Visions of Light: The Art of Cinematography Review
by Jerry Saravia (faust668 AT aol DOT com)December 27th, 2001
VISIONS OF LIGHT: THE ART OF CINEMATOGRAPHY (1993)
Reviewed by Jerry Saravia
RATING: 3 stars and 1/2
Lighting has always played a key role in film, both in color and black-and-white. If it wasn't for lighting, you would never see anything on film. But who are the people responsible for lighting, for setting that mood and that atmosphere, for showing us the close-up faces of our favorite movie stars? They are the cinematographers, also known as directors of photography. "Visions of Light" is not only a documentary of lighting techniques in films but also of the physical and emotional art of cinematography. In other words, it is about the actual movement of the camera and light to create the look of a movie.
"Visions of Light" details the visual sweep and grandeur of films like "Sunrise" and "Napoleon" from the 1920's with their colored tints and roving camera sequences to the more documentary, harsh look of the 1970's with films like "Taxi Driver," "Easy Rider," "Dog Day Afternoon" and so on. It goes as fa r as the 1980's with the candy colored look of David Lynch's "Blue Velvet" and a brief look at "Eraserhead," both photographed by Frederick Elmes.
The cinematographers interviewed and discussed are Michael Chapman ("Raging Bull"), Sven Nykvist ("Through a Glass Darkly"), Michael Ballhaus ("GoodFellas"), Nestor Almendros ("Days of Heaven"), Vittorio Storaro ("The Conformist"), Conrad Hall ("In Cold Blood"), James Wong Howe ("Picnic"), Haskell Wexler ("Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?") and of course Greg Toland ("Citizen Kane"). One of my favorite tidbits is from the filming of two Roman Polanski classics, "Chinatown" and "Rosemary's Baby." For "Rosemary's Baby," cinematographer William Fraker talks how he argued with Polanski over a shot of Ruth Gordon on the phone whose face is blocked by the doorway. Polanski insisted on the shot and Fraker explains how the audience at a screening tilted their heads to see Gordon's face! As for "Chinatown," cinematographer John A. Alonzo had also argued with Polanski over using hand-held Panaflexes in scenes that would ultimately be too distracting. That was Polanski's point, particularly in one scene where Jack Nicholson's Jake Gittes's character walks around a garden. By keeping the camera at eye level and from the back of Nicholson's head, we are subjectively involved in the scene and as curious about the garden as Jack is.
Also noteworthy and illuminating is the scene from "GoodFellas" where the camera zooms in and tracks backward (if I recall correctly) in what looks like a static shot between Robert De Niro and Ray Liotta in a cafe (the technique originated in Alfred Hitchcock's "Vertigo"). Ballhaus finally convinced Scorsese to try the effect which shows Liotta's world is turning upside down. Greg Toland and Orson Welles's arguments during the making of "Citizen Kane" are now legendary and are briefly reprised here. What I learned was how important it was for cameramen to make their movies stars from the past look as beautiful as possible, even in the face of danger or else the cameramen would be fired. The stars had to be perfectly lit and actresses, like Marlene Dietrich, would insist on certain cinematographers for the right look. Haskell Wexler's unflattering, cold and harsh lighting on "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" is the opposite - Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor certainly look ugly in that film.
The cinematographers provide insightful and entertaining commentaries on the processes of lighting and certain individual or collaborative choices they made with the director to create scenes, many of which are the most memorable pieces of celluloid ever seen. Who can ever forget the powerful scene of Robert Blake from "In Cold Blood" where he admits to his wrongdoing while tears seem to be running down his face, only they are the reflections of raindrops from the window (an effect that was apparently accidental). And how about the starkness of film noir or shots from "On the Waterfront", or for that matter, "The Night of the Hunter"? Or the deliberate underexposed shots from "The Godfather" movies where one could barely see the characters sitting in the dark? Or the mysticism and beauty of "Days of Heaven"? If there are any films excluded, it would be the work of director Stanley Kubrick, particularly "Barry Lyndon" which was shot using natural light from candles and special NASA lenses, an absolute first in film history. Surely some mention should have been made of that masterpiece.
Still, "Visions of Light" is a true movie lover's dream and a real cinematic treat. It is a reminder of what films once looked like and what they look like now, and how that look was achieved.
For more reviews, check out JERRY AT THE MOVIES at http://moviething.com/members/movies/faust/JATMindex.shtml
E-mail me with any questions or complaints at [email protected] or at [email protected]
More on 'Visions of Light: The Art of Cinematography'...
Originally posted in the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup. Copyright belongs to original author unless otherwise stated. We take no responsibilities nor do we endorse the contents of this review.
