15 Responses for "NINE/KANE homage"

1. Mark November 26th, 2009 at 3:18 pm 1

   Im sorry to say but is AD or Ryan Adams being paid by the Weinsteins to post anything, even the most irrelevant, about Nine. There are many other films this season u know. Give us variety.

2. Ryan Adams November 26th, 2009 at 3:25 pm 2

   If you think an almost certain Oscar nomination for cinematography is irrelevant, Mark, maybe you’re on the wrong website.

   I’m sure you can find someplace else that’s posting anything they can dream up about Crazy Heart or Clooney.

   How much space did this post take up? You spent more effort typing the word “u” than it would take to scroll past it if you’re not interested.

3. filmboymichael November 26th, 2009 at 3:26 pm 3

   that shot of DDL also reminds me of John C. Reilly singing Mr. Cellophane.

4. OscarMovieBuff84 November 26th, 2009 at 5:48 pm 4

   I think the cinematography race could be very interesting.

   Nine – Front runner
   Other nominees: Ingl. Basterds, The Hurt Locker, Lovely Bones, Bright Star

5. tundraaim November 26th, 2009 at 7:42 pm 5

   maybe we should clear up the confusion Mark, this site is devoted to movies with Oscar Buzz, NINE has it, its a front runner, that’s it, if you are not interested, move on to the next story. Not everyone is interested in Precious or The Hurt Locker or Avatar or Up in the Air or The Lovely Bones, but I’m constantly reading irrelevant stories about those movies too.

6. Robert Wyatt November 26th, 2009 at 11:03 pm 6

   Dynamic backlighting automatically qualifies as some sort of “homage” to Citizen Kane? That’s a stretch.

7. The Natural November 26th, 2009 at 11:15 pm 7

   Cinematography: Nine, Lovely Bones, Bright Star, White Ribbon, Harry Potter.

   Hurt Locker’s photography is nauseating.

8. Ryan Adams November 26th, 2009 at 11:20 pm 8

   I almost said the theatrical contrast gives the shot a crepuscular noir “texture” but I know you hate that sort of shit, Robert.

9. Ben November 26th, 2009 at 11:49 pm 9

   Backlighting = “Citizen Kane” homage. I suppose deserts = “Lawrence of Arabia” homage, too.

   More importantly, Ryan, I thought your response to the first post quite amusing. Pithy, indeed!

10. Ryan Adams November 27th, 2009 at 12:10 am 10

    alright, alright, you guys.
    I’ve seen plenty of backlighting over the years that doesn’t reverberate for me like tumblers in a lock as these two shots do. If nobody else sees it then that’s just moe evidence than I’m wired up differently that most people. As if we needed further proof.

    Thanks for making me feel especially autistic on Thanksgiving Day.

11. Robert Wyatt November 27th, 2009 at 1:28 am 11

    Ryan, while I read this site religiously I rarely bother to comment, so I’m particularly impressed that you remembered my low tolerance for verbal masterbation, ala some comment I made in a thread nine months ago. Seriously. I’m impressed.

    That being said, while filling space with statements that are as linguistically dense as they are incomprehensible (…the theatrical contrast gives the shot a crepuscular noir “texture”), will win you no points from me, the editorial boards of both Film Comment and the NY Times will likely offer you a high paying job. You may want to consider applying.

12. Ryan Adams November 27th, 2009 at 2:00 am 12

    Just so long as we’re clear that we’re both in on the joke, Robert.

    It’s as easy for me to mimic that style for playful exaggerated effect as it is for others to mock it.

    The harder thing is grope around for angles day after day that a few people might find interesting (including myself) at the same time trying to keep things casual and not take any of it too seriously. Hardest thing of all might be to have patience with each other and the wide variance we see in a thousand levels of reading and writing and comprehending on a worldwide public forum.

    If I could trick the Times or Film Comment into thinking I’m one of them, I sure hope I’d be getting paid enough to be more precise in what I write. I’d also have the arrogance to disable comments so my high-paid time wouldn’t be spent explaining myself in followup.

    I think this is friendly teasing, and that’s fine as long as I get to tease back. But in order to make sure you know I’m still having good-natured fun, I’d have to punctuate with a smiley, and geez, how abhorrent would that be for you?

13. John Villeneuve November 27th, 2009 at 3:20 am 13

    RobertWyatt, you may want to put your knives away and your linguistic expertise, and consider saying something fruitful. Otherwise, you just come off sounding like a pompous ass.

14. Bob Burns November 27th, 2009 at 7:14 am 14

    oddly weak field. Beebe was nommed for Chicago and won for Geisha. He, Richardson and Lesnie all feel like a return….

    Delbonell on the other hand is overdue but in a film unlikely to get a BP nom. Deakins is so overdue it sucks but his material this time is not likely to draw the attention of the Academy at large.

    Ackroyd… maybe not part of the gang.

    Given the field – Beebe is where I’d place my bet now, unless my eyes pop out of my head during TLB. And even so, the aging hams in the Academy would have to love imagining themselves in all that backlight… wrinkles don’t show.

15. Vince November 27th, 2009 at 8:42 pm 15

    Dion Beebe is a LOCK. And he deserves it. How often are you taken by cinematography from a trailer ? Personally I was. It was the first thing out of my mouth to my girlfriend in the very first time I witnessed it. Seeing more clips on Oprah even cemented that thought. Technically is looks like impressive work was done.
    As for some other lensing chances ? I’d say The Lovely Bones, Avatar, The Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds and Invictus will probably be in the mix.