This past Oscar ceremony had some pleasant surprises. Nearly all of the awards given were well-deserved and all of the nominees deserved the honor.
“The Artist” won the best picture award (it's a great and entertaining film) and the surprise there was the fact that it is only the second silent movie to take home that honor. The other one was “Wings” and it won in 1929, at the very first Academy Awards presentation. The fact that “The Artist” was shot in black and white made it a bit more of an outsider as well.
In the early days, everything was in black and white. The first color film to win best picture was “Gone With The Wind” in 1940. The last black and white film to win it was “Schindler's List” in 1994.
I've been in theaters and have seen (mostly younger) viewers complain and walk out when they discover the movie is a black and white feature. It seems some folks have a misconception that black and white is old school, low-tech and cheap. Nothing could be further from the truth. Just think about some of the most notable still photographers. I dare say that the works of Ansel Adams and Diane Arbus would not be as beautifully powerful if they were color prints. I can't even imagine an Arbus photo in color.
With that in mind, I've compiled a short list of the most beautifully filmed black and white movies; some old some new, some well known, others obscure.
Especially if you have an HD TV, you should treat yourself to some of these. If you're a “color snob” they will change your mind.

“Nights of Cabiria” (1957) and “La Dolce Vita” (1960) Director: Federico Fellini Cinematography: Aldo Tonti/Otello Martelli (“Cabiria”) Otello Martelli (“La Dolce Vita”)
While best known for -as The Internet Movie Database states- his “bizarre, abstract plots peppered with risque humor,” Fellini wrote and directed several films that were fairly straight forward. “Nights of Cabiria” was one of his most personal films. Written as a love pean to, and starring, his wife, Giulietta Masina, it is the story of a waif streetwalker living in Rome and awaiting the miracle that will transform her life. The first time I saw it, I was stunned. Any given frame of “Cabiria” could be blown up into a beautiful black and white still. I am a fan of all of Fellini's films, but this one occupies a special place in my heart.
“La Dolce Vita,” which I first saw while preparing for this article is another stunner. The depth of field that cinematographer Otello Martelli achieves is at times, nearly unbelievable. Those raised on wowza zowza digitally created special effects (which are fine when needed) may not even notice “La Doce Vita's” beauty or simply take it for granted. Big mistake.
“Rashomon” (1950) and “Seven Samurai” (1954) Director: Akira Kurosawa Cinematography: Kazuo Miyagawa (“Rashomon”) Asakazu Nakai (“Seven Samurai”)
Another duo from an iconic director. Kurosawa continues to influence generation after generation of filmmakers. These days, with the films of Quentin Tarantino and others, audiences are getting used to the non-linear method of telling a story on-screen. But Kurosawa broke new ground when he used the technique in “Rashomon.” The story unfolded and was told from several different characters' points of view. Director Edward Zwick copped this style in “Courage Under Fire.” Kazuo Miyagawa's for cinematography for “Rashomon” is as rich as it is subtle.
“Seven Samurai's” most obvious descendant is the classic American western, “The Magnificent Seven.” I had the pleasure of seeing “Seven Samurai” on the HUGE screen at The Gillioz a few years ago. I saw “Casablanca” (another b&w classic) there as well. Anytime The Gillioz is showing a film, I recommend you attend. If only to remember the time when screens were BIG. The Palace also has one auditorium with a nice sized screen. I saw a fresh print of “Taxi Driver” there. DVDs are convenient and inexpensive but nothing compares to a large theater screen. If only The Palace or Gillioz would show “Lawrence of Arabia.”
Oops, veered off a bit. Back to black and white masterpieces.
“Manhattan” (1979) Director: Woody Allen Cinematography: Gordon Willis
Cinematographers such as Gordon Willis and Roger Deakins are icons to movie geeks (myself included.) Willis was director of photography for all three “Godfather” films,
many other well known movies and eight Woody Allen projects starting with “Annie Hall.” He can shoot color but is also equally adept at black and white. His b&w work with Allen includes “Zelig,” “Broadway Danny Rose,” “Stardust Memories” and parts of “The Purple Rose of Cairo.” And, of course, “Manhattan.”
Allen has said this is the least favorite of his films and added, “I can't believe I got away with it.” Considering what happened in his personal life, one can understand he might be uncomfortable by being on-screen as a man of 42 who falls in love with a 17 year old girl.
You can make your own judgment call about the plot, I'm talking about the cinematography.
Willis is a textbook example of how a cinematographer doesn't actually shoot simply in “black and white” but manages a thousand shades of gray. “Manhattan” is a beautiful film to watch, especially if you have been to New York City. It's the place Allen loves the most and it has been a character -of sorts- in most of his films.
“Citizen Kane” (1941) Director: Orson Welles Cinematography: Gregg Toland
Much like Kurwosawa, Orson Welles is responsible for many innovations in film- making that are now considered to be in the norm. But the style of “Citizen Kane” was a startling production and to this day it remains at the top of a great number of “Best Films of All Time” lists.
“Citizen Kane” is described as a film à clef, a French term describing a movie about real life that is portrayed as fiction. In this case, the “real” component is the story of William Randolph Hearst and his publishing empire. It's because of Hearst -who owned the tree farms and mills that produced the paper his newspapers were printed on -that marijuana is now illegal. Hemp is a non-potent form of marijuana that had long been grown for use in making rope, textiles and paper. The Declaration of Independence is printed on hemp paper. George Washington and Thomas Jefferson grew it. Ben Franklin had a hemp mill.
And to ensure full disclosure I will tell you I have several garments made from hemp. They are all legal and all very comfortable.
But this has nothing to do with the film...
When asked -years later- about what made him (a first time film director) want to be so innovative, Welles claimed it was merely ignorance. He had no idea how films were made. But he knew how to tell a story. His “War of the Worlds” radio broadcast caused a nationwide panic.
Cinematographer Gregg Toland experimented with lighting and lenses and created the “deep focus” technique, giving “Kane” a previously unseen depth of field. There are also several matte shots. They are essentially double exposures where the background is shot first, the lighting is changed, the film rewound and the foreground is photographed. This too, adds incredible depth of field. Keep in mind it was all done “in camera.” There were no computer generated effects back then.
“Kane” is another early example of the non linear storytelling technique. The bulk of the film is one flashback after another. There's a reason that it is still considered by many to be the best/most important American film ever made. Plan a double feature night and watch “Citizen Kane” along with another Welles classic, “Touch of Evil.”

