoot often in very low light conditions without jeopardizing the image quality and neatness.

Light has a natural feel throughout the film. Most of the time characters are lit with a single light placed outside windows when it imitates the daylight or on one side in the indoor shots imitating on set lights. Sometimes the only lights used on scene are headlamps, flash-lights, neons or candles, and it's in these scenes where we can see Deakins' great work: contrast is high, light is low and shadows are really deep and yet the image is clean and beautiful.

Prisoners is a dark film and Deakins shows it by the way of lighting. There's no sign of the sun throughout the film: all the exteriors are shot on dull days, sometimes in rainy or even snowy ones. That results in an overall grey tone with desaturated colours, an aesthetic that goes very well with the story. In the indoor shots, characters are almost always backlit or side lit, creating silhouettes and  a strong contrast. By this way of lighting, characters are often shadows that move in the scene: this suits perfectly the characters who have somehow something to hide.

As a good thriller as it is, Prisoners releases pieces to complete the puzzle one by one; to enhance this concept Deakins offers us some of the most artistic images of the film. The frame is like a black canvas where the British master draws few brush-stroke of light, lighting half a face of a character or some details of the scene. The shadows gain great importance for the story: they are what is not seen or known, the secrets and the unconscious, they are where the truth lays.

Camera movements are dosed and imperceptible helping the audience to stay in the story, a purpose also achieved by the focal lengths used, never too wide  nor too telephoto, always staying within the normal range of the 50mm, avoiding perspective distortions and offering a more natural look.

Prisoners is a very well made film brilliantly directed by D. Villeneuve who managed to build tension since the first frame. With his stunning work R. Deakins teaches us that cinematography isn't necessarily about where placing the camera to get the best possible angle, but it's about enhancing the story and finding the way to make a moment or an emotion more beautiful, more intense, more powerful. 

Film review. An analysis of the cinematography of Captain Phillips, by Paul Greengrass

Captain Phillips is a film based on a true story directed by Paul Greengrass (The Bourne Ultimatum, The Bourne Supremacy, United 93) with Tom Hanks playing the role of the captain.

The plot. Failing to hijack an US flagged ship, 4 Somali pirates kidnap her captain, Rich Phillips, asking for ransom. Us Navy intervenes in rescuing him.

Cinematography: Barry Ackroyd

Camera: Arriflex 435 and 235, Aaton Penelope and XTR Prod, Arri Alexa, Canon Eos C300

Lenses:  Angenieux Optimo

Aspect ratio: 2.35:1

Format: 35mm,  16mm, ARRIRAW

Film Stock: Fuji Eterna 8663 250D, Fuji Eterna 8673 500T, Fuji Eterna 8563 250D, Fuji Eterna 8573 500T

The cinematography of Captain  Phillips is signed by Greengrass' usual DP, Danny Akroyd (Green Zone, United 93, The Hurt Locker, Looking for Eric); his choice for the film stock is justified for the texture and the reality he was after, characteristics that, according to him, digital doesn't offer as much as film does.

The sense of reality is the first thing we notice from the very beginning of the film. Audience is thrown into the story thanks to the way of shooting which has all the characteristics of documentaries: the hand-held camera is constantly looking for action or motions, panning and shifting rapidly, shaking, re-framing, following the characters... Even long zoom is used in this sense: as in a docufilm or a tv reality, the focal length is changed quickly closing up to characters.

Multiple camera shooting and improvisation were necessary to ensure a better sense of realism (apparently Tom Hanks and the actors who played the roles of the pirates didn't meet till the day of shooting to create a certain tension in the scene...). But the realism is also achieved thanks to camera shots used: there's a clear preference for close ups which, along with the way the story is told, makes us feel close to characters and feel respect for them; for example, we never consider most of the pirates as bad.

Close up and extreme close up shots are also used at the beginning of the film to introduce the character Tom Hanks plays and empathise with him.

The way of lighting is as natural as possible, along with the general feel of realism of the film. Artificial lights are reinforced and softened but there's not a specific regard for exposure: characters, when moving, easily fall into sub-exposure or overexposure which, obviously helps with the purpose of the film.

There's a clear difference in texture, grain and colours depending on which  characters camera is following. Tom Hanks and his crew are shot on 35mm, with perfectly balanced and vivid colours and a nice colour palette; the image is neat and organic.The pirates are shot on 16mm: the image is very grainy, the look is "dirty" with lots of flares easily visible and tones are are quite warm. The US Navy is shot on digital: the image is very neat and no grain is present, a blue tone and desaturated colours make everything cold and formal. Regardless if this is an easy and far too obvious solution, it works.

