What style/technique/trend in film would you like to see go away?

A

Angelshare1

Well-known member
I'm really getting tired of crane shots. Especially in television. There seems to be a lot of "hey we have a crane/dolly" shots. I remember in Taxi Driver how a subtle dolly shot of the pimp really let us know what Travis was thinking. Now news broadcasts have it. NCIS I think is the worse. I want to jump through the screen and yell at them "it's a friggin interrogation, you're supposed to hold the camera still during intense moments!"

Also the Saving Private Ryan documentary look has kind of played out.
 
Shaky cam without a doubt. If it's used sparingly it can be effective, but it seems to be the crack cocaine of filming techniques. Once a filmmaker starts doing it they can't seem to stop and it just gets abused more and more.
 
romantic comedies. Of all the ones i've had to suffer through, i've yet to see a watchable/good one. Not really a technique but i had to sit through "How do you know" this weekend and am still bitter.
 
To be honest, there are many things I think are overdone...

but I would love to see film break from the bounds of aspect ratio. It's very far fetched to dream, but I'd love to see a big screen medium where we can switch aspect ratios to fit the mood of that scene or that shot. Right now, we pick an aspect and go with it for the entire film... I think that is wrong.

Breaking aspect does not work very well for television, since we have hard edges with pillar or letter boxing, but in theater, where we are all sitting in the dark... I think we can do it. We already suffer through cuts between scenes, time, and places. We can effortlessly go from a super wide establishing to a close up... so why can't we go from an epic wide shot, to a 4:3 shot where our character is now vertically scaled down to emphasis his powerlessness?

Our minds have been conditioned to have 'persistance of vision' between all sorts of filmmaking tricks. I'd love to have an ever changing canvas in regards of dimensions to help emphasis the feeling and mood of the moment.

This stems from frustrations when shooting a 2.40 anamorphic film and suddenly I want to give the character lots of head room to emphasis stature, or to showcase some lovely architecture or vertical frames and I want to show the roof of a cathedral or etc.

It's time we train ourselves to be able to break aspect ratios during a film and not have it break us away from story.

My hope.
 
Ryan Patrick O'Hara said:
To be honest, there are many things I think are overdone...

but I would love to see film break from the bounds of aspect ratio. It's very far fetched to dream, but I'd love to see a big screen medium where we can switch aspect ratios to fit the mood of that scene or that shot. Right now, we pick an aspect and go with it for the entire film... I think that is wrong.

Breaking aspect does not work very well for television, since we have hard edges with pillar or letter boxing
Click to expand...

The only poblem with that is that a good film done like this will go to BR/DVD eventually, a bad film will go straight there if it's lucky.

Honestly, it sounds "different", but I think it would be quite unsettling. You would probably pay more attention to that because it is different rather than the story. I think there are certain things that are like they are for a reason, Ryan. But I definitely agree with you on pushing the envelope and thinking outside the box.
 
I know what you mean.... but to reference history:

The first cuts between scenes was jarring for early film folks. The cutting on action to different angles was jarring for the first people who viewed it. Hell, for early movie goers, trains heading toward the camera made them flinch with unease. Sound was lamented, color was 'distracting', and etc. Many monumental advancements in story telling were first met with doubt, unease, or described as distracting. If you think an audience 40 years ago could deal with the handheld shaky cam we have now, forget it. Same goes with Avatar 3D.... people 50 years ago would have probably fainted in their seats. We, as an audience have evolved to seamlessly overcome jump cuts, cuts between action, cuts between scenes, handheld shake, 'talkies', color, 3D, CGI, and etc. We are still able to progress and find more aspects of story telling which can be accepting without breaking our attention from story.

My point was that we will find it slightly jarring at first, but with a little time, I think it will be something we completely don't think about, such as cutting to different angles within scenes and etc.

Many moves you've already seen do this... not the way I forsee, but close enough. Look at movies like '500 days of summer'. They, at times, break into 4:3 16mm film 'confessionals' and then for some of the movie, split the screen into portions and have different narratives playing at once, for instance the 'expectations versus reality' segement.





sadly this video has some sh*tty commentary which does not allow the sequence to finish, as you would see a clever way to transition between the divided frame to the normal aspect ratio.


also, watching many many pan-and-scan movies on TV, I can tell you that even movies like 500 days of summer with multiple formats (1.20:1, 1.50:1, and 2.35 : 1) are all subject to pan and scan. I'm just saying it will work better in theaters.

Movies and blu-ray's like 'The Dark Knight' bust in and out of aspect ratios for 2.40 anamorphic and the more square 1.44:1 IMAX format. Nobody seemed to complain there. It got me the first time, but that is because I am a cinematographer... otherwise it was flawless and 90% of people didn't notice the change in aspect ratio. If it were more common, I doubt even the trained eyes would be distracted.
 
Last edited:
Ryan Patrick O'Hara said:
To be honest, there are many things I think are overdone...

but I would love to see film break from the bounds of aspect ratio. It's very far fetched to dream, but I'd love to see a big screen medium where we can switch aspect ratios to fit the mood of that scene or that shot. Right now, we pick an aspect and go with it for the entire film... I think that is wrong.

Breaking aspect does not work very well for television, since we have hard edges with pillar or letter boxing, but in theater, where we are all sitting in the dark... I think we can do it. We already suffer through cuts between scenes, time, and places. We can effortlessly go from a super wide establishing to a close up... so why can't we go from an epic wide shot, to a 4:3 shot where our character is now vertically scaled down to emphasis his powerlessness?

