Lighting and Jarmusch etc.
Lighting: In general I want to learn more about the technical side and be a bit more aware of camera work, lighting, and editing when I watch a movie and comment on it -- but you don't want to overdo that, because it can be a distraction from the overall experience. Focusing on the "cinematic" was something I used to harp on when I was young; I wrote an essay arguing that popular American reviewers talked too much about film as if it was theater or a novel. I was talking pre-Kael. To some extent Pauline Kael, with her keen visual memory, changed that, though conventional reviewers since still tend now to revert to talking like movies are books whenever they can. What I was less aware of then than I am now is how important the writing
is, more than anything else, particularly in something conventional of course, something with a lot of dialogue, such as a romantic comedy.
I would certainly say that the photography, which would include the lighting, of Jarmusch's Dead Man, is absolutely amazing. I don't know why people don't talk more about that aspect of Dead Man. The landscapes are shot just the way 19th-century photographers and painters saw landscape. It's a completely different look, unique for modern film.
I haven't seen a lot of the recent Criterion DVD's, but I just watched the Vadim And God Created Woman last week, and it looked great -- as it did when it was new, I realized, watching the DVD. Full of the brilliant light of the Côte d'Azur.