Movie Magic: Why rock your camera?

[CB2001]

Re: Movie Magic, why rock your camera?

Normally, tilting a camera (or dutch angle) often helps in conveying an unbalanced feeling (the same is true with rocking the camera back and forth, which gives the physical appearance of things shifting). From what I've been told by one of my teachers at film school, just tilting the camera slightly makes an image a little bit more interesting.

 

[DarkHelmet]

Re: Movie Magic, why rock your camera?

But it can be misused.

Just lock the camera down and let the actors do their thing. That is more powerful than a camera move or angle.

 

[CB2001]

Re: Movie Magic, why rock your camera?

But it can be misused.

Just lock the camera down and let the actors do their thing. That is more powerful than a camera move or angle.

True, but when it comes to a film, it's not JUST the actors. The camera is a character. A camera can have a personality. And the camera helps in telling the story through composition and movement. It helps in showing the emotion a character goes through (look at the "Vertigo" effect in "Jaws" when Brody watches the shark attack in person, which conveys the realization that the threat of a shark attack is truly real) and often invoke a feeling or response in the audience before the characters do (like how we see Michael Myers fading in from the dark just moments before he attacks Laurie in John Carpenter's Halloween).

The director and the cinematographer both make the camera movements to help tell the story. To quote David Mamet about the camera in his book On Directing: "Most American directors approach it by saying, "let's follow the actors around," as if the film were a record of what the protagonists did. Now, if the film is a record of what the protagonist does, it had better be interesting."

If it was just about allowing the actors to do their thing, it'd be a stage play, not a film. It would all be stationary shots, there'd be no movement and at eye level. Does the tilting get abused? Yes. But the same argument can be made about every single type of shot that has ever been pulled off in film and television history. If a director chooses to have that kind of shot, he chose it for a reason.

My point is its not just about the actors. The camera, the audio, the lighting, acting, directing, writing and editing are all equally important.

 

[JMChladek]

Re: Movie Magic, why rock your camera?

That dutch angle trick they used in the Trek episode "Wink of an Eye" when you had scenes where the action was going on between the people who were moving at a very fast rate. It did get a bit odd though when Spock drank the agent that caused it and you saw the room angle right in front of you (and kind of took me out of the moment).

In camera tricks I've always liked, such as the hallway scene in TWOK where Kirk and Spock are dialoging in the background and the foreground has a miniature in it to make the room bigger and more interesting. The diopter shots (I think that is what they were called) where you could have a camera focused on both an actor in the foreground and one in the background by using two smaller lenses where they would be recombined in the main lens worked well also (as in ST:TMP). I am also wondering how Stanley Kubrick pulled off the scene in 2001 where one astronaut is standing on a floor in the background and another is standing at a 90 degree angle and has to look up at the camera before climbing into a seat. I am thinking it was likely done with a couple mirrors and shot real action as opposed to being an optical composite or screen projection in the scene. But it is really hard to tell.

 

[SSgt Burton]

Re: Movie Magic, why rock your camera?

The diopter shots (I think that is what they were called) where you could have a camera focused on both an actor in the foreground and one in the background by using two smaller lenses where they would be recombined in the main lens worked well also (as in ST:TMP).

There was a similar shot (though not achieved the same way) in Conan the Barbarian near the end before the final battle in the mounds-

The shot is over Subotai's shoulder looking at Thusa Doom's army riding in the great distance, yet both Subotai and the riders are in focus. In the commentary Milius said the cinematographer had to refer to his little black book on how to do the shot, and that they had to place the camera waaaaaaay behind Gerry Lopez (Subotai) and use a long lens.


Kevin

 

[DarkHelmet]

Re: Movie Magic, why rock your camera?

True, but when it comes to a film, it's not JUST the actors. The camera is a character. A camera can have a personality. And the camera helps in telling the story through composition and movement. It helps in showing the emotion a character goes through (look at the "Vertigo" effect in "Jaws" when Brody watches the shark attack in person, which conveys the realization that the threat of a shark attack is truly real) and often invoke a feeling or response in the audience before the characters do (like how we see Michael Myers fading in from the dark just moments before he attacks Laurie in John Carpenter's Halloween).

