Bothered about Gravity's Cinematography win [Flixist] / by Alec Kubas-Meyer

Wherein I claim that Gravity's visual brilliance is technically superior but actually inferior to its competition.

This one I did two days ago to coincide with my blog from earlier this week. But while here I wanted to make some grand statements about acting awards, on Flixist I said some things that people are much less likely to agree with, at least certain people.

I don't think Gravity deserved to win Best Cinematography on Sunday, because so much of its beauty comes from post production rather than the camera. It's a sort of pretentious argument, but Best VFX and Best Cinematography categories are different, so why are they being treated the same? Life of Pi was even worse, because it didn't have the impressive long takes to sorta justify its win. That movie was just all CG.

But without all of the work in post, nobody would have looked at Gravity over, say, 12 Years a Slave, which did equally brilliant things with long takes (if not more brilliant). The fact that that film got snubbed is truly ridiculous.