On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 14:08:38 -0700 (PDT), John Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Me, too. The intimacy of the photography in Lost in > Translation killed me, in part because find myself > doing a lot of close, interior, fly-on-the-wall > available light shooting. Yes, I know that L in T was > not shot available light, but much had that look. > > Watched Girl with a Pearl Earring twice on an 16 hour > flight (one stop for fuel in Cape Verde) earlier this > summer. More intimacy, more gorgeous available light > (or the illusion thereof). Liked the way the film > evoked, but didn't mimic Vermeer. > > Humm... Scarlett Johansson in both movies. Couldn't > have affected my appreciation of the cinematography, > could it? >
Scarlett is ~such~ a babe! (sorry for being politically incorrect, but it's the truth...). Of course another interesting thing about Lost in Translation is that Scarlett's dopy photographer boyfriend used a Pentax 6x7. I know it's been mentioned here before, but what the hell. Haven't seen Pearl Earring yet but I want to - heard lots of good things about it. cheers, frank -- "It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby." -Eliott Erwitt
