Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2021 5:00:04 GMT
This has become so popular in the last 10-20 years of film making and tv shows.
I recently rewatched Better Call Saul, and every shot is perfectly steady, perfectly framed. Now I’m rewatching Breaking Bad- which I also love- but its shot entirely in handheld and the difference is huge. Every frame is jostling and wobbling even in static scenes. And it doesn’t really bother me. I can get invested in the show and tune out the movement but the steady unwobbling frame is so much more professional looking. And the cinematography of Better Call Saul is head and shoulders above BB primarily for this reason.
I guess it’s meant to provide some sort of “intensity” or “grittiness”? I suppose that’s somewhat effective in movies like Bourne Supremacy. I get it. But I still don’t really get why so many directors intentionally chose to have the frame bouncing all over the place in every scene like it’s shot by an amateur or something.
|
|
|
|
Post by ck100 on May 23, 2021 5:05:33 GMT
I'm guessing the bouncing and shakiness is supposed to create energy or something like you're on a roller coaster ride.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2021 5:08:13 GMT
I'm guessing the bouncing and shakiness is supposed to create energy or something like you're on a roller coaster ride. I get that for action scenes- though I don’t particularly like action scenes shot that way. But what about a scene where two people are just talking in a living room or in a backyard and the cameras are still wobbling around? What’s the point?
|
|
|
|
Post by ck100 on May 23, 2021 5:10:23 GMT
I'm guessing the bouncing and shakiness is supposed to create energy or something like you're on a roller coaster ride. I get that for action scenes- though I don’t particularly like action scenes shot that way. But what about a scene where two people are just talking in a living room or in a backyard and the cameras are still wobbling around? What’s the point? The director must think we have short attention spans for dialogue scenes. So they have to create some kind of action for it.
|
|
|
|
Post by SuperDevilDoctor on May 23, 2021 7:03:19 GMT
I think it was in one of the Bourne movies, but there was a quick, simple establishing shot of a name-plate on an office door... done with a wobbly, jiggly, hand-held camera.
It was at that point that I decided, "Fuck this shit. STOP IT!"
|
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on May 23, 2021 8:01:12 GMT
BCS is shot immaculately. Hard to top it.
All I’ll say is that BB does it intentionally. When you watch all of it it makes sense.
That’s all. I won’t spoil it, but BB does it perfectly, and that’s coming from someone who hates handheld. It just works.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vits on May 23, 2021 9:47:40 GMT
The contrary happens too. The B.B. title sequence has the kind of effects you'd expect in any other TV show and the theme song ends with a fade out effect. The B.C.S. title sequence has a bad image quality and the theme song ends with an abrupt cut.
Plenty of shows (and movies) employ amateur techniques. Sometimes, there's a meaning behind it; other times, it's a simple aesthetic choice. What matters is that they make the separation clear enough that the audience knows they're doing it on purpose. This is achieved by using professional techniques for the most part.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on May 23, 2021 12:50:15 GMT
I'm guessing the bouncing and shakiness is supposed to create energy or something like you're on a roller coaster ride. I get that for action scenes- though I don’t particularly like action scenes shot that way. But what about a scene where two people are just talking in a living room or in a backyard and the cameras are still wobbling around? What’s the point? Either the cameraman doesn’t know what they’re doing or they’re not confident about what’s actually being spoken so they just distract the audience with movement. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2021 20:12:03 GMT
BCS is shot immaculately. Hard to top it. All I’ll say is that BB does it intentionally. When you watch all of it it makes sense. That’s all. I won’t spoil it, but BB does it perfectly, and that’s coming from someone who hates handheld. It just works. Oh I’ve seen BB like half a dozen times  , so spoil away. And it does work. I don’t dislike it. I just prefer BCS’s style and think that BB would’ve been absolute perfection if shot the same way.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on May 23, 2021 21:20:22 GMT
It's cheaper because they don't have to do such complicated set ups. I assume it is saving money somewhere but who knows0they probably spend the savings on crack or heroin or investment in crypto-currency.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2021 23:13:29 GMT
It's cheaper because they don't have to do such complicated set ups. I assume it is saving money somewhere but who knows0they probably spend the savings on crack or heroin or investment in crypto-currency. Bit coin is a TRAP.
|
|
|
|
Post by phantomparticle on May 24, 2021 2:26:56 GMT
Cameras have become so lightweight some directors use the device to cut down on costs; others because they are lazy and others because they are hacks.
