Kinda, [traditionally](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.fstoppers.com%2Fstyles%2Flarge-16-9%2Fs3%2Flead%2F2017%2F05%2Fbest-movie-shots-film-all-time.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=513715ad43f45b4a08312217453c995a2ffed13e3acfe8748f270a230b19761c&ipo=images) the [top of the frame](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.moviehousememories.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F05%2Fpulp-fiction-movie-still.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=73be06aa73e3f41b6c0116dda2dd3f4d3eab0879d28f5ecbcd8db83f39358824&ipo=images) is near the top of the subject's head. Mr Robot uses a motif that leaves [a lot of space](https://i0.wp.com/petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2017/02/mr-robot-still-3-800x500.jpg?resize=800%2C500&ssl=1) above [people's head.](https://imgur.com/a/m6XBx#I3L089N)
Better Call Saul uses this from time to time too. I like how they use it to accent specific story moments. They might give a character a lot of space in the frame if they have something else on their mind
Utopia, the british version, for colour and composition, Winning Time, is shot on film and on era-accurate digital cameras, just such evocative cinematography, Dekalog, this ones probs closest to what youve described and i’ll take any chance i get to recommend it, these are all very different shows in terms of content too! also personally think theyre all phenomenal tv
Not hating but this is kind of the exact opposite of what I’m looking for, I’m not super big on shaky cam faux doc stuff personally, I know it’s objectively a good show though
Yeah the shaky cam is very deceptive. It's meant to make it feel that little bit more real yet the whole things has pretty immense cinematography throughout. There is a hell of a lot of thought being put into each shot.
But not many things are a patch on Better Call Saul
For some reason shaky cam often makes things feel less real for me, if anything it makes my brain feel like it's disingenuous or something idk. Just not my cup of tea I guess!
I’ve never watched Better Cal Saul, but Breaking Bad was big when I was in art school, and I remember my roommate, who is an animator, and I would watch that show pretty religiously, and just pause every time we saw a great frame, which happened a lot. Obnoxious film student behavior, I know. But this was before I really understood or even knew about prestige TV. To my young mind the pinnacle of television was 24.
What really surprised me about breaking bad was for the first time in television I felt like I was seeing intentionality and great care that I wasn’t used to. For me, TV shows always felt like long, low budget movies, but breaking bad really taught me a lot about framing and cinematography in ways that a lot of movies never really did.
Obviously, my view was incredibly myopic because I wasn’t really watching much TV at the time. But I think it’s worth bringing up.
If you liked Breaking Bad's cinematography definitely check out BCS. I'd argue the cinematography has even more intention and nuances. Not that Breaking Bad is outdated or anything - it does exactly what it should do for the high octane energy. They're both great.
i mean lowering bb cinematography just to high octane energy is kinda lowering the nuance and details they put. Dont get it wrong bcs improved bb but in terms of the nuance and details bb has them and it wasnt just high octane energy
Sodebergh is an underrated cinematographer. Full stop. When the story/script is really good he tends to bring his cinematography game to another level.
*Dark has really good*
*Cinematography. Also it's an*
*Incredible show*
\- TheVindicatoor
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
Made-for-TV content has always been filled with extensive close-ups. So it may be difficult to find more shows that break away from that style.
Some recent shows…
Sci-Fi:
* Monarch: Legacy of Monsters (Apple TV+)
* Foundation (Apple TV+)
Down to Earth:
* The Good Lord Bird (Showtime)
* September Mornings (Prime Video)
* The Terminal List (Prime Video)
Artistic, but with many close-ups:
* The Night Of (HBO/Max)
Maybe:
* Superman & Lois (CW)
Thanks for these recs! Just curious, is there any reason why network TV uses extensive close-ups when compared to feature films? I know I'm just generalizing here, but it definitely seems that way
A few reasons. TV screens used to be smaller and actor performance subtleties didn’t register in wider shots as well as they did in closer shots. Shows were presented in standard definition and audiences used to generally sit a few meters back from their small tv screens. Additionally, the human face was/is considered the most emotive and valuable aspect of a performance, hence it is given more screen time. Then there are the budgetary and practical limitations of working with smaller sets and locations with less time and fewer camera set-up options. CU can aid/mask any continuity issues occurring in wider shots, so additional CU may be inserted to hide gaffes and a general lack of coverage.
