You will be given a review about a book, an item, a place or a movie. After that, a question is given that you should answer using a certain span of the review. Your answer should be from the review itself and should not contain extra words, and should not be a combination of different spans. If there's no direct answer to the question, answer with a part of the text that is the most relevant to the question. See the examples for clarification.
Q: review: This gorgeous film has nothing to do whatsoever with the explosion of the planet. That is purely symbolic. It is a film solely about the massive depression and isloation of a family, and it focuses purely on two siblings, and how they are dealing with familial dysfunction, and their own mental self-destruction. The cinematography here is outstanding, the "choreography", if you will, pure genius, and the acting/direction of the highest quality. Not a film made to please the "masses". It's not Spielberg or Howard. This film, like Bergman's, deals with the complexity of feelings and the interaction of its characters. It is by far the best performance ever by Dunst, and where has the brillant Charlotte Gainsbourg been all my life (what a "face" packed with character). The demise of the planet is merely a set-technique to add drama and a background to a fascinating saga of psychological character. A fabulous movie, with great depth, emotion, and artistic innovation.
question: How is a cinematography wonderful?
A:
The cinematography here is outstanding