The director and the cinematographer both make the camera movements to help tell the story. To quote David Mamet about the camera in his book On Directing: "Most American directors approach it by saying, "let's follow the actors around," as if the film were a record of what the protagonists did. Now, if the film is a record of what the protagonist does, it had better be interesting."

If it was just about allowing the actors to do their thing, it'd be a stage play, not a film. It would all be stationary shots, there'd be no movement and at eye level. Does the tilting get abused? Yes. But the same argument can be made about every single type of shot that has ever been pulled off in film and television history. If a director chooses to have that kind of shot, he chose it for a reason.

My point is its not just about the actors. The camera, the audio, the lighting, acting, directing, writing and editing are all equally important.

Preaching to the choir

Yes, SOME camera moves can add dramatic effect, but it is the actor(s) who pull the emotion. The dolly zoom shot you mention is a good example, but it has to be used gently. I personally won't ever use it because it's been done to death. It was cool the first time around, but not anymore.

I love subtle camera moves and Spielberg is master at them. He uses a lot of push in's and pull outs very, very successfully. When other directors will use multiple cuts within a sequence, Spielberg will use camera moves within the scene to move us to the next scene. Every single camera move must serve a purpose, otherwise it's distracting and amateurish. Don't zoom unless you are zooming to something. Don't pan unless you are following something. Your job as a cinematographer is to support the actors and their action (if any) and the vision of the director. It's not our show. Good actors draw a lot of emotion to act, and it's draining on them. To distract from that is a crime in my book.

Paint your canvas within the frame. That's the job of a cinematographer.

A slow push in does more for me than a dolly zoom, or dutch angle. This style of MTV cinematography drives me nuts but I don't see it going away anytime soon. :unsure

 

[Bloop]

Re: Movie Magic, why rock your camera?

I get bothered by unnecessary camera movements too. Overuse of shaky cam, snap zooms, frequent quick pans back and forth all take me out of a movie rather than help me get into the story, which I assume the movie makers want. Snap zooms in particular have started bothering me even more than the shaky cam stuff. Like in the movie "Unstoppable," Tony Scott kept snap-zooming all over the place, trying to make things seem intense even when the scene didn't merit it. It's also used a lot in sfx shots, trying to make things look more "real" by making the camera look less mechanical.
It also bugs me when I see those things pop up in talking head interviews and other non-fiction stuff. It's people trying to emulate movies and misusing camera tricks to try to create interest where there is none.

 

[Contec]

Re: Movie Magic, why rock your camera?

But it can be misused.

Just lock the camera down and let the actors do their thing. That is more powerful than a camera move or angle.

Sergio Leone is the GOD
Some films are very POWERFUL thanks to the locked camera.. Just look at the Good bad and ugly.. minimal movement only the Cuts make it intense
YouTube - ‪The Good, the Bad & the Ugly Finale‬‏

and the for a few dollars more final duel
YouTube - ‪For A Few Dollars More - Final Duel‬‏

The music also plays a huge role in how we see the movie.

 

[DarkHelmet]

Re: Movie Magic, why rock your camera?

The main reason the camera was locked down all of the time until recently was out of necessity. Those old Panavisions and Mitchells weighed a ton.

 

[blip]

Re: Movie Magic, why rock your camera?

... I am also wondering how Stanley Kubrick pulled off the scene in 2001 where one astronaut is standing on a floor in the background and another is standing at a 90 degree angle and has to look up at the camera before climbing into a seat. I am thinking it was likely done with a couple mirrors and shot real action as opposed to being an optical composite or screen projection in the scene. But it is really hard to tell....

You make an interesting point.
While rocking and turning the camera usually causes disorentation, Kubrick used it in 2001 for exactly the opposite effect.

 

[Contec]

Re: Movie Magic, why rock your camera?

The main reason the camera was locked down all of the time until recently was out our necessity. Those old Panavisions and Mitchells weighed a ton.