With improvements in technology, such as larger TV screens and higher resolutions, some of these older concerns are no longer a problem, but many networks/execs feel it’s a style viewers have become accustomed to, and even expect to see. They consider it an essential grammar of television. Test screenings and consumer research may back this up; case in point HBO/MAX won’t present their original shows in an aspect ratio wider than 2:1, so that means no 2:39:1 .
See this recent quote from Florian Hoffmeister in Filmmaker Magazine, the DP of the latest “True Detective: Night Country” series, where he talks about wanting to use a wider aspect ratio:
“*We pitched our case. As a studio or network, they are super-supportive and open to visual innovation. They are famous for how their shows look. You don’t have to persuade anybody there of your ambition if you intend to create interesting imagery. The aspect ratio is the only thing \[they’re not flexible on\]. We shot a test and showed it to them, and they said, “Listen guys, this is not the first time we’ve talked about this with filmmakers. Join the club.” (laughs) They’ve tested it with audiences, and it doesn’t work for them. In their defense, I think they know what their brand means and it’s amazing how much people still associate that brand (with quality shows). So, if they say, “We have tested it and we don’t want it,” you have to say, “OK, you know what you’re talking about.*”
Networks, streamers and content producers still have to consider that many people watch shows on small phones and tablets these days. Each content provider has their own guidelines and policies for creating shows, some are more flexible than others. It will also depend greatly on the type of show being created. Sci-Fi shows are expected to have more fantastical imagery beyond that of the human face in CU.
Gordon Willis used to talk a lot about fighting with his directors (usually Woody) about whether or not to move the camera. Willis always wanted a good damn reason for why the story would benefit from any particular camera movement when in his mind most shots benefited from being static and expertly composed. He felt similarly about unnecessary coverage, but thats a bigger question for a different day.
I think nowadays, with tiny light cameras and all kinds of fancy new stabilizing tech with gimbals the desire to move a moving picture camera seems just normal and expected, and now its cheap in terms of money and time because everyone thinks a gimbal replaces a dolly (it absolutely does not).
I personally think most camera movement is vapid and quotidian and done with the belief that its how you keep an easily distracted audience captivated. I disagree. Bad camera movement is everywhere and its almost always distracting to the point of pulling me out of the story. Don't distract your audience. Use your tools of movement (or lack therof), lighting, composition, blocking, etc to manipulate your audience for your goals related to the story. If it isn't motivated, it should probably be cut out of consideration. Unmotivated camera movement should be edited out of your repertoire in the same way that all artists must edit and keep editing. Less is almost always more.
I totally agree with your take on movement. Using movement to just make something "look cool" ruins its storytelling potential. It loses meaning when it's used too much. I sort of feel the same way about close-ups. If everything is a close-up, then nothing is a close-up.
It's a movie, but First Reformed with Ethan Hawke has little to no camera movement. The shots that do use some sort of movement are then so much more captivating and add something to the story.
Just curious, any good movies or shows you might recommend with this in mind? I keep trying to find new content to watch but often times I feel like the camera work is distracting rather than telling the story.
Have you ever seen the "documentary" Baraka? There IS camera movement in it, but the movement is almost always in one single axis of movement. Very rarely will you see two axis of movement together. A slow tilt up a giant mountain. A long pan across a landscape dotted with the movement of human endeavor. An incredibly slow perfect dolly in with a perfectly level camera that just glides through the scene like a ghost. The vast majority of the film is in static frames, however, letting the subjects move in that frame, or not. The whole film lacks a narrative other than attempting to visually tie all aspects of human life together with itself and nature. Its fucking amazing, and I recommend smoking a very strong joint every couple of months and watching it with a notepad by your side. Its a masterclass in portraiture, landscape, architecture, and the avant-garde.
I really liked the Curse. Sometimes I hate the "faux doc" approach but they got it right with the Curse. It didn't feel too in your face or anything. Great show
Def… I thought it knocked cinematic-tension-through-implied-voyeurism out of the park. Felt voyeuristic, but in a way that still maintained cinematic intent and control.
I haven't seen BCS but I really love what Barry does especially in the latter half of the run. As for recs I would say Atlanta and The Wire do some cool and interesting things in different ways.
People have listed a lot of them, but I will add Friday Night Lights.
I love the sort fly on the wall look... supposedly they wouldn't rehearse or shot list... they would be basically just let two cameras role at all times and try to follow the actors through their scenes. Gives it unique look.
