Into the storm

[DaOld Man]

Ok, I laid down a little over 8 shucks to see this movie.
I thought it was pretty good, overall.
If you like action than this one is non stop. (That's the main reason I thought it was pretty good.)
What I didn't like about it was first the acting. Some of it was mediocre to say the best.
Also if you didn't like (what word am I looking for here, first person?), movies such as cloverfield, (you know the movies that take on the perspective that it is all seen through the view finder of someone holding a video cam), then you wont like this one.
Most of the film (I estimate 90-95%) is done with someone looking at the actors and making a home movie, and the actors are very aware of this.
Let it be thusly known that I hate movies filmed in this perspective. (Waited for Cloverfield to be on DVD before watching it, just for this reason alone, and I have yet to see blair witch project.)
I almost walked out when I saw it was going to be like this, but the quick and constant action kept me in my seat.
I mean, if I am stuck in a storm with 300 mile an hour winds picking up trucks around me, I doubt I would be thinking to hold the video cam or iphone to record it all, especially people hollering at me to put down the camera and run with them.
So, my honest opinion about this movie is to wait until it comes out on DVD, and it shouldn't be a very long wait.

[dkersten]

It was something new with blair witch, and although it made me sick, the movie was interesting and scary enough to warrant the hype.  But since then I have HATED it.  Cloverfield was a great concept, but it was ruined by the shaky hand cams, as was Chronicle.  And that spawned the whole genre of shaky hand cams even for regular movies, specifically the Bourne series, of which the third made me so nauseous to watch I had to leave.  If you can't make the action good enough, making it all shaky like it is so crazy even the guy filming it is shaking is NOT going to help..

When I see them doing something like that it reminds me of GI Jane, at the battle at the end when they needed a little extra "oomph" in the film so for each explosion the cameraman would quickly zoom in and out.. Complete and utter CHEESE.

Thanks for letting everyone know, I won't waste my money on it.  [/bullet dodged]

[Slippyblade]

I fully agree.  Shakey-cam needs to go.  Now.  With much prejudice.

[Vigo]

Why won't the shakey cam trend die?

[Xiaou2]

Why won't the shakey cam trend die?

  I think a lot of this happens when they dont know how to choreograph stuff.   Shake it up, so nobody can see all the flaws in the horribly choreographed action scenes.

 I think Id rather suffer with bad action...  than the shake n baked nightmare.

[ChadTower]

I don't hate shaky cam as much as I do "rotating around a single axis" cam.  Every action sequence in TMNT was like they had the camera attached to a tetherball swinging around.

[Howard_Casto]

Neither is preferable.  Using a creative camera motion as an establishing shot is one thing, but 90% of your shots should be stationary.  Remember the camera is supposed to be the viewers eyes... in other words nice and stable and rarely running around. 

[SavannahLion]

It was something new with blair witch, and although it made me sick, the movie was interesting and scary enough to warrant the hype.  But since then I have HATED it.  Cloverfield was a great concept, but it was ruined by the shaky hand cams, as was Chronicle.  And that spawned the whole genre of shaky hand cams even for regular movies, specifically the Bourne series, of which the third made me so nauseous to watch I had to leave.  If you can't make the action good enough, making it all shaky like it is so crazy even the guy filming it is shaking is NOT going to help..

When I see them doing something like that it reminds me of GI Jane, at the battle at the end when they needed a little extra "oomph" in the film so for each explosion the cameraman would quickly zoom in and out.. Complete and utter CHEESE.

Thanks for letting everyone know, I won't waste my money on it.  [/bullet dodged]

+1 on this.

The whole shaky camera trend has even gotten into shows and films where there shouldn't be any shaky cam at all, period. I've seen older films use shaky cams to great effect but shows like the last series of Stargate was just nauseating. Why is Judge Judy filming bone still but the filming of some titular law show look like a 4 year is holding the camera? Same setup and same crappy plots...

[DaOld Man]

Let me clarify:
The camera shaking is not really that bad in this film (Into the storm), it's just the view of someone holding a camera.
The actors look at the camera and talk to the guy holding the cam.
Its like someone holding a camera that is mounted rigidly to a tripod, but moving with the people, while the person behind the cam and the people being filmed are talking to each other. (Ignorant idea IMHO)
I don't like that. But I would have had to leave the movie if the picture shook real bad on top of that.
Looking at the previews, it doesn't appear to be filmed like this, but beware, it is, like I said 90 to 95% looks like one of the actors is the camera person.

[dkersten]

You were clear on it, I was just adding that the shaky cam thing along with the "friend recording it" thing are both annoying trends that need to go away.

[eds1275]

The only through the camera movie I have enjoyed was Diary of the Dead, and the worst part of it was watching through a camera. But the rest of the movie made up for that.