Visions of Light

I watched this to hopefully get some ideas on what movies would be interesting to watch. From this point of view I was disappointed.

The movies used as illustration are fairly mainstream. I had heard of almost all of them even though I hadn't seen them all.

One thing that I very much have a problem with is that I think that the frame speed was accelerated on some of the silent film clips. The alternative would have been to repeat some frames so that events would play at the intended speed, but would have a slight skipping irregular pace. (24 frames per second was not a standard film speed during the silent period, so many films were done in 16, 18 or even occasionally 12 frames per second) I believe that the latter solution to the frames problem is preferable to comically fast pacing.

Also the silent period was some what gypped in that it got the same amount of time and focus as each subsequent decade. It should have gotten twice as much time as a decade, because it includes 1910's and 1920's and all prior movie history. Other than this minor disparity, the amount of time spent on each decade is about equal. This is good because the documentary isn't skewed toward any era.

Even bias is a prerequisite for a film documentary, and this documentary has it.

Keep in mind that this documentary is very general. It would be impossible to go into a great deal of depth in only 1 1/2 hours. It is not for an extreme film buff. The film is not going to be a revelation, but if you are looking for a very general introduction to cinema this is a good documentary to watch.

Yes, it ignores most of Europe and the rest of the worlds contributions, but for what it is, it's just lovely.

It's an introduction to the art of cinematography in American movies, with clips and comments from the greats about American film from birth till 1990 or so, when it was made. Some of the cinematographers are humble and self-effacing, some clearly have large egos, but they all obviously love and care deeply about film and film making.

This is a terrific film to show your children, a behind the scenes that is informative rather than salacious or snarky.

Highly recommended.

A great film can rescue mediocre cinematography, but great cinematography cannot rescue a mediocre film. That being said, cinematography is probably one of the greatest contributors to the success of a film. This well-made documentary shows clips from well over 500 films; many of which are classics.

At times, there are explosions of color, as in The Last Emperor, and at other times, there are fantastic settings for film noir by using black and white filming techniques. My favorite cinematographer was always James Wong Howe, probably the finest techician the industry had ever seen. The film is a bit overlong, but we forgive that quickly because of all the wonderful content and great selections of examples of different styles of cinematography. No serious student of film can miss this production; it should be shown in every film course in the world.

People who surf this particular website, generally-speaking, should love this documentary as it deals with the movies, and how they are photographed and how the cameramen and we, the viewer, see them. That may sound a bit dry, but this documentary is anything but that. They never stay more than a few minutes on any topic, personality or movie.

I appreciated this DVD more and more as I became more familiar with films. The more of a fan you are of both movies and cinematography, the higher you will rate this documentary. From silent movies to modern-day, the producers on this did a fine job showing examples of films from every decade up to 1990. (It would be fun to see an updated edition of this to include films from the past 15 years.)

This video gave me a new appreciation for black-and-white films. Some of the photography was magnificent and many cinematographers think that is the medium in which they could really show off their talents.

Regarding color, this documentary is where I first heard about the fabulously- filmed movie, "Days Of Heaven" (1978), which has become one of my all-time favorites. In all, there are about 125 films mentioned, so you may discover some gems you weren't aware of, as I did.

Whether you know most of these films or just a few, you should find a number of things in here interesting.

I was a film student in college, but my primary interest was in the story/writing end. While I wasn't totally into the directing and cinematography aspects, I did have a lot of exposure to it, being that the University of Utah film program forces you to have a well-rounded background in all the basics of film-making.

I was also a teacher's assistant in college to a great film professor, who made it a habit of showing this documentary to his classes to introduce them to the field they were getting into. After the three times I was "forced" to watch this piece, I can truly say I gained a treasured respect and appreciation for the mechanics of film. Yes it's story..yes it's acting...but really, the story is conveyed through images--and best conveyed through images captured by those who know what they're doing. There is so much thought that goes into being a good DP--being aware of your surroundings, lighting, being innovative enough to solve problems (because they come up a lot), and how to make an actor look good or how to get the best shot of something.

Rather than explaining like a text book "how to be a good DP," the film is composed of a series of documentary type interviews and clips from influential films over the years--films like "Sunrise" from the silent era, to modern films like "Days of Heaven," "Raging Bull," and "The Godfather." They give a good summary of the best examples of DP work, as well as highlighting why a particular cinematographer was viewed as a master in his field.

This is a well put -together piece, and I'd definitely recommend it.