Hopefully your appetite has been whetted for some “old fashioned” black and white film. As an addendum, let me add this list:
“Raging Bull” (1980) Director: Martin Scorsese Cinematography: Michael Chapman
Later picked as the best film of the decade, it lost its Oscar bid in 1980 to “Ordinary People.”
“The Night of the Hunter” (1955) Director: Charles Laughton Cinematography: Stanley Cortez
The only film that has classic actor Charles Laughton credited as director. It's scary in the cerebral way. You know. Before “scary” meant chainsaws, hooks, saws, dismemberment and blood and guts.
“Metropolis” (1927) Director: Fritz Lang Cinematography: Karl Freund, Günther Rittau and Walter Ruttmann
A look at the dystopian future through the vision of Fritz Lang in 1927. Incredible special effects for the time. It's somewhat unsettling but has a ring of truth for then, today and tomorrow.
“Double Indemnity” (1944) Director: Billy Wilder Cinematography: John F. Seitz
If you aren't familiar with the film noir genre, this is the place to start. Seeing Fred MacMurray -the affable dad on “My Three Sons”- as a cold blooded S.O.B. (and insurance salesman. Hmmmm...) is disturbing enough. Add to that a screenplay by hard boiled novelist Raymond Chandler and you've got a chiller. Murder and betrayal run rampant in this film. I've seen it a dozen times and it never gets stale. The b&w work by John F. Seitz captures the noir genre and is a benchmark for the style. It's an absolute must see.
“Nosferatu” (1922) Director: F.W. Murnau Cinematography: Fritz Arno Wagner and Günther Krampf
THE first over the top horror film and still rated a classic among aficionados of the genre. Based loosely on the Dracula legend, Max Schreck's performance as the vampire is the stuff of legend. So much so that Tim Burton made a film, “Shadow of the Vampire” (also gloriously b&w), about the making of “Nosferatu.”
“Psycho” (1960) Director: Alfred Hitchcock Cinematography: John L. Russell
Hitchcock, the master of the macabre, fashioned “Psycho” based loosely on the psychopathic killer with a mother fixation, Ed Gein. Hitchcock adapted it from the 1959 novel by Robert Bloch. The film caused quite a stir at the time. It was somewhat too visceral and, well, psychotic, for the times. One might argue that the film ushered in the new wave of very frank horror films that came along in the 1960s. The cinematography is stark and at times it makes the viewer uncomfortable. I'm fairly sure that was what the film makers intended. It's a true classic and has influenced horror films (some good, many bad) for more than 50 years.
Anyway, these are merely some suggestions. With the advent of HD, home theater audio systems and large screen TVs -and the fact that most things on DVD these days are clean, restored prints- the home viewing experience is better than ever,

