Modern Action movies

[KrangPrime]

So,

I'm watching Civil War again on Demand. Perhaps the only GOOD summer blockbuster of the season.

But the one thing that I Have ae problem with, is a problem with most modern action movies. The CUTS ARE TOO DARN FAST!

When the action zooms by in less than 30 frames, your eye doesn't have time to focus and attention on the detail as much..I tend to think, at least.

I realize people of today tend to like faster paced stuff, and don't have time for environment and feel..... But I kind of miss the older, slower action movies where things where a little easier to follow..

Am I the only one?

 

[Malphas]

You're not alone. I don't think fast cuts make it fast paced. You can film someone walking down a hallway with the same style of cuts but it doesn't mean anything is actually happening. Look at Escape From New York. It is classified as an action movie but it is pretty slow, in a good way.

I have the same problem with fight scenes. I have a hard time making out who's doing what to who. I just want the camera to back up a bit and hold steady. A lot of movie fights are like two cats fighting in a small box with a camera thrown in there. You see a lot of movement but that's about it.

EDIT* Remember that GIF of the Falcon from TFA where it's flying, flipping, diving, and the camera is spinning around it. Someone edited it to look like a more traditional shot where it swoops down to the planet surface and I think looked better. I was oriented on what was happening.

 

[batguy]

Car chases have gotten really bad about this too.

 

[Solos blaster]

My 2nd biggest gripe of the bayformers films is the cuts as well as the "too closed in" shots during the you know....gigantic...robots fighting.

 

[NeoRutty]

You can cut fast if you know what you're doing...

I learned A LOT from this vid...

Your brain can keep up with any action if it's framed correctly...

 

[NeoRutty]

EDIT* Remember that GIF of the Falcon from TFA where it's flying, flipping, diving, and the camera is spinning around it. Someone edited it to look like a more traditional shot where it swoops down to the planet surface and I think looked better. I was oriented on what was happening.

That's a weird shot in that some hate it, and some love it.

We watched that first trailer in the theater at work and must have put that scene on over and over... we applauded the first time. It's such a great shot... the fact it reads so well is a testament to the talent working on it...

BUT... then after watching it a dozen times I got online and as many people that loved that shot, there were just as many that hated it. Watched people "fixing it" and taking the life out of it.

So subjective

 

[PoopaPapaPalps]

You can cut fast if you know what you're doing...

I learned A LOT from this vid...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CR7ejkmf8Y4

Your brain can keep up with any action if it's framed correctly...

Just get someone to helm a film that knows what they're doing and with a clear and succinct vision and all will be gravy. After seeing Fury Road, I really changed my belief in current films, where I thought previously a bunch of factors either makes or breaks a movie, but now, I'm of a starker thought: either they got it or they ain't and a lot of filmmakers currently just ain't got it.

 

[NeoRutty]

http://67.media.tumblr.com/019ea5f57791a0cbb2540bb6b96cc60d/tumblr_nqevmadxCy1r3ftwpo1_540.gif


Just get someone to helm a film that knows what they're doing and with a clear and succinct vision and all will be gravy. After seeing Fury Road, I really changed my belief in current films, where I thought previously a bunch of factors either makes or breaks a movie, but now, I'm of a starker thought: either they got it or they ain't and a lot of filmmakers currently just ain't got it.

Mad Max deserves all the praise it's been given... I've watched it over and over... it's the real deal.

 

[batguy]

That's a weird shot in that some hate it, and some love it.

We watched that first trailer in the theater at work and must have put that scene on over and over... we applauded the first time. It's such a great shot... the fact it reads so well is a testament to the talent working on it...

BUT... then after watching it a dozen times I got online and as many people that loved that shot, there were just as many that hated it. Watched people "fixing it" and taking the life out of it.

So subjective

The emotional context within the movie is a factor. Lots of shots seem rough or wrong when viewed alone but they are great in the rolling footage.