Our minds have been conditioned to have 'persistance of vision' between all sorts of filmmaking tricks. I'd love to have an ever changing canvas in regards of dimensions to help emphasis the feeling and mood of the moment.

This stems from frustrations when shooting a 2.40 anamorphic film and suddenly I want to give the character lots of head room to emphasis stature, or to showcase some lovely architecture or vertical frames and I want to show the roof of a cathedral or etc.

It's time we train ourselves to be able to break aspect ratios during a film and not have it break us away from story.

My hope.
Click to expand...

I agree. The overdone aspects are usually done by the less sophisticated I think. Shaky cam is done too death but I would never get rid of it. Like all techniques, I think when used correctly (too convey emotion and visual intent) it works brilliantly.

The Aspect Ratio ? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Interesting thoughts. Like everything else, could be used rather interestingly.

Getting rid of the Crane ? (from the OP)

Watch Hitchcock, De Palma and Tarantino

Now that, is how one uses a Crane.
 
Ryan Patrick O'Hara said:
To be honest, there are many things I think are overdone...

but I would love to see film break from the bounds of aspect ratio. It's very far fetched to dream, but I'd love to see a big screen medium where we can switch aspect ratios to fit the mood of that scene or that shot. Right now, we pick an aspect and go with it for the entire film... I think that is wrong.

Breaking aspect does not work very well for television, since we have hard edges with pillar or letter boxing, but in theater, where we are all sitting in the dark... I think we can do it. We already suffer through cuts between scenes, time, and places. We can effortlessly go from a super wide establishing to a close up... so why can't we go from an epic wide shot, to a 4:3 shot where our character is now vertically scaled down to emphasis his powerlessness?

Our minds have been conditioned to have 'persistance of vision' between all sorts of filmmaking tricks. I'd love to have an ever changing canvas in regards of dimensions to help emphasis the feeling and mood of the moment.

This stems from frustrations when shooting a 2.40 anamorphic film and suddenly I want to give the character lots of head room to emphasis stature, or to showcase some lovely architecture or vertical frames and I want to show the roof of a cathedral or etc.

It's time we train ourselves to be able to break aspect ratios during a film and not have it break us away from story.

My hope.
Click to expand...

GalaxyQuest switched aspect ratios on the fly. Did it brilliantly, too.
 
I'd actually like to see a return to using black & white more often than once or twice a year, if even that on a major release. Of course, if it is appropriate for the subject matter. A film like Avatar would be a horrible use of black & white, but something like Minority Report, which was already very monochromatic. A good example is The Mist. When it was released on video, Frank Darabont included an alternate black & white version on the disc.
 
What style/technique/trend to go away? None IMO.

I say the awful application of style/technique/trends should go away.

It's all about how you use it.
 
Jon Starr said:
What style/technique/trend to go away? None IMO.

I say the awful application of style/technique/trends should go away.

It's all about how you use it.
Click to expand...

Way to sit on the fence Jon Starr!

Jk. I know what you mean, I think that's true for everything... perhaps a better question is what is being used 'wrong' alot?
 
Ryan Patrick O'Hara said:
To be honest, there are many things I think are overdone...

but I would love to see film break from the bounds of aspect ratio. It's very far fetched to dream, but I'd love to see a big screen medium where we can switch aspect ratios to fit the mood of that scene or that shot. Right now, we pick an aspect and go with it for the entire film... I think that is wrong.

Breaking aspect does not work very well for television, since we have hard edges with pillar or letter boxing, but in theater, where we are all sitting in the dark... I think we can do it. We already suffer through cuts between scenes, time, and places. We can effortlessly go from a super wide establishing to a close up... so why can't we go from an epic wide shot, to a 4:3 shot where our character is now vertically scaled down to emphasis his powerlessness?

Our minds have been conditioned to have 'persistance of vision' between all sorts of filmmaking tricks. I'd love to have an ever changing canvas in regards of dimensions to help emphasis the feeling and mood of the moment.

This stems from frustrations when shooting a 2.40 anamorphic film and suddenly I want to give the character lots of head room to emphasis stature, or to showcase some lovely architecture or vertical frames and I want to show the roof of a cathedral or etc.

It's time we train ourselves to be able to break aspect ratios during a film and not have it break us away from story.

My hope.
Click to expand...
Doesn't IMAX do this already?

I'm not sure about digital, but a 35mm projector uses different lenses for every aspect ratio. Switching on film would mean a few seconds black screen.
 
As for the aspec ratio thing:

Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World changes aspec ratios constantly.

It's an interesting notion that I've pondered, and even used to lesser extent in my feature film (which some times has movies-within-the-movie shot in 4:3, windowboxed within the 2.35 ratio a la Boogie Nights) but I don't know if it's something I'd want to see in ever movie.

I agree with Jon that nothing should go away. Every technique is valid. It's just about how it's used. Hacks will always misuse techniques, but everything has its place. I will agree that hand-held is pretty overused now, but it shouldn't go away entirely.
 
Jawa Ex Machina said:
Doesn't IMAX do this already?

I'm not sure about digital, but a 35mm projector uses different lenses for every aspect ratio. Switching on film would mean a few seconds black screen.
Click to expand...
I just realized how stupid this statement was. In my defense, it was written like 7.30am. My hours are still weird after coming back to Europe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top