MEXICO HAS LEFT A GIANT MARK IN HOLLYWOOD !!!! Alejandro G Inarritu*Alfonso Cuaron*Guillermo Del Toro*Emmanuel Lubezki* A combined 12 OSCARS !!! #MexicanPOWER
Probably why he was my favorite photography director before Tarkovsky became my favorite director. There's a pure beauty to their work that really resonates with me.
Really loved this! I'd love if you guys did a little more investigation into the practical side of cinematographers. Like what types of lenses and other equipment does Lubezki use? Film vs digital. how does he practically light scenes when it calls for it?
He uses wide lenses almost exclusively now, especially with Malick and Innaritu. He shoots on digital (ARRI Alexa) for many reasons now e.g. ability to pull shadows and especially for the Revenant, ability to shoot in low light levels. He's also not a fan of film grain and likes that pristine pellucid look that digital gives. He started perfecting his natural light photography with Malick back in 2005 on the New World so I'm not sure about his prior work.
If you want to look into the technical aspects of the work of famous DP's, then search for the channel named Wolfcrow from an Indian filmmaker. He provides really good insights on how these DP's work their magic.
This is amazing, the way he’s able to capture feelings and transmit them through a screen, so many great movies, great casts and a great cinematographer.
And for children of men as well. Imo that and Tree of Life are two of chivo's best shot films. This man and his work with the camera is so breathtaking. My favourite living DP
Today I woke up and only thought of one thing, Image language, and soon for tomorrow here in Luanda, Angola is 9 hours I just received the video by the notification bell. in the meantime, I love the tracks that Chivo did and I'm very inspired by it, and with your help and dedication I know I'll be able to reach a good level of DPs. THANK YOU "FANDOR, amazing movie channel.
It’s one of the best photographers in the world, he’s really great and the way he can share all the things and feelings using his photographs it’s amazing!
It's amazing the way he uses nature and daylight for his shots. He knows how to take advantage of every hour of the day to create something that goes exactly with what he wants you to feel.
Truly one of the best cinematographer ever ! Also we could talk about his choice of focal length. He said multiple times that his two favorites lenses are the 21 and 22 mm which allows to capture the face of the talent surrounded by a large background/landscape. This is a big part of how he manages to shot "the truth" : by placing the actor in the very middle of his environment.
It is incredible that his work on the film itself can overshadow the director and almost everything else about the film. Every film I have seen of his I can immediately tell it is his work, and it almost becomes more of a Emmanuel Lubezki film rather than say Inarritu or Cuaron or Malick. Very few cinematographers have achieved this, only others I can really think of off the top of my head are Robby Muller and Roger Deakins. All around dopeness.
He's a really talented dp, no doubt. It's pretty much well known that he relies on heavy post-production to spice his natural light shots, specially on the revenant ("matte painting" sky for example). Nothing wrong with that imho, the results are amazing
I balk a little at his "search for truth" assertion there, but the fact is there are shots in Tree Of Life that feel like they were plucked directly out of my memories as a toddler
I’ll be honest, it’s surprising that he only started winning Oscars with the very flashy, in-your-face formalism of the Inarritu collaborations and Gravity (arguably Cuaron’s most formal exercise), when it is in fact his salt of the earth, grounded explorations of humanity, spirituality and eternity, as seen in his longest lasting and most influential partnerships (Alfonso and Malick) that wowed us and moved us throughout his career. In particular, his AIG features to me get a little caught in the “because we can” aspect of pulling off some of these sequences. It’s rare to see any of his Cuarón films and say that the long takes were unnecessarily flashy or overshadowed the emotion and drama of the scene. The Inarritu work, in contrast, is close up heavy, relies often on unmotivated camerawork and a level of whip panning and random motion blurring to extend cuts that would make early Edgar Wright jealous. I would bet any money that Birdman has more tight close ups than all of Cuaron’s films combined. Same artist, same “technique”, very different emotional impact.
Several cinematographers have achieved great results with natural light, but better will always be subjective. Please consider Nestor Almendros, a Spanish cinematographer ( who worked with Trenece Malik on Days of Heaven, Francois Truffaut and Eric Rohmer, who had particular requests); Jorge Herrera, a Cuban cinematographer ( Lucia 1968); and G.R. Aldo an Italian cinematographer ( Bicycle Thieves and Rome Open City, enough said) who used natural light.
