Shakey Camera Action

Zascar

What is it about so many new films that it's like the dam camera man had Parkinsons or something. Even when people are standing still having a conversation the camera is bouncing around. And in any action scene you can barely figure out whats going on the camera is swinging around the place so much.

Last time I was at the cinema I was sitting in the front row and started to feel sick! Does this bug anyone else?

Galvasean

If used sparingly it can add realism to an action scene. However if used with excess at the breakfast table it hurts (I'm looking at you Bourne 3)

Karl Hungus

I despise it. Honestly, it's what ruined the Bourne films for me. Don't get me wrong, I liked them a lot, but the shakeycam just really brought my enjoyment of them down.

I really hope that Hollywood learns to leave this annoying trend behind.

Pigman II

It's the new in thing and I like it a lot. It makes you feel involved in the sequence and the documentary nature of it makes everything look more realistic. Fight sequences were getting too elaborate and choreographed of late and I'm glad Bourne et al came along to drag us back to earth and show us something different but still exciting.

Batman begins uses it too and probably that latest Bond movie (I was too bored to play close enough attention)

Sad Professor

I think it was probably the D-Day sequence in Saving Private Ryan that started this whole shakey-cam craze. Spielberg used it well there but there's really no justification for the way Paul Greengrass uses it, it's just sloppy.

There's a brilliant bit of shakey-cam work in Se7en where the camera chases Brad Pitt down the hallway and down the stairs as he runs after the killer. It really adds to the confusion and intensity of the moment. But the reason it's so effective is because the camera is very still through most of the preceding scene and film.

S.M.B.

Sad Professor wrote: »

I think it was probably the D-Day sequence in Saving Private Ryan that started this whole shakey-cam craze. Spielberg used it well there but there's really no justification for the way Paul Greengrass uses it, it's just sloppy.

There's a brilliant bit of shakey-cam work in Se7en where the camera chases Brad Pitt down the hallway and down the stairs as he runs after the killer. It really adds to the confusion and intensity of the moment. But the reason it's so effective is because the camera is very still through most of the preceding scene and film.

What? Of course there's justification for the way Greengrass uses it.

When done well, it can be very very effective.

sunzz

never noticed it in any of the bourne films, guess i was to engrossed in the move, ie you know i actually watched it...........

IamBeowulf

sunzz wrote: »

never noticed it in any of the bourne films, guess i was to engrossed in the move, ie you know i actually watched it...........

Pardon my bluntness sunzz, but how in Gods name could you not notice the shakey camera? Just take the hand-to-hand battle in the assassins home in Supremacy. The car chase.

Hell, pick any moment. It's excellent to jar the viewer in small doses---make them feel disorientated---but to subject us to 4 hours (Im not counting Bourne 1---the cinematography was much more restrained) of queasifying shakes and rattles and wings is punishable by death. Lucky for Greengrass, everything else about those movies was silky smooth.

S.M.B.

Well Doug Liman did 'Identity' which is the poorer of the three films. Greengrass raised the standard in the following two.

L31mr0d

absolutely hate this type of filming, first seen it used in NYPD: Blue. It actually makes me feel nauseous after watching it for a long time. I didn't watch the 2 sequels to the Bourne Identity in the cinema for this reason, the shakiness with a completely blacked out cinema gave me a headache. I was able to watch them at home though with a little lighting in the room.

I will admit that if done well, with smooth movement of the camera rather than jerky, out of focus and constantly zooming in and out filming, it can add to the film/TV show. An example would be the way dog fights are filmed in BSG. You get the feeling of being in a spaceship with the camera man as hes trying to focus in on the action. In this instance it works very well as it makes the viewer feel they are actually in the battle rather than just being third party to it.

Otacon

'Shaky Cam' when used incorrectly, can be disorientating, confusing and annoying but I think Greengrass has perfected its use.

In Ultimatum, I always knew what was happening in a scene, it felt more real than normal, as if I was in the room as well, and it also added to the atmosphere greatly.