Just get someone to helm a film that knows what they're doing and with a clear and succinct vision and all will be gravy. After seeing Fury Road, I really changed my belief in current films, where I thought previously a bunch of factors either makes or breaks a movie, but now, I'm of a starker thought: either they got it or they ain't and a lot of filmmakers currently just ain't got it.

Totally agree.

So many modern filmmakers seem to operate as if cinematography began as an art form in the 2000s. They seem to think more "intense" (frenetic & incomprehensible) is always better.

The concept of shooting things differently for a theater versus TV screen has been totally lost. Its partly because TV screens have grown larger but partly because filmmakers don't even think about it.

 

[kialna]

Agreed with a lot of the things said here. I may be a minority in this, but I can't watch the Christopher Nolan batman triology due to bad cinematography. Half of the time, there's unnecessary camera shaking, and in close-up dialogue, the field of depth is so small, Morgan Freeman's nose is out of focus, his eyes are, and his hair and ears are not. (one of the scenes I remember most vividly) I was so annoyed by it that I just can't enjoy those films, while they're critically acclaimed and loved by a lot of people...

Film making is subjective, an art. But being paid for it doesn't mean you're 'good' at it. It just means there's a market for it. Watching films is subjective too, interpreting, enjoying and registering the film in your mind as either good or bad.

People hated Star Trek into Darkness. Storywise; I can't argue with that, because it's full of plotholes. When it comes to the visuals however, I was definitely sucked into that 'world' with good costumes and props. I felt the direction was not too bad and not 'too fast' cut, to keep it with the topic. There are not too many fight scenes, but the ones that are, seem rather stabilised.

Mad Max Fury Road, as hailed in this topic, is amazingly well done. V for Vendetta is also a rather nice film with plenty of action, but not super extremely cut. But all of this makes me curious for Marvel's newest flick: Doctor Strange. Scott Derrickson has only filmed horror flicks so far and is not always well-received. However, when I see the trailer for Doctor Strange, it doesn't discourage me, and there's a shot visible where Strange and Kacaellius (Spelling) are fighting in the corner while the world around them 'rebuilds' itself, rather than up-close-shots of fists in faces. I wonder how he'll do in the superhero/action genre, as horror usually builds on suspence rather than fast-pacing...

 

[astroboy]

It was very clear that christopher nolan doesn't know how to do a fight scene. He can come up with an impressive staging ground, but not the actual combat. Abrams is the same way.

So they compensate by using closeups and fast cuts...

I was one of the people who hated that shaky cam shot of the falcon. For me, that type of shaky-cam works well in a monster movie, when you are supposed to feel like a spectator, being blown away from the action you are watching.

But the great thing about Star wars is that it was like a fairy tale, bringing you into the adventure. That's why the POV shot from the falcon cockpit was perfect. In fact, I would say that it's one if the greatest moments in film making. In Star wars, we immerse ourselves into the adventure, on the speeder bike, in the death star trench, escaping the space slug and shooting TIE's from the quad cannon. We fly our snow speeder between the legs of the AT AT.

 

[Augh]

Guy I'm a big fan of helped me to understand the underlying problem that's been infesting recent offerings, he laid it out in a very easy to follow manner in the following video much better than I ever could;

Yeah, the subject is action comedy, but check the latter half of the video, where he and Chan between them explain the problem of fast cutting on hits in fight scenes. You end up with a couple of people flailing around next to each other with very little sense of impact, coherence or rhythm. Rhythm is definitely a large part of it, which goes out the window with a lot of frenetic cutting. Visual language and spatial coherence dissolve and you end up with just visual noise. Bay is definitely the crown prince of doing this completely wrong, especially when you combine it with an affinity for shaky cameras, random changes of direction, zooms and close-ups which eliminate proper framing, etc.

Another example from the same guy of a philosophy of coherent framing and cutting from one of the best who ever did it (Kurosawa);

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doaQC-S8de8

I'm sure the audience here of all places are able to see how these both directly relate to the specific problem of action scenes in recent movies, though especially the latter video is more concerned with a broader view of framing, cutting and composing in general.

