Oscar Guide 2011: Best Cinematography
'The Artist,' 'Dragon Tattoo,' 'Hugo,' 'The Tree of Life' and 'War Horse' square off
Jeff Cronenweth received a second consecutive Oscar nomination for David Fincher's "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo."
Are you a fan of In Contention?
Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.
(The Oscar Guide will be your chaperone through the Academy's 24 categories awarding excellence in film. A new installment will hit every weekday in the run-up to the Oscars on February 26, with the Best Picture finale on Saturday, February 25.)
As is often the case, the cinematographers' branch didn't exactly search far and wide for contenders in this category, settling instead on a quartet of high-profile Best Picture nominees, plus one major December release (and guild nomination hog) that surely came close to cracking the top race. Four of the men selected, moreover, are previous nominees, in keeping with this year's unofficial theme of sticking with the familiar.
The scramble for the fifth slot on the ballot was, presumably, a tight one: moodily lensed by Hoyte van Hoytema, "Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy" was a surprise ASC nominee that seemed to be building late momentum in the final stages of voting, but wound up ceding its spot to more postcard-pretty work from a two-time Oscar champ who had been frozen out of the guild list. Oh, well.
The nominees are...
"The Artist" (Guillaume Schiffman)
"The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" (Jeff Cronenweth)
"Hugo" (Robert Richardson)
"The Tree of Life" (Emmanuel Lubezki)
On balance, it's a sightly enough group of films, though I can't help wishing the branch had shown a little more ingenuity in their choices: this would have been a lovely place to recognize some visually astonishing arthouse items too modest or too tricky to get a foothold in major categories: "Jane Eyre," "Melancholia," "Meek's Cutoff"... take your pick. Meanwhile, "Drive" would have been a more arresting contemporary pick than they one they went with. But no matter -- we still have an exciting race.
Related
-
'Tinker, Tailor,' 'Dragon Tattoo' among ASC nominees, 'War Horse' snubbed again
Yet another bump in the road for Steven Spielberg's World War I epic
-
Tech Support: 'Tree of Life,' 'The Artist' lead a field of 'pretty' pictures in Best Cinematography
Other films at the fore include 'War Horse' and 'The Girl With the Dragon Tat...
No predominantly black-and-white film has won this award since "Schindler's List" in 1993, despite "The Man Who Wasn't There" and "The White Ribbon" both taking top honors with the ASC since then. So even if Frenchman and lone first-time nominee Guillaume Schiffman (who shot both Michel Hazanavicius's "OSS 117" pastiche comedies) winds up taking that peer-voted precursor for "The Artist," there's still no guarantee the general Academy will favor the beloved retro exercise over its more colorful competition. In his favor, of course, is that the film is a Best Picture frontrunner, and an attractive one at that: Schiffman's silky, silver-toned lensing deftly replicates not just the palette of vintage silent cinema, but the soft textures of its stock too.
After 20-odd years of collaborating with director David Fincher on both films and music videos, Jeff Cronenweth was rewarded last year with his first Oscar nomination for "The Social Network." Their partnership has now yielded a second consecutive nod for the icy Nordic atmospherics of "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo," and while it's certainly a handsome film, I can't help thinking there's an idle sense of afterglow voting at work here. The film's crisp, stately compositions at least make it a refreshingly neoteric choice from the branch, though it's probably a couple of unnecessary, incongruously vertiginous trick shots that netted the nomination -- which will have to remain Cronenweth's reward this year.
The most established name in the field, Robert Richardson netted his seventh career nomination -- and his second for a Martin Scorsese picture -- for venturing into the realm of 3D on "Hugo." His on-off collaboration with the master brought the DP his second Oscar for "The Aviator" seven years ago, and the Paris-set children's adventure is a similarly flashy period showcase for his ever-conspicuous artistry, as well as another opportunity to play with the antique finishes of past cinematic eras. Richardson hasn't won much on the circuit so far this year, but I wouldn't be at all surprised to see respect for his limber adaptation to new technology -- coupled with the urge to convert at least some of the film's 11 nominations -- net him a third statuette.
