Saga Ranking the Cinematography of the Saga

Cinematography is one of the most important, most identity-defining (yet oftentimes overlooked) aspects of any film. The Star Wars films, while maintaining many overarching similarities, all had their own visual sensibility when it came to the various aspects of cinematography. And considering the diversity of opinions on this board, I'm curious where people rank the cinematography of these films.

Here's my ranking:

#1: Empire. I know some people have criticized the look of ESB for being too "romantic" or "traditional Hollywood" but I disagree. The camera of ESB provides richer, more intimate, and more expressive view of the world that ANH had introduced us to. The brilliant use of environmental lighting (Peter Suschitzky deserves an individual Oscar for every shot in the carbon freezing chamber) to the shallow depth of focus, the decision (informed by the director, I'm sure) to keep the camera tightly focused on human emotions, like how the ignores Lando and Chewie in the foreground to linger on the moment of Leia clutching a wounded Luke. So many wonderful things to say about this film's camerawork, but I'll just say this; while a lot of people like to cite generalities like "the dark story" or "best dialogue" as reasons why ESB is their favorite, I think it's truly the artisan quality of the cinematography that, even if on a subconscious level for most viewers, elevates ESB to a higher class of film than it otherwise would be.

#2: Phantom Menace. I didn't have a huge amount of love for this film visually until I saw it on blu ray (minority opinion here, but I like the look that the noise reduction gave, and the image density increase did wonders). Now it's one of my favorites, and a sad reminder of what the other two prequels could have been (talking specifically about cinematography, and more on that in a bit). TPM has a wonderfully rich, storybook-like look to it, with a lovely range of colors and painterly shot composition. My personal favorite? Darth Maul clashing against Qui Gon and Obi Wan as he backs up into the massive power-beam chamber. The synchronization of the dolly camera movement, the choreography, and the music just gives me chills every time.

#3: A New Hope. For what was most of us the introduction into the world of Star Wars, Gil Taylor delivered a film with great visual range and yet a tremendous keen eye for tone. From the gritty, almost cinema verite quality of certain moments on Tatooine to the white-lit, classically composed shots from within the halls of the Death Star, the original film is still a visual treat. Taylor works with a deeper depth of focus than Suschitzky did in empire, which really highlighted the pulp influences the film drew from, while still leaving for inventive, iconic shots like Dath Vader emerging from the cloud of smoke on the Tantive, an introduction that scared the bejesus out of me as a 4 year old, no small part due to the low camera angle that emphasized just how big and scary this guy was.

#4: ROTS/ROTJ (Tied). With these films, when it comes to a pure in-camera cinematography standpoint, it seems like they kind of stopped caring. I'm not saying there wasn't any good work put into them, but there certainly wasn't the level of artistic dedication poured into every frame of the photography such as in TPM or ESB. ROTJ often feels like a lower rent version of the Gil Taylor's work in ANH, dipping briefly into dated 80's cinematography trends like flood lighting, ROTS, there's just isn't as much to judge from a purely in-camera standpoint, but what is there isn't terribly impressive. The film does get bonus pints from me for some terrific digital matte shots though, like the sequences on Padme's balcony.

#5: Attack of the Clones. I actually like some aspects of the shot composition in this film, as some of it harkens back to a theatrical style that hasn't been widely in use since the sixties, but the cameras... oh boy. I admire George's advances in digital cinematography, but it absolutely hurts the film in AOTC. The shots lack texture, areas of the screen are overexposed, the "videotape" quality drums up unwanted daytime soap opera associations (that's just me). But actually my least favorite thing about the look of this film is the constant use of slow-zooms. As a cinematography nerd, seeing a camera slowly zoom in on a subject for no real reason is the bane of my existence. It just looks so corny. Use a dolly, use a crane, keep the camera still, whatever. But the zoom feature has no place in professional cinema, unless your name is Quentin Tarantino (and he uses quick, intentionally comedic zooms, not the slow, melodramatic, "we were too lazy to bust out the dolly" zooms found in AOTC.)

Now that my wall-of-text OP is over, what do you think?