Seems to me the current and recent offerings need to calm down, take their time, respect the flow of the scene as a whole, and most importantly; K.I.S.S.

 

[Laspector]

In Batman Begins, I actually liked the way the fighting was staged. This being Batman's first appearance (in world) people weren't supposed to know what or who Batman was or what he really looked like. It gave it the feeling of "what was that, what is this bat thing, what am I seeing?" At least that's the way I took it. It seemed intentional to me.

 

[astroboy]

I have to say, I think Daredevil has done a REALLY good job with their fight scenes. They rarely get repetitive and each one is directed to tailor to the setting and purpose of the fight.

 

[Laspector]

Totally agree. Daredevil has some great stuff!!

 

[airair]

Nolan's fight scenes aren't filmed very good, but then again there weren't many direct combat scenes in his Batman Trilogy. I think he should have hired a Chinese or Hong Kong specialist to deal with them, would have helped greatly.

The fast shaky cuts in The Dark Knight were a bit annoying. The scenes in The Dark Knight Rises were a bit better. Everything else by Nolan is majestic, partly because of Wally Pfister's cinematography in most of his movies, and I love the way he used IMAX, the proper way to make a movie a spectacle.

It seems the trend started in the early 2000s with The Bourne movies, fast shaky cam, and choppy cuts to denote action and since then its been the norm, with the exception of a few.

Maybe the trend might change soon.

 

[airair]

Guy I'm a big fan of helped me to understand the underlying problem that's been infesting recent offerings, he laid it out in a very easy to follow manner in the following video much better than I ever could;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1PCtIaM_GQ

Yeah, the subject is action comedy, but check the latter half of the video, where he and Chan between them explain the problem of fast cutting on hits in fight scenes. You end up with a couple of people flailing around next to each other with very little sense of impact, coherence or rhythm. Rhythm is definitely a large part of it, which goes out the window with a lot of frenetic cutting. Visual language and spatial coherence dissolve and you end up with just visual noise. Bay is definitely the crown prince of doing this completely wrong, especially when you combine it with an affinity for shaky cameras, random changes of direction, zooms and close-ups which eliminate proper framing, etc.

Another example from the same guy of a philosophy of coherent framing and cutting from one of the best who ever did it (Kurosawa);

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doaQC-S8de8

I'm sure the audience here of all places are able to see how these both directly relate to the specific problem of action scenes in recent movies, though especially the latter video is more concerned with a broader view of framing, cutting and composing in general.

Seems to me the current and recent offerings need to calm down, take their time, respect the flow of the scene as a whole, and most importantly; K.I.S.S.

Brilliant video. Jackie is a genius. No wonder his work is timeless.
And they are right about the Expendables action scenes. Some of the fight scenes were atrocious, in particular the first movie and second movie.

 

[Malphas]

Haven't seen it in years but I would take the hammer scene from Oldboy to any Nolan Batman fight. People get tired, they don't really want to be there v.s. that Batman nightclub jumbled mess.

 

[PoopaPapaPalps]

@Augh - I've been following that guy for some time now and, as a film fan, they really sum up the language of film-form in easy-to-digest bits. His recent video talking about the music in the Marvel films extend to something he touches on in his other videos which pertain to this thread regarding modern action films: so much of them are safe. They have to be inoffensive and appeal to a broad market so they all pluck the lowest hanging fruit and regurgitate the lowest common denominator that worked in other safe, monotonous films.

- - - Updated - - -

Haven't seen it in years but I would take the hammer scene from Oldboy to any Nolan Batman fight. People get tired, they don't really want to be there v.s. that Batman nightclub jumbled mess.

I think anyone with any taste would; the Vengeance films were directed by a modern master and were meant to be savored.

 

[astroboy]

Then there's that great jail fight scene with punisher

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk