jtr7 on 7/8/2007 at 00:55
It's not so much the shakiness for me but the closeness. I'd like to be able to recognize who's doing what at the very moment, not half a second later. If the camera's going to shake then pull the shot back a bit. I get nothing out of feeling like I'm part of the scuffle, because I'm not. This isn't a video-game. I'm an observer, watching the action go down.
I watched the behind-the-scenes clips of Christian Bale and Ken Watanabe working on their fight scene for Batman Begins. In the movie, the shot's so close in, you cannot see what they're doing. All that training and choreography and it's gutted.
Thirith on 7/8/2007 at 07:45
I actually like shaky-cam when it's used well. I like being disoriented sometimes. The effect can be very, well, effective and involving. And while I found the Bourne fight sequences disorienting to some extent, I didn't think they were confusing.
I get it that some people don't like it, but then, you'll find people who dislike practically any type of effect that they aren't used to. If every film used the shaky-cam look and this one new film used a steadier, more stable camera, you'd get people saying, "That whole stable look is so boring! It takes me out of the movie immediately!"
DaveW on 7/8/2007 at 11:17
Quote Posted by Ulukai
Slightly concerned that the atmosphere of the latest film will be marred by the fact that Bourne is no longer in Europe. And of course, Franka ain't in it. The shakey-cam stuff I've never found a problem.
Unfortunately for Matt Damon and chums, Die Hard 4 has already won my heart as action movie of the year, and I doubt very much it can beat it.
Firstly, London is in Europe. And secondly the Bourne films aren't the same kind of action as Die Hard, at all. In terms of all out action Die Hard 4's going to win, obviously, since it's just pure shooting and stuff blowing up. The difference is in the Bourne films the action is driven more by the plot and is meant to be realistic.
Dia on 7/8/2007 at 13:50
Quote Posted by jtr7
It's not so much the shakiness for me but the closeness. I'd like to be able to recognize who's doing what at the very moment, not half a second later. If the camera's going to shake then pull the shot back a bit. I get nothing out of feeling like I'm part of the scuffle, because I'm not. This isn't a video-game. I'm an observer, watching the action go down.
I watched the behind-the-scenes clips of Christian Bale and Ken Watanabe working on their fight scene for
Batman Begins. In the movie, the shot's so close in, you cannot see what they're doing. All that training and choreography and it's gutted.
I absolutely agree, jtr. I didn't feel at all as though I was a part of the action and I don't go to the movies to become disoriented (if I wanted to be disoriented I'd start taking drugs :p ). As I said before, I felt that the beautiful choreography and precision of the fight sequences was totally lost with the shakey-cam. The shakey-cam method of filming isn't very realistic imo; even if you're up close to the action you can observe a hell of a lot more than you could in Ultimatum.
I also agree that the far-too-numerous-to-count closeups of the actors got to be a tad much; I started wanting to push them back a little - it was like they were in my face waaay too much. I mean, you could actually count the pores in the actors' skin. Not entertaining imo.
Oh- and Dad ..... each to their own. No need to get nasty about it.
P.S. What's an 'arkward'?:confused:
UsMercenary on 7/8/2007 at 14:03
I just saw this movie with my family yesterday (myself, my brother, and my dad all love the Bourne movies) and we thought is was great. There was a lot of hype for an awsome car chase, yet the short car chase was kinda a let down.... Don't get me wrong, the movie was awsome, the action was non-stop, and the plot was enthralling.
failure2comply on 7/8/2007 at 16:48
The thing with shaky cam is that it can be used as a substitute for poor fight choreography. I loved Identity more than Supremacy for that reason, but still enjoyed it. And I love how they went over the edge by killing Potente off in the Supremacy. Very unexpected, and made it feel more real. I'll probably get three boxes of kleenex and some warm liver for Ultimatum as well.
AQWSXZ on 7/8/2007 at 16:57
Just came across this site. Its very helpful. Amazing tips.
User was banned by David on 7-8-2007
Ulukai on 7/8/2007 at 17:21
Quote Posted by DaveW
Firstly, London is in Europe.
You saw it here first. Was assuming that as Bourne is "coming home" more of it would be set in the States. My bad.
Quote Posted by DaveW
And secondly the Bourne films aren't the same kind of action as Die Hard, at all.
Well, shit. You think? :D
You're welcome to subdivide your favourite action thrillers into sub-genres of varying realism levels. I'm not tempted to do that because life is just too damn short.
failure2comply on 7/8/2007 at 17:23
Heh - that'd be like saying Independence Day is in the same category as The Matrix.
Fafhrd on 7/8/2007 at 18:01
Quote Posted by Dia
As I said before, I felt that the beautiful choreography and precision of the fight sequences was totally lost with the shakey-cam.
Which is precisely the point. They're not supposed to be beautifully choreographed, precise fight sequences, they're supposed to be two guys beating the everliving shit out of each other and using whatever comes to hand to be the guy that doesn't die.