Captain Phillips is a very suspenseful film in which a story unfolds to the audience with great realism thanks to the good work director Paul Greengrass and cinematographer  Barry Ackroyd did together.

Film review. An analysis of the cinematography of Gravity, by Alfonso Cuarón.

Gravity is the latest feature by Alfonso Cuarón (Children of Men, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, Y tu Mamá También), a sci-fi film that takes us into the space with Sandra bullock and George Clooney.

The plot. While outside the shuttle, on a spacewalk repairing a satellite, disaster hits the medical engineer Sandra Bullock and the veteran astronaut George Clooney; the shuttle is destroyed and they have to find a way to get back to earth.

Cinematography: Emmanuel Lubezki

Camera: Arri Alexa

Lenses: Zeiss Master Prime

Aspect ratio: 2.35:1

Format: ARRIRAW

Film Stock: -

Emmanuel Lubezki (Children of Men, The Tree of Life, To the Wonder, Ali) proves himself, once again,  to be one of the finest working cinematographer, and this time choosing digital (instead of the usual film stock) and showing us that he can master digital light too. Even if there's lots of CGI (almost everything you see on screen is fake), the cinematography of Gravity is absolutely stunning.

The approach to lighting Lubezki makes is, as he always uses to do, very natural: being in space, he uses the sun as main light source and very often as Key Light, both for the spacewalks scenes and the scenes shot inside the shuttle; but he also uses stars and the earth as light sources, the latter one as a big bouncer of the sunlight. Lubezki is not afraid of showing the sun light as it is, very harsh, so there are deep shadows, contrast is quite high and, sometimes, the image has blown highlight: that results not only in some visually beautiful images but also in a very natural feel which is one of the elements that make us be there in the space with Bullock and Clooney.

The difficulty Lubezki found was that he had to match all the CGI work: the only things "real" on screen are faces, everything else (including hands and legs) is computer generated; characters don't stand still, they float gently or move and change direction in space so the light had to match perfectly with the background: different speeds in movement, different contrast or wrong density would have broken the natural feel and the film would have not worked as it does. To make things easier, Lubezki created a box with LED screen and they shoot the actors inside of it: the LEDS were projecting the backgrounds of the scenes, lighting the actors and offering them visual references for acting (which a green screen would not offer).

The other element in Gravity's cinematography that helps to bring us into space is camera movement. Camara doesn't stop moving and it actually floats gently around characters  up and down and sideways giving us the impression of the lack of gravity. That was achieved thanks to Bot&Dolly, a robotic camera rig with 10 axis of freedom, which moved, along with the background on the LED panels, to trick the eye and make us think the actors are moving (while they are actually standing still).

The exclusive use of wide angle lenses also helps to this purpose: we are into the action close to the actors and sometimes we take their place like in some subjective shots as we see the action trough the visor of the helmet. Remarkable is the second sequence of the film where the camera approaches slowly to Sandra Bullock and ends up entering her helmet as the shot turns into a subjective one.
The shots are, as Cuarón got us used to, very long ones. The first sequence, for example, lasts almost 20 minutes and introduces the audience into the emptiness of the space and its absence of gravity, and this feeling will be kept throughout the film: it is very interesting how the tension and the anguish is maintained trough these long shots (when normally the same effect is achieved by fragmenting the action in several shots).

Even if with plenty of CGI (I'm not really fond of it at all), Gravity is a film with an excellent aesthetic, its cinematography is a feast for the eye and, given last years trend, I'm pretty sure it will win this year Oscar. It's a pity that the film is just pure entertainment and offers little room to think; also I think it would have worked much more better if the audience could connect and emphasize with characters, thing which doesn't happen.

Film review. An analysis of the cinematography of Kon-Tiki, by Joachim Ronning and Espen Sanberg

Kon-Tiki is a co-direction between Joachim Ronning and Espen Sandberg who already directed together theirs previous features (Max Manus, Bandidas). It is the Norwegian film with the highest budget ever produced and it is the official submission of Norway to the best Foreign language Film of the Oscar 2013.

The plot. It's a true story about explorer Thor Heyerdal who, in 1947, decided to cross the Pacific Ocean from Lima to Polynesia in a balsa wood raft to prove that Polynesia was first settled by south Americans and not from Asians.

Cinematography: Geir Hartly Andreassen

Camera:Arri Alexa Plus,Red One MX, Sony NEX-FS100

Lenses: Zeiss Master Prime, Fujinon Alura

Aspect ratio: 2.35:1

Format: ARRIRAW, Redcode RAW

Film Stock: -

As he already did for the previous two directors' features, Max Manus, Gair Hartly Andreassen is in charge for the cinematography of Kon-Tiki. I don't know his previous works so I am not able to say if the way he lit for Kon-Tiki is his own style or not. But, to be honest, I found that the cinematography did not have a structure throughout the film apart from few characteristics.