Those 3 oscar winning films were some of the best looking films of the past 25 years. But i’d say his best work are the ones where he didn’t win, TREE OF LIFE and CHILDREN OF MEN are for me his best work.
Wow if you can take a beautiful picture of the horrible US Mexico border Steel fence you are The best in the world. Do you know the work of The great Mexican cinematographer Gabriel Figueroa of the golden era of filmaking? I highly recommended its poetic.
Some day Cuarón and Iñárritu will have their names pronounced properly. You'd think their achievements would garner a bit of care to read their short names with the basic marked Spanish vowels. You almost have to purposefully choose to change the pronunciation. In this video, even Mamá is pronounced wrong! Mamá!!
His work with a Terrence Malick and Alfonso cuaron is is easily my favorite of what he's done so far. I'm always disappointed when he works with innaritu because that filmmakers a hack
@@Gavin48 any director can try different things and please let's not use the Oscars as an example for artistic credibility when they so often have made the wrong choices over and over again for 90 years. Especially since Richard Linklater and George Miller were much more deserving both of the years Innaritu won. The script for birdman is about as subtle as a brick to the face and offers no credible or creative insight into the industry it claims to know so much about. It's great acting and gimmicky craft hide the fact that it's characters are exposition machines, there to tell you exactly who they are and what the themes of the film are (did you know that Edward Norton only feels real on the stage?). It's one take premise isn't as impressive as a film like Russian Ark. And movies like Sunset Boulevard and Mulholland Drive are far superior examples of films that not only have something fascinating to say about the film industry but have far better execution with subtlety and nuisance. The Revenant attempts to be aguirre the wrath of god and the grey but comes out looking like a beautiful piece of schlock. When it wants to be an intense action film it occasionally works but when it tries to be melancholic and dream like it's laughable. When you look at a long take like the one in the car in children of men, what makes that scene work is that with the combination of the script, the actors and the direction, we as an audience member are perfectly manipulated to feel different things watching it and it's incredibly effective in that way. Innaritu shoots every different dramatic point the same way he shoots the action scenes so we are never manipulated to feel a complex set of emotions that the script calls for. It also doesn't help that it is way too long, especially when it contains a scene of DiCaprio and another person sticking their tongues out in the snow and we are supposed to feel......what exactly? If they wanted to have a scene of those characters truly bonding they couldn't have thought of something more original? His films have never worked for me. Don't even get me started on babel, which is on par with Crash as one of the worst movies I've ever seen
So you don't like his storytelling/screenplays. But what do you think about his directing? In my opinion it really is exceptional, especially in a combination with lubezki!
Adriano Vazquez Way to overact. Babel and Crash are two of the worst Movie's you have ever seen. I take it you haven't seen "The Room" or "50 Shades Darker?. I hate when people over hate on movie's. I bet you're one of those fools that give movies like Dunkirk 1 Star on IMDB.
Really? Every person (on reddit at least lol) who dislikes Innaritu calls him a hack. I actually like Birdman and Revenant but I can see why people dislike him, almost all his work bar Birdman (actually, maybe including it) is absolutely obsessed with suffering and putting his characters through so much pain that it seems like artifice. Biutiful was the worst for it. A lot of his work is also really heavy handed and a bit show-offy.
I actually agree Roger Deakins is probably technically better and versatile as a cinematographer but I prefer Lubezki's work. Every film he's done since 2005 (The New World) has been absolutely stunning and groundbreaking. The main difference between them IMO is that Roger Deakins adapts his photography depending on the director and he's more versatile. Lubezki has a very specific unique style and I and I'm sure many others can instantly tell when he's the DoP of a movie just by watching the images.
One of the best cinematographers of all time
Truly
Agreed
i agree!
Master of tracking shots
MEXICO HAS LEFT A GIANT MARK IN HOLLYWOOD !!!!
Alejandro G Inarritu*Alfonso Cuaron*Guillermo Del Toro*Emmanuel Lubezki* A combined 12 OSCARS !!! #MexicanPOWER
Don't forget Guillermo Navarro, Eugenio Caballero, Anthony Quinn, Lupita Nyong'o, Beatrice de Alba
Rodrigo Prieto, Alxis Zabé
You'll have to edit this in 2 months... Cuarón is likely to win again!