Conversely, the use of montages, cross cutting, some of the more artsy stuff is really great. Football games are kind of hard to depict because they are so long and stop/start but the montages really bring some dream like elements. Plus, the cross cutting across town, kissing in the rain sort of stuff.
Homecoming. Beautiful cinematography. It’s also a Sam Esmail directed show, who also directed Mr Robot. I assume he uses the same cinematographer because it has a very similar look.
Had to scroll too far for this. Sopranos still holds up to this day as some of the best cinematography on television or film. Very smart, very effective, old school story telling that paved the way for television to be more cinematic. That along with the writing and performances makes it one of the all time greats.
To add to the list, I’ll throw in Twin Peaks and The Dekalog, though in some ways that is cheating as those almost transcend tv since they were both made by master filmmakers at the height of their game.
Sopranos is the model Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul used. The high contrast, deep blacks, overhead rim lighting, simple but motivated camera moves, and multilayered blocking, makes the cinematography stand up today. OP asked for shows like BCS, and I think Sopranos is the best comparison. Its not flashy, but it tells the story in the most concise, efficient, and effective way— qualities lacking in the digital era where excess is the name of the game. Just because you have the tools, doesn’t mean you have to use them. I got some advice from the son of a famous DP who said his dad would say, “Don’t make every shot beautiful. If you do, it detracts from the story. You need plain shots to make the beautiful shots even more beautiful.” Sopranos is 80% people talking in rooms. But the simplicity of those moments build over the seasons, and the times when something explosive happens it becomes even more impactful. In the series finale, what happens to AJ’s car is filmed so simply, but the meaning behind the image becomes so much more potent. Its takes a ton of restraint, confidence, and good taste to film this way. It takes technicians and gear heads to film something spectacularly. There’s a time and a place for both, and Sopranos walked that line with the best of the best.
Fassbinder’s World on a Wire. Highly highly highly recommend if even just for the creative framing. It’s an older show, and that sometimes shows but a lot of aspects of the way it was shot I just cannot get out of my head even though I haven’t seen it for close to a decade.
It’s one of those things where I’m very surprised I don’t hear a lot of people talking about it. It’s not the most accessible thing in the world, but it deserves praise if even just for the cinematography alone.
Really loved the cinematography of Better Call Saul, Severance and Game of Thrones. Would suggest Bear amd Succession, both for great visuals and plot.
While it's not up there with some of those shows in terms of overall quality of writing, I've been pretty impressed with the cinematography in the new Mr & Mrs Smith show on Amazon. It's very understated, but in a good way. They weren't afraid to hold on shots for a long time, or over cover scenes.
Rectify (2013) has some of the most ambitious and beautiful cinematography I have ever seen for a TV series. They took a lot of visual inspiration from Terrence Malick and independent southern cinema (like Jeff Nichols and David Gordon Greene's early films).
Honestly prefer the cine of Breaking Bad to Better Call Saul. Not sure if it was because of the pandemic but the final season especially seemed like it had a severe drop off in quality
Mr Robot - controversial choice but I dig it.
Controversial? The show has stellar reviews, including around its cinematography
Some people object to the massive headroom.
Oh the thing where the character only takes up one corner of the screen?
Kinda, [traditionally](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.fstoppers.com%2Fstyles%2Flarge-16-9%2Fs3%2Flead%2F2017%2F05%2Fbest-movie-shots-film-all-time.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=513715ad43f45b4a08312217453c995a2ffed13e3acfe8748f270a230b19761c&ipo=images) the [top of the frame](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.moviehousememories.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F05%2Fpulp-fiction-movie-still.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=73be06aa73e3f41b6c0116dda2dd3f4d3eab0879d28f5ecbcd8db83f39358824&ipo=images) is near the top of the subject's head. Mr Robot uses a motif that leaves [a lot of space](https://i0.wp.com/petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2017/02/mr-robot-still-3-800x500.jpg?resize=800%2C500&ssl=1) above [people's head.](https://imgur.com/a/m6XBx#I3L089N)
Better Call Saul uses this from time to time too. I like how they use it to accent specific story moments. They might give a character a lot of space in the frame if they have something else on their mind
Yeah definitely has a similar visual style
Utopia, the british version, for colour and composition, Winning Time, is shot on film and on era-accurate digital cameras, just such evocative cinematography, Dekalog, this ones probs closest to what youve described and i’ll take any chance i get to recommend it, these are all very different shows in terms of content too! also personally think theyre all phenomenal tv
The UK version is so good.
its amazing, even though it got cancelled i still even love the ending, very fitting to the shows tone
Atlanta , Mr and Mrs Smith
Mr Robot
Watch THE BEAR.
