Filming dialogues - To move or not to move

[David Evans]

This has been on my mind for quite a while. Not so much as a mistery but more of a cinephile curiosity. There are movies like Mystic River, Schindler's List and others that have what it's called a classical direction (reminiscent of the classical Era), where the camera won't shake nor tremble one bit on the close ups and dialogues, and every camera movement is smooth and made only when absolutely necessary. And then there is a huge ammount of other films (I got the idea for this post when watching Angels and Demons a few days ago) that have a very similar kind of approach, only the camera has specific tiny shakes when filming dialogues. It's not remotely enough to make that "Bourne" effect, but it's just enough to make you realize the camera is not still. I wish I had a few videos to show my point, but I'm at work now and I don't have access to any videos. Is this a conscious choice that directors make to have their films look more "modern" as opposed to classical film directing, or just an option to shoot with steadycam operators vs still cameras?

Looking for some thoughts
David

 

[indybones]

mmm yeah I'm kind of in a similar position, not that I'm filming a dialogue scene, but trying to figure out weather the camera should be locked off or not.

I have done various tests where the camera is,
1. Handheld
2. Hand held but on a kind of stabilizer
3. Camera on a tripod but just really subtly moving the camera up and down
4. Recording the footage locked off but then applying shake in post
5. Locked off camera

I still can't work out which seems to fit the overall atmosphere and quality of the short I'm filming. They all seem to have different qualities which in their own way kind of fit.

The handheld produces a lot of energy behind the camera, but this maybe to much energy, the stabilizers seem to work quite well, you get just a little bit of energy and tension but it's not over the top. The locked off produces a static still image, conceptually one may think of that as lacking energy, but strangely although it's lacking energy it has a kind of quiet insidious tension.

I haven't really come up with any answers, but maybe doing some tests might help.

Cheers

Indy

 

[Finnegan]

in my opinion, cam movement should always reflect some artistic intent. that is to say it should never move unless it needs to, and it should need a valid artist reason to need to move. so much can be said about every aspet of the film through camera movement that it is pretentious to move it without reason. personally, I can't stand films that track, pan, tilt, shake, or cant the image unnecessarily because it seems like the filmmaker wants to draw attention to the construction of the film solely for the purpose of deflecting the viewers attention to show that he can.

now, on the other hand, if one were to move the camera unnaturally to draw attention to the construction of the film because, for instance, its a documentary about the subjectivity of truth or some film speculating on audience identification where attentiveness to representation and construction is highly important about how film is studied, then yes, by all means move the cam. I realize that my answer isn't very straight forward but I feel very strongly about camera movement.

 

[daveswan]

Being an old-fashioned sort of bloke, I consider the default state of a cam should be locked off on the most stable support you can afford / have access to.
Any movement from that should be dictated by the artistic intent of the production, but always keeping things simple.
Once camera movements distract the viewer's attention away from the film, it's failed.
I've lost count of the number of times I've nearly been given vertigo by consciously "arty" camera movements that have no merit in themselves.
/rant

 

[Steffo]

You can win a dramatic effect during dialog if there´s no movement in the camera. With a locked close up on the faces you notice tension in every little muscle, eyebrows which frown just a mm, and lips pointing down for less than a second. It enables a more subtile acting