Ew wtf really you make me feel horrible for being spanish,I'm nobody's cheering section or charity case ,maybe you need that not me
@@SM-4359 shut the fuck up
I’ve never seen a film channel pump out so much good content in such a little amount of time. Good job. Keep it up
And they're always good quality, I think they deserve a lot more views and subscribers.
Agent K true 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
You can see a big influence of Andrei Tarkovsky in Lubezki's work
That is very true, the mirror, the stalker, Solaris,...
Probably why he was my favorite photography director before Tarkovsky became my favorite director. There's a pure beauty to their work that really resonates with me.
From México to the world. Chivo is just a genius. The best.
Really loved this! I'd love if you guys did a little more investigation into the practical side of cinematographers. Like what types of lenses and other equipment does Lubezki use? Film vs digital. how does he practically light scenes when it calls for it?
He uses wide lenses almost exclusively now, especially with Malick and Innaritu. He shoots on digital (ARRI Alexa) for many reasons now e.g. ability to pull shadows and especially for the Revenant, ability to shoot in low light levels. He's also not a fan of film grain and likes that pristine pellucid look that digital gives. He started perfecting his natural light photography with Malick back in 2005 on the New World so I'm not sure about his prior work.
M
If you want to look into the technical aspects of the work of famous DP's, then search for the channel named Wolfcrow from an Indian filmmaker. He provides really good insights on how these DP's work their magic.
Lubezki's best work is in The Cat in the Hat. Just phenomenal.
Lol no
you have no taste
I was referring to Guido's response
this is the best comment on here
@@FreakieFan Guido go finish the movie man we are waiting for it
This is amazing, the way he’s able to capture feelings and transmit them through a screen, so many great movies, great casts and a great cinematographer.
Tree of life should have won an oscar for him
Agreed
It is known
I concur!
And for children of men as well. Imo that and Tree of Life are two of chivo's best shot films. This man and his work with the camera is so breathtaking. My favourite living DP
I will standing right next to Lubezki, Deakins and many others very soon… remember me ❤️🔥 these cinematographers are my inspirations…
Today I woke up and only thought of one thing, Image language, and soon for tomorrow here in Luanda, Angola is 9 hours I just received the video by the notification bell. in the meantime, I love the tracks that Chivo did and I'm very inspired by it, and with your help and dedication I know I'll be able to reach a good level of DPs. THANK YOU "FANDOR, amazing movie channel.
It’s one of the best photographers in the world, he’s really great and the way he can share all the things and feelings using his photographs it’s amazing!
It's amazing the way he uses nature and daylight for his shots. He knows how to take advantage of every hour of the day to create something that goes exactly with what he wants you to feel.
Ur so cute
✨✨✨ Bravo! Beautiful! Homages! ✨✨✨
Truly one of the best cinematographer ever ! Also we could talk about his choice of focal length. He said multiple times that his two favorites lenses are the 21 and 22 mm which allows to capture the face of the talent surrounded by a large background/landscape. This is a big part of how he manages to shot "the truth" : by placing the actor in the very middle of his environment.
It is incredible that his work on the film itself can overshadow the director and almost everything else about the film. Every film I have seen of his I can immediately tell it is his work, and it almost becomes more of a Emmanuel Lubezki film rather than say Inarritu or Cuaron or Malick. Very few cinematographers have achieved this, only others I can really think of off the top of my head are Robby Muller and Roger Deakins. All around dopeness.
It looks like he is one of few who goes for ultra wide lenses and actually makes them look cinematic.
He's a really talented dp, no doubt. It's pretty much well known that he relies on heavy post-production to spice his natural light shots, specially on the revenant ("matte painting" sky for example). Nothing wrong with that imho, the results are amazing
Excellent video !, I wish it was longer.
I ended up wanting to know more. I want to decipher every aspect of what makes Lubezki so brilliant.
They are great cinematographers, I loved learning about them, they explained so good that I ended up wanting to know more about this.
Great video BTW. I also would love more of a deeper dive into the craft and art of cinematographers
Chivo mexicano, un orgullo!
I balk a little at his "search for truth" assertion there, but the fact is there are shots in Tree Of Life that feel like they were plucked directly out of my memories as a toddler
Such a great channel. Thank you for the amazing content
I love this channel!! Keep it up! Thanks for share this content.
