The Most Visually Stunning Shots of 2012?

Avengers...........not. just got it out since this is superherohype.

lets start with Life of Pi . i will go on tumblr searching for gif's.

 

It's a tie for me with:
Life of Pi
The Dark Knight Rises
Skyfall
The Avengers

 

Skyfall
The Dark Knight Rises
Avengers
Life of Pi

 

The entirety of the Master.

 

Spoiler

When Peggy's eyes go black

.

 

Am I the only one that is no more impressed by Life of Pi than I would be with an animated film? I mean it is quite beautiful, no taking away from that, so as a pure visual standpoint I guess I agree.

Its cinematography awards kind of irk me though.

On that note, pretty much the entirety of Paranorman. The craftsman ship involved in every single frame is astounding.

 

The entire Shanghai-sequence in Skyfall (the music and the photography together makes it awe-inspiring.)

The no-cut-panorama swoop of all the avengers fighting the aliens together in New York was unreal. Never thought I would see such a shot in a movie. Ever.

And then we have the very short and brief, but at the same time goosbump-enducing shot of the camera zooming in on Batman as he makes his very first appearance in 8 years down on the lower road. From when the lights go out and Zimmers cue starts, until the young cop shoots at his EMP, I have chills down my spine.

 

Do you have problems with digital intermediates for color timing ?

 

There is a pretty large difference between that and digitally constructing the vast majority of everything that is in a shot for the vast majority of the film.

 

During the opening of The Dark Knight Rises, there is one of the first shots outside of the plane. The way it framed, the entire plane was in the shot. It was the first time that I had ever seen a theatrical film in IMAX and it honestly felt like I was outside the plane. It wasn't painterly, but that was deffinitely the most personally affecting shot of the year for me.

 

A lot of movies today look completely different than the way it was shot. Because of going trough a DI . Not everyone uses it to fix bounced light or something.

If the problem is the process , then any movie made by traditional methods should be rewarded by that .

Miranda's work in Life of Pi is an amazing achievement. Its not the process , its the end result that is evaluated.

 

color timing and creating something entirely on a computer is not quite the same...

in a real life exterior you have restrictions/changing conditions all over the place.. I always would choose a shot which was made right there on the day..

the vfx stuff sure looks good, but there is always this voice in my mind that its not the real thing..

 

I never said its the same.

And again , restriction don't make a movie look good or bad. .

Every Fincher movies looks good. There's also a lot of vfx shots on those movies. Beautiful ones. There is no line you can draw that separates the processes of creating photography.

 

Glad I don't have that voice.

Infact most of the times in Life of Pi I couldn't tell what was real or not, probably also because I was so immersed in the visuals I couldn't be bothered to think. I just saw and felt it and it was beautiful.

Visual effects has always been a key to creating visually great movies. Cause like the OP said, this thread is not only about cinematography.

A movie that must be mentioned that I haven't seen mentioned yet is Prometheus. Effects, art direction, locations, costume and cinematography are all fantastic in it.

 

Some Prometheus stuff:

 

Again, I'm not talking about DI, I'm talking about films that are essentially animated at this point.

Would you nominate Brave for cinematography?

And yes I know that's not what this thread about. Pi is beautiful. Mad props to them.

 

I also would like to add that shots doesn't necessarily need to be in the category of stunning for me to absolutely love them. Not everything has to be pretty or like a painting, it can also be evocative, stirring, immersive and striking in many other ways.

 

I know you're not talking about di. That's the point. You're making a strange line differentiating the processes , when through a di (which i have nothing against) you can completely reshape the look of the film , looking nothing like it was shot.

As for Brave. No i wouldn't , because its ugly as hell. Not because its animation. And the process of animation is very different to Pi's work in framing and post.

But let me ask you , what's the share of vfx that you allow a movie to be celebrated by its cinematography ? 10% ? 5% ? 30% ? 70% of the frame ? What's the line ?

My point is just...there is no line . Im not disagreeing that there's a level of authenticity in capturing photography that Pi simply doesnt have. But i dont think that disallows the movie to be rewarded for its cinematography.

 

i forgot about prometheus. thumbs up. Scott is one of the best visual directors. the guy knows how to use shadows and the color ''black''

 

Prometheus

Shanghai sequence in Skyfall

As for Life of Pi, the topic is "The Most Visually Stunning film." Not "Who Had the Best Cinematography." So whether you agree that it is a cinematography achievement, or not, it is still visually stunning.

 

I know this movie doesn't have the weight of mainstream popularity on its side, but it probably has more awe inspiring shots than anything else released....

Samsara

 

EASILY Life of Pi. From the God Storm scene, to the magical luminescent island, and to Richard parker himself. I'd say its arguably the most visually stunning film in the past 10 years.