New York Times Profiles Cinematographer Bradford Young

12 Comments

• | Reply

• Imhotep | May 20, 2012 7:24 PMReply

  Bad Brad Young. Do your thing homeboy, do your thing. Even gave a shootout to Prof. Daniel.
  Shine your light on the world.
  Shine your light so the world can see.

• Priss | May 20, 2012 7:19 PMReply

  Kudos to Mr. Young - period. Keep doing your thing and doing it well.

• BluTopaz | May 20, 2012 6:22 PMReply

  Sergio's entire piece is snark. "And if you don't know who he is, then you're late to the game too."--ooh , can we all sit with the cool kids now that we know who Bradford is. Whatever. I'm sure Bradford is happy about the complimentary piece. And it does take NYT a minute to catch up to what's going on, it's still a big accomplishment to be featured there. Congratulations to him, I loved reading the bit about his shooting through windows at people from the diaspora, etc.

• Alex | May 20, 2012 4:15 PMReply

  Oh dear to the author even bothering to respond in such a petulant way to the comment. Sergio, not good man, not good.
  
  This is very good news. Late or not, it's publicity either way and its a very good taster that will enable those NYT readers to go and look him up in depth themselves. I on the other-hand thought it was a concise piece in which he actually shines and I immediately understood and grasped work and character.
  
  Also there is a small print: "A version of this article appeared in print on May 20, 2012, on page AR12 of the New York edition with the headline: He’s Just a ‘Custodian of the Moment’. "
  
  
  So maybe the version you seek is in print?

• Sergio | May 20, 2012 7:16 PM

  "Sergio just wants to hog this young brothers spotlight and minimize the accomplishment of being featured in the worlds most widely read newspaper because he never will be."
  
  Are you being serious? I found that the NY Times piece though it was nice that they had written a piece on Young, it was not as good as I thought it could have been. They could have written a much better piece on him with more depth. I read the NY Times all the time and they do much better articles in filmmakers than the one they did on Young. Now everyone is upset about me because I said it wasn't that good. Give me a break.
  
  If I "snarky" I word that truly I despise. (Who came up with that word?) then so be it. I prefer the words "rude" and insulting. That's I'll admit to

• Ross | May 20, 2012 5:40 PM

  Alex, Sergio just wants to hog this young brothers spotlight and minimize the accomplishment of being featured in the worlds most widely read newspaper because he never will be. I also congratulate Bradford and all the filmmakers that he works with.

• sergio | May 20, 2012 4:28 PM

  "Oh dear to the author even bothering to respond in such a petulant way to the comment. Sergio, not good man, not good"
  
  I am who I am whether that be good or not. I'm too damn old to change nor do i want to

• kirk | May 20, 2012 3:53 PMReply

  Miss Duvernay has the ability to force the establishment to cover her team. Face it, the members of the establishment (NY Times, etc) only want to cover their mirrored image and thoughts - thus we get disengaging featured like this. When it really could have been a brilliant, informative, fun article. Where is that "change you can believe in"?

• Critical acclaim | May 20, 2012 2:51 PMReply

  I didn't think it was disappointing. I thought it gave great insight into his approach. Do you like ANYTHING? You're always so damned negative. I feel sorry for you in general. I'm not saying that to be mean or petty. I really do feel sorry for you. Anyways kudos to Mr. Young. I love the part when he talks about freeing our minds and freeing our stories. I love learning that he comes from funeral home directors! I love that he works with strong black women like Duvernay, Rees and I was glad they mentioned Tina Mabry. Her film Mississippi Damned is a beautiful movie. His theories as a person and his good choices of the people he works with definitely shows through in his cinematography.

• sergio | May 20, 2012 3:19 PM

  I had a feeling you wouldn't get it. I responded childishly because your original comment about me is completely childish (and moronic) That you "feel sorry for me" because I don't "like' anything and "so negative". You read all of the hundreds (maybe thousands of items) I've written for S & A since day one and they're all "negative"? Really? If ou don't like anything you read on S & A or anyone giving their opinion about anything then you're more than welcome to start your own site and top us at our game

• Critical acclaim | May 20, 2012 3:10 PM

  I'm laughing. I've never heard of a grown man writing something like this. Poor thing. You're a boy.
  
  I won't be checking back to read your juvenille reply, so save yourself the few brain cells you have. Poor thing.

• sergio | May 20, 2012 3:03 PM

  "Do you like ANYTHING? You're always so damned negative. I feel sorry for you in general.'
  
  No, I don't like ANYTHING! I hate, hate and hate. And I especially HATE YOU! You fill me with disgust. You make me want to puke my guts out