I don't like handheld photography any more than I like frenetic editing for people with a three second attention span. The overuse of the technique doesn't increase pace or create tension. It just causes vertigo.
The most egregious examples are the POV films like Cloverfield; two hours of someone pounding on your head and slamming cymbals in your ears while spinning you around in a swivel chair.
|
|
|
|
Post by MCDemuth on May 24, 2021 2:46:51 GMT
Not a fan of constant lens flares either... Especially when a scene is taking place indoors and is being lit with light bulbs.
If I want bright lights constantly flickering in to my eyes, I get a laser light and do it myself.
|
|
|
|
Post by vegalyra on May 24, 2021 2:49:28 GMT
Yeah not a fan of that filming technique. Give me some huge Ultra Panavision 70 cameras. Not that it would make a lot of sense for a television show...   |
|
|
|
Post by Vits on May 24, 2021 7:08:23 GMT
It's cheaper because they don't have to do such complicated set ups. Well, it depends. Even if they're using a hand-held camera, the number of shots they'd have to prepare wouldn't really change. Heck, I'd argue that it takes more time since they would have to test the camera movements first (to make sure it creates the effect they want without making the images incomprehensible) instead of simply placing the camera on the tripod.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on May 24, 2021 16:39:19 GMT
Well, it depends. Even if they're using a hand-held camera, the number of shots they'd have to prepare wouldn't really change. Heck, I'd argue that it takes more time since they would have to test the camera movements first (to make sure it creates the effect they want without making the images incomprehensible) instead of simply placing the camera on the tripod.
They are watching the image on a monitor as they shoot--someone else can be checking the footage--the director is often looking at a screen as they shoot. They can also add or remove shake in post. And they don't have to restart the camera either if they want to keep going.
But a digital camera is more delicate than the old-fashioned kind so there are probably issues to deal with on that front. In general shakycam removes the need to set up a dolly track or crane and a lot of other more technical apparatus that would use a dozen or more crew people. They have to set up the dolly track, test the track, and then start planning the shot. In addition, they also have to check the lighting and old-fashioned cameras--they had have all that planned in advance--they could not fix it in post-production easily.
|
|
Phoenix101
Sophomore
@angryjoeshow
Posts: 605
Likes: 141
 
|
Post by Phoenix101 on May 26, 2021 0:08:00 GMT
The title makes you sound like Jerry Seinfeld.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 1, 2021 5:38:51 GMT
The title makes you sound like Jerry Seinfeld. 
|
|
|
|
Post by jonesjxd on Jun 4, 2021 10:58:28 GMT
I used to be a die hard supporter of the handheld camera, in high school when I was really getting into movies handheld was all the rage. I saw Joe Carnahan's NARC on opening night and it became my benchmark for cinema. All I wanted to see was grainy, blue and sepia tinted movies shot handheld, and went back and watched all the old 70's cop movies that influenced it, French Connection, Serpico, etc, and watched all the Cinéma Vérité that influenced those. This style really became popular in the aughts as you had Alejandro Gonzalez Innaritu, Richard Linklater, Danny Boyle, Steve Soderbergh, Darren Aronofsky, Alexandre Aja, Rob Zombie shooting all their movies handheld and stripping them of color. You weren't an indie filmmaker unless your movie was shot handheld and stripped of color. Then that went out of style, and I suspect it has to do with the evolution of digital cameras, specifically the RED ONE. The early thrill of digital cinematography was it was like a super 8 camera, it looked like shit but you could stuff it in the tightest of places and run around with it. But with the RED ONE, digital cinematography actually started resembling film and it was a heavy camera and was trailed by a mass of cables and battery packs. Not so easy to run around with, so the style went back to the cinematic. I also suspect it was a changing of generation in filmmakers. Most of the filmmakers listed above are late Baby Boomer/Early Gen X who would've been more interested in Cinema Verite than "mainstream stuff" like Spielberg. We're now in an era where the filmmakers gaining success are middle to late Gen X, who came of age obsessing over Spielberg, Carpenter, Cameron etc. They want their movies to look cinematic and big. I was recently watching The Last Jedi and Knives Out and its amazing to me how big Rian Johnson is able to make his films look, even when you're watching them on a laptop screen. Every shot is carefully crafted, the camera is always perfectly placed. Those are movies where each shot is probably exactly how it looked storyboarded.
|
|
, so spoil away. 