The precursor monolith in the field this year has been Emmanuel Lubezki. There's scarcely an award the prodigious Mexican DP hasn't won so far for his rapturous visual poetry in Terrence Malick's "The Tree of Life," and rightly so: at once intimately disciplined and wildly expansive, his camera reflects both individual character perspective and a more intangible, ethereal worldview, catching the subtlest shifts of woozy afternoon light like butterflies in a net. It seems unthinkable that he could lose, and yet five-time bridesmaid Lubezki has been here before: his 2006 loss for dazzling work on "Children of Men," after winning the ASC prize, still smarts, and I fear the polarizing nature of "The Tree of Life" could count against him in the general Academy vote.
The most divisive work in the field come from another five-time nominee, this one with two previous wins under his belt: Janusz Kaminski may have been Steven Spielberg's go-to DP for almost 20 years, but he hasn't been nominated for a Spielberg film since "Saving Private Ryan." Many will wish that stretch hadn't been been broken: his unashamedly old-fashioned pictorial lensing of "War Horse," with its saturated orange sunsets and inconsistent evocations of vintage studio lighting styles, crosses the line more than once into kitsch -- and was rather pointedly snubbed by the ASC. General Academy members, however, are suckers for lush landscapes, so don't write this one off -- as it happens, the last time the Oscar went for a film unnominated by the guild ("Pan's Labyrinth"), it was also at Emmanuel Lubezki's expense.
Will win: "Hugo"
Could win: "The Tree of Life"
Should win: "The Tree of Life"
Should have been here: "Meek's Cutoff"
Keep track of our current rankings in the Best Cinematography category via its Contenders page here.

What do you think deserves the Oscar for Best Cinematography? Have your say in the comments section below.
For more views on movies, awards season and other pursuits, follow @GuyLodge on Twitter.
Sign up forInstant Alerts from In Contention!
2012-2013 OSCAR PREDICTIONS
Best Picture
Best Director
Best Actor
Best Actress
Best Supporting Actor
Best Supporting Actress
Best Adapted Screenplay
Best Original Screenplay
Best Cinematography
Best Costume Design
Best Film Editing
Best Makeup And Hairstyling
Best Original Score
Best Original Song
Best Production Design
Best Sound Editing
Best Sound Mixing
Best Visual Effects
Best Animated Feature Film
Best Documentary Feature
Best Foreign Language Film
Latest Posts
-
Oscar Isaac is a revelation in melancholy study of arrested artistrySunday, May 19, 2013
-
Putting a bow on last year's awards season with a few laughsSunday, May 19, 2013
-
How has the franchise fared at the Academy Awards over the decades?Saturday, May 18, 2013
-
Competition's first outright dud is a major letdown from Arnaud DesplechinSaturday, May 18, 2013






Comments
Option 1
Comment instantly as a guest GuestOption 2
Option 3
Login or create a HitFix account Login SignupKristopher Tapley
January 26, 2012 at 6:14PM EST Reply to CommentToughest category for me to pick at the moment. I could see any of four winning. Sorry Cronenweth.
Liz Really, you think War Horse has a shot? God, I hope not.
January 26, 2012 at 7:02PM ESTN8 Are we going to see your top ten shots this year, Kris?
January 26, 2012 at 10:33PM ESTGuy Lodge To answer for Kris: yes.
January 26, 2012 at 10:46PM ESTHoustonRufus
January 26, 2012 at 6:19PM EST Reply to CommentThe cinematography in Tree of Life was the technical achievement of the year, for me anyway. Nothing I saw all year moved me as much as the camera work in that film. Given that I have few favorites nominated at all, I'll be watching this race as close if not closer than any of the others and hoping Lubezki gets his Oscar.
Laura Stewart Ditto.
January 27, 2012 at 12:08AM ESTMatthew Starr Agreed in that this is the award I am the most interested in. Lubezki losing would pretty much ruin the entire night for me.
January 27, 2012 at 12:14AM EST/3rt
January 26, 2012 at 6:33PM EST Reply to CommentOT: Eiko Ishioka has dead at 73.
/3rt has died
January 26, 2012 at 6:34PM ESTKristopher Tapley Yes, noted in another thread.
January 26, 2012 at 6:35PM ESTJorge
January 26, 2012 at 6:35PM EST Reply to CommentAny sense as to whether Lubezki has any name recognition outside the guild? I think any other person winning this one would be a mistake, although I guess a case could be made for Hugo.
The "The Artist" nod feels like a coat-tails nod to me, but maybe I don't understand Black & White cinematography that well. I did feel visually stunned with "White Ribbon" though. The incessant cut offs into dialogue cards distracted me in The Artist.
Guy Lodge Name recognition isn't really a factor in these categories, as the names don't even appear on the ballot.
January 26, 2012 at 6:40PM ESTDylanS case in point: Roger Deakins hasn't won an Oscar yet.
January 26, 2012 at 6:54PM ESTLiz I'm a fan of The Artist, but I don't feel all that strongly about the cinematography. I can appreciate the challenge in capturing the Old Hollywood aesthetic, but it didn't really make a big impression on me.
January 26, 2012 at 7:04PM ESTLubezki for the win, please. And yes, Drive absolutely should have been here.
DylanS "Drive" certainly looked good, but I was never really wowed by its cinematography in the way I was with, say, "Tinker, Tailor" or "Melancholia".
January 26, 2012 at 7:09PM ESTCoffeysr
January 26, 2012 at 6:35PM EST Reply to CommentI still can't get Hoyte van Hoytema's astute cinematography out of my mind. His snub is one of the more unfortunate aspect of this year's nominations.
Anyway. I actually think all 5 could take this prize, but I'm with Kris, as he's said before on his podcast, that The Tree of Life probably won't win, despite cries that it should. I think Richardson's work is almost too atypical to win here, but then again Inception won here last year. I do think it's The Artist's to lose, at any rate.
DylanS I think "The Artist" would be an atypical winner even more so than "Hugo". People are citing its B&W as some sort of advantage, but I think that quality does nothing to help it here.
January 26, 2012 at 7:11PM ESTMarc R
January 26, 2012 at 6:46PM EST Reply to CommentI've said this before, but Lubezski is the only name that, i feel, even deserves to be here. The fact that we're discussing whether or not he'll even win is sad. I really hope the academy looks beyond their knack for playing favorites and love for the "pretty" film and reward someone who is seriously overdue
brian
January 26, 2012 at 6:53PM EST Reply to CommentThe Artist doesn't look anything like a silent film. The female lead isn't several stops hotter than everyone around her. None of the women are in soft focus. The whole movie looks shot at proper exposure and is for the most part very evenly lit. In silent films, it's either lit or it's totally dark because their stocks had no latitude and had ISOs of like 25. The fact that they shot this movie on 5219 proves they didn't even attempt to replicate the look of silent cinema. They choose the stock that has the most latitude, the most shadow detail, and the finest grain ever invented to make it look like a silent film? Granted, they don't have access to stocks from that era, but they could at least use one that was closer and try to approximate the look. Shooting a movie in black and white doesn't make it look like a silent film. It makes it look like a modern movie shot in black and white. It's a pretty, well shot movie and I don't mean to come down especially harsh on the cinematography, but it really doesn't look like a silent film and it doesn't feel like they even tried.
If Chivo loses this it will be the biggest travesty of a night I'm sure will be full of them, and I even thought Pan's Labyrinth deserved it in 2006 so I'm not holding Children of Men against them.
JJ1 BINGO! on the look of 'The Artist'. It's very pretty, for sure. But it's also not Silent Film Era Cinematography.
January 26, 2012 at 6:59PM ESTDylanS Actually Brian, I think there only goal was to fetishistically replicate the silent film look, which is not to say that you aren'r right about your points, I just think they did a bad job.
January 26, 2012 at 7:14PM ESTred_wine I agree with this! The claim that The Artist is a silent film in form or style is bogus. Its just a modern feel good movie made in black and white with pantomime acting - I have seen a whole ton of silent movies and The Artist is nothing like them.
January 27, 2012 at 1:11AM ESTInfact I'd say War Horse is a closer approximation of old John Ford pictures than The Artist is of silent movies.
JLPatt I'd argue the film has no intention to literally replicate the look and feel of a silent film. The whole point of the movie, after all, is how the old can adapt to the new. The film follows suit by using modern tricks in an old-fashioned way. Indeed, if it really wanted to be a complete replica of silent films, it wouldn't include sound, would it? The film works as well as it does because it always seems aware it's being made in the modern sound era. Your argument just doesn't work here.