The 84th Oscar ceremonies were, as is usual for awards shows these days, a double edged sword.
On the plus side, the majority of the films, performances and technical teams nominated this year were top notch. The one film that seemed out of place was the latest in “The Transformers” series. Sure it had the wow factor and made a ton of money but it's a film based on kids' toys, for crying out loud. Cars that turn into robots. Or vice versa. I can't tell. Nor do I care. I guess it's not as ridiculous as a film like “Super Mario Brothers” which was based on a video game. Give us movie lovers a break, please. “Transformers” didn't win anything and the nominations it got were just a nod to the money it made...and its ability to pull in the lucrative 5~14 year-old male demographic.
The latest exercise in tedium (by that I'm referring to the newest Harry Potter installment) didn't take home any of the three awards it was nominated for, either.
The minus side of the presentation was comprised of the usual misfires. The show was poorly paced and Billy Crystal's ninth (and hopefully final) stint as host was nearly unbearable.
Hank Stuever of “The Washington Post”said, “Crystal seemed to be to be overseeing a cruise ship dinner show designed to appeal to the over-50 travel club. Early on, it hit the rocks and started to list. Almost everyone drowned."
That was a kind way to put it.
The montage scenes need to be permanently banned and there were even more than usual this year. I was singing the montage song from “Southpark” several times. At least that kept me from nodding off.

As always there was the mostly unbearable (unless you're doing some illegal substance or laughing gas) pre-show. Because of the time difference and the fact the show had to be in prime time on the East coast and here in the Midwest, it was rather bizarre to see these denizens of L.A. showing up in extravagant evening wear and jewelry, IN GLARING DAYLIGHT. It was still the afternoon in California.
A newly coined word that makes my skin crawl came about in a segment with the mothers of some of the actors being nominated. These parents were referred to as “mominees.' In my hand-scrawled notes I have written, “Kill me now!”
Hey, if actors can be melodramatic we “little people” have that right, too.

