Shakey Cam Poll

senordingdong

So this is a topic that seems to be getting debated heavily in the threads for just about every major production nowadays and just wanted to see where we all stand on it. Personally, I hate it at this stage.
When the phenominon first started, I didn't mind it, though found it abit strange and mildly interefering.
But now, I see many scenes from films as recent as the Bourne Ultimatum and 28 Weeks Later being ruined because of it. It truely has been taken too far.
I cant comprehend how anyone could enjoy it or worse, defend it and would love for someone to explain to me why they love it.

So what are everyone's thoughts on this?

humanji

There are times when it's useful and fits in, but there are too many films that use it non-stop and it just hurts my head. That and the crazy MTV quick-cuts that don't let you focus on anything for more than a split second, are used all too much these days.

Vegeta

if it is intended to be the view through a characters eyes i.e. a first person perspective then i'd expect some mild camera movement but I am not a fan of shaking the camer needlessly to try and create a sense of panic/chaos/mayhem

Transformers had a bit of this also, together with the transformers themselves being way too detailed I feel it took away from the action rather than add to it

sham69

hate that shaky cam, it ruined the fight scenes in all the bourne movies.

Rhyme

The shaky-cam effects name is being ruined by bad examples while some films do manage it really well. For every Children of Men you have 3 or 4 horrible examples.

It might just become the newest Bullet-Time.

Gillie

Can't vote on this as the option "it depends on the movie" isn't there.
Some movies it suits. Some it doesn't.

Blair Witch was so effective because of it.
Others movies suffered though!

BlitzKrieg

Shakey Cam works great when it matches the aesthetic and structure of the film.

usually this aesthetic is that the entire film was shot in a hands on style, much in the way Children of Men was shot.

But if a film goes from pans from cameras on cranes and dolly shots to sudden shakey camera (such as that *1* battle scene in letters from iwo Jima) Its highly distracting and breaks the films flow.

its very difficult to go from epic shooting style to shaky cam convincingly its quite hard.

The Bourne Ultimatum I had no problem with the shakey cam, because for the most part the film was shot with a very much hands on style, which helped to emphasize the atmosphere of the film.

senordingdong

True but Balir Witch was not nearly as extreme as the more modern renditions....and that was being filmed on hand held recorders anyway.

I don't recall it being anyy more bearable in Children of Men then I did in 28 Weeks Later.

Galvasean

I like it in action scenes but not at the breakfast table (hear that Bourne?).

The poll is a bit too "all-or-nothing" for me. When its done right, it can be an effective tool for creating atmosphere, but when its overused (see Bourne Ultimatum) it makes me feel dizzy and it annoys me.

Like I said in the other thread, a healthy balance is needed.

senordingdong

I'm going for all or nothing since that seems to be the way the industry does it now.

Wacker

I too did not like the way the question was out. Basically, a shaky camera om it's own doesn't bother me; once all the actionn is in the shot, you'll be able to figure out what is going on, and I think it does add a bit of drama and discord. I thought it was fine in Bourne, for example.

As said above by Humanji, it is only really bad when combined with quick cuts. Batman Begins (which I loved) was terrible for that. The scene where he takes on the drug smugglers at the docks was ludicrous; I could barely make out one thing that was happeniing.

Duggy747

To me only a few movies make the Shaky Cam work because it works with the structure of the film. But like Rhyme said, it's pretty much the new bullet-time, as in everyone is doing it. They're trying to create a more realistic feel to it or it's been viewed through your eyes as if you were there in the scene (I don't think I shake and zoom into people's faces that much, do I? )

But honestly, I find it annoying as I like to immerse myself in scenes, taking in detail rather than having to keep up with the camera. I agree as well with the dolly to shakey cam technique to be a brutal choice as it distracts you away from what's actually happening. E.g. a lot of car chase sequences where you should be focusing on a particular car but can't because the cameraman is having a violent epileptic fit! I couldn't make head nor tail out of some of the fight sequences in Transformers, just a mish-mash of colour and metal.

Creature

I wouldn't say that I love the style, but I certainly enjoyed it for The Bourne Ultimatum and Children of Men, actually I'd say it definitely added to my enjoyment of those films. I suppose it depends on the type of film and how well its carried out, I can easily see it going over the top by overuse.

Wagon

The shaky camera style works well if its a film that's more dramatic and focuses on drama and horror, adds uncertainty to the whole thing espicially if the film has already sucked you into the plot.
However, when it's a mindless, fun action movie or fight scene and the camera is shaking all over the place, that irritates me. Makes the movie look cheap and highlights the laziness of the director and production team who couldn't be arsed puttign a bit more effort into special effects. It takes the piss out of the audience, requiring you to imagine what's really happening. In an action movie I want to see someone get shot and have their arms blown off with a well placed grenade from the headlight of a car and I want to SEE IT WITH MY EYES.
I voted yes, but only in the right envoirnment.

L31mr0d

can't stand it at all... the first time I noticed it was when watching an episode of NYPD Blue years ago and I wished it a quick painfull death. It has since slowly seeped it's way into more movies than I can number. I understand WHY they are doing it, to create a sense of energy and confusion and try to immerse the viewer in the scene as if they where there, but I don't like it.

This will really come down to what kind of viewer you are. Those who don't want it are the people who like to view what is happening in a movie from a 3rd persons perspective, those who do like to view a movie from a first persons perspective.

Of all the times i've seen it, i've never liked it except for the dogfights in battlestar galactica, I think because they are set in space the camera movements are a lot less jerky but still protray a sense of realism as if somebody where actually filming the fight as it unfolds.

The Freeman

i think if it is used to desired effect it can add something to a film(very few imo) ultimatium, children of men are the titles that come to mind

second bourne was too much of it to be honest and ya couldn't make out the fight in your man's kitchen in germany at all, if you make comparisson to the first bourne fights you can make all the hits out and the director didn 't seem like he was a bad reporter in the ring of a u.f.c. fight


transformers fights were ridiculous with the zooming in-out, shaking around and stuff was pathetic, maybe if greengrass shot transformers we might have worked out the fights i little bit more(like ultimatium not supremacy)

galactus

Man on Fire is another ruined by the over-use of the shaky cam.

Mind you my pet peeve is "fade to black" in trailers.

S.M.B.

I think it works great when done well.

Bourne Ulitmatum wouldn't be half the film it is if it was shot in a different style. I've never seen a film before with such a fast pace and a lot of this was due to the frantic camera work.

Mr. K

Generally, I enjoy the style. In fact, I can only think of one scene where it actually irritated me, from the Bourne Ultimatum. The scene in question is where Bourne is talking to Marie's brother, near the start. The shakey camera was rather distracting throughout this scene. It could be argued that the camera helped the viewer get a sense of Bourne's emotional turmoil, but it was just too much!