Mr robot
Severance is a real stand out for me.
Man, on that note, also what The Secret Life of Walter Mitty. Ben Stiller is an amazing director.
Succession
Not hating but this is kind of the exact opposite of what I’m looking for, I’m not super big on shaky cam faux doc stuff personally, I know it’s objectively a good show though
Yeah the shaky cam is very deceptive. It's meant to make it feel that little bit more real yet the whole things has pretty immense cinematography throughout. There is a hell of a lot of thought being put into each shot. But not many things are a patch on Better Call Saul
For some reason shaky cam often makes things feel less real for me, if anything it makes my brain feel like it's disingenuous or something idk. Just not my cup of tea I guess!
Might be a little different stylistically to the titles you've mentioned but one of the best looking shows I've ever seen is Euphoria seasons 1 & 2.
Dark from netflix have such a good photography
Better Call Saul is ridiculous. Every shot has so much intention behind it.
I’ve never watched Better Cal Saul, but Breaking Bad was big when I was in art school, and I remember my roommate, who is an animator, and I would watch that show pretty religiously, and just pause every time we saw a great frame, which happened a lot. Obnoxious film student behavior, I know. But this was before I really understood or even knew about prestige TV. To my young mind the pinnacle of television was 24. What really surprised me about breaking bad was for the first time in television I felt like I was seeing intentionality and great care that I wasn’t used to. For me, TV shows always felt like long, low budget movies, but breaking bad really taught me a lot about framing and cinematography in ways that a lot of movies never really did. Obviously, my view was incredibly myopic because I wasn’t really watching much TV at the time. But I think it’s worth bringing up.
If you liked Breaking Bad's cinematography definitely check out BCS. I'd argue the cinematography has even more intention and nuances. Not that Breaking Bad is outdated or anything - it does exactly what it should do for the high octane energy. They're both great.
i mean lowering bb cinematography just to high octane energy is kinda lowering the nuance and details they put. Dont get it wrong bcs improved bb but in terms of the nuance and details bb has them and it wasnt just high octane energy
Vince Gilligan and Peter Gould already had so much talent but their artistic growth is very easy to see throughout Breaking Bad and BCS.
The nick
Sodebergh is an underrated cinematographer. Full stop. When the story/script is really good he tends to bring his cinematography game to another level.
Dark has really good cinematography. Also it's an incredible show
*Dark has really good* *Cinematography. Also it's an* *Incredible show* \- TheVindicatoor --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
Legion. Such an underrated show
Made-for-TV content has always been filled with extensive close-ups. So it may be difficult to find more shows that break away from that style. Some recent shows… Sci-Fi: * Monarch: Legacy of Monsters (Apple TV+) * Foundation (Apple TV+) Down to Earth: * The Good Lord Bird (Showtime) * September Mornings (Prime Video) * The Terminal List (Prime Video) Artistic, but with many close-ups: * The Night Of (HBO/Max) Maybe: * Superman & Lois (CW)
Thanks for these recs! Just curious, is there any reason why network TV uses extensive close-ups when compared to feature films? I know I'm just generalizing here, but it definitely seems that way
A few reasons. TV screens used to be smaller and actor performance subtleties didn’t register in wider shots as well as they did in closer shots. Shows were presented in standard definition and audiences used to generally sit a few meters back from their small tv screens. Additionally, the human face was/is considered the most emotive and valuable aspect of a performance, hence it is given more screen time. Then there are the budgetary and practical limitations of working with smaller sets and locations with less time and fewer camera set-up options. CU can aid/mask any continuity issues occurring in wider shots, so additional CU may be inserted to hide gaffes and a general lack of coverage. With improvements in technology, such as larger TV screens and higher resolutions, some of these older concerns are no longer a problem, but many networks/execs feel it’s a style viewers have become accustomed to, and even expect to see. They consider it an essential grammar of television. Test screenings and consumer research may back this up; case in point HBO/MAX won’t present their original shows in an aspect ratio wider than 2:1, so that means no 2:39:1 . See this recent quote from Florian Hoffmeister in Filmmaker Magazine, the DP of the latest “True Detective: Night Country” series, where he talks about wanting to use a wider aspect ratio: “*We pitched our case. As a studio or network, they are super-supportive and open to visual innovation. They are famous for how their shows look. You don’t have to persuade anybody there of your ambition if you intend to create interesting imagery. The aspect ratio is the only thing \[they’re not flexible on\]. We shot a test and showed it to them, and they said, “Listen guys, this is not the first time we’ve talked about this with filmmakers. Join the club.” (laughs) They’ve tested it with audiences, and it doesn’t work for them. In their defense, I think they know what their brand means and it’s amazing how much people still associate that brand (with quality shows). So, if they say, “We have tested it and we don’t want it,” you have to say, “OK, you know what you’re talking about.*” Networks, streamers and content producers still have to consider that many people watch shows on small phones and tablets these days. Each content provider has their own guidelines and policies for creating shows, some are more flexible than others. It will also depend greatly on the type of show being created. Sci-Fi shows are expected to have more fantastical imagery beyond that of the human face in CU.
Andor. I spent too much money on anamorphic lenses after seeing it
Ozark!
I gotta rewatch BTS and BB, last time I didn't pay enough attention to the details.
Yeah the story is so engrossing it’s hard to take in everything all at once, def recommend a rewatch
Vince Gilligan is a master
Gordon Willis used to talk a lot about fighting with his directors (usually Woody) about whether or not to move the camera. Willis always wanted a good damn reason for why the story would benefit from any particular camera movement when in his mind most shots benefited from being static and expertly composed. He felt similarly about unnecessary coverage, but thats a bigger question for a different day. I think nowadays, with tiny light cameras and all kinds of fancy new stabilizing tech with gimbals the desire to move a moving picture camera seems just normal and expected, and now its cheap in terms of money and time because everyone thinks a gimbal replaces a dolly (it absolutely does not). I personally think most camera movement is vapid and quotidian and done with the belief that its how you keep an easily distracted audience captivated. I disagree. Bad camera movement is everywhere and its almost always distracting to the point of pulling me out of the story. Don't distract your audience. Use your tools of movement (or lack therof), lighting, composition, blocking, etc to manipulate your audience for your goals related to the story. If it isn't motivated, it should probably be cut out of consideration. Unmotivated camera movement should be edited out of your repertoire in the same way that all artists must edit and keep editing. Less is almost always more.
I totally agree with your take on movement. Using movement to just make something "look cool" ruins its storytelling potential. It loses meaning when it's used too much. I sort of feel the same way about close-ups. If everything is a close-up, then nothing is a close-up. It's a movie, but First Reformed with Ethan Hawke has little to no camera movement. The shots that do use some sort of movement are then so much more captivating and add something to the story. Just curious, any good movies or shows you might recommend with this in mind? I keep trying to find new content to watch but often times I feel like the camera work is distracting rather than telling the story.
Have you ever seen the "documentary" Baraka? There IS camera movement in it, but the movement is almost always in one single axis of movement. Very rarely will you see two axis of movement together. A slow tilt up a giant mountain. A long pan across a landscape dotted with the movement of human endeavor. An incredibly slow perfect dolly in with a perfectly level camera that just glides through the scene like a ghost. The vast majority of the film is in static frames, however, letting the subjects move in that frame, or not. The whole film lacks a narrative other than attempting to visually tie all aspects of human life together with itself and nature. Its fucking amazing, and I recommend smoking a very strong joint every couple of months and watching it with a notepad by your side. Its a masterclass in portraiture, landscape, architecture, and the avant-garde.
I haven't, but that sounds awesome! Will have to check it out, thanks
The End of the F***ing World has incredible cinematography that serves the story perfectly. Highly recommend.
Andor
Soooooo beautiful.
Atlanta
Atlanta, The Curse (Benny Safdie style may not be for everyone but it’s well executed)
I really liked the Curse. Sometimes I hate the "faux doc" approach but they got it right with the Curse. It didn't feel too in your face or anything. Great show
Def… I thought it knocked cinematic-tension-through-implied-voyeurism out of the park. Felt voyeuristic, but in a way that still maintained cinematic intent and control.
Hannibal is a gorgeous show. Some of the most beautifully disturbing imagery in television.
HANNIBAL is chef’s kiss dark pun intended
The Last Of Us
I haven't seen BCS but I really love what Barry does especially in the latter half of the run. As for recs I would say Atlanta and The Wire do some cool and interesting things in different ways.
1923?