 

Excellent topic! I plan on rewatching the films again very soon, so I'll post my thoughts then when they're all really fresh in my mind.

 

As an artistically-inclined person (who isn't as experienced with film and cinematography as you are), I agree. I wish I had more to add but I think OP really put it well.

Have people really criticized the look of Empire as 'too Hollywood'? The colors and lighting are to expressive, I think, in comparison to the other films, ANH being deliberately more documentarian. With the others... not sure, though like you I actually like the look of TPM. Though I think that also has to do with how TPM kind of formed a balance between the older and newer elements: model work that wasn't overpacked with additional stuff in the frame, comparatively a fair amount of location filming, actual film being used, etc, but still with a 'sleeker' look than the OT had, and in some cases shots that couldn't be done any other way.

Going back to Empire, there's a shot that I really like, which I think says something about the difference between the way that film works/looks versus the others. When Luke leaves Dagobah, we don't see the ship, but rather Yoda and Ben, with shifting lighting (with sound carrying a lot of meaning too). Perhaps someone else who sees the same thing can better put into words what I'm getting at here... ?

 

Correction: I'm not sure why my previous post says the colors in ESB are "to expressive." That's not even a typo, it's the sentence accidentally a word. Probably meant something like "the colors and lighting are more expressive."

 

Got to agree with all of that, except the ranking - I place SW/ANH at #1, but it's purely down to personal preference.

Apparently GL & Gil Taylor didn't get along too well - glad that Taylor won out over GL's intention to shoot the film in a soft-focus style to emphasise the fairy-tale context (probably something along the lines of how Excalibur was shot.).

 

I don't have much to add to this beside that I like Excalibur, and it always had some resonance with SW to me, for some reason. They don't look the same or tell stories the same way, but the 'feel' (including visual style) had some elements that worked together, to my remembering-mind.

 

Great original post and I don't pretend to understand everything you discuss, but your top and bottom rankings are spot on.

I couldn't put in to words why ESB looks the best of the movies, but it looks beautiful and the carbon freezing chamber is my favourite scene of the whole series with its atmospheric lighting and setting. Neither could I expaling in detail why I feel AOTC looks the worst by seeming too sterile looking if you know what I mean.

 

Another great thread, Han Burgundy !
I'm not an expect in any way, but my favourites are AOTC, TESB and ROTS.

I'll focus on AOTC a bit because I feel that - again - it's underrated.
It's starts off with a pan up. That fact alone deserves credit because - contrary people who feel they "knew" from that moment on the movie would "fail" - it showed that Lucas was still willing to approach Star Wars in new ways - despite AOTC being the fifth film to be made.

I also appreciate the many "longing/yearning" shots from Anakin's POV at the beginning of the film....


... and she ignores him...


Obi-Wan inspecting the army was competently filmed. I enjoyed the simplified "summary" of Obi-Wan "investigating" (the appartment) and "finding" his target (Jango):







Additionally, I liked Dooku's presentation when we heart his voice while seeing Obi-Wan sneaking around until we finally saw veteran actor Christopher Lee:


Let's not forget classic imagery like this...

...or that...

As one might guess, this is my single favourte Star Wars frame. It's pure ease and peace, there's almost no movement, it's Anakin in "Jedi mode" until Padmé "interrupts" which is kind of symbolical.

I'm also very happy with the Anakin/Padmé romance. I like the playful, circling camera work in some of their scenes, especially the dinner and picnic scene. Consider this frame:

This is an incredibly complex....painting.
The sunlight behind Padmé and its reflections on the floor, sun "blinding" Anakin, four pillars, two couples,one illuminated, the other in shadow. I love it.

Light...

and dark..

...contrasts with Anakin and Padmé.

The camera following Anakin's head is also a great moment while entering the arena:


Terminator shots:

 

LIGHTsaber battle:





Dooku and Sidious walking out of the frame:


They are still one step ahead of us.

And the beautiful finale: Is he more maschine now than man?

No. Not yet.


He's still a loving human being.