Since the beginning of the film, Andreassen makes use of wide angle lenses offering us some beautiful landscape shots, like the opening one, in the snowed Norwegian countryside, and, particularly, the shots of the raft while in the ocean. 

Light, at the beginning, has a natural feel: every light source is justified; day light, windows and artificial lights are used as sources, always softened by diffusers or, sometimes, smoke. Anyway, there are some shots where the light looses its naturalism and becomes a bit more theatrical, without really a reason. In the second half of the film, all the scenes are shot in the balsa-wood raft and light looses completely its natural feel. In the daytime scenes, contrast is never as high as it is under the sun in open ocean neither as harsh; in the cabin, I like the way Andreassen plays with the reflection of the sun passing trough the wooden roof, but I really miss some more contrast: light is very soft and the worry of filling up shadows caused problems of double shadow in some shots.  At night time, light imitates the moon light or lightning but not always with good results: there's always a Back Light cutting the characters out from the background that sometimes is too strong and sometimes unnatural, like in the storm scene, where moon light and lightnings coexist.

The strong Back Light is not a negative point though. This is another characteristic we find throughout the film and I quite like it actually, especially  I find very interesting the use of on set lights as light sources placed as Back Lights: lampposts, shop signs and neon lamps are used for this purpose, creating some very pleasant images. Even on the raft, characters are placed between the camera and the sun, producing beautiful flared or washed images. But it's true that sometimes the Back Light is far too strong, which can be disturbing and the problem is that we don't know if it is for a chosen aesthetic inspired by the original documentary Thor shot or the necessity of getting chroma right.

As it has become usual shooting with digital cameras, a soft filter has been used, probably a Pro Mist, to soften the image. Also we can notice some grain which add an organic look, though there are some shots, particularly the ones in low light conditions, where the presence of grain is too strong and not really pleasant: working at high ISO or shots taken with the NEX?

Kon-Tiki is a film with a lot of CGI which offers us some really spectacular images. It is entertaining even without the tension and the twists you normally expect from a film of this kind. Its cinematography, though, is quite fair to be honest, with very good approaches but with unhappy solutions too.

Film review. An analysis of the cinematography of Rush, By Ron Howard

Rush is the last feature by Ron Howard (A Beautiful Mind, The Da Vinci Code, Cinderella Man...) which tries (succeedingly) to recreate an evocation of the years of glory of Formula 1 competition. Not sure if people who don't follow F1 might like it, though.

The plot. Based on a true story, the film follows the rivalry between  two 1970's  F1 drivers, Niki Lauda and James Hunt, from their beginning till the famous and exciting 1976 season.

Cinematography: Anthony Dod Mentle

Camera:Arri Alexa Plus, Arri Studio, Canon Eos C300, IndiCam GS2K

Lenses: Bausch & Lomb Super Baltar

Aspect ratio: 2.35:1

Format: ARRIRAW

Film Stock: -

Anthony Dod Mentle (Slumdog Millionaire, Antichrist, Trance) was the man in charge of the cinematography of Rush. It was its first collaboration with Ron Howard thus he managed to convince the director to shoot his first feature in digital. The British cinematographer made a great job in achieving to enhance the story visually by the camera angles used, sizes of shots, camera movements and lens used along with the constant presence of flares.

The 70's look of the film is the first characteristic of Rush cinematography the audience notice since the very first sequence. But it's a kind of false one because there's no downgraded, saturated and predictable look typical of the seventies. The colour palette used is brilliant; colours are really vivid and sometimes they pop up in the shot like during the scenes of rainy Grand Prix or the one of the rendez-vous between Hunt and Suzy, where the rest of colours is desaturated or fall into grey due to light. He achieved this look also thanks to the heavy presence of a really organic grain (which is something I really love to see).

Apart from a brilliant job in post production, this was the result of combining  one of the best digital camera on the market, the Arri Alexa Plus, with its latitude and resolution, with  very old lenses like the 60's Bausch & Lomb lenses, which added aberrations and beautiful flares to the image. Dod Mentle also used a Soft Grad filter to further soften the image, producing a very soft and kind of dirty look which remind us of a 70's film stock. The soft filter anyway, produced blurred out of focus highlights (typical with this kind of filters) which sometimes I found a bit distracting.

The use of camera is amazing. It get us into the action with close ups or extreme close ups of the two rivals and the cars, where the camera is placed practically everywhere to show us every single detail important to the story: the cockpit, the silencer, the motor itself...

