In the Loop : Hold the bloody camera still!

Hold the bloody camera still!

I really wanted to watch this film because of the good reviews especially about the screenplay. But a good film is more than just the writing. Visually this film is awful and made me seasick with the fast edits and camera swaying about like the cameraman is drunk. This is so unnecessary especially in a film that is dialogue driven. What is wrong with holding the camera still when a person is talking in an office? This is not realism - if my eyes are moving from one person to another my field of vision is steady and panning from one person to another is smooth. I had to walk out half an hour into this to barf (like the recent Star Trek movies - can imagine already how JJ Abrahms is going to ruin the new Star Wars films with this shonky camerwork!).

Re: Hold the bloody camera still!

Damn. You and I are alone in this. :(
I agree with you 100%.

Re: Hold the bloody camera still!

Thank you. A sane person.

Re: Hold the bloody camera still!

It's meant to represent a documentary style (as in, mockumentary).

~ I've been very lonely in my isolated tower of indecipherable speech.

Re: Hold the bloody camera still!

I don't care what its meant to represent it made me sick and many others as well. Fine if filmmakers want to do this but they are alienating half their audience.

Re: Hold the bloody camera still!

So documentaries make you feel sick too? Poor you!

Re: Hold the bloody camera still!

I can see why you wouldnt like it but I enjoy this style if done right, like it was here. But the best thing about it is that it lets the actors improv with their actions.

-

See, you? Get me a *beep* Curly Wurly, right?

Re: Hold the bloody camera still!

No it doesn't. How a film is shot does not improve/worsen an actors performance. It is pretentious and unnecessary.

Re: Hold the bloody camera still!

.
It wasn't "unnecessary" the entire film was shot on the fly, with one camera, with the cameraman following the actors with a handheld camera as they improvised. There is no way they could have done that with static shot-based camera work and rehearsed dialogue.
.

Re: Hold the bloody camera still!

Yes they could have. Actors are not beholden to shaky cameras.

Re: Hold the bloody camera still!

.
To repeat, the entire film was shot on the fly, with one camera, with the cameraman following the actors with a handheld camera as they improvised. There is no way they could have done that with static shot-based camera work and rehearsed dialogue.
.

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.
Top