January 27, 2012 at 1:41AM ESTJLPatt I'd argue the film has no intention to literally replicate the look and feel of a silent film. The whole point of the movie, after all, is how the old can adapt to the new. The film follows suit by using modern tricks in an old-fashioned way. Indeed, if it really wanted to be a complete replica of silent films, it wouldn't include sound, would it? The film works as well as it does because it always seems aware it's being made in the modern sound era. Your argument just doesn't work here.
January 27, 2012 at 1:41AM ESTDylanS That bit with sound (which is much much briefer than many have lead us to believe) is pretty much the only moment where the film seems to make any sort of clever post-modern touch, which for me just wasn't enough when you consider the narrative of the film (silent-sound transition), which as a result, is dangerously slim and barely holds together (we can all thank Dujardin for the recovery on that one). Other than that, Hazanavicius totally boxed himself in by holding so strictly to the silent aspect. I don't disagree about the film lacking the approximation of older silent films (I agree very much with the pantomime comment, which was an issue I had with the film), but I do believe those were Hazanavicius' intentions.
January 27, 2012 at 2:34AM ESTJLPatt First of all, there is more than one bit with sound. And these are not just throwaway moments either, but true centerpieces.
January 27, 2012 at 2:45AM ESTSecondly, I completely disagree those are the only post-modern touches. There are many instances of visual flourishes and effects work that make it seem rather modern, not to mention the fact Bérénice Bejo (as has been mentioned elsewhere) does not really come across as someone from that era. All of this contributes to the meta feeling of the movie, I think, and is in no way a blight or a mistake.
brian ^ It's not really an argument I'm making so much as an observation that you seem to agree with, which is that it doesn't look or feel like a silent film. I think you're likely to fall into a minority if you say The Artist is not attempting to replicate the look and feel of a silent film.
January 27, 2012 at 2:45AM ESTMy post is actually in response to Guy Lodge's own appraisal in the article that the film "deftly replicates not just the palette of vintage silent cinema, but the soft textures of its stock too," which I disagree with for the reasons I've stated above, reasons with which you apparently agree.
If you like the cinematography in The Artist because you think it's a well composed, well lit film, then great, so do I. If you justify its look because you think it's intentionally not replicating that of the silent film era, I think you're incorrect, but hey, to each his own. If you thought that it's a great replication of silent films, I think you'd be objectively wrong on a number of points. And if you think it deserves to be in the top five films in this field, then I guess we just disagree.
DylanS JLPATT: Ok, fine, there's a little bit more sound at the end. And they are both considerably brief moments. I can't say I remember any of the modern visual flourishes or touches you speak of, so they might be there, but they weren't strong enough for me to notice. Yes, Bejo doesn't look like an old hollywood movie star, but lets not forget that she's married to the director. That's why he casted her even though she doesn't look the part, not because of some quirky post-modern touch. If that was what he was attempting, then explain to me why Dujardin looks so the part of a douglas fairbanks/gene kelly old hollywood movie star?
January 27, 2012 at 4:24PM ESTJJ1
January 26, 2012 at 6:57PM EST Reply to CommentWill win: The Tree of Life (barely)
Could win: War Horse
Should win: The Tree of Life
But I must agree that it could very well by any of the 4 (The Artist, Hugo included). It's so close.
I admire the cinematography in each movie. But I think 'The Tree of Life' just does something extra special with the camera.
'Hugo' looks beautiful; though, I get fuzzy trying to differentiate if it's the cinematography or the sets/ costumes/make-up/fx that I was oooohing and ahhhing at.
'The Artist' has some really nice black & white compositions. But some of the black & white comes across a ta flat & literal, as well. Anyone else agree?
'War Horse' is gorgeous, as well. And I have to say that I don't really understand the criticism for some of the choices (throughout the film). I even liked the last scene (my pupils were probably as small as a flea). But I sat in awe of it. So I think the 'Academy as a whole' may swing for it.
I also enjoyed the camerawork of Dragon Tattoo. There's a very distinctive look to both 'The Social Network' and 'Dragon Tattoo' that really appealed to me. The locales and interiors helped. But I DID enjoy the compositions/pallette/lighting/various shots.
I think 'Drive' is the film that could have been here. :(
Good year for cinematography, says I.
