Deakins has never even shot anamorphic. Not once in his entire career. Now he refuses to shoot on the superior aesthetic of film negative. Not to mention he was the first to rely on digital intermediate color timing in post. So no, he absolutely is not the greatest cinematographer. I'll easily rattle off 25 cinematographers who are better: 01. Gregg Toland 02. Robert Krasker 03. Jack Cardiff 04. Gordon Willis 05. Vittorio Storaro 06. Conrad Hall 07. Vilmos Zsigmond 08. Jordan Cronenwith 09. Robert Richardson 10. Caleb Deschanel 11. Ron Fricke 12. John Seale 13. Dean Semler 14. Lajos Koltai 15. Janusz Kaminski 16. Emmanuel Lubezki 17. Darius Khondji 18. Dante Spinotti 19. Nestor Almendros 20. John Toll 21. Howard Atherton 22. Michael Seresin 23. Dariusz Wolski 24. John Mathieson 25. Robert Elswitt The best ain't Roger Deakins. I mean, he's a great compositional lighter, but since he's never even attempted to shoot with anamorphic lenses, acts like kinetics are beneath him, hates long lenses, loathes flares and bokeh, and now refuses to shoot on film stock - his neglegiance to aesthetic variety and superior methodology simply disqualifies him from the prerequisites of G.O.A.T. status. Now how about all the glib hipsters who memorized three cinematogtapher's names just pipe down and go look at the plethora of sublime work from others who deserve more credit than they recieve.
@@cinemart5281 No, I don't believe I will be docile in the false name of subjective relativism, just because being challenged by the validity of facts and precedents hurts the ignorance of naifs. I subscribe to the Tolstoy standard for art assessment. Meaning that such prerequisites do, should, and must exist. Will you survive astute dissenting scrutinizations or should everyone with acumen just sit on their hands while your lazily wrong ilk run everything right and true into the proverbial ground merely so as not to disturb the fragile hipster delusions you rely on for rhetoric? That's a decisive rebuke upon your filmic fraudulence. Now get off my damn lawn!
Truly outstanding, what a masterpiece ❤️
Emmanuel Lubezky is on his way yo become the Best of all time
1:00 which movie is this, sir ?
The big lebowski
Deakins has never even shot anamorphic. Not once in his entire career. Now he refuses to shoot on the superior aesthetic of film negative. Not to mention he was the first to rely on digital intermediate color timing in post. So no, he absolutely is not the greatest cinematographer.
I'll easily rattle off 25 cinematographers who are better:
01. Gregg Toland
02. Robert Krasker
03. Jack Cardiff
04. Gordon Willis
05. Vittorio Storaro
06. Conrad Hall
07. Vilmos Zsigmond
08. Jordan Cronenwith
09. Robert Richardson
10. Caleb Deschanel
11. Ron Fricke
12. John Seale
13. Dean Semler
14. Lajos Koltai
15. Janusz Kaminski
16. Emmanuel Lubezki
17. Darius Khondji
18. Dante Spinotti
19. Nestor Almendros
20. John Toll
21. Howard Atherton
22. Michael Seresin
23. Dariusz Wolski
24. John Mathieson
25. Robert Elswitt
The best ain't Roger Deakins. I mean, he's a great compositional lighter, but since he's never even attempted to shoot with anamorphic lenses, acts like kinetics are beneath him, hates long lenses, loathes flares and bokeh, and now refuses to shoot on film stock - his neglegiance to aesthetic variety and superior methodology simply disqualifies him from the prerequisites of G.O.A.T. status. Now how about all the glib hipsters who memorized three cinematogtapher's names just pipe down and go look at the plethora of sublime work from others who deserve more credit than they recieve.
Yo chill, isnt this about personal preference?
@@cinemart5281
No, I don't believe I will be docile in the false name of subjective relativism, just because being challenged by the validity of facts and precedents hurts the ignorance of naifs.
I subscribe to the Tolstoy standard for art assessment. Meaning that such prerequisites do, should, and must exist.
Will you survive astute dissenting scrutinizations or should everyone with acumen just sit on their hands while your lazily wrong ilk run everything right and true into the proverbial ground merely so as not to disturb the fragile hipster delusions you rely on for rhetoric?
That's a decisive rebuke upon your filmic fraudulence. Now get off my damn lawn!
Maybe that is exactly why he is the greatest.
@@wallnerbrothers
Yes he's the greatest for chosing inferiority and lack of versatility, that must be it.
😂😂😂😂 stomachfire