The tree of life in my opinion is the most beautiful film ever shot, period.
i just wanna say i fkn luv!!!!!! this channel
Mi Dios el Chivo Lubezki
Nice video! I also love the way Lubezki uses wide angle lenses in combination with natural light.
If directors are the heart of the visuals of film then cinematographers are the head/brain.
sorry to say but i cant share this channel with anyone cause i have become obsessed with this channel.
Chivo is the best.
Definitely agree about scene from Children of men
The moment i saw " A Little Princess " in 1995 i knew compadre Chivo will go far with his talent and he did.
thank you for a great video.
Hands down, the only cinematographer who use natural light like no one. ❤️
He is an Artist!
I'm sure Lubezki smiled when saw Deakin's shot in Sicario of the sunset as the soldiers descend down the slop into darkness.
You explained this really well, thank you.
deakins - long wide shots
chivo - long takes
GOATS
Thank you for this video ☺️
Maravilhoso. Obrigado.
I’ll be honest, it’s surprising that he only started winning Oscars with the very flashy, in-your-face formalism of the Inarritu collaborations and Gravity (arguably Cuaron’s most formal exercise), when it is in fact his salt of the earth, grounded explorations of humanity, spirituality and eternity, as seen in his longest lasting and most influential partnerships (Alfonso and Malick) that wowed us and moved us throughout his career. In particular, his AIG features to me get a little caught in the “because we can” aspect of pulling off some of these sequences. It’s rare to see any of his Cuarón films and say that the long takes were unnecessarily flashy or overshadowed the emotion and drama of the scene. The Inarritu work, in contrast, is close up heavy, relies often on unmotivated camerawork and a level of whip panning and random motion blurring to extend cuts that would make early Edgar Wright jealous. I would bet any money that Birdman has more tight close ups than all of Cuaron’s films combined. Same artist, same “technique”, very different emotional impact.
Several cinematographers have achieved great results with natural light, but better will always be subjective. Please consider Nestor Almendros, a Spanish cinematographer ( who worked with Trenece Malik on Days of Heaven, Francois Truffaut and Eric Rohmer, who had particular requests); Jorge Herrera, a Cuban cinematographer ( Lucia 1968); and G.R. Aldo an Italian cinematographer ( Bicycle Thieves and Rome Open City, enough said) who used natural light.
Please do a 'Language of the Image' episode about Darius Khondji.
I love this channel!!
很棒的频道，非常喜欢。
Those 3 oscar winning films were some of the best looking films of the past 25 years.
But i’d say his best work are the ones where he didn’t win, TREE OF LIFE and CHILDREN OF MEN are for me his best work.
Emmanuel Lubezki is a Fucking Great Mexican Cinematographer 🇲🇽🇲🇽🇲🇽
Cat in the hat photography is propably his best work in enterely life, such a genius
Lubezki is the greatest in modern cinematography. El Chivo el mejor. Que insipiracion para los aspirantes a directores del fotografia
He's real legend.
Now he needs to win an Oscar with Terrence Malick
These are great cinematographers and love learning about them. Wish the text was less praising and more technical, though.
Hold up, he's the DP and also his own cam OP?
Great analysis! May i know what font you used for the title of on this video?
Great, great video essay! Keep up the good work!!
Lubezki is a True POET !
i’m a fan of FANdor!
ORGULLO MEXICANO
🔥
He also shoots a bunch of commercials for Apple, Nike, and Jim Beam.
Cat In The Hat should never be left apart from his work showcases,
The 🐐
Is that hes official insta work page?
From no Oscar Lubezki to 3-Oscar Lubezki
You came from apple?
Fantastic video!
Personally I find The Tree of life and the Revenant to be his greatest works so far
Where you got that backsound?
вы показываете пример операторской работы из "Выжившего", а она точь в точь совпадает с Юсовым, оператором Тарковского....
I think Iñárritu is very inspired by Malick. They just have allot of similarities in their styles.
Mencionaste Y tu mamá también, alch te amo we
Genius
what's the background track.?
Derrière les nuages by Monplaisir -- can be found on freemusicarchive.org
Arriba el Chivo!
Wow. Unbelievable.....
the long takes are cool but they feel like show off pieces long takes are more impressive if you don't notice them
Your research is really shallow. I don't think this video explains half of the potential of this man. But your video is still appreciated.
