Movie: Good Night, and Good Luck

[Robert Budding]

We don't talk much about motion pictures here, but . . .

Has anyone else here seen the movie, "Good Night, and Good Luck"? I thought the acting was superb - particularly David Strathairn who played Murrow. But I found the skin highlights distracting. They were above zone VII in many scenes. I guess they were going for a high key and sort of a clinical look. I prefer a bit less exposure to shift all of the tones down slightly.

Anyone else have opinions?

 

[Donald Miller]

I liked the movie a great deal. To be honest, it has been awhile since I saw it and I really don't remember anything about the photography.

 

[bjorke]

I thought the DP did great, great work. I expect the show was digitally graded, I never saw any highlights I felt were offensive. And lots of great shadow work, to say nothing of the terrific layered/multi-planed staging.

 

[Bruce Watson]

I saw it an an indi-house. It had the smoothest tonality of any movie I've ever seen. I'm sure part of this is due to the projectionist paying attention, which isn't the megaplex way. In any case, I thought the highlights were excellent, as was the shadow detail. What made this possible was the lighting.

Just from a cinematography standpoint, I thought it was an excellent movie. That they had a good story to tell and fine actors to tell it was just icing on the cake.

 

[Jordan]

It's a great movie. Interestingly, in the first scene one of the main characters (who we don't yet know is a main character) is shown taking photos in a dimly lit reception hall with a Rolleiflex -- no flash.

The whole tonality of the movie was fabulous. It took me right back to the 50s (though I wasn't even around then).

 

[Robert Budding]

Maybe I should see it again in a different movie house. It could have been the projection.