nemein

You know the type I'm talking about w/ the non-steady cam and flash cuts in the action sequences... blurring effects, etc...
RE2 used it much to the detriment of the movie IMHO. Bourne Supremacy made me nausous (I was sitting rather close to the screen though so that may have been my own fault ). I don't recall off hand if AvP used it, but I'm pretty sure it did. Those are the only movies I've seen in the theather this year but I'm sure the other action movies probably weren't that different. Not getting into the movies themselves (aka we don't need another AvP or RE2 thread ) but is it just me or is this style ruining movies for you?

Playitagainsam

yes, I agree... camera movement used to hide bad choreography in movies of old, now even if the fights are nicely executed, we get a headache while trying to actually watch them.

SeekOnce

Personally I can't stand it either. I mean I just don't get it. It's so painfully obvious that the shaky cam (esp. the 2 movies you referenced) detracts from the viewing experience that it just defies belief how directors leave that junk in.

Giles

I found it very visually distracting in "The Bourne Supremacy"

NitroJMS

I also sat close to the screen at the Bourne Supremacy, but that's because its Loews and the theater design is awful. Their "stadium" seating just crams you up against the screen like a sardine.

I found the cinematography extremely distracting though and I still don't know exactly what happened during the final chase sequence. It seemed like a blur of cars and guns and then it was over.

wm lopez

I hate that and I hate the greenish look some movies have like in FIGHT CLUB except in the MATRIX movies since it looks like that had to be done becuse of the green screen SFX.

HN

The greenish tint in Matrix was not b/c of green screen SFX; it was to distinguish the Matrix world from the "real world"... i think.

As for the shaky cam -- "oh look, like, you're part of the action man! you feel like you're really there!"

DonnachaOne

You know, I watched Claude Lelouche's C'etait Un Rendezvous the other day. It's nine minutes of first-person ferrari driving through Paris. You feel like you're really there alright.

Not a single shaky-cam shot in the thing. And it works.

Shaky-cam isn't bad; like slo-mo, timeslicing or contra-zooming, it's just overused, or abused in the hands of lackluster directors. It has its place and in the hands of exceptionally stylish directors, like Tony Scott, it's magnificent.

So I voted .

jaeufraser

Actually, for any film with a "greenish" tint, that was done for an intended look, not because of green screens. If anything, the green screens will cause the film to not be green, not to be green.

On that note, I don't recall Fight Club being particularly green, nor is it a film that exhibited shaky cam.

Jackskeleton

nope, it did take ahold of a gritty look, but it was neither greenish or a film with a lot of shaky cam.

A lot of it is just for the times. reality tv has allowed folks to be more accepting of it and so it is a way to get you in the middle of the action.

FinkPish

For me, the worst thing a movie can do is make you aware of the camera. In a case like Bourne Supremacy, the director chose the shaky cam style from the beginning and stuck with it, so it wasn't distracting at all. If he had suddenly gone to locked-off shots in the in middle of the film, then I would have been really distracted by it.

Same is true the other way around too. This came up in Harry Potter 3, where most of the film seemed to be shot with steadycam and dolly or crane shots, but then he suddenly used a handheld camera in a few scenes, and I was immediately aware of what had happened, and I didn't like being pulled out of the film for something that minor.

If its a specific and well-thought out style of directing, then I don't have a problem with it, but if it is just the director getting bored and deciding to throw in a few alternate shots for the hell of it, then its a problem.

DJLinus

I just saw the Bourne Supremacy and I HATED the shaky cam. I didn't enjoy it in Friday Night Lights, either. Yet, I love Arrested Development. Go figure.

As for the color tinting in certain movies, I liked how Boiler Room had a blue tint to it.

jaeufraser

Another thing is how it's used. Shaky cam can be very effective in conveying a realistic feel, let's take Saving Private Ryan as a good example.

Often times though, it's used as a cheat for directors who have no idea how to shoot action. Instead of coming up with something visceral, they just shake the camera and cut the shot every half a second to pretend like something is going on.

But on the bright side...most of the films that exhibit this sort of mind numbing filmmaking usually wouldn't have been good no matter what you do. Of course, I don't hate it all...it's just a matter of whether it's effectively used or not.

devilshalo

I don't mind if it's used correctly.

eedoon

Word.

matome

Jon2

Unless one is doing a documentary about the making of MTV videos and want to give the impression it was shot on a low budget with hand held cameras, I can't think of a single way it could be used correctly.

I'm also not thrilled with the techniques used in Saving Private Ryan, Gladiator, AI, Minority Report, or Master & Commander. To me, the "look" of these films is just a distraction that keeps one from being "pulled into" the story. They are a constant visual reminder that one is watching a movie.

In the case of SPR, I understand the reasoning why it was done, but to me it just failed in its purpose. In SPR, and Gladiator, every time an action sequence shifted to that strobe-like, grainy, hand-held, 16mm documentary film "look", it pulled me right out of the story and reminded me I was watching a movie.

I think that in all these (and similar films) cases, "art" has overcome common sense film design. Style (has been given dominance) over substance.

Bad (or at the very least, poor) filmmaking, IMHO.

duff beer

Actually on the contrary, Gladiator and SPR gave you the eyes of a regular soldier in the gory and dirty battles.

jaeufraser

Sometimes style is the most effective way to effect atmosphere, mood, and put the audience into the situation. It might not work for everyone, but remember film is a visual medium. I'd hate for people to follow what you call common sense, when this style if anything is great for portraying certain moods and styles, and definately effective in relating a more realistic feel for many films. Granted, film style isn't everything, but I can't fathom dismissing this style of filmmaking completely. Of course, that's my opinion, but I think you'd be hard pressed to find many people who'd agree with the sentiment that the style in SPR and MandC was bad filmmaking. Of course, I don't even recall MandC exhibiting this type of filmmaking either.

duff beer

The "you're there" filming is perfectly OK for war films.