ROTS and TESB are equally great imo but I'll keep it short with those in case I'm already boring readers:
Farther and Son...

...strange lovers


The sunlight, half of the Republican starship "falling" into darkness which is followed by that magnificant tracking shot:


The Jedi's twilight....

....and the Emperor's ultimate victory:

 

Don't get me wrong, I love Excalibur, but its look wouldn't have worked as well for SW. Excalibur was very much about allowing the audience to peek into a misty time of legend and myth, SW wanted to drag you into its world from the start.

There was a beautiful rawness about Excalibur, but it never tried to be contemporary, and I never felt that it was attempting to present a sort of 'universal' story for the audience to identify with - it was a modern retelling of the Arthurian legend. SW, on the other hand, was a simple story set in an other-worldly context that audiences were meant to accept and almost forget once they became immersed in the basic good guys vs bad guys plot.

Incidentally, I visited one of Excalibur's locations in Wicklow on a trip to Ireland 15 years ago - the stream where Arthur and Lancelot meet for the first time and fight - stunning setting, but the lingering memory is the little biting insects swarming around. Must have been a nightmare for the actors dolled up in plate-mail armour.

 

I voted for Episode 4. Whilst I appreciate the beauty and complexity of the photography elsewhere in the saga, the ability of the original film to immediately draw into its world through its sparse, documentary-like filming is unparalleled in my opinion.

 

Oh, it definitely doesn't look like any of SW. But it does work to evoke certain... mythic sensibilities, which I think may come across more just as functions of scale, color, shadow, etc, than anything else. The sunset scene as Arthur dies is completely unrealistic looking, but it feels like something. Some of SW can make me feel, in that sense, too. (As with the cinematography of ESB. Binary Sunset might do it too, though it's not like I've directly compared these things.)

Actually, since you pointed out that the look of Excalibur wouldn't have worked for SW, I then sort of imagined what a SW film with that look might be like. Gotta be contrarian. One idea that popped into my head was... the prequels. Imagine if the 'more civilized age' that Ben alluded to were actually depicted in a slightly different visual style, a more 'legendary' approach. The Hugh Fleming 'young Ben Kenobi' painting (you know the one) from one of the SW Galaxy card sets kinda gets at that, I think. Imagine Chiang and McCaig's design work for Episode I, the galaxy of the past, depicted in a 'misty time of myth and legend' sort of way. (Actually, the first few shots of the TPM teaser kinda do that too.) Just a little thought.

 

a new hope.

 

GL & Taylor's clash was partly due to studio interference (i.e. FOX). Apparently, people from the studio were telling G. Taylor - without Lucas' knowledge - to not use the soft-focus gauze on the camera.

 

I agree with you about the greatness of the cinematography in ATOC, but man, the green tint in the blu-ray really hurts the movie (which used to be vibrant and colorful).

 

To me, it's a tie between TPM and ANH, with RotS as a close second.

Because of that, it's the episode I watch the least nowadays. And when I do, I use the DVD.

 

green tint?

 

I have to admit I haven't bought the Blu-rays yet, but this is the main reason I'm not in a hurry to buy them. Does it look as bad as in those pics?

 

Yes, specially on Kamino. But the Blu-rays are still worth buying for the other 5 movies.

 

Any comparison screens? I have no idea what green tint you're talking about, haven't noticed it myself.

 

http://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=929191

 

I will try to remember to do the same!

 

yeah that sucks.

 

To be honest I don't mind it that much (although I've only seen screencaps and selected scenes of the "new" film). It certainly hurts the film in general, especially on Kamino (as Alexrd said) although it's not always as bad as the terribly green windows in Jango's appartment and I even prefer some scenes (although not that many) with the new color tone.
I'm guessing they changed the tone (if anything was intentional) because of the "digial look" AOTC was/is often accused of having.

 

I've only seen screencaps, so I can't really know, but I find that the new tint not only hurts Kamino (badly), but the vibrant colours of Naboo, Tatooine and Geonosis are gone as well. I can't imagine why they decided it was a good idea to add that to the WHOLE film.