Jello

When it's done well and used sparingly I think it can be very effective, but Greengrass does overdo it - it was the one drawback from the otherwise excellent Bourne films.

Cloverfield looks like it will be hard to watch because of this. I know it's supposed to look like it was filmed by someone 'who was there' but I don't think you'd want to go near a cinema showing it if you suffer with vertigo.

I love Shakey-cam when its used correctly. I always get so much more involved in the movie.

Best Shakey-Cam movies:
Blairwitch Project
Children of Men
Saving Private Ryan

cashback

Yeah, it also did a lot to put me off the third Bourne. Even though i thought it was a good film, I had to look away every now and then. Diuring that fight in the bathroom, I had no idea what was going on.

CrazyTalk

I thought the bathroom fight in Bourne 3 was a step above the house fight in the second one, it was still very energetic but it was a lot clearer.

I have to say, though, that some of the scenes in that movie, a lot of the pivotal dialogue moments in that movie were almost ruined by half the screen showing nothing but the background or someones shoulder, with the focal point or that character in question being missing. Totally unneeded

robby^5

I think it looks a whole lot better on small screen, in cinemas it can get confusing with such a big image shaking about.

I thought the shaky cam in transformers ruined a lot of the action scenes, specifically Optimus/Megatron (not that you see much of it anyway for some rewason)

MisterAnarchy

S.M.B. wrote: »

Well Doug Liman did 'Identity' which is the poorer of the three films. Greengrass raised the standard in the following two.

Thats open to opinion.
I thought Identity was the best film of the trilogy followed closely by Supremacy.
I didnt rate the third film at all.
The handy cam shots are very useful when used in the correct scenarios and in moderation.
Battlestar Galactica is a very good example of excellent handy cam usage .

Jazzy

its wat directors do to create tension in a scene as they are too poor at their job to do it any other way. its a farce really, overused and generally there to hide the fact that the script is poor anyway

senordingdong

I also immensly dislike it.
As mentioned, it takes away from the films enjoyment for me.

Fenster

It worked very well in Children of Men; there are moments when you feel like the cameraman is running for his life, which really adds to the immersion.

Podge_irl

I can't stand it. But then, I've always seen films as someone telling a story rather then me being in the story, so all a shakey cam does is confuse the crap out of me and leave me not knowing whats going on.

fillefatale

I felt it was used slightly too excessively in 'Two Days in Paris' - I suppose it was for that realistic, following day-to-day life sort of feel.

junkmail99723

I would like to see a shaky camera rating added to the many other ratings that are attached to films these days. Maybe something like 40% of film is random motion. Then maybe I wouldnt waste my time and/money to watch these films.

Mackman

Argh shakey cam!! I ****ing hate it!! Totally overused, and improperly used. Someone mentioned se7en earlier, it works well in situations like that, or in the beach scene Saving Private Ryan But having the camera moving about while two characters are talking is rediculous.

It just shows to me the inability of the director/cinematographer to frame a good shot. Or the fact that whats happening is just plain boring so the move the camera about.
Over used in Bourne movies too. Action movies dont need that ****, look at Die Hard or The Matrix FFS.
:mad::mad:

*goes to ranting and raving forum*

Edit: Realism my bollix, i dont stand there moving my head all over the place.

Now im done.

bnt

Black Swan has a lot of ShakyCam too. I don't find it too objectionable if used in moderation and it suits the scene (e.g. action). What really bugs me is when cameramen try to make normal scenes "edgy" by this and other "fake amateurism" gimmicks, such as sudden zooms or jerks of the camera, or bizarre camera angles. I don't want to see an extreme zoom up someone's nostrils, thank you very much. :eek:

Phony Scott

Jazzy wrote: »

[...]generally there to hide the fact that the script is poor anyway

...like how I felt with 'Saving Private Ryan'. The camera was all over the shop and I really felt sucked in to the opening D-day landings. Then the shaking stopped and the 'plot' started. And I was so bored at how bad the 'plot' was.