Could you imagine watching The Good The bad And the ugly in Bourne shaky cam vision? :lol

 

[micdavis]

Re: Movie Magic, why rock your camera?

Can you imagine if every film was made the same as every other film.

That'd be exciting.

 

[Contec]

Re: Movie Magic, why rock your camera?

Can you imagine if every film was made the same as every other film.

That'd be exciting.

That would be a dream come true Mic

 

[blip]

Re: Movie Magic, why rock your camera?

Sometimes you keep your camera and actors still, and move the whole set.

 

[Solo4114]

Re: Movie Magic, why rock your camera?

Don't forget editing. It's not just the angles of the shots or how the shots are zoomed, but also how quickly they happen.

I can remember watching Quantum of Solace last year and thinking to myself "WTF just happened in that scene?! I know something was hitting something else but if you asked me what or who, I couldn't tell ya!"

To me, that was it. That was the nadir of rapid cuts in film. It was so awful and so ADHD that I literally had NO IDEA what was going on in the film when action sequences took place. If I described it in literal terms it would go something like this:

"Someone's foot is kicking someone else's head fist punch nose jaw armbendcrackWTF?!!!!!"

It wasn't just the occasional disorienting fistfight, either. It was EVERY ACTION SEQUENCE and it SUCKED. With Bourne, it was an artistic choice to put the viewer "in" the fight. I didn't particularly enjoy it, but I understand the decision, and the cuts didn't come SO quickly that I couldn't at least follow what happened in the fights. They were disorienting, sure, but not to the point where they'd end and I'd say "What just happened?!" With Bond, it was just an assload of 0.5 second cuts that simply were not coherent, at least not to my recollection. I think the storyboards for them were a single frame with the words "THEN BOND BEATS THE CRAP OUT OF THAT GUY" and on to the next scene.


That said, it was at least consistent throughout the film.

 

[SSgt Burton]

Re: Movie Magic, why rock your camera?

Yeah I was first exposed to that "rapid cuts camera too close" fight scene in Batman Begins. Hated it too.

Sorry- when it comes to a larger than life hero I want to see what the hell is going on, not feel like I'm getting beaten up as well. :lol


Oh and moving the set with a fixed camera was used to great effect in "Poltergeist".

Kevin

 

[Solo4114]

Re: Movie Magic, why rock your camera?

Yeah I was first exposed to that "rapid cuts camera too close" fight scene in Batman Begins. Hated it too.

Sorry- when it comes to a larger than life hero I want to see what the hell is going on, not feel like I'm getting beaten up as well. :lol


Oh and moving the set with a fixed camera was used to great effect in "Poltergeist".

Kevin

Not to mention Singin' In the Rain. Not sure if that one's the first use of it, though.

 

[blip]

Re: Movie Magic, why rock your camera?

Don't forget editing.

Good point. I'll do a seperate topic on that later, it's a big subject.

This one's about: the film, lens, actor and set distance and orentation. What's the effect of altering any one or group of the four relative to any one or group of the others.

 

[MFP 2020]

Re: Movie Magic, why rock your camera?

I tried watching "The Shield" once but only lasted about five minutes because the shaky cam was out of control. Just egregious. The funny thing is, all that shakiness doesn't reflect a first-person POV (as I read recently) because human eyesight is self-leveling.

I only occasionally tried to watch the new BSG but it bugged me that every single shot of a ship in space had to have camera shake and snap zoom.

I hesitate to say anything good about Attack of the Clones, but there's one shot that I really like: when the camera pans up from the ground battle and zooms in on the ship carrying the Jedi. There's something very Japanese about that shot (as in, it feels like something out of a kaiju movie), but I can't put my finger on it.

In terms of the grammar of film, the first uses of a shiny new technique are usually pretty blatant and unrestrained (witness the godawful swoopy mess at the beginning of the Kilmer Batman movie); later, if a technique is deemed worthy or workable or effective, it's adopted into the language and used more sparingly--as a tool, not a gimmick. (I have a copy of David Bordwell's "The Way Hollywood Tells It" that I'm looking forward to reading...someday.)

 

[blip]

Re: Movie Magic, why rock your camera?