Main > Everything Else
Battle Los Angeles
SNAAKE:
well shaky doesnt always ruin movies. just gotta balance things out and not overuse it.
agree with cloverfield though. the ENTIRE movie was shaky cam. I got a massive headache after watching it... :dizzy:
shmokes:
It doesn't always ruin movies, but it's probably at least almost always a bad idea. A great example is the cinematography in the second two Bourne movies vs. the first one. All three are good movies, but the camera work in the second two is obnoxious.
RayB:
BLA has way worse shakey-cam than any other movie i've seen save Cloverfield. It had this sort of unatural "synthesized shake" look too it (As if it was added in post-procesing).
Mikezilla:
--- Quote from: shmokes on March 29, 2011, 03:41:34 pm ---It doesn't always ruin movies, but it's probably at least almost always a bad idea. A great example is the cinematography in the second two Bourne movies vs. the first one. All three are good movies, but the camera work in the second two is obnoxious.
--- End quote ---
I never saw the bourne movies, but a lot of times they do that to speed up/blur fight scenes in order to hide stuff. I remember they did that a lot in Batman Begins.
I personally like it when its warranted, like Cloverfield. It gave you that sense that it was really recorded by someone because thats how it would be given the circumstances. Of course I dont like it CONSTANTLY, because I get a little nauseous, and I also dont like it just for the sake of using it like some movies do. If its used in subtle ways, it isnt that big of a distraction. In my opinion anyway.
shmokes:
--- Quote from: Mikezilla on March 30, 2011, 12:58:03 pm ---
I never saw the bourne movies . . .
--- End quote ---
You should remedy that. :)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version