After my eyes stopped glazing over, I had my first good thought since this thing started, I would love to watch the Oscars with writer/director/raconteur John Waters. He revels in this kind of thing and does so with the most wicked of good humor.
There were technical problems (to be continued in the ceremonies, too) but live TV is hard to do, I suppose. I found it sort of ironic in a way, but laughed all the same.
The top moment for me in the pre-show was seeing Rooney Mara (from the American version of “The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo”) looking like, as someone mentioned, “a cross between Audrey Hepburn and punk.” More power to her.
J Lo nearly had a Janet Jackson moment and someone (again, my notes are incomplete) was wearing something so sheer you could see her undergarments. If you're going to go that sheer, go “commando” as well.
I am totally sick of the phrase (reserved for these kind of affairs), “Who are you wearing?” Would “Who designed your dress?,” be too hard to say? Or, more appropriately “WHAT are you wearing and what were you thinking?”
To be fair, many of the actresses (mostly the “older” ones, you know, 30 or above) looked very lovely no matter who they were wearing. Meryl Streep, Glenn Close,
Nick Nolte looked about the same as he did in his mug shot a few years ago. But that's a good look for him (and Gary Busey.)
I somehow missed the Sacha Baron Cohen bit where he spilled “ashes” on Ryan Seacrest. Seacrest claims he had no idea it was going to happen. And he just happened to have a spare tux jacket with him and I have some prime land in Florida I'll sell you CHEAP.
Since my admittedly overwrought death wish didn't materialize (thank you, powers-that-be) I was catapulted into the the belly of the Oscar beast and while I was happy with nearly all of the nominees, I was equally horrified by the execution (that's an appropriate word in more ways than one) of the schlock.

There was an ongoing problem with the audio from the live mics onstage, You'd think a show that was awarding not only artistic but technical achievements would hire competent audio engineers. But as I learned many years ago in the video production business many people simply say, “It's only audio.”)

There are hundreds of places you can go online to find the list of winners so I'll sidestep that here and just hit some personal highlights and low points.

A deep valley was Crystal's now obligatory “spoof” introducing the films nominated for Best Picture. And that was merely the first of many interminable montage scenes.
Later on was the stupefying Cirque Du Soleil acrobats who actually did a routine using wheel chairs. (I think I ask to be killed again at this point...)
Tom Cruise in his “crazy on Oprah's show mode” was the weirdest of the presenters. He was strange, seemed like he was “on something,” self satisfied, unctuous and downright phony. My hope is that if I ever make even one tenth of what Cruise has been paid (less what he gives to the Scientologists) I'll still have the good manners to simply become a hermit. He's truly frightening.
The high point of the side excursions was a spoof on focus groups with Christopher Guest, Catherine O'Hara, Fred Willard, Eugene Levy and Bob Baliban. I'm surprised the Academy signed off on this. Another surprise was the rather risqué routine done by the ensemble female cast of “Bridesmaids.”

Two films I was happy to see get their just deserts were “The Artist” and “Hugo,” both with five Oscars.
“The Artist” is only the second silent movie to win the Best Picture award. The other was “Wings” in 1929. The fact that it is not only (almost entirely) without dialog, it's also a black and white production. That made it even less likely win. Director Michel Hazanavicius won the award for Best Direction and “The Artist” took home honors for Best Actor (Jean Dujardin), Costume Design and Original Score.
“Hugo,” directed by living legend of film Martin Scorsese, won awards for Cinematography, Art Direction, Sound Mixing, Sound Editing and Visual Effects.
Meryl Streep won her third Oscar -she's been nominated 17 times- and as I wrote in my review of “The Iron Lady, she outdid ever herself in that role. There was no possible way she could be denied.
One of the biggest surprises came when Oscar shunning Woody Allen (who never attends these ceremonies) won for Best Original Screenplay for his “Midnight in Paris,” a throwback to the days of his films along the lines of “Crimes and Misdemeanors,” “The Purple Rose of Cairo” and “Radio Days.” Like Scorsese, Allen is one of the best directors working today. Or ever.
There were many other good and bad moments. The tribute to those in the business who passed away last year was moving and even the segment with actors talking about their favorite films was pretty good from a film buff's point of view. Even if it was a bit cloying.
I've been marginally involved in the music “business” since I was 14 and I've watched TV for as long as I can remember. But you'd never catch me viewing The Grammy or The Emmy Awards ceremonies. There's something about the Oscars, though, even with all of its expected faults, laborious self congratulations and overblown production, that still draws me in. It's the power of the movies.
And, you know, I wonder why they don't televise the Nobel Prize ceremonies?
That would grab me, I know. Instead we still have The Daytime Emmys.
YIKES!