Storytelling is more complex than landscapes: Andrew Boyd Allen on the cinematography of Rogue One (Twitter Transcript)
Last week on twitter filmmaker Andrew Boyd Allen responded to a tweet about the cinematography in Rogue One. The tweet he reacted to stated that Rogue One has some of the best cinematography of all the Star Wars films.
It's an interesting statement because, yes, the cinematography of Rogue One is beautiful. Personally, I am not much of a Star Wars fan, I don't hate it but I don't love it either. And I had no interest in seeing Rogue One, until I saw the trailer. So I saw it in cinema after all. I went there for the beautiful imagery and I was not disappointed.
But is it actually good cinematography? I feel that Andrew Boyd Allen makes some very good points in his thread and I want to do a more in-depth post about the function of cinematography in the near future. (I also want to mention that I think Greig Fraser is an amazing DoP and I can't wait to see what he did with Dune)
For now here is the transcript of the tweets:
Andrew Boyd Allen: On the one hand: yes, ROGUE ONE is very well shot.
On the other: we desperately need to evolve the cinematography conversation beyond “shit that would look pretty as laptop wallpaper.” Cinematography is storytelling, and storytelling is more complex than landscapes.
Landscapes are amazing and breathtaking and that can *serve* story. You know what’s way harder to figure out (and more important to story 99.9% of the time)? How the camera ought to behave toward *characters*.
From that perspective I would argue that THE LAST JEDI wipes the floor with pretty much any other STAR WARS movie of this decade. It’s dramatically proactive and thoughtful about how to frame and move around its human (and alien!) subjects.
ROGUE ONE, while absolutely stunning (really, I’m not knocking it at all), is a bit more perfunctory in the way it covers scenes. Noticeably less interested in character interiority and communicating psychology through framing and movement.Point being showing off a bunch of eye-catching panoramas tells me nothing about how cinematography is used as a storytelling tool. All it tells me is that the creative team has an aesthetically-attuned eye. Which is cool! But that’s less than 20% of what cinematography is.
Other STAR WARS movies that I’d say boast tremendous cinematography:
THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK
RETURN OF THE JEDI
REVENGE OF THE SITH
SOLO is also as visually well-built as it can be given how (intentionally!) light the material is. Bradford Young did not come to play.
Just to reiterate:
My background is in cinematography. In my program I was literally known as *the guy* who shoots big, beautiful wides and fantastical vistas. I love shots like that. I insert them in my work constantly.
But they are not THE CENTER of the story.
Wides and vistas are *responses* to what you shoot with the characters (99% of the time). The character work contextualizes everything else properly,
ROGUE has really good cinematography. Nothing about the camerawork in that movie is bad and often it’s great. But the really great stuff isn’t what people draw most of the attention to. Expand the conversation.
