I just finished watching I am Cuba and am completely astonished by how good the cinematography was. I was really dissapointed with the DVD mind you. I just saw that this film was on Criterion DVD and was wondering if the cinematography was as good, and if the DVD was worth buying.
----------------
George Bush Doesn't Care about Black Puppets!
I haven’t watched I am Cuba, but cinematography in the Cranes is a real artwork.
shareThe Cinematography in BOTH is absolutely brilliant. I'd be hard pressed to say which film has the better one.
It's not surprising to know that both Coppola and Scorcese are huge fans.
I am trying hard to find The Cranes are Flying in my city. I really want to see it.
----------------
George Bush Doesn't Care about Black Puppets!
I wanted something to fall asleep to and since Cranes was on, I thought it would be just the thing. I watched it 1-1/2 times and then again from the beginning the next day, at times with the sound off, and wished I had watched it first like that. I think the cinematography would have told me the story without hearing or reading one word. Have you ever read a poem or seen a painting which left you breathless - this movie did that for me.
vocatus atque non vocatus Deus aderit...share
What a great work in all senses. 10/10.
shareI actually prefer the photography in Cranes are Flying.
I am Cuba is great, of course, but tends towards the aggressive and show-offy - even when the scenes don't necessarily call for it. Cranes are Flying is every bit as technical, but it strikes me as technique w/ a purpose. See for instance the scene where Boris searches for Veronika in a crowd of departing soldiers. He disappears from the frame for a moment and we are confronted w/ a series of intricate closeups on Moscow citizens - each face tired and perfect, each looking with equal intensity for their own loved ones. There's a morality in this shot that's hard to describe, but is instantly recognizable. It makes me think of that famous line by John Berger: "never again will a single story be told as though it's the only one."
Nothing left except Clorox bottles and plastic fly swatters with red dots on them!share
The cinematography in Cranes is superb, lyrical and dramatic like a Beethoven sonata, and owes a lot to Russian silent films
shareurusevsky was the man , he worked with other directors as well as kalatozov and like he was always a more then just a cinematographer.
shareA movie camera virtuoso!
shareUrusevsky was most definitely a master. His work with colour and light on Chukhrai's The Forty First is nothing short of mesmerising as well.
-
-You won't forget me now?share
-No. I've got nobody else to remember.
Are you disappointed with the DVD for <i>Cranes</i> or <i>Soy Cuba</i>? If it's the latter, there's a UK DVD distributor with the original Spanish soundtrack (no Russian dubbing!) and English subtitles.
As for the cinematography in <i>Cranes</i>, it is absolutely brilliant. The editing is amazing as well. It's an all-around fantastic movie. I don't know about the DVD, since I watched it for class. But if it's the only way you can get your hands on the film... yeah, the film is amazing.
"Are you disappointed with the DVD for <i>Cranes</i> or <i>Soy Cuba</i>? If it's the latter, there's a UK DVD distributor with the original Spanish soundtrack (no Russian dubbing!) "
Pardon me, but I think you've got it backwards.
EDIT:
I've got it backwards!I'm sorry.
The Cranes are Flying's cinematography reminded me of the third man with the titled and enlongated angles. Especially when mark plays the piano.
Do you realize that you are judging me based upon the words that I have posted above?
Soy Cuba was much better. The Cranes are Flying is simple in comparison, both in terms of cinematography and the story.
~ Observe, and act with clarity. ~
Check out Letter Never Sent, which people often seem to forget for some reason. Beautiful and ground-breaking photography once again by the master Urusevsky.
-
-You won't forget me now?share
-No. I've got nobody else to remember.
I second that. "Letter Never Sent" might even challenge Soy Cuba with its photography, it's simply magical.
I took some snapshots of...
The Cranes Are Flying (1957)
https://goo.gl/photos/rCUeYK2WkgZ3gDXR6
Letter Never Sent (1960)
https://goo.gl/photos/UWtwP2T8UPmbqneg6
Soy Cuba (1964)
https://goo.gl/photos/j7xj8AhqH5475c158
Mind you that it's not all about Urusevsky... Kalatozov has very similar style with another cinematographer as well in Salt for Svanetia (1930), which is also quite incredible visually. I believe it can be found in Youtube.
Really nice snapshots you got over there. Truth be told, one could stop at any point in a film where these two masters collaborated, and it would look gorgeously composed and framed. Magical times, when Cinema was not just about story, but the whole craft encapsulated as well a respect for the visual medium. Indeed both of them are geniuses on their own field.
I'd be very interested in watching that film, it has been under my radar for quite some time, but so far I couldn't find it anywhere. Would you be kind enough to direct me towards a way or place to watch it? Also, have you come across The Forty-First, from Grigory Chukhrai? Urusevsky provides another cinematography masterclass in that film.
-
-You won't forget me now?share
-No. I've got nobody else to remember.
Salt for Svanetia seems to be available on vimeo.com: https://vimeo.com/12485810
The quality is what it is, but I guess it's better than nothing.
Really nice snapshots you got over there. Truth be told, one could stop at any point in a film where these two masters collaborated, and it would look gorgeously composed and framed.
I'd be very interested in watching that film, it has been under my radar for quite some time, but so far I couldn't find it anywhere.
Also, have you come across The Forty-First, from Grigory Chukhrai? Urusevsky provides another cinematography masterclass in that film.
Indeed, Kalatozov was certainly a very talented filmmaker with a vision, several of his films prove that. I have not seen The Red Tent yet, but it appears to be a misstep to many. I should tell you that The First Echelon (1955) is also far from the brilliancy displayed on some of his masterpieces.
That's unfortunate that Tarkovsky's art has not touched you. I probably already said this in the previous discussion at Battleship Potemkin, but I would really recommend you to read his book Sculpting in Time, as it explains more thoroughly the thoughts and philosphy presented in his films, as well as his work ethic, techniques, etc. It might help you in looking at his films in a different light.
I find it odd therefore that you have enjoyed The Turin Horse, as Tarr often follows (admitedly) a style championed by Tarkovsky himself, the Russian director's later films probably resemble it the best. Satantango is a masterpiece, but Damnation and Wreckmeister Harmonies are also nothing short of fantastic. Give them a chance, and you'll see.
I have seen Come and See and Ballad of a Soldier, but not Queen of the Gypsies, thanks for the recomendation. Soviet Cinema is a true passion of mine and I often have to restrain myself from over-praising it.
PS: Thanks for Svanetia's link as well.
-
-You won't forget me now?share
-No. I've got nobody else to remember.