DylanS
January 26, 2012 at 7:07PM EST Reply to CommentI'm almost always dismayed by the Academy's choices in this particular category (though I loved the "Inception" selection last year, even if at the expense of Deakins), but I'm surprisingly confident that "The Tree of Life" will walk away with this one. "War Horse" is the only one I see as a potential spolier ("Dragon Tattoo" isn't their cup of tea, "Hugo" is much more a art direction/costume kind of visual film and even if "The Artist" does really well below the line, it lacks the scope that they almost always select in this category. I think "War Horse" problem is that many people have issue with its design and that serves as a negative talking point against it. Plus, even as a BP nominee, it's a much less formidable contender than it was expected to be. "The Tree of Life", which I expected to only be nominated in this category and VFX (which didn't pan out), is given a great deal of clout by being a Picture/Director nominee. It is also incredibly showy in its visual design and draws unparalleled amounts of attention to its photography (which I mean as a compliment. That kind of obvious scale tends to triumph in this category ("Inception", "Avatar", "Titanic") and it is certainly pretty enough for them (unlike "Children of Men", which seems to be the parallel argument people are making. I think its critics sweep indicates what an obvious choice it will be when the voting process moves underway.
Kristopher Tapley "'Hugo' is much more a art direction/costume kind of visual film..."
January 26, 2012 at 8:19PM ESTWatched it again last. It's actually gorgeous and the photography stood out to me this time.
DylanS It's no doubt gorgeous, and obviously there is credit due to Richardson for that. I have personal issues with the 3D (technically speaking, not conceptually) and the accompanying color loss, but that isn't Richardson's fault. But were talking about the academy, who are very shortsighted when it comes to voting on technicals (as you've pointed out many a time) and will chalk up the beauty of "Hugo" to sets and costumes before cinematography. If it does win this category, I think that would be very telling of "Hugo"'s popularity.
January 27, 2012 at 2:39AM ESTJJ1 Everything about Hugo is gorgeous. It's the most stunning motion picture of the year, for me. I do wish the pacing was a bit better for that half hour or so in the middle. But it remains one of my faves of the year.
January 27, 2012 at 10:33AM ESTdaveylo
January 26, 2012 at 8:28PM EST Reply to CommentI wonder if enough Academy voters are actually watching Hugo in 3-D. I've seen it two times in 3-D in the theater and was even more impressed by the cinematography the second time. If Lubezski doesn't win, I hope Richardson gets it.
LaHaine
January 26, 2012 at 8:53PM EST Reply to CommentTree of Life easily deserves to win, but I think its between War Horse (because its the "prettiest") and The Artist (best pic. front runner)
Andrej
January 26, 2012 at 9:40PM EST Reply to CommentWill win: The Artist.
Could win: The Tree of Life.
Should win: The Tree of Life.
Should have been here: We Need To Talk About Kevin, Drive.
Chris138
January 26, 2012 at 10:39PM EST Reply to CommentI really hope Lubezki finally wins here.
Rashad
January 26, 2012 at 10:41PM EST Reply to CommentGo War Horse! Those tracking shots had me holding my breath.
jtagliere
January 26, 2012 at 11:23PM EST Reply to CommentKris, Is this the category for which you and Anne have a $20 bet?
red_wine
January 27, 2012 at 1:15AM EST Reply to CommentThe Academy's last THREE choices had me intensely displeased. They were Slumdog, Avatar & Inception. Ugh.
Will win: "Hugo"
Could win: "The Tree of Life"
Should win: "The Tree of Life"
Should have been here: "Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives" or "Mysteries Of Lisbon"
(great call on Meek's Cutoff Guy. It is a most magnificent looking film. Shame that even the cinematographers did not go for it.)
Paul
January 27, 2012 at 4:55AM EST Reply to CommentFilms that are nominated for Best Art Direction tend to succeed in Best Cinematography. In the past 10 years, only one film (Slumdog Millionaire) won Best Cinematography without a Best Art Direction nomination. It must be noted that Children of Men received a Cinematography nomination but not an Art Director nomination back in 2006. We all know what happened then. I have a feeling that Hugo is Pan's Labyrinth 2 in disguise.
DylanS
February 7, 2012 at 2:57PM EST Reply to CommentWill Win: "The Tree of Life" (though very hard to call)
Could Win: "War Horse"
Should Win: "The Tree of Life"
Should Be Here: "Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy"