Anyone else dislike shakey camerawork in action / fight scenes?

C

Candacy M

New member
... why do directors insist on using this technique?

"LOTR", "Gladiator", "Kingdom Of Heaven", "Pearl Harbor" .... just a few of the movies in recent years that I won't say have been spoiled but have certainly been marred by the current trend for fast, choppy edits, extreme close-ups and shakey cameras in fight & combat scenes.

I suppose the idea is to give the viewer the feeling that he / she is right in the thick of things, but for the most part you just can't tell what's happening or who's doing what to whom, and in some cases it can literally be headache-inducing.

I just hope it goes out of fashion soon.
 
It's sometimes used because directors are under pressure to produce a film that gets a child friendly certificate. It gives the illusion that something has happened when it hasn't, especially when combined with quick editing.
 
the fight scene in Batman Begins as well in the prison thats all over the place.

i sort of like it and dont.
gives the vieweer the impression of what the fight is like, first person type, that its all busy and full on.
but id also like to see the action as well.

can work well.
 
i cant watch films that use that sort of footage as i get motion sickness (serious!!!:)) i have been known to have to rush out of cinemas to throw up:(:(
 
You know, I think that might actually be part of the problem. They think "oh, that's very hip, here and happening" and decide we all want to see extended pop videos masquerading as movies.
 
It's mostly to keep the attention of viewers, who are thought by the industry to have the attention span of goldfish, so the camera cannot be allowed to stay in one position or move slowly at all.

The shaky, handheld effect is meant to make things look more "realistic", as if it's been shot live, documentary-style on a camcorder.

Very fast, numerous edits just give me a headache and are an incredibly lazy way to add pace and style to a shot.

I blame MTV. Have you ever watched an episode of a pointless show called "Cribs"? I guarantee you, the camera will not stay in one position for more than two seconRAB - it's continually restless and the edits are so fast, you can't see anything.

I'd love to see what the MTV generation make of Tarkovsky...
 
Well, it doesn't keep my attention. In fact I hate the choppy shaky style of filming. And as for the shots shere the camera whizzes round the actor(s) - that makes me feel extremely nauseous and I have to look away or even turn off.
 
A shocking wobblycam example that just gave me a stonking migraine is Denzel's "Man On Fire". Off work for a week I was. Don't say you haven't been warned.
 
Back
Top