what happened to locked down shots?

armisiano said:
I actually became motion sick during Cloverfield and almost threw up several times. I had to frequently close my eyes and just listen to what was happening. The Bourne Identity didn't bother me at all, but I remember the Bourne Supremacy causing a little bit of dizziness and because of that I never even saw the third one.
Click to expand...

Experiencing Cinema shouldn't require barf bags.

Dan
 
armisiano said:
I actually became motion sick during Cloverfield and almost threw up several times. I had to frequently close my eyes and just listen to what was happening. The Bourne Identity didn't bother me at all, but I remember the Bourne Supremacy causing a little bit of dizziness and because of that I never even saw the third one.
Click to expand...

Cloverfield nauseated me as well. Thankfully not to the point of its full manifestation.

Bourne Identity was minimally shakycam (relatively). Identity ratcheted it up a lot, and Ultimatum went way over the top. Not *quite* as bad as Cloverfield IMO, but close. Enough to really spoil it for me, that's for sure.

So...if I were you I'd just skip it altogether. Shame, huh?
 
the first Bourne was not directed by Greengrass. Interestingly Spielberg preferred the 3rd - praising Greengrass fulsomely, describing it as "modern" cinema, and explaining his own films were more "old-fashioned"
 
"Modern" cinema, huh? How about 80s TV commercial like cinema. Just 'cause he makes great films doesn't mean he has the final word. Other great directors would disagree with him.
 
In Bourne Ultimatum, if they would have just used that a little during the fight and rooftop chase, it would have been effective but the fact that use it throughout the film just gives me a headache, I have never wanted to leave a movie so badly but all of the friends I was with wanted to finish it so I did. Mostly with eyes closed.

Dan
 
the locked down shot is increasingly avoided in high budget contemporary production - how long until that aesthetic filters down to budget productions?

excepting hand-held, what alternatives are available to the run and gun shooter?
 
A wheelchair is a good option, famously used by Robert Rodriguez. Although I'm not sure if that is run'n'gun but close enough. Steadicam is out there too.
 
As per my previous post, I contend that it's the other way around. Shakycam made it's way into mainstream film. Beginners take the easy way and just follow the action handheld and don't have to worry about composition, blocking, breaking out the scene blah blah.
Some contemporary films equate swish pans with action and many moviegoers have fallen for it.

When I was a kid (in the sixties) I noticed that there was a difference between home movies and theatrical films. I figured out what the differing elements were and a big factor was that the pros used tripods.
When I got to film school I already knew a lot about making good imagery. I mostly had to learn the terminology. I found that many of my peers would ask me to man the camera for their productions.

Shakycam is just a copout.
 
Let's not generalize. Shakycam is a copout...sometimes. But often it also does make things more exciting. Some also like to call handheld "organic" but I do not like that word.
 
Just re-watched Pan's Labyrinth. (Liked it much more the second time.) Anyhow, the camera NEVER stops moving. Every single shot is a floating jib arm. And it really is quite beautiful.
 
Exactly Sean - If you are not looking for it you may not even notice it - the same is true of the vast majority of Hollywood movies.

The whole "justification" logic is reversed. Locked down shots now appear as an aesthetic statement: don't use them unless they are motivated, or you don't have the budget to do otherwise.
 
I would definitely not put floating jib moves in the same category as shakycam. You might say that jib, steadicam, dolly shots are "mobile lockdowns".
 
jimpatro said:
I would definitely not put floating jib moves in the same category as shakycam. You might say that jib, steadicam, dolly shots are "mobile lockdowns".
Click to expand...
You can argue handheld by itself isn't always "shackycam" either. Documentary style like used in Schindler's List never really seems to bother anyone, or Jaws, which was shot largely handheld specifically so that it didn't make the audience throw up. (Due to a rotating horizon like they would've had if they'd shot on a tripod. That's more of any exception for shooting on water, granted.)

pwyll said:
The whole "justification" logic is reversed. Locked down shots now appear as an aesthetic statement: don't use them unless they are motivated, or you don't have the budget to do otherwise.
Click to expand...
I've noticed this as well, and I think it can work equally well. I remember in one movie (can't remember which, it was a while ago) where the camera was on a steadicam constantly moving around two characters as they argued about something and right at the climax, the camera stopped moving on a CU of a character's face. The lack a movement had just as much weight as if they'd kept the camera still and then moved in right at that moment, just a different effect was achieved for the rest of the scene.
 
Last edited:
Ted Spencer said:
Haven't seen it, but I agree. If the *desired* effect is a chaotic, bumpy, inside-of-the-washing-machine effect, then yeah. Grab that camera by the horns and let 'er rip. But only while that effect is called for, which almost certainly should not be the entire film.

Bourne Ultimatum-style relentless shakycam, even in simple, otherwise calm dialog 2-shots for heaven's sake, seems to me to be an almost pure example of filmmakers' conceit.

Barf...

Literally...
Click to expand...


Maybe you noticed as I did in the most recent Bourne that the over the shoulders were so sickeningly zoomed that the shoulder was just a massive black block of blur. Its like taking candy, wrapping it in more candy, melting all that candy and then building a candy mountain. Too much candy but they made a mint....
 
the billion dollar Bourne franchise speaks for itself.

But why Greengrass? Answer: Bloody Sunday.

Before Bloody Sunday Greengrass worked in low-budget TV. After he was flooded with multi-million dollar offers - Bourne, Flight 93, Emerald City etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top