That thumbnail. You're just setting yourself up for disappointment.
I understand why this channel updates these videos yearly, but I would like them to make ones about other visually pleasing oscar categories as well, like make-up or costume design
So here's my question, which of these do you think are undeserved or won over better movies?
So glad that Black Narcissus won the 1947 Oscar. It is one of my favourite movies and does look absolutely gorgeous. Even more impressive, when you realize that it takes place in the Himalayas and certainly feels like it, but was in fact almost entirely filmed at Pinewood Studios in London.
The Towering Inferno´s win in 1974 is always a bit surprising to me. It does look pretty good, don´t get me wrong, but a disaster movie is such an atypical pick for an Oscar. The movie, which features an impressive cast, was a big success though and in fact nominated for eight Oscars, winning three.
This Year Dunkirk should win the cinematography.
The Imax Aerial Shots are breathtaking. The way they used cinematography to create a sense of dread was impeccable.
Can someone explain what a novice/uninformed person should look for in movie that are telltale signs of a good cinematographer? Isn't everything skewed by the director's vision?
2007 was a tough year. Because I felt like Children Of Men should of won it but I just can't argue against Pan's Labyrinth
I can't shake it, the earlier films (1950 and before) just look...richer, more vibrant. The shadows are so beautiful and the colors are breathtaking. The more recent winners are gorgeous in their own way, but they look "thin."
I thought it was interesting that I really hadn't heard of 90% of them until the year 1990, and then after that I'd heard of (or seen) every single winner.
They fucking jinxed it goddamnit. If deakins didn't get his Oscar I swear to god