what happened to locked down shots?

how old are you?

the easiest way to determine whether any art form is truly modern is to find out if it gives old folks a headache.

Fincher is brilliant, but keep it on the down low or I have to start a thread on

"what happened to hollywood lighting"

PS - not all people age at the same rate
 
Fincher once said
"People will say, 'There are a million ways to shoot a scene,' but I don't think so. I think there're two, maybe. And the other one is wrong."
I think that is a good way to look at it because it simplifies things and gets you to the root of the question as a director or cinematographer. He may not be right, but it's a starting point.

>

Red One Camera Rental
 
Leo Versola said:
When it's overdone, it can be excruciating to watch. For me, it's almost unbearable to watch any episode of 'The Office' because of the incessant camera movement and even worse, again at least for me, the constant zooming...
Click to expand...

Actually, I don't mind it in THE OFFICE, because it's intended to have the look of a documentary/reality show, where the camera operator is catching stuff as it is actually happening (vs. scenes acted out from a script).

On the other hand, I watched an episode of NCIS the other night, and I wanted to scream "HOLD THAT BLEEPING CAMERA STILL!" Every single shot--and I mean EVERY ONE--had movement in it. I couldn't focus on the story at all, because I was being distracted by camera movement that had no purpose whatsoever but to show off that the director was being "cool" and/or trendy. Ick. I sure hope this fad passes quickly.
 
I read though this thread a few days ago. Then last night I watched Zodiac and I couldn't help but notice the fact that so many of the shots were locked down, and so many looked fantastic.

Fincher is one of my favorite directors and it speaks volumes when a talented guy like him vogues for lock-downs. If someone doesn't speak up, pretty soon every movie is going to look like Cloverfield and Blair Witch.
 
Moving the camera provides eye candy, which is good, it should be done, but not for no reason. Find ways to motivate the camera movement. It's much more powerful that way.
 
I know this is an old thread but I stumbled on it randomly and just had to say this... One of my favorite concert films of all time has some of the best 'lock down' shots of all time.. The Rolling Stones - Live At The Max. Its a very dated film that was made for the Imax cinemas, and there are large sections that take place on ONE camera, with minimal cuts... IE: Keith Richard's solo on Happy... One camera, all the way through, and beautiful. They will actually hold a wide shot for... gasp... 15 seconds!!! Amazing!

I'm hoping The Stones live in Texas 1978 will far surpass this...
 
It can be good. If talking about weight of a shot, the juxtaposition of a locked off shot in an array of moving shots can carry more visual meaning than a locked off shot among other locked off shots. The more disproportionate something is, the more it will stand out either consciously or unconsciously.

I'm not defending the practice of always moving the camera, but when I see it being done, and then all of a sudden a static moment... I really notice it! Can be used to heighten tension or reveal inner peace... among a thousand other effects depending on context.

The same goes for films with all static shots.... if you suddenly start to move the camera, that movement has more meaning because it's not been there before.

I love cinema.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top