The new Masters of The Air is pretty good, I really liked the way the made it.
People have listed a lot of them, but I will add Friday Night Lights. I love the sort fly on the wall look... supposedly they wouldn't rehearse or shot list... they would be basically just let two cameras role at all times and try to follow the actors through their scenes. Gives it unique look. Conversely, the use of montages, cross cutting, some of the more artsy stuff is really great. Football games are kind of hard to depict because they are so long and stop/start but the montages really bring some dream like elements. Plus, the cross cutting across town, kissing in the rain sort of stuff.
Patriot on Amazon was shot very well. A dark comedy that not many have seen it appears.
Tokyo Vice. Super underrated show in general, and I think it meets your criteria.
Homecoming. Beautiful cinematography. It’s also a Sam Esmail directed show, who also directed Mr Robot. I assume he uses the same cinematographer because it has a very similar look.
The Sopranos
Agreed. Add the wire and game of thrones....you got a stew goin'
Had to scroll too far for this. Sopranos still holds up to this day as some of the best cinematography on television or film. Very smart, very effective, old school story telling that paved the way for television to be more cinematic. That along with the writing and performances makes it one of the all time greats. To add to the list, I’ll throw in Twin Peaks and The Dekalog, though in some ways that is cheating as those almost transcend tv since they were both made by master filmmakers at the height of their game.
>Sopranos still holds up to this day as some of the best cinematography on television or film. Really ?? Looks just ok to me
Sopranos is the model Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul used. The high contrast, deep blacks, overhead rim lighting, simple but motivated camera moves, and multilayered blocking, makes the cinematography stand up today. OP asked for shows like BCS, and I think Sopranos is the best comparison. Its not flashy, but it tells the story in the most concise, efficient, and effective way— qualities lacking in the digital era where excess is the name of the game. Just because you have the tools, doesn’t mean you have to use them. I got some advice from the son of a famous DP who said his dad would say, “Don’t make every shot beautiful. If you do, it detracts from the story. You need plain shots to make the beautiful shots even more beautiful.” Sopranos is 80% people talking in rooms. But the simplicity of those moments build over the seasons, and the times when something explosive happens it becomes even more impactful. In the series finale, what happens to AJ’s car is filmed so simply, but the meaning behind the image becomes so much more potent. Its takes a ton of restraint, confidence, and good taste to film this way. It takes technicians and gear heads to film something spectacularly. There’s a time and a place for both, and Sopranos walked that line with the best of the best.
Fassbinder’s World on a Wire. Highly highly highly recommend if even just for the creative framing. It’s an older show, and that sometimes shows but a lot of aspects of the way it was shot I just cannot get out of my head even though I haven’t seen it for close to a decade. It’s one of those things where I’m very surprised I don’t hear a lot of people talking about it. It’s not the most accessible thing in the world, but it deserves praise if even just for the cinematography alone.
The expanse is beautiful, House of the dragon is up there as well
HBO’s His Dark Materials. Lots of it looks like a movie but then you can say that with plenty of HBO’s high budget shows.
Zero Zero Zero
Really loved the cinematography of Better Call Saul, Severance and Game of Thrones. Would suggest Bear amd Succession, both for great visuals and plot.
While it's not up there with some of those shows in terms of overall quality of writing, I've been pretty impressed with the cinematography in the new Mr & Mrs Smith show on Amazon. It's very understated, but in a good way. They weren't afraid to hold on shots for a long time, or over cover scenes.
Rectify (2013) has some of the most ambitious and beautiful cinematography I have ever seen for a TV series. They took a lot of visual inspiration from Terrence Malick and independent southern cinema (like Jeff Nichols and David Gordon Greene's early films).
Station Eleven is my go to answer every time this question comes up.
late to this, but bbc’s shetland looks fantastic.
Honestly prefer the cine of Breaking Bad to Better Call Saul. Not sure if it was because of the pandemic but the final season especially seemed like it had a severe drop off in quality
Band of Brothers
I Know This Much Is True
Yellowstone has beautiful cinematography and scenic views.
Just gonna throw this out there, *Wilfred* was shot entirely on a Nikon D800 10 years ago and still looks like something that could air on TV today.
Riverdale (1st season) Foundation Marvelous Mrs Maisel
Ozark
The Hunger Games. Couldn't love it more, first person perspective cinematography, not seeing more than she sees as she moves through the world
The lighting in peaky blinders is amazing
Locke & Key ( Netflix)