Dod Montle himself wore a burn suit and stepped into Niki Lauda burning car (whose accident was recreated in all details following the only footage available of the crash) to shoot subjective point of view trough the flames, sitting the audience with Lauda.

Another remarkable shot is delivered with the use of the IndiCam, a mini HD camera, that is placed inside the helmet Lauda try to wear while he is recovering in the hospital after the crash. Once again we adopt Lauda's point of view and we really pull the helmet despite the bounds and suffer with him.

Every now and then Dutch tilt is used: the camera angle is deliberately slanted on one side which adds a dramatic effect and suits well the unease, desperation and even the inner agitation hidden behind the apparent calm of the two characters.

Light has a natural feel throughout the whole film; light sources are always justified but  a bit  exaggerated to create more contrast and lots of flares that better suit the story, with lots of situations on the edge,  and the characters, always on the spotlight and pushing to the limit. The result is visually pleasant.

To shoot the Grand Prix scenes, 7 to 10 Arri cameras were used plus lots of IndiCams mounted everywhere on the car to cover every angle even subjective shots at 300Kmph; lots of CGI was employed though, for crashes, flips and recreation of circuits. Despite of that (no, I'm not very fond of today digital tricks) Rush is a very entertaining film, very well directed by Ron Howard, in which the director and cinematographer Anthony Dod Mentle, along with the rest of the crew, managed to transmit the 1970`s Formula 1 atmosphere and the adrenalin characters feel.

Film review. An analysis of the cinematography of Trance, by Danny Boyle

Trance is the last work by very well known director Danny Boyle (Trainspotting, Shining, Slumdog millionaire, 147 Hours...) shot during a break among the two tears preparation for the London Olympic show.

The plot. An art auctioneer who joined a group of criminals for an inside job, has to seek the help of hypnosis to find a lost painting. But the line between reality, suggestion and desire becomes more and more undefined.

Cinematography: Anthony Dod Mentle

Camera: Arri Alexa, Phantom Gold, Canon Eos 1D MarkIV, Canon Eos C500, Indiecam IndiePov

Lenses: Zeiss Ultra Prime, Fujinon Alura, Hawk V-Lite, Canon, Indiecam lenses

Aspect ratio: 2.35:1

Format: ARRIRAW, Canon cinema Raw, H264, CinemaDNG

Film Stock: -

Danny Boyle confirmed again his usual collaborator Anthony Dod Mentle as cinematographer for Trance. In the first image of the film the light is quite theatrical and expressionist, then the following scene the light becomes natural. I could not understand the meaning of it till the plot develops: the whole movie is a game between reality, hypnotic suggestions and lies, creating confusion among characters and audience. Mentle played with this confusion by using light in different ways, alternating naturalism and expressionism with a tendency for the last one, never, or almost never, justifying the light source and always positioning the light source on the side of the character creating a strong contrast (1:3 or even greater sometimes) on the face of the actors leaving it half in shadow, with a stronger split for Vincent Cassel and James McAvoy and a softer one for Rosario Dawson. This lighting set-up creates a chiaroscuro throughout the film that highlights the fact that no one of the characters say entirely the truth and everyone seems to be hiding something. 

The use of the rim light helps this concept too: it is quite strong, often used as key light, sometimes exaggerated (and blowing some areas of the image) and always helping to create a sense of mystery, strength and menace. Memories play an important part in the film: Mentle gives them different texture and aesthetic using different cameras and a huge selection of lenses: of course he used the Phantom for the high frame rates shot and the indiPov , the world smallest HD camera shooting RAW, for placing the camera in unconventional places; when shooting with  the Eos camera, he added a soft diffusion filter on the lens to soften the hard line  Canon cameras produce. The choice of the focal length is never extreme, apart from few shots were an extreme wide angle lens is used and where the camera is placed at a very low angle. 

There's no camera movement worth to point out because Mentle used instead peculiar locations to help telling the story visually: they are full of shimmering surfaces, creating multiple reflections of the characters, in great consonance with the plot. When he could not manipulate the surface, he used flares. Another interesting decision is the use of colour in some scenes: a single colour pops out vivid from the rest which are quite dull, like the scene of the Selfridges bag.

Anthony Dod Memtle made a very good job with the cinematography of Trance, a film well crafted and entertaining, but, honestly not as good as other Danny Boyle's works: he has proved that he can make far better films.

Cinematography: Laurie Rose

Camera: Red MX

Aspect ratio: 2.35:1

Format: RedCode RAW

Film Stock: -

- See more at: http://donatelloromanazzi.blogspot.com.es/p/film-review.html#sthash.LrYRPyVT.dpuf