WOW
The big lubezki
Why isn't this 20mins long
I LOVE CHIVO
How often he works with directors like the coen brothers?...he's done one film with them....
L
Not one mention of the New World? Good vid tho.
Wow if you can take a beautiful picture of the horrible US Mexico border Steel fence you are The best in the world. Do you know the work of The great Mexican cinematographer Gabriel Figueroa of the golden era of filmaking? I highly recommended its poetic.
Some day Cuarón and Iñárritu will have their names pronounced properly. You'd think their achievements would garner a bit of care to read their short names with the basic marked Spanish vowels. You almost have to purposefully choose to change the pronunciation. In this video, even Mamá is pronounced wrong! Mamá!!
The Mexican Roger Deakins
My god I’ve got chill
Many of the times you used Mallick's scenes..
His work with a Terrence Malick and Alfonso cuaron is is easily my favorite of what he's done so far. I'm always disappointed when he works with innaritu because that filmmakers a hack
A Hack who has 4 Oscars and is very versatile.?
@@Gavin48 any director can try different things and please let's not use the Oscars as an example for artistic credibility when they so often have made the wrong choices over and over again for 90 years. Especially since Richard Linklater and George Miller were much more deserving both of the years Innaritu won.
The script for birdman is about as subtle as a brick to the face and offers no credible or creative insight into the industry it claims to know so much about. It's great acting and gimmicky craft hide the fact that it's characters are exposition machines, there to tell you exactly who they are and what the themes of the film are (did you know that Edward Norton only feels real on the stage?). It's one take premise isn't as impressive as a film like Russian Ark. And movies like Sunset Boulevard and Mulholland Drive are far superior examples of films that not only have something fascinating to say about the film industry but have far better execution with subtlety and nuisance.
The Revenant attempts to be aguirre the wrath of god and the grey but comes out looking like a beautiful piece of schlock. When it wants to be an intense action film it occasionally works but when it tries to be melancholic and dream like it's laughable. When you look at a long take like the one in the car in children of men, what makes that scene work is that with the combination of the script, the actors and the direction, we as an audience member are perfectly manipulated to feel different things watching it and it's incredibly effective in that way. Innaritu shoots every different dramatic point the same way he shoots the action scenes so we are never manipulated to feel a complex set of emotions that the script calls for. It also doesn't help that it is way too long, especially when it contains a scene of DiCaprio and another person sticking their tongues out in the snow and we are supposed to feel......what exactly? If they wanted to have a scene of those characters truly bonding they couldn't have thought of something more original?
His films have never worked for me. Don't even get me started on babel, which is on par with Crash as one of the worst movies I've ever seen
So you don't like his storytelling/screenplays. But what do you think about his directing? In my opinion it really is exceptional, especially in a combination with lubezki!
Adriano Vazquez Way to overact. Babel and Crash are two of the worst Movie's you have ever seen. I take it you haven't seen "The Room" or "50 Shades Darker?. I hate when people over hate on movie's. I bet you're one of those fools that give movies like Dunkirk 1 Star on IMDB.
Really? Every person (on reddit at least lol) who dislikes Innaritu calls him a hack. I actually like Birdman and Revenant but I can see why people dislike him, almost all his work bar Birdman (actually, maybe including it) is absolutely obsessed with suffering and putting his characters through so much pain that it seems like artifice. Biutiful was the worst for it. A lot of his work is also really heavy handed and a bit show-offy.
His best work was in The Cat in the Hat.
Was that _Tree of Life?_
subtitle please.
No mention of cat in the hat?
XD
Yo le invitaba los Elotes al Chivo :v
Why is he not just becime a director??????
I two mama tampbien jajaja
Roger deakins is better than lubezki
Both legends with very different styles, no need to compare
I agree with the other comments. But I also disagree with yours.
Not for me, both have stunning work, but I guess everyone has the right to appreciate art in a different way...
I actually agree Roger Deakins is probably technically better and versatile as a cinematographer but I prefer Lubezki's work. Every film he's done since 2005 (The New World) has been absolutely stunning and groundbreaking. The main difference between them IMO is that Roger Deakins adapts his photography depending on the director and he's more versatile. Lubezki has a very specific unique style and I and I'm sure many others can instantly tell when he's the DoP of a movie just by watching the images.
Nah man. Tequila and wine. You are not comparing those two on the same night.